sharp-pointed head and of green color.
[2851] Colle (1824) III, 146.
[2852] Diff. 178. “Et iam testificati sunt mihi duo amicorum fideles
argentum arte decoctionis fecisse verum omni examine non tamen valde
lucrari aperte.”
[2853] See above pp. 262-3.
[2854] For a similar image mentioned by Arnald of Villanova see above,
p. 858.
[2855] See above p. 546.
[2856] “De partibus occidentalibus”; this may be a slip of the copyist,
or a careless retention by Peter of the wording of some Arabic writer.
[2857] Addit. 37079, fol. 106r, “Nunc autem periit fides sigillorum.
Nota bene. Quoniam tam illegalis quam allegans ad vos sigillata
portatur.”
[2858] J. G. Frazer (1911) I, 305, gives some instances from Mongolia
of use of “bezoar stones as instruments of rain” combined with
incantations. Here “bezoar” is used in the sense of a stone found in
the stomach or intestines of an animal.
[2859] Diff. 1.
[2860] Naudé (1625), p. 381.
[2861] _Ibid._, p. 390.
[2862] Diff. 156.
[2863] Diff. 1.
[2864] Tomasini (1630), p. 22.
APPENDIX I
PREVIOUS ACCOUNTS OF PETER OF ABANO
[Sidenote: Original sources.]
As is usually the case with past authors and scholars, Peter of Abano’s
own works[2865] are the best source concerning the events of his life
as well as his learning and superstition. Another important document
is his will, published by Verci, whose _History of the Trevisan Mark_
includes some other documents bearing upon Peter’s career.[2866]
Other contemporary source-material connected with Peter or members
of his family has been noted by Gloria in his collection of material
concerning the University of Padua,[2867] or by even more recent
investigators. Less valuable are the inscriptions, chiefly sepulchral
or eulogistic, which older writers reported but whose dates are late or
uncertain. In a MS of the fifteenth century[2868] a page between two of
Peter’s treatises is devoted to a “Catalogue of writings which Peter
of Abano partly composed himself, partly translated from the Greek.”
The list has not, I think, been noted by previous writers on Peter of
Abano, but adds little to our knowledge of his compositions. What the
sources for Peter’s life are, however, appears in more detail in the
appendices which follow and in the notes to the text.
[Sidenote: Michael Savonarola.]
What we have to consider further at present are the previous secondary
accounts of Peter which may be reckoned as of some importance. The
first occurs in the work on great citizens of Padua composed about
the middle of the fifteenth century[2869] by Michael Savonarola, the
noted physician and medical writer and grandfather of the Florentine
reformer, Girolamo Savonarola. Michael at least appreciated Peter’s
learning and shared in many respects his point of view, and, while he
makes some assertions which we must regard as extremely exaggerated,
if not entirely legendary, seems to have had access to documents
which we no longer possess as well as to local tradition. He states
that he treasures in his possession the original manuscript of the
_Conciliator_ in Peter’s own handwriting; and he mentions having
read with great pleasure an abundance of letters by which the people
of Padua had recalled Peter from Paris to their midst. Savonarola’s
account, however, is brief.[2870]
[Sidenote: Secondary accounts since 1500.]
Scardeone, who wrote in the sixteenth century _On the Antiquity of the
City of Padua_,[2871] can scarcely be regarded as so good an authority
as Savonarola, but he makes new assertions concerning Peter’s life and
his account has been much followed by modern writers. In the early
seventeenth century Naudé included Peter in his defense of great men
who had been charged with magic,[2872] but incorrectly gave the date of
his death as 1305, while Tomasini gave 1316 as the date and included
a portrait of Peter in his _Eulogies of Illustrious Men adorned with
pictures_.[2873] I have not seen the account of Peter in Duchastel’s
_Lives of Illustrious Physicians_,[2874] published at Antwerp in
1618, nor Goulin’s _A Historical and Critical Notice on the Life of
Abano_,[2875] printed in 1715; but have used an article with a similar
title which Count Gian-Maria Mazzuchelli[2876] published in 1741 and
which included a bibliography of Peter’s works. Tiraboschi, in his
_History of Italian Literature_,[2877] corrected and supplemented
Mazzuchelli on a number of points and in general displayed a sounder
judgment than previous writers, although he still retained some of
their errors. A further step in the study of Peter of Abano was taken
by Colle who published a monograph concerning him in 1823,[2878] which
he reprinted in 1825 with some variations in his _Scientific and
Literary History of the University of Padua_.[2879] A monograph by
Ronzoni in 1878[2880] does not seem to have made any new contributions,
but in 1884 Gloria adduced new source-material in his _Monuments of the
University of Padua_,[2881] and pointed out errors in Colle’s account.
Sante Ferrari discussed Peter’s contributions to biology in a pamphlet
published in 1900,[2882] when it was stated that he would soon issue
a volume upon Peter, which has been supplemented in 1918 by a further
study. Meanwhile in 1912 B. Nardi discussed “The theory of the soul
and the generation of forms according to Peter of Abano,”[2883] and
in 1916 Antonio Favaro wrote on “Pietro d’Abano ed suo ‘Lucidator
astrologiae’.”[2884]
FOOTNOTES:
[2865] An account of the editions and MSS of them will be found in
Appendix II.
[2866] G. B. Verci, _Storia della Marchia Trevigiana e Veronese_,
Venice, 1786-1791, in Tome VII (not VIII, as it is usually incorrectly
cited).
[2867] Andrea Gloria, _Monumenti della Università di Padova
(1222-1318), Presentata il 29 dicembre 1884, Memorie del Reale Istituto
Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti_, vol. XXII, pp. 583-9. This
publication, however, is rather an account from the monuments than the
monuments themselves, of which Gloria printed only a limited number of
copies and which I have not seen.
[2868] Canon. Misc. 46, fol. 30v.
[2869] Muratori estimated that Savonarola completed the _Libellus de
magnificis ornamentis regiae civitatis Paduae_ soon after 1445.
[2870] It is contained in Muratori, _Rerum Italicarum Scriptores_,
XXIV, 1135-8.
[2871] Bernardino Scardeone, _De antiquitate urbis Patavii et claris
civibus Patavinis libri tres ... eiusdem appendix de sepulchris
insignibus exterorum Patavii iacentium_, Venice, Volgrisi, 1558. I have
used the edition of Basel, 1560, where the account of Peter occurs at
pp. 260-2. It is also printed in Graevius, _Thesaurus antiquitatum et
historiarum Italiae_, 1725, Tom. VI, Pars. 3.
[2872] Gabriel Naudé, _Apologie pour tous les grands personages qui ont
esté faussement soupçonnez de Magie_, Paris, 1625, pp. 380-91.
[2873] Jac. Phil. Tomasini, _Illustrium virorum elogia iconibus
exornata_, Padua, 1630, p. 20.
[2874] Duchastel, _Vitae illustrium medicorum qui toto orbe ad haec
usque tempora floruerunt_, Anvers, 1618. I presume this is the
“Castellan” whom Naudé cites.
[2875] Goulin, _Notice historique et critique sur la vie d’Abano,
in Mémoires littéraires et critiques pour servir à l’histoire de la
médecine_, Paris, 1715, p. 15.
[2876] Mazzuchelli, _Notizie storiche e critiche intorno alla vita di
Pietro d’Abano, in Raccolta d’opuscoli scientifici e fisiologici_, vol.
XXIII, Venice, 1741.
[2877] Tiraboschi, _Storia della Letteratura Italiana_, Modena,
1772-1795, vol. V (1775), pp. 152-9.
[2878] Francesco Maria Colle, _Notizie sulla vita e sulle opere di
Pietro d’Abano, in Opuscoli Filologici_, Padua, 1823, pp. 7-36.
[2879] Colle, _Storia Scientifico-Letteraria dello Studio di Padova_,
Padua, 1824, four vols., III (1825), 128-55.
[2880] Ronzoni, _Della vita e delle opere di Pietro d’Abano_, Rome,
1878, in _Atti della R. Accademia dei Lincei, serie terza, Memorie
della classe di scienze morali, storiche e filologiche_, II (1878),
526-50.
[2881] See above, p. 914, note 3.
[2882] Sante Ferrari, _Contribuzioni alla storia della biologia_;
_Pietro d’Abano_, Genoa, Ciminago, 1900, 23 pp.
[2883] B. Nardi, _La teoria dell’ anima e la generazione delle forme
secondo Pietro d’Abano_, in _Rivista di filosofia neo-scolastica_, IV
(1912), 723-37.
[2884] _Atti del R. Istituto Veneto_, LXXV, 515-27.
APPENDIX II
A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF PETER OF ABANO’S WRITINGS
[Sidenote: Arrangement.]
The following order will be observed in this list of Peter’s works.
First those to which an exact or probable date can be assigned will
be taken up in chronological order. Next will be listed those which
are undated but undoubtedly genuine. Last will be mentioned those
of dubious or spurious authorship. As Peter’s translations of the
astrological treatises of Abraham Aben Ezra are closely connected with
those of Henry Bate, and as Abraham and Bate are names of considerable
importance in the history of astrological literature, a separate
appendix following this one will be devoted to them and Peter’s
relations to their work. The following lists of MSS for Peter’s various
works can probably be greatly added to, but the present bibliography is
fuller than any preceding one.
[Sidenote: Translation of Abraham Aben Ezra, 1293.]
