Fordham University

 

Home | Ancient History Sourcebook | Medieval SourcebookModern History Sourcebook | Byzantine Studies Page
Other History Sourcebooks: African | East Asian | Global | Indian | IslamicJewishLesbian and Gay | Science | Women's


Medieval History


Select Sources Full Texts Saints' Lives Law Texts Maps Search Help


Selected Sources Sections Studying History End of Rome Byzantium Islam Roman Church Early Germans Celtic World Carolingians 10 C Collapse Economic Life Crusades Empire & Papacy France England Celtic States Iberia Italy Intellectual Life Medieval Church Jewish Life Social History Sex & Gender States & Society Renaissance Reformation Exploration
IHSP Credits
Medieval Sourcebook:
St Bridget:
Revelations to the Popes, 14th Cent.

This file includes the full text of

Arne Jönsson, ed., St. Bridget's Revelations to the Popes: An edition of the so-called Tractatus de summis pontificibus, Studia Graeca et Latina Lundensia 6, (Lund: Lund University Press, 1997)

Because footnotes, and some text tables, are not rendered satisfactorily in HTML, a Microsoft Word version is also available.


St. Bridget's Revelations to the Popes

 

An edition of the so-called
Tractatus de summis pontificibus

by Arne Jönsson

Published with the aid of grants from the Hjalmar Gullberg and Greta Thott research fund

VXORI OPTIMAE

Table of contents

Bibliography 7

Abbreviations 11

1. Introduction 13

1. 1. St. Bridget and the popes 13

1. 2. The Tractatus de summis pontificibus 14

1. 3. Previous scholarly work on the Tractatus 15

1. 4. The aim of the present study 17

2. The manuscripts of the Tractatus and their mutual relations 18

2. 1. The corpus reuelacionum tradition 18

2. 1. 1. The selection of manuscripts 18

2. 1. 2. The relationship between yq and KF 20

2. 2. The Za and Wb manuscripts 23

2. 3. The relationship between the corpus reuelacionum and the Za Wb manuscripts 26

2. 4. The relationship between the Za and Wb manuscripts 30

2. 5. The L and p manuscripts 30

2. 6. The stemma 34

3. Principles of edition 35

3. 1. The reconstruction of the archetype 35

3. 2. Archetypal errors 36

3. 3. Presentation of the text 37

STEMMA CODICUM ADHIBITORUM 38

REUELACIONES AD SUMMOS PONTIFICES ("TRACTATUS DE  SUMMIS PONTIFICIBUS") 39

I. To Clement VI 39

II. About Innocent VI 41

III. About Urban V 41

IV. To Urban V 44

V. To Urban V 45

VI. To Gregory XI 47

VII. To Gregory XI 50

VIII. About Gregory XI 53

IX. To Gregory XI 54

X. To Gregory XI 57

XI. About Gregory XI 58

XII. About Clement VI 60

XIII. About Urban V 61

4. Results and discussion 63

4. 1. The title and the content of the Tractatus 63

4. 2. The aim and the date of the Tractatus 65

4. 3. The codification of the revelations 66

4. 4. Alfonso's rôle as editor 67

Bibliography

Manuscripts

F = Lund, Universitetsbiblioteket, ms. 21 ("Codex Falkenberg"), late 14th century.

(Gh = editio princeps, printed by B. Ghotan, Lübeck 1492.)

K = Kalmar, Stifts- och Gymnasiebiblioteket, late 14th century.

L = London, British Library, ms. Harley 612, middle 15th century.

p = Stockholm, Royal Library, ms. A22, first half of the 15th century.

q = Vienna, Nationalbibliothek, ms. 3960, dated 1380-1386.

y = Prague, Universitní Knihovna, ms. V. G. 20, late 14th century.

Wb = Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, ms. Ashb. 896, early 15th century.

Za = Helsinki, University Library, "Codex Nordenskiöld", early 15th century.

Printed works

Acta et Processus Canonizacionis Beate Birgitte. Utg. av I. Collijn (SSFS, Ser. 2, Latinska skrifter I), Uppsala 1924-31.

Alfonso of Jaén, Epistola solitarii and Informaciones. See Jönsson, Al- fonso of Jaén.

- Conscripcio de eleccione Urbani sexti. See Bliemetzrieder, pp. 83- 100.

Aili, H., Rev. IV. See Birgitta.

- 'St. Birgitta and the Text of the Revelationes. A Survey of Some In- fluences Traceable to Translators and Editors'. See The Editing of Theological and Philosophical Texts, pp. 75-91.

Bergh, B., Palaeography and Textual Criticism (Scripta Minora Regiae Societatis Humaniorum Litterarum Lundensis, Studier utgivna av Kungl. Humanistiska Vetenskapssamfundet i Lund 1979-1980:2), Lund 1978.

- Rev. V-VII. See Birgitta.

- 'Zeitdifferenzbestimmungen mit per in birgittinischen Texten', Era- nos 64 (1966), p. 133-148.

Birgitta, Sancta, Quattuor Oraciones (Opera Minora III). Edited by

S. Eklund (KVHAA and SSFS, Ser. 2, Latinska skrifter VIII:3), Arlöv 1991.

- Regula Salvatoris (Opera Minora I). Edited by S. Eklund (KVHAA and SSFS, Ser. 2, Latinska skrifter VIII:1), Uppsala 1975.

- Reuelaciones, Book I with Magister Mathias' Prologue, edited by C.- G. Undhagen (KVHAA and SSFS, Ser. 2, Latinska skrifter VII:1), Stockholm 1977.

- Reuelaciones, Book III, edited by A.-M. Jönsson (forthcoming)

- Reuelaciones, Book IV, edited by H. Aili (KVHAA and SSFS, Ser. 2, Latinska skrifter VII:4), Göteborg 1992.

- Reuelaciones, Book V, Liber questionum, edited by Birger Bergh (KVHAA and SSFS, Ser. 2, Latinska skrifter VII:5), Uppsala 1971.

- Reuelaciones, Book VI, edited by B. Bergh (KVHAA and SSFS, Ser. 2, Latinska skrifter VII:6), Arlöv 1991.

- Reuelaciones, Bok VII, edited by B. Bergh (KVHAA and SSFS, Ser. 2, Latinska skrifter VII:7), diss., Uppsala 1967.

- Reuelaciones extrauagantes. Edited by L. Hollman (SSFS, Ser. 2, La- tinska skrifter V), diss., Uppsala 1956.

- Revelationes S. Birgittae e codice membr. fol. 21 Bibl. Universitatis Lundensis edidit E. Wessén, 1-2 (Corpus codicum Suecicorum medii aevi XIII-XIV), Hafniae 1952-56).

- Revelationes. Impressit B. Ghotan. Lubece 1492.

- Sermo Angelicus (Opera Minora II). Edited by S. Eklund (KVHAA and SSFS, Ser. 2, Latinska skrifter VIII:2), Uppsala 1972.

Birgitta of Sweden, Life and Selected Revelations. Edited, with a pre- face by Marguerite Tjader Harris, translation and notes by Albert Ryle Kezel, introduction by Tore Nyberg (The Classics of Western Spirituality), New York, Mahwah 1990.

Bliemetzrieder, F. P., 'Un'altra edizione rifatta del trattato di Alfonso Pecha, vescovo resignato di Iaën, sullo scisma (1387-88), con no- tizie sulla vita di Pietro Bohier, Benedettino, vescovo di Orvieto', Rivista storica benedettina 4 (1909), pp. 74-100.

Colledge, E., 'Epistola solitarii ad reges. Alphonse of Pecha as Organizer of Birgittine and Urbanist Propaganda', Mediaeval Studies 18 (1956), pp. 19-49.

