Stephen Langton and Hugh of St. Cher on Peter Comestor's Historia Scholastica : The Lombard's sentences and the problem of sources used by Comestor and his commentators

IF 0.3 2区 哲学 0 MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES
M. Clark
{"title":"Stephen Langton and Hugh of St. Cher on Peter Comestor's Historia Scholastica : The Lombard's sentences and the problem of sources used by Comestor and his commentators","authors":"M. Clark","doi":"10.2143/RTPM.74.1.2022837","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, I explore preliminarily whether Peter Comestor's Historia scholastica was well suited to extended theological inquiry. After providing a brief introduction to Comestor's method to acquaint the reader with the literary character of the History, I turn my attention to the use by Stephen Langton and Hugh of St. Cher, two prominent commentators on the History, of source material that Comestor himself used in composing the History. I pay particular attention to the Lombard's Sentences, the most important source for Comestor's treatment of the first three chapters of Genesis in the first twenty-five chapters of the History and, not surprisingly, a crucial source for his two commentators. Focusing on source material from the Lombard's Sentences used both by Comestor and by Langton and Hugh illustrates well the disparate ends of Comestor and his commentators. It also provides a common basis for comparing not only how the two Peters treated certain problematic theological matters but also how Langton and Hugh interpreted and commented upon Comestor's presentation of the same. I conclude that, at least in certain instances, a work like the History was not entirely amenable to the new ways of pursuing theological inquiry in the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries.","PeriodicalId":41176,"journal":{"name":"Recherches de Theologie et Philosophie Medievales","volume":"8 1","pages":"63-117"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2007-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Recherches de Theologie et Philosophie Medievales","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2143/RTPM.74.1.2022837","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

In this article, I explore preliminarily whether Peter Comestor's Historia scholastica was well suited to extended theological inquiry. After providing a brief introduction to Comestor's method to acquaint the reader with the literary character of the History, I turn my attention to the use by Stephen Langton and Hugh of St. Cher, two prominent commentators on the History, of source material that Comestor himself used in composing the History. I pay particular attention to the Lombard's Sentences, the most important source for Comestor's treatment of the first three chapters of Genesis in the first twenty-five chapters of the History and, not surprisingly, a crucial source for his two commentators. Focusing on source material from the Lombard's Sentences used both by Comestor and by Langton and Hugh illustrates well the disparate ends of Comestor and his commentators. It also provides a common basis for comparing not only how the two Peters treated certain problematic theological matters but also how Langton and Hugh interpreted and commented upon Comestor's presentation of the same. I conclude that, at least in certain instances, a work like the History was not entirely amenable to the new ways of pursuing theological inquiry in the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries.
Stephen Langton和Hugh of St. Cher论Peter Comestor的《经院史》:伦巴第语的句子和Comestor及其评论者使用的资料来源问题
在本文中,我初步探讨了彼得·科米斯特的《经院史》是否适合扩展神学研究。在简要介绍了科米斯特让读者熟悉《历史》的文学特征的方法之后,我把注意力转向两位著名的《历史》评论家斯蒂芬·兰顿和圣舍尔的休,他们使用了科米斯特自己在撰写《历史》时使用的原始材料。我特别关注伦巴第的句子,这是Comestor在《历史》的前二十五章中,对《创世纪》前三章的处理最重要的资料,毫不奇怪,这也是他的两位评论者的重要资料。关注Comestor、兰顿和休所使用的伦巴第句的原始材料,很好地说明了Comestor和他的评论员的不同目的。它也提供了一个共同的基础,不仅可以比较两位彼得如何处理某些有问题的神学问题,还可以比较兰顿和休如何解释和评论科米斯特的陈述。我的结论是,至少在某些情况下,像《历史》这样的作品并不完全符合12世纪末和13世纪初追求神学研究的新方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Recherches de Théologie et Philosophie Médiévales / Forschungen zur Theologie und Philosophie des Mittelalters (formerly Recherches de Théologie Ancienne et Médiévale of the Abbaye Mont César) provides a forum for original, high-quality research on all aspects of theology and philosophy from Augustine and the Early Middle Ages up to late scholasticism. Recent articles have included highly focused studies on particular facets of the medieval philosophical or theological tradition, broader reconsiderations of received views in the history of medieval theology and philosophy, and editions of texts and manuscript studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信