Aside from Latin editions of single works (such as the _De
nativitatibus_, Ratdolt, 1485, Cologne, 1537, which is not Peter’s
original Latin version anyway; and the _De luminaribus et criticis
diebus_, 1508, 1544; _de criticis diebus_, 1496, 1550) the only
inclusive edition seems to be:
Abrahe Avenaris Judei ... in re judiciali opera, ab
excellentissimo Philosopho Petro de Abano post accuratam
castigationem in Latinum traducta, Ex officina Petri
Liechtenstein, Venetiis, 1507. For further account of this
edition and the MSS see Appendix III.
[Sidenote: The _Physiognomy_, 1295.]
Incipit liber compilationis phisonomie a Petro padubanensi
in civitate Parisiensi.... Viro fulgenti domino Bardeloni
de bocosis mantue honorandissimo capitaneo generali Petrus
padubanensis parisius philosophie minimus alumnorum grata
agere cum salute. Ed. Padua, 1474.
Decisiones Physionomiae ... a Blondo medico ... compertae
inque lucem productae. Venice, 1548.
The earliest MS that I have seen is
BN 16089, 13-14th century, fols. 98r-113, “Incipit liber
compilationis physonomie a magistro petro de padua in
civitate parisiensi.... Nobilitate generis urbanitatum
titulis viro fulgenti domino bardelloni mantue
honorabilissimo capitaneo generali de bona coxis petrus de
padua parisius philosofie minimus alumpnorum grata agere
cum salute.”
Practically the same is
BN 2598, fols. 87r-98r, “Explicit liber compilationis
physonomie per petrum de padua anno domini millesimo
ducentesimo nonagesimo quinto.”
Other MSS, all of the 15th century, are:
BM Addit. 37079, fols. 3r-81v. Here the captain-general’s
name is spelled “Bardeloni ... de Bonaconsis” and the
Explicit gives the precise date, May 23, 1295.
BL Canon. Misc. 46, fols. 1-30, “Liber Physionomiae
clarissimi viri Petri de Appono Patavini ab eo in civitate
Parisiensi aeditus.”
CLM 637, fols. 12-66.
Vienna 5307, fols. 23-32.
The work is listed in the catalogue of the MSS of Amplonius at
Erfurt, written in 1412, “Math. 29, Egregius liber Petri Paduani de
phisionomia,” but seems to have disappeared from that collection since
then.
[Sidenote: _Problems_ of Alexander of Aphrodisias.]
Escorial f-I-11, 14th century (here we first have the
Problems of Aristotle, or perhaps Peter’s commentary
on them “secundum speciem compilationis” and “secundum
novam translationem,” then), fols. 31-42, “Incipiunt
problemata alexandri affrodiseos translata p. M. petrum
Aponensem padue de greco in latinum. Archo. tr. unico
... / ... aut diversa inferiorum et superiorum molle
figuratione. Explicit liber problematum alexandrii
affrodiseos translatus per petrum padubanensem padue de
greco in latinum MCCC secundo XV die decembris et sunt
omnia problemata numero 197.” On the other hand, the list
of Peter’s works contained in Canon. Misc. 46, speaks of
these Problems as having “differentiae quinquaginta.”
[Sidenote: Translations of Galen.]
CLM 5, written in 1304 A. D., fol. 181, Galeni de optima
corporis nostri compositione et bona habitudine translatus
per Petrum medicum Paduanum.
S. Marco XIV, 6, written at Bologna in 1305 A. D., fols.
68-106, contains Peter’s completion of the translation of
the Therapeutic Method, begun by Burgundio of Pisa.
Vienna 2294, 14th century, fols. 1-82v, De ingenio sanitatis
quod deficiebat de translatione Burgundionis (usque ad
libri xiv, c. 12) complete translatum per P. de Albano de
Padua.
In the list of his works in Canon. Misc. 46 Peter is credited with the
translation of six of Galen’s treatises, namely: de cholera nigra,
de utilitate particularium, de optima compositione, de tabe, liber
creticorum, and a sixth title which I did not clearly make out, “Item
transtulit librum eiusdem de re fa (or sa, perhaps sanitate) de verbo
ad verbum non sicut ille abreviatur.” This last translation was in 18
chapters.
[Sidenote: The _Conciliator_, 1303.]
Conciliator differentiarum philosophorum et precipue
medicorum. Printed eight times before 1500 and several
times thereafter. Most editions are to be found in the
British Museum, but it does not have the first edition
of 1471, Venetiis apud Octavianum Scotum, although it
possesses the Venetian editions of 1521 and 1526, which
are omitted from the bibliographies of Mazzuchelli and
Colle. I have chiefly used, at the John Crerar Library,
Chicago, the edition of 1526, and at the British Museum
the very rare second edition, Mantua, 1472. The editions
of 1476, 1483, 1490, and 1496 are also found in America
(CFCB).
Quaestiones de febribus, pp. 217-40, in a collection of
various authors on fevers printed in 1576, are simply nine
Differentiae from the Conciliator.
Not many MSS appear to have survived; some are:
BN 6961, 1384 A. D., conciliator discordiarum medicinalium.
BN 6962, 15th century.
Library of the Dukes of Burgundy, 10871, early 16th century,
Petri de Abano, Conciliator de medicinis, “Ad melius
intelligendum.”
Medic. 54, “Egregie questiones Petri Paduani consiliatoris,”
in the 1412 A. D. catalogue of Amplonius, seems no longer
in that collection.
Harleian 3747, 15th century, fol. 233, Petri de Ebano de
balneis, is probably an extract from the Conciliator.
Vienna 5289, 15th century, fol. 15r, Cura epidimiae, “Recipe
radices pedis corvini ... / ... adiustionem prohibitum,”
ascribed to Peter and immediately followed by his De
venenis, is perhaps also an extract from the Conciliator.
[Sidenote: _On the astrolabe._]
It appears to have been printed twice but I have not seen either
edition:
Astrolabium planum in tabulis ascendens continens
qualibet hora atque minuto aequationes domorum coeli
significationes imaginum moram nati in utero matris cum
quodam tractatus nativitatum necnon horas inaequales pro
quolibet climate mundi, Venice, 1488; and 1502 (Luc’
Antonio de Giunta).
Perhaps it is the same as the following work ascribed to Peter in a MS
at Munich which I have been unable to inspect:
CLM 22048, 15th century, 176 fols., De signis celestibus
eorumque significatione et potestate, cum multis tabulis
astronomicis.
Kroll and Skutsch, in their edition of Julius Firmicus Maternus, II
(1913), xxviii, list what appears to be another edition of the same
year, 1488, at Augsburg, and which they say was reprinted in 1494 and
often thereafter.
Opus Astrolabii plani in tabulis: a Iohanne Angeli artium
liberalium magistro a nouo elaboratum; explicit feliciter.
Erhardi ratdolt Augustensis viri solertis: eximia
industria: et mira imprimendi arte: qua nuper veneciis:
nunc Auguste vindelicorum excellet nominatissimus.
Vigesimoseptimo kalendas Novembris. M. CCCC. LXXXVIII.
Laus deo.
This edition, Kroll and Skutsch state, contained portions of the
Mathesis of Firmicus, and some notes which Peter of Abano had added to
the astrological images (Kroll et Skutsch, II, xxxii). Whether these
brief notes are Peter’s sole connection with the Astrolabium planum,
they do not make clear.
[Sidenote: _On the motion of the eighth sphere_, 1310.]
I have seen it stated somewhere that it forms a part of the preceding
work. I have read the treatise in the first of the following MSS:
Canon. Misc. 190, 1445 A. D., fols. 78r-83v, Tractatus motus
octave spere.
Cod. Vatic. Palat. Lat. 1377, 14-15th century, fols.
1r-5r, “Incipit tractatus quem composuit magister Petrus
Paduanus in motu octave spere et sequitur capitulum primum
prohemiale in operis causa et ipsius intentione. Quoniam
iuxta Ptholomeum rerum quippe causas ... / ... inde causa
existit prefati. Explicit tractatus motus octave spere
ordinatus a magistro Petro Paduanensi anno gratiae 1310.”
Vienna 5498, 15th century, fols. 60r-70v, “Libellus in motu
octave sphere.”
[Sidenote: The _Lucidator_, 1310.]
The fuller title, “Lucidator dubitabilium astronomie,” is used by Peter
himself in citing the work in the Prohemium to his treatise on the
motion of the eighth sphere.
BN 2598, following the Physonomia, fols. 99r-125v, “Quoniam
astrologyce considerationis ambiguitates....” At fol. 125v
the copyist, Petrus Collensis, whom Duhem characterizes
as “scribe aussi maladroit qu’ignorant latiniste,” adds
his name and a table of contents comprising ten questions.
But the last four of these do not seem to be discussed in
the text, of which the last three pages contain rather
the beginning of the treatise on the motion of the eighth
sphere. Therefore we have only the preface and first six
Differentiae of the Lucidator. No copy of the Lucidator
was known before Duhem, Études sur Léonard de Vinci,
1906-1909, I, 50-51, called attention to this MS.
[Sidenote: Commentary on the _Problems_ of Aristotle, 1310.]
Expositio in librum problematum Aristotelis, Mantua 1475;
Padua, 1482, 1501, 1520. The editio princeps of 1475 is
not in the British Museum, although it has the other three
editions, but copies of it exist in America (CFCB). The
1482 edition is said to have really been printed at Venice
by Herbort. I have consulted the edition of 1482 in this
country at the Columbia University Library. The Incipit
in the 1482 edition reads, “Expositio praeclarissimi
atque eximii artium ac medicinae doctoris Petri de Ebano
Patavini in librum Problematum Aristotelis feliciter
incipit.”