The Editing of Theological and Philosophical Texts from the Middle Ages. Acts of the Conference Arranged by the Department of Classical Languages, University of Stockholm, 29-31 August 1984. Edited by Monika Asztalos (AUS, SLS 30), Stockholm 1986.

Eklund, S., Regula Salvatoris, see Birgitta.

Ekwall, S., Vår äldsta Birgittavita och dennas viktigaste varianter (KVHAAH, Historiska serien 12), Lund 1965.

- 'Quando morì il B. Giovanni dalle Celle?', Rivista di Storia della Chiesa in Italia 1951, pp. 371-374.

Ellis, R., 'The Divine Message and its Human Agents; St. Birgitta and her editors'. See Studies in St. Birgitta, pp. 209-233.

Gilkær, H. T., The Political Ideas of St. Birgitta and her Spanish Con- fessor, Alfonso Pecha. Liber Celestis Imperatoris ad Reges: A Mirror of Princes (Odense University Studies in History and Social Sciences 163), Odense 1993.

- 'Redaktionelle problemer i Åbenbaringernes VIII bog. Bogens dis- position: Alfons Pechas ordningsprincipper', Birgitta, hendes værk og hendes klostre i Norden, edited by Tore Nyberg (Odense University Studies in History and Social Sciences 150), Odense 1991, pp. 425-46.

Grundmann, H., 'Die Papstprophetien des Mittelalters', in idem: Aus- gewählte Aufsätze, II (Schriften der Monumenta Germaniae His- torica 25,2), Stuttgart 1977, pp. 1-57.

Hollman, L., Den Heliga Birgittas Reuelaciones extrauagantes. See Birgitta.

Jönsson, A., Alfonso of Jaén. His Life and Works with Critical Editions of the Epistola Solitarii, the Informaciones and the Epistola Serui Christi (Studia Graeca et Latina Lundensia 1), diss., Lund 1989.

- 'Birgitta i Birgittalegenderna', Heliga Birgitta - budskapet och före- bilden. Edited by Alf Härdelin and Mereth Lindgren (KVHAA, Konferenser 28), pp. 35-48.

- [Review of] H. T. Gilkær, The Political Ideas…, Historisk Tidskrift 1995, pp. 116-120.

- 'On the so-called Tractatus de summis pontificibus', Birgittiana 1 (1996), pp. 15-27.

Jörgensen, A., 'En Birgitta-handskrift i Helsingfors universitetsbiblio- tek', Miscellanea bibliographica I (Helsingfors universitetsbiblio- teks skrifter VIII), Helsingfors 1925, pp. 19-67.

Klockars, B., Birgitta och böckerna. En undersökning av den heliga Bir- gittas källor (KVHAAH, Historiska serien 11), Lund 1966.

- Birgitta och hennes värld (KVHAAH, Historiska serien 16), Stock- holm 1971.

- Biskop Hemming av Åbo (Skrifter utgivna av Svenska litteratursäll- skapet i Finland 379), diss., Vasa 1960.

Mathias, Magister, Prologus. See Birgitta, Reuelaciones, Book I.

Nyberg, T., Birgitta of Sweden, see Birgitta of Sweden.

- Birgittinische Klostergründungen des Mittelalters (Bibliotheca Histo- rica Lundensis XV), diss., Lund 1965.

- Birgittinsk festgåva. Studier on heliga Birgitta och Birgittinorden (Skrifter utgivna av Svenska Kyrkohistoriska Föreningen 46), Uppsala 1991.

Öberg, J., 'Authentischer oder autorisierter Text? Der Weg von Konzept zu moderner Edition an Beispielen von Petrus de Dacia und der Heiligen Birgitta'. See The Editing of Theological and Philosophical Texts, pp. 59-74.

- Kring Birgitta (KVHAA, Filologiskt arkiv 13), Lund 1969.

Oxford Latin Dictionary, Oxford 1968-82.

Piltz, A., 'Communicantes. Aspekter på kyrkan som solidarisk gemen- skap i svensk högmedeltid', Svensk spiritualitet. Tio studier av förhållandet tro-kyrka-praxis, Klippan 1994, pp. 15-55.

Schmid, T., Birgitta och hennes uppenbarelser, Lund 1940.

Schück, H., Några anmärkningar om Birgittas revelationer (KVHAAH 33, Ny följd 13:1), Stockholm 1901.

Sensi, M., 'Alfonso Pecha e l'eremitismo italiano di fine secolo XIV', Ri- vista di Storia della Chiesa in Italia 47 (1993), pp. 51-80.

Studies in St. Birgitta and the Brigittine Order, edited by James Hogg, vol. 1 (Analecta Cartusiana 35: 19, Spiritualität heute und ges- tern 19), Salzburg 1993.

Thesaurus Linguae Latinae, I-, Lipsiae 1900-.

Undhagen, C.-G., Rev. I, see Birgitta.

- 'Une source du prologue (Chap. 1) aux Révélations de Sainte Brigitte par le cardinal Jean de Turrecremata', Eranos 58 (1960), pp. 214- 226.

Voaden, R., 'The Middle English Epistola solitarii ad reges of Alfonso of Jaen: An Edition of the Text in British Library MS Cotton Julius F ii'. See Studies in St. Birgitta, pp. 142-179.

Westman, K. B., Birgitta-studier (Uppsala Universitets Årsskrift 1911, Teologi 1), diss., Uppsala 1911.

Abbreviations

add. addidit

A & P Acta et Processus, see the bibliography

alt. alteravit

AUS Acta Universitatis Stockholmiensis

cf. confer

ch. chapter

corr. correxit

del. delevit

f(f). folium (folia)

KVHAA(H) Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antikvitets Akademien(s Handlingar)

marg. margine

OLD Oxford Latin Dictionary (see the bibliography)

om. omisit

r. recto

R rubric

rec. recensuit

rev. revelacio, revelation

Rev. ex. Reuelacio extrauagans

SFSS Samlingar utgivna av Svenska Fornskriftsällskapet

suppl. supplevit

SLS Studia Latina Stockholmiensia

TLL Thesaurus Linguae Latinae (see the bibliography)

tpt. transposuit

v. verso

vol. volume

< > supplenda

{ } delenda

The books of the Bible are abbreviated according to the principles ap-plied in the Biblia Sacra iuxta Vulgatam Versionem (rec. Weber), I-II, Stuttgart 1975.

1. Introduction

1.1. St. Bridget and the popes

In the 14th century many people, including some popes, felt that the Church was in urgent need of reform. If the Church did not embody the ideals and values of the gospel, the blame was placed on the popes, since they had been entrusted with the task of watching over the Christians. As many felt that very little was accomplished in the field of reform, the popes as persons (not the institution, of course) quickly became the object of criticism. The very fact that the popes, the bish-ops of Rome, resided at Avignon was an affront, and many Christians felt that the pope's return to Rome was a prerequisite for reform. Since the popes were themselves the arbiters of reform and reformers had to have papal approval to gain official status, the only alternative left to those who wanted to carry out reforms was to try to influence the popes and goad them into taking action. One of these concerned Christians was St. Bridget of Sweden. She had revelations in which God, Christ or St. Mary appeared, deploring the state of the Church in gene-ral and condemning a number of abuses and bad practices. In several revelations, the popes too are treated harshly. A famous example is book I, ch. 41. This revelation is a message from the Creator to the ca-put Ecclesie mee, viz. Pope Clement VI (1342-1352). God reminds him of the fact that he sits on His throne as successor to St. Peter and has been entrusted with the task of binding and loosening the souls from sin, but he is performing miserably. Instead of saving souls, he dis-perses and kills them; he is even worse than Lucifer:

  • tu, qui deberes soluere animas et ad me presentare, tu vere es animarum interfector … Tu … es dispersor et lacerator earum, tu … peior es Lucifero. Ipse enim habebat ad me inuidiam et nullum concupiuit occidere nisi me, ut pro me dominaretur. Tu autem tanto deterior est, quod non solum occidis me remouendo te a me per mala opera tua, sed et animas occidis per malum exemplum tuum.

