No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Did Rolandus of Bologna Write a “Stroma ex Decretorum Corpore Carptumt?”*
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 April 2015
Extract
The manuscript transmission of the so-called Stroma of Rolandus, considered to be the second-oldest Summa on Gratian, is so complex and diversified that one ought to ask whether it really constitutes a single work. The present writer as a young man followed Thaner, Schulte, and others in his Repertorium der Kanonistik, without even asking the question. In the present Note he sets out to answer it in the negative.
C.1-C.36 of the work is transmitted without Part I, which only MS Stuttgart HB VI.63, fos. 1-34, combines with the other parts. We have C.1-C.26 in nine manuscripts, without counting the Cambridge fragment, University Library addition 3321 (on C.1-C.4 q.3, C.13-C.23) and the Zürich manuscript (see below), but with a new manuscript added in Liège, Grand-Séminaire 6.N.15, fos.147r-178r, and a new fragment in Heiligenkreuz 44. MS Zürich, Zentralbibliothek (Stadtbibliothek) C.97 is a different work, the Summa Turicensis. C.27-C.36 is given a title of its own, De coniugio, in all but two manuscripts. It is transmitted by itself in Berlin lat. 462, Bologna, Archiginnasio A.48, Grenoble 627, and divided from the relatively short Summae on C.1-C.26, which follow it in London, British Library MS 11.B.ii and Worcester, Cathedral Chapter, Q.70 (in Worcester, these Summae are incomplete and end at C.19 q.1).
- Type
- Symposium in Honor of Judge John T. Noonan, Jr.
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Center for the Study of Law and Religion at Emory University 1994
Footnotes
*
This paper is a revised reprinting of my article first published in 20 Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law 69 (1990) 69-70. I dedicate it to John Noonan in particular because of his own important research on Rolandus of Bologna.
References
1. Thaner, F., ed, Die Summa magistri Rolandi nachmals Papstes Alexander III nebst einem Anhange Incerti auctoris quaestiones 1–234 (Wagner, 1874)Google Scholar (hereinafter Die Summa).
2. Repertorium der Kanonistik (1140-1234): Prodromus Corporis Glossarum I 127-9 (Studi e testi 71; Città del Vaticano 1937) (hereinafter Repertorium).
3. Cited as Jur 63 (H72) by Thaner; Repertorium at 127-8.
4. Repertorium at 127 (cited in note 2).
5. The Liège manuscript was discovered by G. Fransen (his letter of 20 December 1949), and the Heiligenkreuz fragment, MS 44 fo 273r (C 1 q 1-4) by myself in 1937.
6. Stickler, Alfons M., “Concerning the Political Theories of the Medieval Theories” in Canonists, 7 Traditio: Studies in Ancient and Medieval History, Thought, and Religion 450 (Fordham U Press, 1949–1951)Google Scholar.
7. See Thaner, , Die Summa at 43 note a (cited in note 1)Google Scholar.
8. Repertorium at 128 (cited in note 2).
9. Repertorium at 127 (cited in note 2).
10. Kunstmann, Friedrich, “Das Eherecht des Bischofes Bernhard von Pavia” in 6 Archiv für katholisches Kirchnerecht 217, 222 (Mainz/Rhein Verlag Kirchheim, 1861)Google Scholar.
11. Weigand, R., “Kanonistische Ehetraktate aus dem 12. Jahrhundert” in Proceedings of the Third International Congress of Medieval Canon Law, Strasbourg, 3-6 09 1968Google Scholar; 59, 69-71 (Monumenta Iuris Canonici, Series C: Subsidia 4; Città del Vaticano, 1971).
12. On the medieval concept of Commentum see Weimar, P., “Die legistische Literatur der Glossatorenzeit” in Coing, H., ed, Handbuch der Quellen und Literatur der neueren europäischen Privatrechtsgeschichte, I: Mittelalter (1100-5000) (München, 1973) 129–260 at 214Google Scholar, citing Huguccio; Kuttner, Stephan, “The Revival of Jurisprudence,” in Benson, Robert L. and Constable, Giles, eds, Renaissance and Renewal in the Twelfth Century, 299, 315 (Harvard U Press, 1982)Google Scholar citing William of Conches.