But the Explicit is given imperfectly in this 1482 edition
and may better be repeated after a Venetian MS, S. Marco
XII, 84, 14th century, fols. 1-139, “Explicit expositio
succincta compilationis problematum Aristotelis quam
Petrus edidit Padubanensis et a nullo prius interpretante;
incepta quidem Parisius et laudabiliter Paduae terminata
anno legis Christianorum millesimo trecentesimo decimo
cum laude Dei altissimi cuius nomen sit benedictum per
saecula, amen.” The Explicit as given in the first
edition similarly stated that Peter composed the work
partly in Paris and finished it in Padua in 1310. The
Venetian MS just mentioned omits the text of Aristotle and
gives only Peter’s commentary.
BN 6540. An illuminated MS with a picture at the beginning
of a smooth-shaven man in gown and hood which is possibly
meant for Peter. This MS would presumably be the
autograph, were the MSS Catalogue right in dating it in
1310 A. D.; but I think that the date when the Explicit
states that the work was completed has been incorrectly
assumed to be the time when the MS was written. There
seems to be nothing about the MS to indicate that it was
written as early as 1310.
BN 6541, 14th century.
BN 6541A, 15th century.
BN 6542, 1385 A. D., per m. de Jenduno (i.e. Jean de Jandun)
elucidata et declarata.
BN 6543, 14th century.
Arsenal 723, 15th century, 286 fols. This also begins with
the prologue of Jean de Jandun who lectured on the work at
Paris from a copy of Peter’s Commentary given him by the
famous Marsiglio of Padua.
Mazarine 3520, 14th century. According to the MSS Catalogue,
the prologue differs from that in the 1519 (1520?)
edition, but the text is the same except that it stops in
the midst of the 28th problem under Particula X.
Digby 77, 14th century, fols. 57-82, Summa Problematum
Aristotelis “secundum Petrum Paduanensem.”
BM Addit. 21978, 1477 A. D. Two other translations of
Aristotle’s Problems accompany Peter’s work in this MS.
Peterhouse 79, 14th century, “Expl. prior exposicio huius
libri per petrum padubanensem incepta parisius et finita
padue cum gaudio magno, deo sit honor.”
[Sidenote: _On poisons_, 1316 (?).]
Tractatus de venenis (also in the MSS, “Pollex de venenis”
or “Pollex venenorum”), Mantua 1472 (or 1473?); Padua,
1473; also in 1484, 1490, 1495, 1515, 1555, and, with the
Conciliator, in 1476, 1496, 1499, and 1521. CFCB also
lists separate editions of 1475, 1487, 1498, and 1500.
Amplon. Q. 222, mid. 14th century, fols. 227-37.
CLM 77, 1386 A. D., fols. 142-5.
CLM 184, 1439-1444 A. D., fol. 272-.
CLM 257, 15th century, fol. 111-.
Berlin 909, 15th century, fol. 107-.
Vienna 2358, fols. 150-7; 4751, fols. 218-37; 5289, fols.
16r-19v; 5398, fols. 197-204; all of 15th century.
BM Addit. 37079, 15th century, fols. 83r-131v.
Canon. Misc. 46, fol. 31-; 455, fols. 176-83; both 15th
century.
Bodleian 484 (Bernard 2063, #26), fols. 206-26.
Vendôme 243, 18 Jan. 1441, fols. 176-83.
Arsenal 873, 15th century, fol. 97-.
BN nouv. acq. 1789, moyen format, fols. 99-110.
Library of Dukes of Burgundy, 8554, 15th century.
Bibl. Naz. Turin H-II-16, 15th century, fol. 115v.
Naples XII-G-78, 15th century, in Italian.
Vicenza 328, in Italian.
Volterra 1, 16th century.
Florence, Nelli 243, 16th century; 374, 18th century.
Riccard. 1177, 15th century, fols. 7-13.
[Sidenote: _Addition to Mesue._]
Petri Apponi in librum J. Mesue (Yuhanna ibn Masawaih)
additio, fols. 100r-129 in the 1471 edition of Yuhanna ibn
Masawaih, fols. 111-21 in the 1495 edition. Also printed
in 1485, 1491, 1497, 1513, 1523, 1531, 1541, 1551, 1602,
1623.
S. Marco XIV, 42, 14th century, fols. 194-222.
CLM 8, completus Paduae ann. 1464, fols. 120-38, Additiones
libri Mesuae ut communiter traditur Francisci pede
montium, immo Conciliatoris. In the 1495 edition additions
by Francis of Piedmont follow those of Peter of Abano.
CLM 13, fol. 223-; 81, 14-15th century; 25061, 15th century,
fols. 337-8.
Sloane 3124, 15th century, fols. 276-323.
[Sidenote: Dioscorides.]
Dioscorides, De materia medica, Colle, 1478. “Explicit
dyascorides quem petrus paduanensis legendo corexit et
exponendo que utiliora sunt in lucem deduxit.”
Dioscorides digestus alphabetico ordine additis
annotatiunculis brevibus et tractatu de aquarum natura,
Lugduni, 1512. This is said to be a reproduction of the
1478 edition.
BN 6820, 14th century, fols. 1-72r, words the Explicit a
little differently from the edition of 1478: “Explicit
dyascorides quem petrus paduanensis legendo correxit et
exponendo que occultiora in lucem deduxit.”
There are said to be a number of MSS of this medieval enlarged Latin
Dioscorides, which indeed Wellman (“Dioskurides” in PW) calls “the
most widely-disseminated handbook of pharmacy, which dominated the
whole later middle ages,” but Peter’s edition of it is not well
distinguished from preceding ones. Wellmann, for example, says nothing
of Peter’s commentary and corrections.
[Sidenote: Pseudo-Hippocrates.]
Libellus de medicorum astrologia a Petro de Abbano in
latinum traductus, Venice, Ratdolt, 1485 (in “Opusculum
repertorii pronosticon in mutationes aeris”). Many copies
in America (CFCB).
Tractatulus Hypocratis medicorum optimi De aspectibus
planetarum versus Lunam (a Petro de abbano in latinum
traductus), Leipzig, 1505.
Printed with Magninus, Regimen Sanitatis, 1500, 1517, 1524.
Printed in 1585 and 1626 by Z. T. Bovio.
Also found with the works of Hippocrates and Galen in
various editions and in the 1497 edition of Rasis.
MSS are also numerous, but catalogues usually do not state whether
William of Moerbeke or Peter of Abano is the translator. It is ascribed
to the former, however, in
BN 7337, pp. 78-84, Liber hyppocratis de prognosticationibus
egritudinum secundum motum lune traductus a domino fratre
Guglielmo de Morbercha archiepiscopo Corintino ordinis
predicatorum.
Vienna 5498, 15th century, fols. 53-59, our treatise
precedes that of Peter on the motion of the eighth sphere.
Vienna 5275, 16th century, fol. 195, Pseudo-Hippocrates,
Fragmentum libri de medicorum astrologia a Petro de Abano
in latinum sermonem traducti.
Sloane 780, 15th century, fols. 55v-58v, “De iudiciis a
lune observatione formandis de sanitate vita et morte
infirmiorum,” is the Peter of Abano version, opening, “Cum
legerem libros hypocratis medicorum optimi inveni hunc
parvum sed magne utilitatis librum....”
Sloane 636, 15th century, fols. 98v-102v, has the Incipit
of William of Moerbeke’s translation (Quetif and Echard,
1719, I, 390), “Sapientissimus ypocras omnium medicorum
peritissimus ait, Inscius medicus est qui astronomiam
ignorat....” This is also the Incipit of Digby 29, 15th
century, fols. 167-72.
The recently revised catalogue of the Royal MSS notes that a third
version, which apparently is neither by William of Moerbeke nor Peter,
is found in
Royal 12-C-XVIII, 14th century, fols. 33v-36r, which opens,
“Dixit ypocras qui fuit medicus et magister optimus et
medicus non est qui astronomiam ignorat”;
Sloane 3171, fols. 104v-116, which opens, “Dixit ypocras
medicorum optimus cuiusmodi medicus est qui astrononiam
ignorat”;
Sloane 3282, fols. 89v-90, which opens, “Dixit ypocras qui
fuit medicus et magister optimus cuiusmodi medicus est qui
non astronomiam nossit”;
Cotton Appendix VI, fols. 5r-8r, which opens, “Dixit ypocras
qui fuit medicus et magister optimus cuiusmodi medicus est
qui astronomiam ignorat.”
Digby 28, early 14th century, fols. 81v-85, which opens,
“Dixit Ypo. non est medicus qui astronomiam non novit,” is
perhaps the same version; at any rate Coxe says that it
differs from Digby 29, William of Moerbeke’s translation.
[Sidenote: Geomancy.]
Geomantia, in Latin according to Mazzuchelli, Venice, 1549
and 1586. I have not seen either.
Geomantia di Pietro d’Abano nuovamente tradotta di Latino in
volgare per il Tricasso Mantuano, Venice, 1542.
Novamente dall’ eccell. M. S. Musio da Capoa ricorsa, 2
pts., Vinegia, 1546-1550. Another edition, Venice, 1550.
Comincia la Geomantia di P. d’Abano tradotta di Lattina
lingua, Venice, 1556.
CLM 392, 15th century, fol. 69-.
CLM 489, 16th century, fols. 222-33, “Desideravi verum et
certum Iudicium dare secundum gloriosam et venerabilem
scientiam Geomantiae ... / ... Explicit liber Petri de
Abano. P.”
Sandaniele del Friuli 240, 15th century, “Incipit modum
iudicandi questiones geomantie sive modum magistri Petri.
Considerantibus (?) verum et certum ... / ... veluti
nocturna. Explicit liber Geomantiae. Deo gratias Amen.”
[Sidenote: Prophecies.]
Questa sie la profetia composta per el reverendissimo
negromante piero dabano ... Bologna, 1495.