  • There is another revelation too, VI: 63, in which Christ condemns Pope Clement for his sins and offences and exhorts him to make amends and take action. A new rubric was written to this revelation when re-published (see below rev. I) and from this we learn that Bridget re-ceived the message two years before the Jubilee year, that is in 1348, and that it was communicated to the pope in Avignon by two friends of Bridget's, Bishop Hemming of Åbo and Prior Peter of Alvastra.

    Bridget herself went to Rome for the Jubilee year, never to re-turn to Sweden. In her revelations, she paints a very gloomy picture of conditions in contemporary Rome. In IV: 33, a letter to an unknown addressee, there is a long list of complaints: e. g., that churches are abandoned and converted into latrines for people, dogs and wild ani-mals, that people eat meat in Lent, that the property of the Church is given to laymen, who do not marry because they hold the position of canons, but impudently have concubines in their houses in the day and in their beds at night, saying audaciously: 'We cannot marry, be-cause we are canons'.

    To judge from Rev III: 27, for example, Bridget seems to put the blame for this corruption on Pope Boniface VIII, whose pontificate had proved so disastrous for the Church; according to her, there had been many confessors and martyrs in the period from St. Peter to Boniface's predecessor Celestine V, but after that, development took a turn for the worse. St. Bridget thinks that the root of the problem lies in the popes' absence from Rome (in the above-mentioned revelation IV: 33 she finishes by saying that the priests are like orphans because of the pope's absence). In this perspective it is natural that she is a deter-mined advocate of the popes' return to Rome, as is witnessed by a number of revelations (see below).

    1.2. The Tractatus de summis pontificibus

    Immediately after St. Bridget's death, her revelations were collected and edited as the Liber celestis and the Liber celestis imperatoris ad reges. The editorial work had been entrusted to her Spanish confessor, Alfonso Pecha, former Bishop of Jaén in the south of Spain. In the Li-ber celestis, which was probably finished in about 1375, there are some revelations in which the popes are referred to in various ways and in various contexts. Some other revelations to popes and concern-ing popes were not published until some years later, however, in a col-lection that is normally entitled the Tractatus de summis pontificibus. This work is first mentioned in Prior Peter's testimony on January 30, 1380 for the canonization commission set up by Pope Urban VI:

  • multe [sc. reuelaciones] continentur in libro celesti et multe in libro ce-lesti jmperatoris ad reges et multe in tractatu de summis pontificibus

  • Thus, we learn that many revelations by Bridget are collected in the Liber celestis, many in the Liber celestis imperatoris ad reges and many in the Tractatus de summis pontificibus. It is the last-mentioned collection, the last, shortest and most neglected one, that will be the subject of the present study.

    In the printed editions of Bridget's Revelaciones, including the modern text critical one by Hans Aili, the revelations concerning the popes are to be found (together with some other revelations, about priests) at the end of book IV as chapters 132-144 under the joint title Tractatus reuelacionum beate Birgitte ad sacerdotes et ad summos pontifices ("Blessed Bridget's revelations to priests and popes"). How-ever, a quick glance in Aili's apparatus criticus shows that this title has no manuscript authority, and there is, thus, no reason to believe that this arrangement was the original. In fact, the actual wording of the rubric to ch. 136 and readings reported in Aili's apparatus criticus clearly indicate that this part of book IV, viz. chs. 136-144, originally constituted a separate work, and it has often been taken for granted that these nine revelations represented Alfonso's Tractatus de summis pontificibus.

    1.3. Previous scholarly work on the Tractatus

    In his pioneer work on the textual history of St. Bridget's revelations, Några anmärkningar om Birgittas revelationer ("Some remarks on Bridget's revelations"; Stockholm 1901)-a short, but very ingenious study-the great scholar Henrik Schück devotes some attention also to the Tractatus de summis pontificibus (pp. 21 and 24). He is the first in a succession of modern scholars who touches upon questions such as what was the content of Alfonso's original Tractatus, why was it com-piled and why did Alfonso not include it in the corpus reuelacionum ("the collected works"). In Schück's opinion, Alfonso had tried to rear-range all the revelations that had been handed over to him in a thematical way, and in the Tractatus he had "included all or most of Bridget's attacks on the popes" (my translation). However according to Schück, this book had been considered unsuitable for publication at a time when Bridget's canonization was in the balance. These views are in the main subscribed to by recent scholars: for instance, Tore Ny-berg, too, claims that Alfonso prepared thematical digests of the huge original collection of revelations with various addressees in mind and that the tractatus is such a collection addressed to "pontiffs and bish-ops", and as concerns the question of why the Tractatus was not in-cluded in the corpus reuelacionum, Carl-Gustaf Undhagen, who dates the so-called second Alfonso redaction of the revelations (which did not include the Tractatus) to "around 1380", concurs with Schück's opinion and writes that the omission was due to "ecclesiastical pre-caution". As far as the content is concerned, Schück had maintained that the original Tractatus contained far more revelations than the nine in the printed editions, namely 57, as in book IX of the codex Harleyanus 612 in the British Museum (see my bibliography). Many other hypotheses as to the contents of this text have been put forward during the years: it has been suggested that it originally contained nine (as in the Ghotan edition), eleven, twelve, thirteen (as in various manuscripts of the corpus reuelacionum), twenty-one (as in a Florence manuscript; see below) or fifty-seven revelations (as in a British Li-brary manuscript; see below). The latest scholar to have expressed an opinion in this issue, Tore Nyberg, subscribes to the fifty-seven-revelations-hypothesis originally propounded by Schück and further elaborated upon by Eric Colledge in his very influential article on Al-fonso.

    In his edition of book IV (including the Tractatus part) published in 1992, Aili states, to be sure, that his aim is "to present the text of the original Alfonsine version". However, in actual fact he complies with the principles laid down by previous editors: namely, to stick to the editio princeps, the Ghotan edition, Lübeck 1492, as regards the selection and arrangement of the revelations, which, generally speak-ing, means that supplementary material (the addiciones and declara-ciones) is interspersed between the chapters of the books of revela-tions as was the case in the Ghotan edition, even if this does not corre-spond to the original arrangement of either the first or the second Al-fonsine edition. The Tractatus revelations, too, are presented by Aili in accordance with Ghotan: i. e. as chs. 136-144 of book IV, and the orig-inal title of the entire Tractatus (see p. 63) is retained as the heading of one single chapter, viz. ch. 136. However, in one respect Aili's ar-rangement is unprecedented: rev. VI: 63 is presented as pars prior of IV: 136.

    1.4. The aim of the present study

    A number of hypotheses have been put forward as regards the con-tent and arrangement of the Tractatus, but no systematic evaluation of the source manuscripts has been made and no edition has been pre-sented that reconstructs the original Alfonsine version. The fundamen-tal task will thus be to present such an edition.

    A supplementary reason for making a reappraisal of the text is that there are some puzzling readings in the recent edition: e. g., which are the "undecim verba" spoken to Pope Gregory (IV: 142: 4), how can the pope be requested to bend the "cardines ad velle suum" and forbid them, the cardines, to have more clothes, servants, etc, than they real-ly need? (IV: 49: 17, cf. below rev. III: 17), how are we to understand the enlarged rubric to IV: 144, reported in the apparatus criticus, that seems to imply that the pope in question is Gregory XI, and what about the dating of IV: 141? Are the words in festo Sancti Policarpi really an interpolation?

    On the basis of the reconstructed text, I will then make a reap-praisal of the following, much discussed questions: what was the title and content of the original Tractatus? When was it compiled and for what purpose? Why was it omitted in the early editions? To what ex-tent did Alfonso revise St. Bridget's revelations?

     

    2. The manuscripts of the Tractatus and their mutual relations

    The manuscripts in which we find the so-called Tractatus de summis pontificibus can on the face of it be divided into two groups: the cor-pus reuelacionum manuscripts in which we find the Tractatus as a se-quel to book IV (below ch. 2.1) and those manuscripts where the Trac-tatus is handed down separately (below chs. 2.2 and 2.5).

    2.1. The corpus reuelacionum tradition

    2.1.1. The selection of manuscripts

    St. Bridget's books of revelations are preserved in a considerable num-ber of manuscripts. The editors of the modern critical editions of the various books of the Liber celestis have divided the extant manu-scripts into two main groups, the b-group and the p-group, the main difference being that in the manuscripts of the latter group, there is some supplementary material (including the Tractatus) that the b-manuscripts lack. The fact that the Tractatus is not to be found in the b-group means that this collection was not included in the redac-tions of the revelations Alfonso himself had made, the first of which had contained only books I-VII and the second of which had been en-larged to include Epistola solitarii, Liber celestis imperatoris ad reges, Sermo Angelicus and, probably, Quatuor Oraciones. For the recon-struction of the Tractatus text of the p-hyparchetype, the following four manuscripts, viz. y, q, K and F, have been selected on the basis of previous investigations by Bergh, Undhagen and Aili for their re-spective editions of the books of the Liber celestis:

    y = Prague, Universitní Knihovna, ms. V. G. 20, late 14th century, ff. 167r-174v.

    q = Vienna, Nationalbibliothek, ms. 3960, 1380-1386, ff. 158r-160v.

    F = Lund, The University Library, ms. 21 ("Codex Falkenberg"), late 14th century, ff. 171vb-177ra.

    K = Kalmar, Stifts- och Gymnasiebiblioteket (deposited in Lund University Li-brary), late 14th century, ff. 109rb-112va.

    In the selected manuscripts of the corpus reuelacionum, the Tractatus is copied as a sequel to book IV. The manuscripts differ a little as to the selection and arrangement of the revelations included in the Trac-tatus part. In the table below, I give a survey of the contents of the Tractatus in the these manuscripts. (In the interest of clarity, I have also included in this table corresponding information for the other manuscripts I have investigated, below pp. 30-33 and 23-25.) The revelations for which there is evidence in the manuscripts have been numbered by me consecutively as I-XIII, and in the respective columns, I have indicated the content of the various manuscripts and also whether the revelations are written out in full or truncated. Their numbers in the printed editions are stated, too, in order to facilitate identification.

    My Gh Corpus reuelacionum mss. Other manuscripts.

    numbers y q K F L p Za Wb

    Rev. I (VI:63) x (x) x x x x x x

    II IV:136 x x x x x x x x

    III (IV:49) (x) (x) (x) (x) x x x x

    IV IV:137 x x x x x x x x

    V IV:138 x x x x x x x x

    VI IV:139 x x x x x x x

    VII IV:140 x x x x x x x VIII IV:141 x x x x x x x

    IX IV:142 x x x x x x x

    X IV:143 x x x x x x x

    XI (VII:31) (x) (x) (x) (x) 0 0 x

    XII (VI:96) (x) 0 (x) (x) 0 (x) x

    XIII IV:144 x x x x x x x

    x = revelation copied in its entirety

    (x) = the beginning of the revelation is copied

    (x) = revelation indicated in the margin

    0 = revelation not copied

    There is, thus, evidence for thirteen revelations in the corpus revela-cionum tradition of the Tractatus. However, as is shown above, four of the thirteen revelations are duplicates of revelations in the Liber cel-estis, a fact that was realized by those who copied the Tractatus as part of the corpus reuelacionum. It was obviously considered unneces-sary to write the same revelations more than once. Judging from the manuscripts (see the table above), it can be assumed that the hyp-archetype of the p-group was arranged in the following way: the first revelation of the Tractatus, which had already been edited as VI: 63, was copied in full, but the other three duplicate revelations were trun-cated (only the chapter heading and the first words of the revelations proper were copied). For the full text, the reader was referred to cor-responding revelations in the Liber celestis. In the manuscripts, the duplicate revelations of the Tractatus are thus treated in a fairly con-sistent way-unlike the duplicate revelations of the Liber celestis im-peratoris ad reges, which sometimes was written out in full in the Li-ber celestis and truncated in the Liber celestis imperatoris ad reges and sometimes copied the other way round. The reason for this is, of course, that the Tractatus was added to the corpus revelationum at a later stage than the Liber celestis imperatoris ad reges, when the pro-cess of codification was already finished and the copyist, or perhaps rather the promotor, of the copy that was to become known to scholars of our days as the p-hyparchetype had already arranged it in an ap-propriate way.

    2.1.2. The relationship between yq and KF

    There are a number of passages where y and q have one reading and K and F another, as for instance in the following cases:

    y q K F

    I R de regno suecie ordinis cisterciencis ordinis de

    cisterciensis regno suecie

    IV R beate b(irgitte) beate virginis in watz-

    steno

    VI:5 deficeret...eleuauit...fouit… deficiat...eleuat...fouet…

    calefecit...cibauit calefacit...cibat

    VII:7 aliqui alii

    VIII:2 frigus frigor

    IX R Hec…MCCCLXXIII Reuelacio…Gregorio

    IX:3 qui que

    IX:5 celestem curiam meam curiam meam celestem

    y q K F

    IX:19 rapiat rapiet

    X R domina beata

    XIII:1 astabat stabat

    XIII:7 licitum est est licitum

    As a rule, it is not easy to tell which reading is wrong, but some cases merit closer consideration, and I believe that some common errors can be suspected for both K and F on the one hand and y and q on the other.

    Possible errors in K and F:

    In VIII: 2, K F give the reading frigor, whereas y q have frigus. To be sure, frigor does exist, but since it is otherwise unknown in the Reue-laciones, we can undoubtedly regard it is an error in this case.

    In rev. X R, it is obvious that domina is the original reading and that beata is a modernisation in K F (as well as in III R K), but it is not necessary that it indicates a common source, since this alteration could easily have been induced separately. (I can here anticipate the results of my investigation and mention as another example that the K F reading in IV R beate virginis in watzsteno is unauthentic as well.) K F (or perhaps rather a common source) have thus been the object of a deliberate-albeit gentle-revision.

    As regards the series of readings in VI: 5, cf. below pp. 36-39.

    Possible errors in y and q

    In IX: 3 que may be the correct reading (que tres persone unum su-mus in diuinitatis substancia, 'for we three persons are one in the sub-stance of the Godhead'). The reading qui may have arisen due to the antecedent (Pater et) Spiritus Sanctus.

    In IX: 19 the subjunctive rapiat is probably wrong. The future tense rapiet of K F is supported by the same tense in the other verbs faciam...deponam ..erunt...repleberis (IX: 18-19).

    Unlike some of those in K F, the possible errors in y q must be classified as slips of the pen.