Vatican 5356, fol. 28, Variae prophetiae Magistri Petri
Patavini de Abano.
[Sidenote: _Heptameron_, or _Elements of magic_.]
Kiesewetter, Der Occultismus des Alterthums, mentions a
Latin edition, Venice, 1496, which I have neither seen nor
found mentioned elsewhere.
It was printed together with the Occult Philosophy of Henry
Cornelius Agrippa in Latin at Paris, 1565, and in 1600 and
1655 in English translation.
Also in J. Scheible, Kleiner Wunder-Schauplatz, Theil 10,
1855.
In French as Les Oeuvres Magiques de Henri-Corneille
Agrippa, par Pierre d’Aban (Heptameron ou les élémens
magiques de Pierre Aban, Philosophe, Disciple de
Henri-Corneille Agrippa), Liège, 1788.
Sloane 3850, 17th century, fols. 13v-23.
CLM 24936, 17th century, pp. 94-131, Petri de Abano doctoris
urbis Pataviae Magia.
Vienna 11294, 17th century, fols. 41r-74v.
BN 17870, 18th century.
[Sidenote: _Elucidarium necromanticum._]
Vatican, Regina Sueviae 2014, according to Mazzuchelli
(1741) p. liii, who, like Naudé, lists this as a separate
treatise different from the Heptameron.
[Sidenote: _Annulorum experimenta._]
BN 7337, 15th century, pp. 131-8, “Peritissimi artium ac
medicine doctoris in omnibusque scientiis excellentissimi
magistri Petri de abbano annulorum experimenta
feliciter incipiunt. Primo et principaliter in hac arte
considerandum est quod 28 sunt mansiones lune.” This seems
to be the work described by Naudé as “Liber experimentorum
mirabilium de annulis secundum 28 mansiones Lunae.”
[Sidenote: _Circulus philosophicus._]
CLM 17711, 17th century, fols. 284-307, is perhaps identical
with one of the three preceding works.
APPENDIX III
PETER OF ABANO, ABRAHAM ABEN EZRA, AND HENRY BATE
[Sidenote: French translation from the Hebrew.]
The French translation from the Hebrew of astrological treatises by
Abraham Aben Ezra is preserved in BN, fonds de Sorbonne, 1825. I have
not seen the MS but infer from the description in HL XXI, 500-3 that
it includes only five of Abraham’s treatises, The Beginning of Wisdom,
Nativities, Revolutions, Elections, and Interrogations. At the close of
The Beginning of Wisdom we are told that it was written down by Obers
de Montdidier from the dictation of Hagins the Jew in the house of Sire
Henri Bate at Malines and finished December 22, 1273.
[Sidenote: Peter of Abano’s Latin version.]
One MS of Peter of Abano’s version, BN supplem. lat. 151, is partially
described in HL 21, 501. Others which I have examined are BN 7336,
BN 7438, Canon. Misc. 190. I have seen various other MSS noted in
catalogues and elsewhere, but such notices seldom seem to give a full
and accurate list of the treatises. They were printed in 1507 by Peter
Liechtenstein as noted in Appendix II. All copies which I have seen
contain at the close of the first treatise, the _Liber Introductorius_
or Beginning of Wisdom, the passage, of which HL 21, 501 has already
quoted the Latin, stating that when Peter of Abano the Paduan found
this work “in Gallic idiom, through the unskilfulness of the translator
from the Hebrew defective in many ways, corrupt, and sometimes poorly
arranged and failing to make sense, as far as he could he brought it
back in the Latin tongue to Abraham’s original meaning.” The date is
then given as 1293. Peter is also usually named as the translator at
the beginning or end of the other treatises.
[Sidenote: Additional treatises in Peter’s version.]
In the Latin versions of Abraham’s astrological treatises besides
the five named by the Histoire Littéraire are found the _Liber
rationum_,[2885] the _Liber luminarium et de cognitione diei
cretici_,[2886] and _Tractatus particulares_, which are really three
treatises, namely: (1) “Incipit alius tractatus particulare. Incipit
tractatus de partibus horarum in interrogationibus”;[2887] (2)
“Tractatus in tredecim manieribus planetarum”;[2888] and (3) “Tractatus
de significationibus planetarum in duodecim domibus Abrahe.”[2889]
The _De consuetudinibus in judiciis astrorum et est centiloquium
Bethen_, which occurs in the midst of Abraham’s treatises in the MSS,
is probably not by him and is placed last in the 1507 edition. The
_Tractatus particulares_ are not included by Steinschneider in his
list of Abraham’s astrological writings.[2890]
[Sidenote: A Latin translation by Henry Bate.]
While in general the Latin translation of Abraham’s astrological
treatises is ascribed to Peter, in all the editions and manuscripts
that I have seen,[2891] one of them, entitled _De mundo vel seculo_
and dealing with conjunctions and revolutions, is ascribed to Henry
Bate, the same under whose patronage the French translations were
made.[2892] It would therefore seem that Peter found Henry Bate’s own
Latin translation of 1281 more satisfactory than the French translation
made at Bate’s house in 1273,[2893] and did not attempt to revise it.
In some manuscripts Bate is also credited with a Latin translation of
The Beginning of Wisdom or _Liber introductorius_, made in 1292.[2894]
[Sidenote: Other writings of Henry Bate.]
This Henry Bate was called by Pico della Mirandola “a disciple of
Albertus Magnus.”[2895] In 1274 at Malines and in fulfilment of a
promise made to William of Moerbeke, the noted translator of the
Dominican Order and at that time papal chaplain and penitentiary,
when they were together in Lyons, Bate composed a treatise on the
astrolabe.[2896] Later Bate also wrote an account of his own horoscope
and destiny.[2897] It gives the year of his birth as 1244. He was a
canon, doctor of theology, and university professor; and seems to
have spent his life mainly at Malines, Liège, and Paris. He also
wrote on errors in the Alfonsine astronomical tables.[2898] Another
unpublished work of his is entitled _Speculum divinorum et quorundam
naturalium_.[2899]
[Sidenote: Other works by Abraham.]
There were also Latin versions of other astronomical and astrological
works by Abraham than those translated by Bate or Peter.[2900] One
cannot, however, be sure that “Abraham Judaeus” always refers to
Abraham Avenezra, as there was a translator or translators of the
thirteenth century by that name. Simon Cordo of Genoa was assisted in
his Latin translation of the medical works of Serapion by an Abraham
Judaeus of Tortosa;[2901] and Alfonso X of Castile employed a Jew named
Abraham in astronomical translation from Arabic into Spanish.[2902] An
Abraham Iudeus of Barcelona translated Haly on Elections from Arabic
into Latin,[2903] and was perhaps the same as Abraham Bar Chasdai,
a rabbi of Barcelona who translated the supposititious Aristotelian
work _De pomo_ from Arabic into Hebrew, after which Manfred, the
illegitimate son of Emperor Frederick II, translated it or had it
translated from Hebrew into Latin.
FOOTNOTES:
[2885] Incipit liber de rationibus habrabe avenerze quem transtulit
petrus paduanus.... Explicit translatio libri de rationibus per petrum
paduanum.
[2886] Explicit liber luminarium Abrabe Avenare quem Petrus de Padua
Lombardus ordinavit quam melius potuit in planum ydioma latinum, qui
liber potest de cognitione cause crisis intitulari. It was printed
separately by Ratdolt, Venice, 1482.
[2887] This Titulus is wanting in the printed edition (1507), fol.
lxxxv recto, but is found in BN 7336, fol. 109r and 7438. fol. 168v.
[2888] Or “Incipit liber significationum septem planetarum et earum
generibus vel maneriebus.”
[2889] At its close “Finis quorundam tractatuum particularium Abrahe
Avenare quos Petrus Paduanus ordinavit in latinum.”
[2890] In his article “Abraham Ibn Ezra” in _Abhandl. z. Gesch. d.
Math. Wiss._ III, 2 (1880), p. 127, Steinschneider devoted only the
four closing pages of this long article to Abraham’s astronomy and
astrology, promising a future article on that subject, but I do not
know if it ever appeared.
[2891] According to the recent catalogue of the Royal MSS, “_Elecciones
Abraham_” in Royal 12-C-XVIII, 14th century, fols. 26-30, is “not the
same translation as that (by Pietro of Abano) printed, Venice, 1507,”
and this seems to be the case, although by a coincidence the opening
and closing words are the same, “_Sapientes legis_” and “_dixerunt
antiqui_.”
[2892] “Explicit liber de mundo vel seculo completus die lune hore
post festum beati luce hora diei quasi 10, anno domini 1281, inceptus
in leodio, perfectus in machilinia, translatus a magistro Henrico bate
de hebreo in latinum”:--ed. of 1507, fol. lxxxv recto; BN 7336, fol.
1O9r; Canon. Misc. 190, fol. 69; Digby 114, fol. 175; Vienna 4146, fol.
264. CU Emmanuel 70, 15th century, fols. 137v-44, however, gives the
date as 1292, “Expl. lib. de mundo et seculo completus die Jovis post
fest. S. barnabe Ap. sub ascendente scorpionis a. d. 1292 in perside
(?) translatus autem a mag. Henr. dicto bate de machelia de hebreo in
latinum.” Sloane 312, 15th century, fols. 7Ov-97.
[2893] Apparently in the eight intervening years Bate had learned
enough Hebrew to translate Abraham himself.
[2894] Cod. Lips. un. 1466, fols. 1-24; Berlin 963, 15th century,
fols. 152-63; Vatic. Palat. Lat. 1377, 14th century, fols. 21r-37v,
“Translatus est hic liber a magistro Henrico de Malinis dicto Bate
cantore Leodiensis, et est hec translatio perfecta in urbe veteri a. d.
1292”; Wolfenbüttel 2816, anno 1461, fols. 84-111, “Abraham avenezre
initium sapientiae.... Translatus est a magistro Henrico de Malynis
dicto Bate, cantore Leodiensi. Perfecta est hec translatio in Urbe
Veteri anno Domini 1292.” In this last MS follows a _De fortitudine
planetarum_, said to have been translated “in the old city by master
Henry of Malines, called Bate,” but the date is given as 1272. I have
been unable to examine any of these MSS to see if the translation is
really the same as that usually ascribed to Peter of Abano, but Björnbo
(_Abhandl. z. Gesch. d. Math. Wiss._, XXVI, 1911, p. 135) gives that
impression.
[2895] _Adversus astrologos_, IX, 3.
[2896] Digby, 48, 15th century, fols. 143v-152r. “Magistratus
composicio astrolabi hanrici bate ... quod vobis promissum est cum apud
vos essem Lugduniensis.... Expletum est hoc opusculum ab Hanrico Bate
in villa Machliniensi Luna coniuncta Jovi in domo septima ascendente
luna a. d. MCCLXXIIII quinto idus Octobris ad peticionem fratris
Vuilhelmi de Morbeca, ordinis Predicatorum, domini pape penitenciarii
et capellani”; also printed by Erhard Ratdolt, Venice, 1485, with a _De
natiuitatibus_ ascribed to Abraham Judaeus (printed again, Cologne,
1537) which is quite different from the treatise on Revolutions and
Nativities translated by Abano.
[2897] Contained in BN 7324, _Nativitas magistri Henrici Mechlinensis
cum quibusdam revolutionibus_, and described in HL 26, 561-2.
[2898] HL 26, 558-61 and Wolfenbüttel 2816, anno 1461, fols. 9-12,
“Tractatus in quo ostenditur defectus tabularum Alfonsi, compositus a
magistro Henrico Bate de Machlinia A. D. 1347” (_sic_).
[2899] Library of Dukes of Burgundy 7500, 15th century, or, as it
is entitled in two St. Omer MSS (Maurice de Wolf, “Henri de Bate de
Malines” in _Bulletins de l’Académie Royale Belgique, Classe des
lettres_, 1909), “Speculum divinarum humanarumque rerum.”
[2900] BN 7377A, No. 4 and BN 9335, 14th century, fols. 126v-135,
liber augmenti et diminutionis qui vocatur numeratio divinationis
secundum Indos. BN 16648, 13th century, fols. 106-46, liber qui dicitur
abrahismus.... “Dixit habraham iudeus, cognitum est corpus solare....”
[2901] See the printed editions, _Liber Serapionis aggregatus in
medicinis simplicibus_, 1479; _liber Servitoris liber xxviii_, 1471;
etc.
[2902] Canon. Misc. 45, 15th century, 56 fols. “Abulhaze Abnelaiitan
liber de mundo et coelo, de notibus planetarum, etc., in partes duas
distinctus per Abraham Hebraeum jubente Alphonso Hispaniae rege de
Arabico in Hispanum, postea ab anonymo quodam in Latinum versus cum
figuris praeviis capitulorum elencho et Alphonso epistola.” Arundel
377, 13th century, fols. 56v-68, Magistri Habrahe de tabulis planetarum.
[2903] Sloane 312, 15th century, fols. 252-5, 215-51. The same MS
contains two works by Abraham Avenezra with whom Scott, in his Index of
the Sloane MSS has identified--probably incorrectly--this Abraham the
translator.
APPENDIX IV
WAS PETER CALLED TO TREVISO IN 1314?
It was stated by Bonifazio in his _History of Treviso_,[2904] and
repeated by Mazzuchelli[2905] and Tiraboschi,[2906] that on August 7,
1314, the Trevisans, wishing to establish a university, brought Peter
to their city, where he taught and practiced medicine for a year.
Colle[2907] agreed that he received a call but doubted if he accepted
it because his will, drawn up in 1315, makes it appear that he is
still in the employ of Padua. But it is not quite certain that he even
received a call, if we judge from the extant original documents,[2908]
a decree issued by the government of Treviso on August 9, 1314, and
letters of the 15th and 16th of that month. The decree indeed aims at
the institution of professorial chairs in the two laws and medicine
(_phisica_) at Treviso, namely, Ordinary Lecturers in Civil and Canon
Law, and Extraordinary Lecturers in Civil Law and Medicine. Under each
of these four heads it lists three names, and that of “Master Peter
of Abano” heads those in medicine. But the decree further states that
“the doctors named below” are to be balloted upon, and apparently by
lot,[2909] and thus arranged in order of first, second, and third
choice. The position is then to be offered to the first one chosen;
if he refuses, to the second; and so on. It is also stated that the
incumbents “are to lecture and teach through three years continuously
after their arrival,” not for one year. The normal salary is set at
four hundred petty pounds annually, although the Council of Three
Hundred are left some liberty in increasing or diminishing this amount.
Moreover, we have a letter of August sixteenth notifying Peter of
Suzara of his final appointment after he had indicated that he would
accept the election. Similar letters were sent to five others of the
twelve men named in the decree, and the name of Peter of Abano is not
found among the five, the professor named in medicine being Henzelerius
or Hengelerius. Either therefore Peter of Abano had not been elected or
had refused to accept the appointment.
FOOTNOTES:
[2904] Bonifazio, _Storia di Trevigi_, 1591, P. 354.
[2905] Mazzuchelli (1741), p. xxii.
[2906] Tiraboschi (1775) V, 51 and 156.
[2907] Colle (1825) III, 133.
[2908] Verci (1787) VII, _Documenti_, pp. 39-40, 43-4, 46-7 (from
Raccolta Scotti, IV, 376, 342, 388).
[2909] “... quod infrascripti Doctores per sortem eligantur ... quod
illi qui scripti sunt inferius ad lecturam ordinariam per se sortiri
debeant unus contra alium ad buffolos et ballotas.... Et simili
forma observetur et debeat observari in scriptis ad extraordinariam
lecturam....”
APPENDIX V
PETER’S SALARY AT PADUA
[Sidenote: Amount exaggerated.]
The amount of salary offered at Treviso was worth mentioning because
the statement has been made over and over again that Peter in his will
of 1315 bequeathed to the town government of Padua fifteen hundred lire
or pounds that were due him for his past three months’ salary. From
this it was inferred that his annual stipend was either six thousand
pounds, or four thousand if reckoned on the basis of an academic year
of eight months. This seemed to show that he was the highest paid
professor of his own, not to mention our, age. On turning, however,
to the will as printed by Verci[2910] we discover that the fifteen
hundred pounds represent three years of back pay, and that Peter
further bequeaths to the commune of Padua five hundred pounds of small
_denarii_ due on his salary, presumably for the current year.[2911]
[Sidenote: Why was it so far in arrears?]
This puts an entirely different aspect upon the matter. It not only
shows that Peter’s stipend was scarcely a tithe of what had been
supposed, although a good salary for the times, as a comparison with
that offered at Treviso and with the amounts of the other legacies made
by Peter in his will indicates. It also raises the question, why was
the payment of Peter’s salary some four years in arrears? And why does
Peter make a distinction between five hundred pounds for which he holds
papers (_Bulletas_) from the town officials and the fifteen hundred
pounds due him for the previous three years and for which he apparently
has nothing to show. Is there some question as to his claim for salary
for those three years or even as to his having been in the Commune’s
employ? Probably the simplest explanation is that after failing to
receive his salary for these years Peter took the precaution to get a
definite statement concerning it for the fourth. This might also serve
to explain why Treviso had hopes of getting him away from Padua in
1314, and why he stayed on in 1315. The years just preceding 1315 seem
to have been a troublous time for the city of Padua, which incurred a
heavy sentence from the emperor Henry VII, and had wars with Vicenza
and Can Grande, not to mention civil strife such as that of April,
1314, when another Peter--_Judex de Altichino_--was slain with his sons
in the public square by the people, their goods confiscated, and the
family banished to the fourth generation.[2912]
There seems to be no quarrel between Peter and the Commune of Padua,
for he goes on in his will to entrust himself, his children, and his
property to its tutelage and defense, besides leaving the Commune the
two thousand pounds in question. Also as Peter makes his will in Padua,
where most of his legatees live, where he still has his residence, and
where he intends to be buried, it appears that in May, 1315, he still
is in the employ of that city and has been for years past. So he has
not yet gone to Treviso or elsewhere. Nor is his bequeathing the two
thousand pounds arrears to the city a sure indication that he does not
intend to teach there any more, either because he expects to die soon,
or to accept a position in another university, or to cease teaching
entirely because of old age. These arrears are an asset and he has to
dispose of them somehow in making his will; he evidently has continued
to teach when one and two years’ pay was owing him, and he may continue
to do so now when three or four years’ salary is in arrears. However,
it must be said that he shows no hope of ever recovering these arrears,
nor is there any evidence that he ever did.
FOOTNOTES:
[2910] Which Colle, although he wrote after the publication of Verci’s
work, did not take the trouble to do. Gloria was apparently the first
to note that the time was three years and not three months.
[2911] Verci (1787) VII, _Documenti_, 117-8. “Item reliquit Communi
Padue libras quingentas denariorum parvorum quas habere debebat a dicto
Communi Padue pro suo debito salario de quo habebat Bulletas dominorum
Potestatis Ancianorum et Gastaldionum Communis Padue supradicti.
Item reliquit eidem Communi Padue libras mille et quingentas quas
habere debebat a dicto Communi Padue pro suo salario de tribus annis
retroactis.”