    On the basis of the variant readings reported above, it is feasible to di-vide these manuscripts into two groups in the stemma codicum, name-ly y q and K F respectively. To be sure, this result is quite surprising in view of Aili's conclusion that K and F belong to two different sub-groups and, consequently, that whenever "K and F agree, they ... give the text of the archetype," but as far as I can understand, Aili has not pin-pointed any shared errors for K and F in chapters 136-144 (= the Tractatus) specifically. On the other hand, my conclusions square well with the results obtained by Bergh and Undhagen in their investi-gations of the supplementary material in books VII and I respectively: in their editions, K and F belong to one branch of a bipartite stemma and q the other. (Neither Bergh nor Undhagen uses y for their editions.)

    The duplicate, first revelation.

    Since the first revelation of the Tractatus, which was taken over from the Liber celestis, VI: 63, is written out in full in y, K and F, I have also compared variant readings in these two editions of the same re-velation. (As for q, only the chapter heading and a few initial words were copied.) Fortunately, we have book VI in a recent text-critical edition by Bergh, and in my comparison I assume quite simply that he has managed to reconstruct Alfonso's original and that this is the text Alfonso had before him when compiling the Tractatus.

    VI: 63 (ed. Bergh) Tractatus, rev. I (see below p. 39-

    40)

    R Christus dat ... Cap. LXIII Christus per ... ordinis Cisterciensis

    § 1 Filius loquitur ad sponsam Filius Dei loquitur ad sponsam dicens

    y q K F

    hec verba verba hec q K F hec verba y

    super per y q K F

    § 2 in ad y K F

    vide videas y vide K F

    § 3 ad om. y K F

    iudicans iudicans y audiens K F

    § 5 quam1 quod y quam K F

    melius ego Deus melius ego deus y

    ego deus melius K F

    § 6 tempore tuo floruit tempore tuo floruit y

    floruit tempore tuo K F

    § 8 quoque enim y K F

    Thus, in the Tractatus the rubric has been thoroughly revised; specific facts as to the date of the revelation and as to who transmitted Brid-get's message to the pope have been added. Alfonso gives the same in-formation in his Informaciones (§ 3-10).

    In § 1, Filius has been made clearer by the addition of Dei. It is ob-viously motivated by the desire to be more precise about who the son is, since the revelation comes first in the new collection.

    As far as the other cases are concerned where the Tractatus manuscripts offers another reading than book VI, it is difficult to tell whether the variants are revisions by the editor or simple slips of the copyist's pen.

    In one case, however, it is quite possible that the Tractatus has preserved the authentic reading and that we thus can detect an arche-typal error in book VI. The case I have in mind is § 1 super/per. I am tempted to regard the Tractatus reading per omnes gradus as the cor-rect reading on the strength of the parallel passage in § 4, where both book VI and the Tractatus have this reading (For another example, see VIII: 4: 1: Dixi regi prius quosdam gradus, per quos as-cendere potest ad celestia). The reading super may have arisen under the influence of the following surge. If so, this confirms Bergh's conclusion that the archetype was not identical with Alfonso's original.

    Of particular interest are the cases where only y or only K F of-fer another reading than the one we find in the revelation in book VI. In two cases, y offers distinctive variant readings (§ 2 videas, § 5 quod) and, similarly, K and F in three cases (§ 3 audiens, § 5 ego deus melius, § 6 floruit tempore tuo). It is feasible to regard these devia-tions from the original as errors which confirm the classification and evaluation of the manuscripts made above solely on internal criteria.

    2.2. The Za and Wb manuscripts

    As mentioned above, Aili's edition of the Tractatus is based entirely on manuscripts of the corpus reuelacionum tradition. There are, however, other manuscripts as well that contain versions of the Tractatus and should be considered for the establishment of this text (see the table p. 19). Here I will discuss two of these, namely the following:

    Za = Helsinki, University Library, "Codex Nordenskiöld", early 15th century, ff. 117v-120.

    Wb = Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, ms. Ashb. 896, a paper-booklet, early 15th century, ff. 1-19r.

    These manuscripts can be dated to the early 15th century on paleo-graphical grounds. Both of them have a very interesting provenience.

    In Za (f. 115r) there is a note in the margin of Rev. ex. 49 (one of those revelations in which Alfonso was commissioned editor), which reads as follows (to be sure, in a somewhat peculiar Latin):

  • Hec revelatio causa humilitatis idem episcopus non adscripsit in libro reuelationum. Sed ego scriptor reperj eam in suo breuiario post mor-tem suam elapsit aliquibus annijs M°CCCC°

  • We learn thus that out of humility the bishop had not included this revelation in the book of revelations, but "I, the scribe, found it in his breviary some years after his death, in the year 1400." To be sure, the note in Za is hardly original, but copied (together with the revelation itself) from the source manuscript, but in this way we learn at least that the scribe of that manuscript must have worked in the convent San Girolamo di Quarto in Genoa where Alfonso had died in 1389. We know from another source, too-Alfonso's Conscripcio de eleccione Urbani sexti (p. 97)-that the bishop had his private papers in Genoa.

    That the other manuscript, as well, Wb, is related in some way to this monastery is learned from a letter, f. 18r-18v, which is sub-scribed:

  • Janue in Monasterio nostro S[anct]i Jeronimi di Quarto Riperie dioce-sis Januensis M°CCCC°II°

  • On the strength of this subscription, Sara Ekwall dated the manuscript to 1402, but I do not believe that this letter is in the original, because the name of the sender is omitted and replaced with three dots: Et ego frater … conscriptor et miniator harum reuelationum humilis mona-chus ordinis montisoliueti, an arrangement difficult to understand if we take the letter to be an original. The name of the addressee is missing, but he was, according to the sender, known for his devotion to God, Christ and Bridget.

    Wb is unique in that it has preserved all the above-traced 13 revelations of the Tractatus written out in full. After them follow eight others with roughly similar contents: the so-called simony office, re-velations VI 74 and 70, IV 33, 10, 5 (extract), 57 and 78, the above-mentioned letter, and finally, on page 19r, another hand has copied a revelation to Giovanni dalle Celle.

    It was once suggested by Ekwall that this manuscript repre-sented an original twenty-one-revelations-version of the Tractatus, but, as I have previously argued, this is hardly the case. Rather we have here another example of the thirteen-revelations-version, to which some other revelations have been added. In the manuscript, there is, to be sure, a line after rev. XIII, but it of course impossible to draw any conclusions from that. My arguments for making a distinc-tion between the first 13 revelations and the following eight are in-stead based on the following facts:

    1. In the first part of the manuscript, from f. 1v to f. 11r, there are page rubrics. We read REUELACIONES AD on the upper left-hand page and SUMMOS PONTIFICES on the upper right-hand page. The last place where these page rubrics are found is on top of the pages where the thirteenth revelation is found. After that there are no page rubrics at all. This omission is easily explained if we assume that the copyist-or his source-knew that the rest of the revelations were not part of the Tractatus.

    2. A look at the supplementary revelations show for instance that in the chapter heading of revelation VI: 74, Bridget is referred to as beata. Thus we read Videbat sponsa Christi beata Brigida, etc. But in the title of the Tractatus, as well as in III R and VIII R, Bridget is re-ferred to as domina Brigida, not beata Brigida. This inconsistency is ex-plained if these last revelations did not belong to Alfonso's collection of revelations.

    3. Among the first 13 chapters, there are four taken from books IV, VI and VII of the Liber celestis, but there are no references to this source. The last seven revelations are all taken from books IV and VI of the Liber celestis. In all these cases there are explicit references to the corresponding book and revelation in the Liber celestis. This in-consistency in the way of referring to the revelations quoted is easily explained if we assume that the last eight revelations did not belong to the original Tractatus collection.

    On the strength of these observations I thus conclude that in this manuscript we have a copy of the Tractatus with its 13 revelations and another eight revelations, collected by someone interested in having other thematically related revelations conveniently added to the Tractatus.