[2912] _Chronicon Patavinum ab 1174-1390_ in Muratori, _Antiquitates_
(1741) IV, 1156-7 (covering the years 1311-1315).
APPENDIX VI
WHEN DID PETER DIE?
The date of Peter’s death may be placed between May 25, 1315, when
he made his will, and November 19, 1318, when the record of a legal
transaction in which his sons were concerned appears to speak of
him as dead.[2913] It has usually been assumed that he died in 1315
or 1316 and these dates are given in epitaphs,[2914] which, however,
were composed long afterwards and cannot be accepted as sure proof.
Peter’s making his will has been taken as a sign that he was at
death’s door and died almost immediately afterward, but this inference
does not seem necessarily to follow either from the will proper or
from the accompanying confession of faith which he made on the day
preceding. Arnald of Villanova, it will be recalled, made his will in
1305 but lived on until 1311. Peter concludes his confession of faith
by affirming that such has been his belief in the past, is now, “and
will be to the very end of his life.”[2915] Unless we assume that this
last clause is added simply as a matter of form or as a safeguard
against the possibility of the Inquisition’s making the charge that
immediately after his confession Peter became a heretic or relapsed
into his previous heresy--unless we make such an assumption, which may
be entirely unwarranted--the natural conclusion is that Peter did not
expect to die immediately.
The language of the will itself points in the same direction. Peter, “a
provident and discreet man,” contemplating the unstable condition of
human nature and noting that “those things which have the appearance of
lasting for a long time” nevertheless “tend visibly toward their end,”
has decided to meet such perils half-way and happily anticipate the
last day of life by a will made when in full possession of his senses
and intellectual faculties.[2916] No mention is made of his being
in ill health, unlike another will of the same period quoted in the
same volume of Verci, in which the testator speaks of himself as “of
sound mind, although afflicted body, not wishing to depart this world
intestate.”[2917]
Other indications that Peter not only did not die immediately after
making his will, but continued to teach and write, are the fairly
strong evidence and probability that the pope to whom his treatise on
poisons is addressed is John XXII, who was not elected until August 7,
1316; and the dubious assertion in a fifteenth century manuscript that
Peter was acting dean of Montpellier at that time. We might also add
that a prefatory note in the 1555 edition of the _De venenis_ states
that he lived to be almost an octogenarian.
FOOTNOTES:
[2913] Gloria (1884), p. 587, note 6, “Mill. trec. decimo octavo ind.
prima die decimo nono mens. Nov. cora, d. B. (Bernardo) Dei gratia
venerab. abbate monast. S. Marie de Pratalea--Benvenutus q. fil. mag.
Petri fisici olim ser Constancii de Abano pro se--et vice Petri et
Zifredi suorum fratrum q. eiusd. d. Petri et suorum heredum--vendidit.”
[2914] Mazzuchelli (1741), pp. xxxv-xxxvi; Gloria (1884), p. 586;
Tomasini (1630), p. 22.
[2915] Verci (1787) VII, _Documenti_, 119, “et in hac credulitate fuit,
est, et erit usque ad extremum vite exitum.”
[2916] Verci (1787) VII, _Documenti_, 116. “Providus et discretus vir
Magister Petrus filius qu. domini Constancii de Abano de contrata
Sancte Lucie de Padua, Artis Medicine Philosophie et Astrologie
professor, attendens et considerans quod instabilis sit humane nature
status et condicio et quod ea que verisimiliter diu duratura habere
videntur essentiam tendunt visibiliter ad non esse. Ideoque tantis
periculis occurrere cupiens et dispositione Testamentaria vite diem
extremum feliciter et salubriter prevenire sana integra et plena mentis
sensus et intellectus cognitione ut quieti corporis et anime sue
provideat et saluti tale de suis bonis per nuncupationem suam condidit
Testamentum sic dicens....”
[2917] Verci (1787) VII, 77, “... sane mentis, tamen de corpore
gravatus, nolens de hoc mundo decedere intestatus.”
APPENDIX VII
WAS THE DE VENENIS ADDRESSED TO POPE JOHN XXII (1316-1334)?
[Sidenote: Survey of the editions and MSS]
In some nine printed editions which I have examined the pope addressed
is denoted simply by the letter “N”; and most of the MSS do not
specify the pope by name, or if they do, it is not so stated in the
catalogues. Giacosa[2918] says that the treatise is dedicated in some
MSS to Pope Honorius IV, but he does not specify them, and I do not
know of any such. Where the pope is named, he is either John without
enumeration,[2919] or John XXII.[2920] It is perhaps worth noting that
there never was any John XX, and that John XXI is sometimes called
John XX, and John XXII is called John XXI, but that the converse is
impossible. In view of this uncertainty in the enumeration, it would
also not be surprising to find either John XXI or XXII named without
enumeration. Scardeone[2921] in the sixteenth century asserted that
the _De venenis_ was dedicated to John XXII, although this conflicts
with his statement that Peter died in 1315. Mazzuchelli[2922] spoke
of an Italian translation in which the pope is called Giacomo. There
never was a pope so styled, but both Honorius IV and John XXII (called
John XXI by Mazzuchelli owing to the error above noted) bore the name
Giacomo before they assumed their pontifical designations. Another
cogent reason for dismissing John XXI (1276-1277) from consideration is
that Peter at the age of twenty-six or twenty-seven would neither have
adopted the authoritative tone that he employs in the _De venenis_ in
addressing a pope who had himself, as Petrus Hispanus, been a medical
writer of note, nor have failed to advert to that pope’s own medical
works.
[Sidenote: Inference from a citation of Avenzoar.]
In the _De venenis_[2923] Peter cites the Latin translation of a
treatise by Avenzoar (ʿAbd al Malik ibn Zuhr ibn ʿAbd al Malik, Abu
Marwan) concerning the power of a powdered emerald as an antidote
against poison. In the printed editions Avenzoar’s work is referred to
as that translated for Pope Boniface.[2924] If we could only rely upon
this as Peter’s original wording, it would mean that he was himself
addressing some pope later than Boniface VIII (1294-1303), and so would
support the other evidence that the _De venenis_ was addressed to John
XXII. But in at least one manuscript of the _De venenis_ the work of
Avenzoar is said to have been translated “for the Roman people.”[2925]
Moreover, the Latin translation of Avenzoar in question is extant
and in the printed version[2926] we read at the close that it was
translated at Venice, August 21, 1281, from Hebrew into Latin by a
master of medicine from Padua[2927] with the aid of a Jew named Jacob.
The work would thus seem to have been translated long before Boniface
became pope. In a Paris manuscript,[2928] however, the translator
gives his name as John of Capua, a baptized Jew, of whom we know as a
translator of other works from Hebrew into Latin,[2929] and addresses
his present translation to the archbishop of Braga in Portugal,[2930]
whom Hartwig believed to be Martin de Oliviera who held that office
from 1292 to 1313. Now this John of Capua also translated the work on
Diets of Maimonides, at the suggestion of William of Brescia who was
Pope Boniface VIII’s physician, and Hartwig believes that he met the
archbishop of Braga at Rome. But more than this, in a Vienna manuscript
the translation of Avenzoar is addressed to Pope Boniface VIII
himself.[2931] Apparently therefore there is justification for Peter
of Abano’s speaking of the work as translated for Boniface VIII. And
whether it was or not, in any case it was translated at too late a date
for Peter to have cited it in his _De venenis_, had that treatise been
addressed to Pope John XXI who died in 1277. So if we admit that the
_De venenis_ was addressed to a Pope John, it must have been addressed
to John XXII who became pope on August 7, 1316.
[Sidenote: Popes and poisons.]
Returning for a moment to Boniface VIII, it may be remarked that he was
presumably the pope who, as Peter himself states in the _Conciliator_,
had protected him from certain persecutors. That there was nothing
strange in addressing a work on poisons to a pope of that time is shown
by the fact that Ermengard Blasius (or Blasii)[2932] of Montpellier,
physician of Philip the Fair of France, translated the work of Moses
Maimonides on poisons for Clement V, the predecessor of John XXII, in
1307.[2933] But there is no evidence so far as I know to indicate that
Peter of Abano addressed his work on poisons to Clement V, although
chronologically it is possible.
FOOTNOTES:
[2918] P. Giacosa, _Magistri Salernitani nondum editi_, 1901, p. 495.
[2919] Addit. 37079, 15th century, fols. 83r-131v, “Pollex incipit
de venenis editus a petro de abano peritissimo pad. Sanctissimo ac
Reverendissimo in Christo domino Domino Johanni divi providentia pape
et summo pontifici.” Some later hand, presumably Protestant, has drawn
a line through the words _pape_ and _summo_.
Amplon. Q. 222, mid 14th century, fols. 227-37, “Reverendissimo in
Christo patri Iohanni divina providentia summo pontifici.”
Riccard. 1177, 15th century, fols. 7-13, is said to be written at the
request of Pope John.
[2920] Bibl. Naz. Turin H-II-16, 15th century, fols. 111-115v, “Incipit
tractatus de venenis et eorum medicinis appropriatis transmissis summo
pontifici Joh. XXII.” “Explicit tractatus de venenis et eorum medicinis
appropriatis qui pollox (_sic_) venenorum appellatur. Compillatus ab
egregio artium et medicine doctore petro de ebano et temporis decano
studii montisspessulani directus sanctissimo in Xo patri et domino
domino Johanni divina providentia pape XXII. Deo gratias amen.” I
take this description of the MS from Giacosa (1901), p. 495. The MS
was somewhat damaged in the fire of 1904 and in the description of
it in the catalogue of MSS which survived the fire, published in the
same year, Abano’s treatise is not mentioned: “Marsilia Sancta Sophia
Receptae super prima quarti Avicennae De febribus; et alia.”
Canon. Misc. 46, 15th century, fols. 31-47r, described by Coxe as,
“Eiusdem Petri libellus de venenis ad Johannem Papam XXII,” but the
pope’s name does not appear in the MS itself.
[2921] Scardeone (1560), p. 201.
[2922] Mazzuchelli (1741), p. xlii.
[2923] In the fourth chapter or fifth, if, as in most printed editions,
the preface is reckoned as chapter one.
[2924] “Et ego quandoque sum expertus et avenzoar hec invenit ut in
libro translato Papae Bonifacio scriptum est.” Once in an edition of
1555 the pope’s name appears in full, but more often is abbreviated to
“pape Bon.,” as in the 1521 edition, or “pape Bo.” as in the earliest
editions.
[2925] Addit. 37079, 15th century, fol. 102r, “et avenzoar hec invenit
ut in libro populo romano.” It is easy to see, however, how the Latin
abbreviations for _Papa Bonifacius_ and _populus Romanus_ might be
confused by a copyist. Unfortunately I have not been able to trace this
point further in other MSS.
[2926] _Liber Theizir Dahalmodana Vahaltadabir_, II, i, 5 (Venice,
1553), for the passage cited on the emerald. There are also editions
before 1500.
[2927] Can this be meant for Petrus Paduanus himself?
[2928] BN 6948, fols. 1-102: see the extracts made from its
preface and Explicit by Delisle at the request of Otto Hartwig,
in the latter’s _Die Uebersetzungsliteratur Unteritaliens in der
normannisch-staufischen Epoche_, in _Centralblatt f. Bibliothekwesen_,
III (1886), pp. 188-9.
[2929] _Ibid._, p. 187.
[2930] It is somewhat of a coincidence that Petrus Hispanus was
archbishop of Braga before he became Pope John XXI.
[2931] Hartwig (1886), p. 188, “sanctissimi patris domine pape B. VIII.”
[2932] See Chapter 68, p. 845, note 2.
[2933] Peterhouse 101, 13-14th century, No. III, fol. 6r, “Expl. lib.
Rabynoisis cordubensis translatus barthinone a mag. hermengaldo blasii
in honorem reverentissimi summi pontificis Clementis quinto (_sic_)
anno ab incarnacione verbi 1307.”
APPENDIX VIII
PETER AND THE INQUISITION
[Sidenote: His own statement in the _Conciliator_.]
The relations of Peter of Abano with the church and the Inquisition
and the question whether he was accused, tried, or condemned for
heresy, magic, or astrology, are matters which have seldom been either
carefully investigated or correctly stated, although allusions are
often made to these points as if they were definitely settled. We shall
inquire here what real evidence there is. In the _Conciliator_, written
in 1303, occurs a germane statement by Peter himself at the close of
a chapter in which he has discussed the determination of periods in
history and the rise of new prophets and religions by the courses of
the stars, and the connection of seven angelic intelligences with the
seven planets. After this somewhat bold indulgence in astrology Peter
concludes, “So much then has been said as can be comprehended by reason
concerning this according to the skill of the world’s scholars, in no
way derogating from divine wisdom in what has been written but rather
confirming it in all points since it alone is truth and life. In this
matter, however, some mischief-makers, unwilling or rather unable to
hear, for a long time have freely vexed me, from whose hands at last
the said Truth has laudably snatched me and mine, with the intervention
too of an apostolic mandate.”[2934] Before 1303, therefore, Peter’s
astrology had aroused considerable opposition, perhaps at Paris, which
however was checked at least for the time being by papal protection,
and to which Peter does not so far as I know allude again in his
subsequent works.
[Sidenote: His professions of orthodoxy.]
In many passages of his works, however, Peter recognizes that the
Peripatetic philosophy and Christian dogma do not agree, and, while
stating the philosophical position, gives his adhesion to the orthodox
Faith.[2935] In the preface to the _Conciliator_ he states that the
work is divided into three parts in honor of the Trinity. In the
_Addition to Mesuë_ he argues that trust in God is of avail in the art
of medicine. Pious phralses such as _Si deo placet_ and _Deo gratias_
occur with fair frequency in his works. Finally, in his will of 1315,
or rather in a statement made the day before the will was drawn up, he
makes profession of firm faith in the Trinity, Creed, and articles of
faith, and declares that he believes “in all respects just as Holy
Mother Church believes and teaches,” and that he has always so believed
and will until his last breath. “And if it should be found that he has
ever said anything contrary to the Faith, he said it not because he
believed it, but probably for purposes of disputation.”[2936]
[Sidenote: Does his will show fear of the Inquisition?]
There is perhaps no sufficient reason for doubting the sincerity and
spontaneity of these professions of faith, but the question arises
whether Peter did not make this confession of faith in order to
demonstrate that he was no heretic and so secure the validity of the
will which he made on the day following. This would be a prudent step
on his part if he had any fear of future action by the Inquisition,
since the property of a heretic who was condemned to life imprisonment
or to the stake was subject to confiscation. Moreover, the number of
judgments of confiscation against deceased persons was “relatively
high.”[2937] We now turn to the will itself to inquire if there is
anything in it to suggest fear of the Inquisition on Peter’s part.
The most, if not the only, extraordinary feature of the will is the
attitude shown by Peter toward his sons. We have seen that three
survived him and were concerned in legal transactions in 1318 and 1321.
There is, however, only one or at most two mentions[2938] of them in
the will. After a list of legacies for various purposes and to various
persons, including his nephews and grandnieces, and the bequest of
two thousand pounds of back salary to the Commune of Padua, the will
continues, “Also he has commended himself, his sons, and his property
to the Commune and men of the city of Padua as if it were the tutelage
and infallible defense of their own sons and property.” Then he names
the executors of his will (_suos fideicommissarios_) and as his heirs
_Jacobum qu. domini Marsilii de Carrara de Padua_ and _Conradum qu.
domini Bonzanelli da Viguntia_, whom he describes as “trustworthy men
and of eminent virtue and repute.” Jacobus became captain-general of
Padua in 1318.
[Sidenote: Gloria’s inference.]
From these passages Gloria concludes that Peter entrusts his body, his
children, and his property to the Commune of Padua in order to save
them from the Inquisition,--his body from being burned after his death,
his property from being confiscated; and that he names “two rich and
powerful citizens” as his heirs in order to enlist their aid and with
the secret understanding that they shall later transmit the residue
of his property, after his other legacies are paid, to his children.
It should, however, be realized that the confiscation of the property
of a heretic was absolute. “Forfeiture occurred _ipso facto_ as soon
as the crime of heresy was committed, the heretic could convey no
legal title and any assignments which he might have made were void, no
matter through how many hands the property might have passed.”[2939]
Whether, therefore, Peter’s sons received their inheritance directly
or indirectly, it could be taken from them, if he were condemned as
a heretic either before or after his death. On the other hand, there
is this to be said in favor of Gloria’s interpretation of the will.
If Peter’s property were confiscated as that of a heretic, it would
naturally be confiscated by the Commune of Padua, the same secular
power to whom he would be handed over for execution in case he were
condemned to the stake. By making a generous legacy to the city,
by appealing to it for protection of himself and children, and by
naming leading citizens as his heirs, Peter may have hoped to enlist
public opinion on his side, to prevent any Paduan from accusing him
of heresy to the Inquisition or supporting such a charge, or, in case
the Inquisition does condemn him and the city government of Padua does
confiscate his property, to induce the Commune at least to provide
for his children. And certainly the sentence in which Peter entrusts
himself, his children, and his goods to the infallible defense of the
Commune of Padua does not sound as if he meant to disinherit his sons
in favor of other heirs.
[Sidenote: Did Peter’s sons inherit his property?]
The next question is: what evidence is there to show that the sons ever
received their father’s property, if this was his intention? Gloria
holds that Peter’s sons are called his heirs in documents recording
legal transactions of 1318 and 1321, that consequently he meant them
to be his real heirs when he drew up his will in 1315, and that the
nominal heirs, true to their trust, have duly turned over the estate
after the funeral expenses and other legacies have been met. If this
last assumption is true and if Peter’s sons are in 1318 openly called
his heirs, whereas in 1315 he did not dare to call them his heirs, it
would appear probable either that there has been in the interval a
trial for heresy and that Peter has been acquitted, or that there has
been no trial and is not likely to be one. But I am not so sure that
the documents mentioned describe Peter’s sons as _his_ heirs.[2940]
[Sidenote: If so, how?]
If, however, they are openly called his heirs in 1318, or if, whether
called his heirs or not, they are in possession of his property after
his death, there are other possible explanations of this than that
the heirs named in his will of 1315 have voluntarily turned over the
estate to them. Either the will may have been set aside for other
reasons--it will be noted that at its close Peter states, “if it is
not valid by the law of testaments, let it have force and hold by
the law of codicils or any other law by which it may the better and
more efficaciously have force and hold good.”[2941] Or the will may
have been annulled by the sons, angry at being disinherited, having
themselves informed against their father as a heretic. For note the one
exception to the law that the confiscation of the property of a heretic
is absolute even at the expense of his innocent widow and children.
“Frederick II and Innocent IV both decreed that children could inherit
their father’s property, if they denounced him for heresy.”[2942] But
this sensational possibility[2943] seems to be excluded by another
bit of evidence which Gloria did not note but which supports his
interpretation of the will. In 1325 Marsilius de Carrara, nephew of the
Jacobus named as one of Peter of Abano’s heirs and almost as prominent
as his uncle in the town politics, was knocked off his horse and
trodden under foot in a street fight in Padua, and was in danger of his
life, but was helped to his feet by “Benvenutus of Abano, son of master
Peter, and others of his men.”[2944] Thus whatever disposition was
made of Peter’s property, his nominal heirs and his sons seem to have
remained on good terms.