    2.3. The relationship between the corpus reuelacionum and the Za Wb manuscripts.

    A question of prime importance now has to be solved: was the Trac-tatus text of the Florence and Helsinki manuscripts copied from corpus reuelacionum manuscripts, or does it derive independently from Al-fonso's original? In the former case, these manuscripts are not parti-cularly important for the establishment of the genuine Alfonsine text; in the later, they are very important, since this would mean that we have access to sources that are independent of the corpus reuelacio-num tradition.

    For the classification of the Za and Wb manuscripts in relation to the corpus revelacionum manuscripts, there are a number of interest-ing variant readings to examine:

    ZaWb yq KF

    Title brigida birgitta qKF b y

    I R dedit dat

    I R clementi sexto clementi quinto

    I R et veniret et quod veniret

    I:2 in ytaliam ad ytaliam*

    I:6 om. regum*

    I:8 om. tua*

    IV:1 glomationem glomeracionem

    IV:1 defilare filare

    IV:1 om. utitur

    V:6 accurrente Za accurrere Wb occurrentem

    VII: 13 peccatis Wb penis yq

    prauis operibus KF

    In some cases there is no difficulty in evaluating the alternatives: for example, it seems quite obvious that the authentic form (i.e. the form used by Alfonso) of the saint's name is Brigida, not Birgitta, that the pope mentioned in I R is Clement VI (pope 1342-52), not Clement V (pope 1305-14), and that in Ytaliam, not ad Ytaliam is the reading of the original (cf. VI: 63, as reconstructed by Birger Bergh). Thus, in these cases the Za Wb readings are in all probability authentic.

    In VII: 13 the manuscripts offer three different readings, two of which, peccatis and prauis operibus, are acceptable from the point of view of context, whereas the third, penis, does not make good sense and cannot reasonably be authentic. This distribution of readings can be explained by assuming that peccatis is the original reading. If this word was written in an abbreviated form, as it is most often, it may have been misread as penis, which thus may have been the reading of the p-hyparchetype, preserved in yq. If these suppositions are cor-rect, the KF reading must be regarded as an attempt by some copyist to correct the impossible reading penis. It may be added that the phrase praua opera is most unusual in the Reuelaciones, where the normal expression is mala opera.

    On the other hand, there are a number of cases where it can be concluded with reasonable certainty that the yq KF readings are to be preferred and that, thus, the ZaWb readings are to be considered as errors:

    In I R the present dat is obviously correct in view of the follow-ing precipit, also in the present tense, with which it is coordinated, and also in view of the fact that this is the reading in the chapter heading of rev. VI: 63 (Christus dat sponse etc).

    In the choice between et veniret and et quod veniret in I R, it seems safe to prefer the latter, since this is the variant supported by the corresponding passage in VI: 63. For the same reason, regum (I: 6) and tua (I: 8) must be considered authentic in the Tractatus text.

    As for defilare (IV: 1), I suppose that this reading is due to in-fluence from the preceding desinit and that thus filare is authentic. A most interesting case is V: 6. There are two grammatically pos-sible variants, viz. accurrere Wb and occurrentem yq KF, but since Wb was probably copied from Za (p. 30), accurrere is hardly a possible choice stemmatically. It can be explained as an attempt to correct the impossible Za reading occurrente, obviously caused by the omission of the nasal stroke for the final m.

    On the strength of these observations it seems reasonable to con-clude that neither is the Za Wb text derived from the corpus reuelaci-onum text nor vice versa.

    The duplicate revelations

    What about the status of the duplicate revelations that are written out in full in Za Wb, but truncated in the corpus reuelacionum manu-scripts: do the third, eleventh and twelfth revelations in Za Wb derive their origin from a manuscript that contained the text of all thirteen revelations of Alfonso's original Tractatus or had they been omitted there and was added by the copyists of Za Wb directly from IV: 49, VII: 31 and VI: 96, respectively?

    To answer this question, some variant readings must be exa-mined (I give a somewhat simplified report):

    IV:49 Tractatus, rev. III (Za)

    § 4 debent PY1 b2 deberent Y2V p debent

    § 11 custodiuntur et possidentur PY1 custodiuntur et

    custodiuntur cet. possidentur

    § 19 eos (post abhominantur) p om. b om.

    VII:31 rev. XI (Wb)

    §§ 4, 6, 9 see below see below

    § 7 et complebuntur omnia illa, et complebuntur omnia illa,

    que dicta sunt tibi p om. b que dicta sunt

    VI:96 rev. XII (Wb)

    § 5 salutem b requiem P p requiem

    The fact that the Tractatus readings correspond to b-readings in IV: 49 does not prove, of course, that it is derived from a separate Tractatus version, since irrespective of whether the Za text comes directly from IV: 49 or indirectly via the Tractatus, we are entitled to expect that the ultimate source is of the b-type. However, a most interesting fact is that rev. XI: 7 presents a reading that does not belong to the b-group, but to the p-group, which cannot possibly have been available in Italy at that time. How are we to explain that? I would suggest that the reason is that this revelation was not copied from a corpus reuelacio-num manuscript, but from a separate Tractatus manuscript that cer-tainly contained rev. XI and perhaps all thirteen revelations.

    In III: 11, the Za reading corresponds to a variant that in all pro-bability was not the reading of the archetype. Obviously, in 1379, Al-fonso copied from a text that was not the original.

    As regards the eleventh revelation in general, there are impor-tant differences between it and the corresponding revelation in book VII. Let us, however, first take a look at the rubrics to the two ver-sions:

  • Rev. VII: 31 (ed. Bergh): Christus in Roma loquens sponse sue beate Bir-gitte predicit ei diem et modum mortis sue, ordinans, quid fiat de libris reuelacionum. Dicit eciam, quod multi erunt in mundo, qui illas recipi-


    ent cum deuocione, quando ei placuerit, qui optinebunt graciam eius. Disponit eciam Dominus de corpore sponse sue, vbi debeat sepeliri. Cap. XXXI.

  • and

  • Tractatus de summis pontificibus, rev. 11: Paulo ante mortem habuit sponsa Christi subscriptam reuelacionem a Christo, que tangit dictum dominum papam Gregorium super aduentum ad Romam.

  • In the rubric originally written for this revelation in book VII, we learn that Christ predicts Bridget's death and gives instructions about the editing of the books of revelations. The Lord adds that many people will receive the revelations with devotion and finally gives in-structions about Bridget's burial. In the Tractatus, we learn that it is a revelation about Pope Gregory's return to Rome. This wording squares well with the general content of the Tractatus, but has nothing in com-mon with the rubric in book VII. A comparison of the two versions of this revelation shows that in the Tractatus we have a somewhat ab-breviated version of the corresponding revelation in book VII: § 4 is cut after the word paratum, § 6 is truncated, too, and § 9 is entirely omitted. A clear tendency is noticeable: in §§ 6 and 9 there are in-structions about Alfonso's editing of the revelations. These passages were not only totally irrelevant in a work that aimed at proving that it was God's will that the popes reside in Rome, but in fact a mentioning of Alfonso's rôle as editor might compromise the credibility of the message. The combined evidence of the rubric and the deletions gives us reason to believe that the version of rev. XI, as preserved in the Florence manuscript, is the result of a deliberate adaptation of VII: 31 to the new context, not scribal neglect or carelessness. If I am right here, it is thanks to the Florence manuscript-which, as mentioned above, is the only manuscript that has rev. XI written out in full-that we get this glimpse into Alfonso's workshop.