[Sidenote: Burning of Peter’s bones for heresy.]
If Peter’s children were provided for, there is evidence that the men
of Padua were not equally successful in protecting his corpse from the
Inquisition. Thomas of Strasburg, Prior-General of the Augustinian
Friars from 1345 to 1357, in his _Commentary on the Sentences_[2945]
calls Peter a heretic, although he admits that he was a most capable
physician. Thomas affirms that Peter denied the miracles by which
Christ and the saints raised the dead, arguing that men who were
afflicted by a certain disease often fell into a trance for three
complete revolutions of the sky. And when asked if Lazarus was not in
the tomb four days, he would say that it was only for three full days
since the first and fourth days were incomplete. Thomas does not affirm
that Peter ventured to deny the resurrection of Christ Himself, but
concludes his allusion to Peter by saying, “But in this his iniquity he
was deceived and received the reward of his error. For I was present
when in the city of Padua his bones were burned for these and his other
errors.” The inference which has been drawn from this brief statement
is that at some time after Peter’s death his bones were disinterred and
burned. This much may perhaps be accepted as the fact, since Thomas
asserts he was an eye-witness, but such gossipy reminiscence as this by
medieval monks and friars, especially when heretics or saints are the
theme, is notoriously unreliable, as Salimbene and the astounding yarns
in Thomas of Cantimpré’s work on bees show in the thirteenth century.
At any rate Thomas of Strasburg gives no hint that the “other errors”
of Peter of Abano were connected with magic or astrology. Indeed Thomas
displays a considerable faith in astrology himself in other passages
of this work we have cited.[2946] He asserts that the sky itself has a
real action on inferior objects except for free will. Upon it the stars
cannot act directly but they may affect it indirectly owing to the
radical union in us of sense appetite and intellectual appetite.
[Sidenote: The account of Michael Savonarola.]
A century later Michael Savonarola supplements with further detail
the general impression of trouble between Peter and at least a certain
party in the church which we obtained from Abano’s own statement and
from Thomas of Strasburg, and suggests that Peter’s inclination toward
magic, or at least reputation for magic, led the Dominican inquisitor
to denounce him as a heretic at Paris and try to bring him to prison
and the flames. “But he was held in so great veneration by royal
majesty and the entire university that means were not supplied the
inquisitor to take him.” Savonarola goes on to say that, when Peter
learned of this, he induced the king and university to call a council
of doctors of Holy Scripture, whom he convinced by forty-five arguments
that not he but the Dominicans were heretics. “And after sentence had
been so given,” continues Savonarola, “if the story is to be believed,
it was brought about that the Dominicans were driven from Paris as
heretics and exiles and were unable to reside there for thirty-two
years.”[2947] But of course we do not believe any such story, which is
mentioned nowhere else, and therefore Savonarola’s entire account has
to be suspiciously regarded as “a story.”
Savonarola proceeds to say, however, that then the case was appealed
to Rome and that by intervention of the pope peace was at last made
between Peter and the Dominicans; and that in his testament, “which is
held in great veneration by many Paduans,” Peter left his body to be
interred among the Dominicans as a sign to God and the world how he
had kept the peace with them. As a matter of fact, however, it is in
the church of St. Anthony the Confessor belonging to the Friars Minor
or Franciscans of Padua that Peter’s will directs he shall be buried,
while two Franciscans and no Dominicans are listed among the witnesses
to his confession of faith. Again therefore we find Savonarola’s
account unreliable. He concludes, “But the Dominican Inquisitor, full
of venom and breaking the truce to which he had sworn--an action the
more detestable in a clergyman, in the silence of the night opened
the sepulcher, burned the body, and gave the ashes to the wind. O
unspeakable crime!”
[Sidenote: Scardeone’s account.]
As we recede further from Peter of Abano’s own time to Scardeone in
the sixteenth century, more specific details concerning his life
accumulate. Scardeone perverts Savonarola’s statement that Peter’s
astrological predictions won him a reputation as a magician and that
this got him into trouble with the Dominicans at Paris, into the
assertion that Peter’s devotion to mathematical disciplines at Paris
caused him on his return to Padua to be suspected of magic. He adds
that a rival physician, Peter of Reggio, jealous of Abano’s science and
fame, reported him to the Inquisition as a heretic and necromancer.
That the Inquisition twice instituted proceedings against him: in 1306,
when three illustrious men, whom Scardeone mentions by name,[2948] were
his patrons and, since nothing was proved against him at the trial, he
was freed from this calumny; and again in 1315, when he died during the
trial--Scardeone, however, says nothing to suggest that this was due to
application of torture--and was buried in the church of St. Anthony.
The Inquisition, however, went on to condemn him upon the basis of
his writings, but meanwhile either his friends or his housekeeper
Marietta had removed and hidden his body, which the inquisitors had to
be content to burn in effigy. “This,” coolly continues Scardeone, “is
why Thomas of Strasburg wrote that he saw the bones of Peter of Abano
burned in the square of Padua.” Thus Scardeone not merely makes new
assertions based upon no one knows what, but contradicts statements
of Savonarola who was nearer to the events and Thomas of Strasburg
who claims to be an eye-witness. It is on Scardeone’s account,
nevertheless, that most modern allusions to Peter of Abano and his fate
are based.
[Sidenote: Naudé’s statement.]
It is hardly worth while to pursue the matter further in later writers
except perhaps to note an inscription upon a statue of Peter of Abano
in Padua which Naudé mentions in 1625.[2949] “Petrus Aponus of Padua,
most learned in philosophy and medicine, and on that account winner
of the name of Conciliator; in astrology indeed so skilled that he
incurred suspicion of magic, and, falsely accused of heresy, was
acquitted.” Thus only one trial is mentioned and that resulting in an
acquittal.
FOOTNOTES:
[2934] _Conciliator_, Diff. 9.
[2935] See, for instance, _Conciliator_, Diffs. 9, 13, 64, 135, 156.
[2936] Verci (1787) VII, _Documenti_, 118-9.
[2937] CE, “Inquisition.”
[2938] The doubtful passage is, “_Item reliquit domine Marie quondam
Bartolomei a Sancto Gregorio de contrata Sancte Lucie de Padua libras
centum parvorum et pro quolibet anno libras vigintiquinque parvorum pro
suo labore dispensandi domum et pueros suos dum vixerit._”
The question is, does Peter leave Maria one hundred petty pounds
outright and an annuity of twenty-five pounds “for her labor in
managing the house and her children as long as she lives,” or “for
(i.e., in return for) her labor in managing the house and his children
as long as she lives”?
The words “_dum vixerit_” must mean “as long as she lives,” because
they are similarly used in the next sentence of another recipient of an
annuity. Could they mean, “while he (i.e., Peter) lived,” there would
be less difficulty in translating “_pueros suos_” as “his children.”
Later legend (Scardeone, 1560, p. 201) stated that Peter had a
housekeeper named Marietta who saved his corpse from the Inquisition
by hiding it for a time. It is also possible that Maria was Peter’s
mistress as well as housekeeper, and that the “_pueros suos_” were
“their children.”
[2939] H. C. Lea, _A History of the Inquisition in the Middle Ages_, I,
520.
[2940] Again it is a question of the translation of a reflexive pronoun.
In the passage, “_Benvenutus q. fil. mag. Petri fisici olim ser
Constancii de Abano pro se et vice Petri et Zifredi suorum fratrum q.
eiusd. d. Petri et suorum heredum vendidit_” (Gloria, p. 587), does
“_suorum heredum_” mean Peter’s heirs or, like “_suorum fratrum_,”
Benvenuto’s heirs?
The other document of 1321, “... _in villa Abani coheret a mane
Benvenutus q. magistri Petri de Abano cum Petro et Zufredo fratribus
suis_,” shows that they have just inherited some property in Abano
together, but scarcely from their father who has been dead at least
three years according to the other document.
[2941] Verci, VII, _Documenti_, p. 118, “et si non posset valere iure
testamenti valeat et teneat iure codicillorum vel quocumque alio iure
quo melius et efficacius valere et tenere possit.”
[2942] E. Vacandard, _The Inquisition_, 1908, p. 246.
[2943] It is also barely possible that Peter, in drawing up his will,
had planned to have his sons denounce him in order to inherit.
[2944] _Chronicon Patavinum_, anno 1325, in Muratori, _Antiquitates_
(1778) XII, 252.
It is worth noting that the Chronicle is silent as to any heresy trial
or punishment of “master Peter.”
[2945] _Thomae ab Argentina, Commentaria in IIII libros sententiarum,
Genuae_, 1585, Book IV, Distinctio 37 and 38, Article 4, which in this
edition is vol. II, fol. 171r. This passage has been incorrectly cited
by Colle and others, so that I had difficulty in finding it, especially
since it is buried under the heading, “De impedimento praecedentis
conjugii.”
[2946] Liber II, Dist. 14, Quaestio I and Artic. III.
[2947] Perhaps Savonarola uses the word “Dominicans” here merely in the
sense of inquisitors.
[2948] One of them, Jacopo Alvarotto, was one of the witnesses to
Peter’s profession of faith in 1315 and one of the executors named in
his will.
[2949] _Apologie_, pp. 386-7. Eighty-two statues of “illustrious
Paduans and university men” still adorn the Piazza Vittorio Emanuele II
(formerly the Prato della Valle) at Padua.