    We notice that in the Tractatus, as in book VII as well, the chap-ter headings give supplementary information about why, when or where St. Bridget had the revelations in question (and that in the past tense). Otherwise the chapter heading merely summmarizes the con-tent of the revelation (in the present tense). It is most illustrative in this respect to compare the chapter heading of IV: 49:

  • Visio sponse sub figura Ecclesie; et de eius exposicione, in qua continentur modus et status, quos Papa debet tenere respectu sui et respectu cardinalium et aliorum prelatorum sancte matris Ecclesie, et quam maxime in statu humilitatis.

  • and the Tractatus, rev. III:

  • Una die antequam papa Urbanus V intraret Romam, habuit domina Brigida infrascriptam reuelacionem in Sancta Maria Maiori in Roma, que tractat de reparacione Ecclesie.

  • These two rubrics refer in actual fact to the very same revelation, but are written for two different contexts.

    Wb is also the only manuscript that preserves the chapter head-ing of rev. XII. In the other manuscripts, in which there is a reference to this revelation, the chapter heading is omitted and the place of the revelation is indicated with the initial words "Paulo ante mortem", etc. Curiously enough, in y, this heading is preserved as the heading of rev. XIII, whose original heading was displaced, probably because of the similarity in wording.

    2.4. The relationship between the Za and Wb manuscripts

    As to the relative worth of the Florence and Helsinki manuscripts, it can easily be demonstrated that the latter manuscript is marred by a great number of individual errors, e. g., III: 9 Respondi Wb, Respondit ceteri; III: 9 Exponet Wb, Expone ceteri; III: 18 Qi Wb, Qui ceteri. Nothing similar can be shown for Za. In fact, it is quite possible, as far as I can see, that Wb was copied from Za. As mentioned above, Za is mutilated, and must therefore, regrettably, be replaced with Wb for the missing part.

    2.5. The L and p manuscripts

    As shown in the table above, p. 19, the Tractatus is preserved also in the Vadstena manuscript p (ff. 54v-59r) and in the Syon Abbey man-uscript L (ff. 125ra-127rb). In L, the books of the Liber Celestis were copied from a b-manuscript, which thus means that the supplemen-tary revelations (including the Tractatus) were missing. Some of that material (including the Tractatus) was collected and edited in a ninth book, which begins: Incipit liber nonus celestium reuelacionum qui in-titulatur ad pontifices et continet multas alias reuelaciones que non agunt de pontificibus vt patebit. In spite of this incipit, which expli-citly states that the book contains the liber ad pontifices as well as many other revelations that are not about popes, it has surprisingly enough been suggested, as mentioned above, p. 16, that book nine in its entirety represented the Alfonsine Tractatus.

    The p and L manuscripts have been discussed by previous edi-tors of the revelations. Lennart Hollman, who analyses these manu-scripts (p was then designated v) in his edition of the Reuelaciones extrauagantes, concludes that, compared to K and F, they are of secon-dary importance as sources to the original text. Bergh analyses the place of these manuscripts in the textual tradition for the supplemen-tary material to Book VII and advances the following stemma (p. 112):

    Fp L K q

    As far as the Tractatus is concerned, it can easily be demonstrated that in this case, too, the text in p and L is closely related to that of the Vadstena manuscripts K and F and to the editio princeps, Gh.

    Some K F errors were pin-pointed in rev. I (above p. 23). These errors are shared by p and/or L as follows:

    § 5 ego deus melius KF and pL

    § 6 floruit tempore tuo KF and p

    As far as the other possible errors in K and F are concerned (see above), the manipulation of domina into beata is shared by p and L. The passage VI: 5-6 is particularly interesting: above, I assumed that currit was an error that in K and F had caused emendation of the following verbs to obtain consistency in the use of tenses. In L currit has been changed instead, to occurrit, an emendation that is consistent with the perfect of the following verbs.

    Another illustrative passage is V:2 Quamuis infantes habeant suam necessitatem (suam necessitatem om. K gaudium Fp) secundum suam voluntatem… The other manuscripts retained suam necessita-tem. This distribution of variants indicates that these words were omitted in the source of KFp and that gaudium is an emendation in Fp (induced by gaudium in the following sentence) to supply habeant with a badly needed object.

    The duplicate revelations

    In p and L, but not in K F and in y q, rev. III is copied in its entirety. This is potentially a significant difference. As was the case with Za and Wb, the occurrence of the full text can in principle be explained in either of two ways: the revelation was copied from a manuscript of the Tractatus, in which it was written out in full-in this case the stemma has to be thoroughly revised-or the copyist completed his text by re-course directly to book IV: 49. In the former case, the manuscripts would, of course, be of immense importance for an edition of the Trac-tatus, since they would be a source for rev. III and represent another branch of the Tractatus tradition; in the latter case, they are not very important, since it is not book IV we are editing.

    To illustrate this question, I will here quote some variant read-ings from rev. III and compare them with variant readings in IV:49:

    IV:49 (ed. Aili) Tractatus, rev. III

    § 17 de familia a et familia F Gh et fam. p L de fam. Za Wb

    § 10 similatur et designatur a des. et sim. p

    des. et sim. F sim. et des. Za Wb

    § 18 flectantur a flectentur KF flectentur p flectantur Za Wb

    § 15 quod a ut Gh vt L quod Za Wb

    § 17 usus vite a vite usus Gh vite usus L usus vite Za Wb

    § 20 emendare potest papa in mul- papa in m. e. potest L tis a papa in m. e. potest Gh e. potest papa in m. Za Wb

    § 20 necessaria a necessaria sua K necessaria sua L

    necessaria Za Wb

    § 21 quicumque a qui Gh qui L quicumque Za Wb

    Thus, we find that K F Gh errors in IV: 49 are found in the Tractatus text of p and L as well: p shares errors with F, and L with K. It seems reasonable to assume that rev. III was copied from IV: 49, since it was missing in the source. (It is interesting to note that L shares some errors with Gh, which are not to be found in K and F. These errors must have existed in a source manuscript older than L. Thus, K and F cannot have been the only source of Gh.)

    As far as rev. I in L is concerned, there is a reading that posi-tively gives us reason to suspect that the source of this revelation is not to be found in the Tractatus but in the Liber Celestis. In § 1 we read super omnes gradus with the latter branch of the tradition, not per omnes gradus as in the other Tractatus manuscripts (cf. above p. 23).

    Evaluation of p

    To be sure, p cannot have been copied-directly or indirectly-from F, since there is an omission in this manuscript, rev. X: 2, that has no parallel in p, but considering the fact that p in the main represents the same Vadstena recension of the Tractatus as F, as is demonstrated by a number of shared errors, i. e. V: 2 gaudium, see above, V: 9 carita-tem suam, V: 13 ego duxi, VI: 1 eius consciencia and VI: 2 illa tunc, I find it unmotivated to use this manuscript for an edition of the Trac-tatus.

    Evaluation of L

    L seems to represent another twig on the Vadstena branch, and in a number of cases it offers-versus KF-the same reading as (Za)Wb yq, in all probability the correct reading:

    (Za)Wb yq KF L

    II:1 suscipiendos, -um recipiendum suscipiendos

    IV:7 dicte indulgencie indulg. dicte dicte indulg.

    IV:8 tuum monasterium monast. tuum tuum monast.

    V:5 periculis periculo periculis

    V:6 viderit videt viderit

    VI:1 eius corporis corporis eius eius corporis

    VI:7 ego om. ego

    IX:10 ipsarum animarum ipsarum

    XIII:7 licitum est est licitum licitum est

    On the other hand, L has been the object of deliberate revision: for in-stance, the original title has been replaced with a new incipit, the text of rev. III (and possibly of rev. I) is not the original (see above) and some chapter headings have been enlarged by short summaries of the contents. In addition, this manuscript has a considerable number of in-dividual errors. (To give some idea about the frequency and character of these readings, I quote some examples from rev. II: R Clementem sextum L Clementem ceteri; medio eorum L medio ceteri; audierit L audiret ceteri.) For these reasons, I am of the opinion that it is not worthwhile to encumber the apparatus criticus with readings from this manuscript, and I have consequently not used L for my edition.

    2.6. The stemma

    The observations I have reported above can be accounted for by the following stemma codicum:

    p

    Za yq KFv L

    Wb

    3. Principles of edition

    3.1. The reconstruction of the archetype

    Rev. I-II, IV-X and XIII

    The archetype is reconstructed on the basis of a comparison between Za or (where this manuscript is mutilated) Wb on the one hand and the p-hyparchetype on the other. A reading extant in Za/Wb and in at least one of the two subgroups of the p-hyparchetype, i. e., in either yq or KF, must be considered to have already existed in the arche-type.

    In the cases where Za/Wb has one reading and p another and it does not seem possible to rule out either on contextual or linguistic grounds, I have preferred p, since this source seems to give a general-ly superior text. One type of difference between the two sources is that a certain word is found in p but not in Za/Wb. In most cases it is impossible to tell which is correct, but there are a few cases where it is reasonable to suspect that it is the question of omissions in Za/Wb, not additions in p: e. g. IV:1 utitur (obviously correct) and perhaps III:2 suam. Unfortunately, Wb in particular seems to be marred by errors. To give some idea of the character and frequency of these suspicious readings, I quote some examples from rev. XIII: § 1 the omission of sponsa, § 3 audiuit and illa, § 5 the omission of in and § 8 quibus.

    In those cases too where Za/Wb has a reading in common with one of the other manuscripts, I have opted for this reading.

    Rev. III, XI-XII (the duplicate revelations)

    Since these revelations are not written out in the manuscripts of the corpus reuelacionum tradition, they are available in the Tractatus ver-sion only in Za/Wb. As regards the substantial alterations in rev. XI in comparison with Rev. VII: 31, obviously made to adapt the revelation to the needs of the new context (see above pp. 28-29), there is no question about which text to edit. But further there are some minor omissions and other alterations. The crucial question is of course: can these differences be attributed to Alfonso's reediting activity (either deliberate modifications, which should be retained in the present edi-tion, or errors found in his copy) or are they later scribal errors of the type we have seen above? These questions are hardly possible to answer and, in order to avoid ending up in a quagmire of arbitrari-ness, I have decided to follow the manuscript in the main and make a few emendations with reference to the respective chapters in the Liber celestis.

    3.2. Archetypal errors

    In III: 16-17 below, we read an interpretation of a church building in disrepair:

  • 16 In uncinis vero, qui postibus coniunguntur, significantur cardina-les, qui extenti et effusi sunt, in quantum valent, ad omnem superbiam, cupiditatem et carnis delectamentum. 17 Ideo recipiat papa in manu malleum et forpicem et flectat cardines ad velle suum non permittendo eos habere plura de vestibus, de familia et de utensilibus, nisi quantum requirit necessitas et usus vite.

  • After some of the usual complaints about the moral standard of the cardinals, the pope is asked to bend the cardines, the hinges, to his will and forbid them to have more clothes, servants and equipment than they absolutely need. A check in the source of this revelation, IV: 49 (in Aili's edition), shows that cardines to be sure was the reading of the archetype of the corpus reuelacionum, but that two of the eleven manuscripts used for the edition give the reading cardinales and one has omitted the word altogether.

    Generally speaking, cardines can of course be used to signify 'cardinals', but this cannot reasonably be the case here, for in § 16 we learn that uncini, hooks, have that function in this revelation (In unci-nis…significantur cardinales), and in § 10 the cardines appear in an all-together different meaning (In foraminibus…cardinum significatur hu-militas) and have nothing at all to do with cardinals. In actual fact, even if cardines had been used to signify cardinales in this revelation, the reading would have been suspicious in § 17, considering the fact that the interpreting is already done in § 16 and § 17 concerns what should be done as a consequence of this interpretation. In the light of this I suggest that cardines be emended to cardinales, a reading which easily could have been corrupted, since it is often written in abbrevi-ated form in the manuscripts.

    In VI: 5 a series of readings is involved:

  • [pia mater] filio … currit, et, ne deficeret (Wb yq; deficiat KF) frigore … eleuauit (Wb yq; eleuat KF) eundem, quem … fouit (Wb yq; fouet KF) … calefecit (Wb yq; calefacit KF) … cibauit (Wb yq; cibat KF)

  • It might be tempting to consider currit and the following readings in the present tense to be the authentic readings, for currit is undoubt-edly in the present tense (the perfect is given as cucurrit in the reve-lations) and requires the present tense in the following verbs as well, but on the other hand the readings of the archetype was in all proba-bility the ones in the past tense. That distribution of readings could be explained if we assume that something was wrong with currit. My suggestion is that we read accurrit, which can be used in the perfect tense and would make perfect sense in the context (accurrere means 'auxilio venire alicui' [TLL] or 'to run or hurry to or up to, esp. to help [OLD]). Thus, I assume that the first syllable has disappeared, and that currit has then given rise to the alteration in K F in order to obtain a consistent use of tense, whereas the original readings, which do not square with the present currit, have been retained in Wb y q.

    3.3. Presentation of the text

    Orthography

    I have carried out a few normalisations of spelling in accordance with the usage generally observed in the manuscripts.

    Apparatus

    In the apparatus criticus, I have not listed orthographic divergences or obvious and insignificant miswritings, such as X R reuellatio and missit Wb, XIII: 6 monastiche K, XIII: 9 purgatori Wb, or, in the title, swecie K.

    STEMMA CODICUM ADHIBITORUM

    p

    Za (I-V:14 malignus spiritus) yq KF

    Wb (V:14 cum sua fraude-XIII)

     


    REUELACIONES INFRASCRIPTAS HABUIT IN VISIONE SPIRITUALI DIUINITUS DEUOTA ANCILLA CHRISTI SANCTE MEMORIE DOMINA BRIGIDA, PRINCIPISSA DE REGNO SUECIE, STANDO IN ORACIONE. QUE DIRIGUNTUR AD SUMMOS PONTIFICES CLEMENTEM VI, INNOCENCIUM VI, URBANUM V, GREGORIUM XI. QUE TRACTANT DE REDUCENDO SEDEM APOSTOLICAM ET ROMANAM CURIAM AD ROMAM ET DE REFORMACIONE ECCLESIE EX PRECEPTO DEI OMNIPOTENTIS.

    (I)

    Christus per duos annos ante iubileum dat sponse verba hic contenta et precipit illa mittere pape Clementi VI, scilicet quod faceret pacem inter reges Francie et Anglie et quod veniret in Ytaliam et annunciaret annum iubileum, et hanc reuelacionem portauit dominus Hemmingus, episcopus Aboensis et frater Petrus, prior monasterii de Aluastro de regno Suecie ordinis Cisterciensis.

    1 Filius Dei loquitur ad sponsam dicens: "Scribe ex parte mea pape Cle-menti verba hec: Ego exaltaui te et ascendere te feci per omnes gradus honoris. Surge igitur ad faciendum pacem inter reges Francie et Anglie, qui sunt periculose bestie, animarum proditores. 2 Veni deinde in Ytaliam et predica ibi verbum et annum salutis et dileccionis diuine et vide plateas stratas sanctorum meorum sanguine et dabo tibi merce-dem illam que non finietur! 3 Attende eciam tempora priora, in qui-

    bus audacter ad iram prouocasti me et silui, in quibus fecisti que volu-isti et non debuisti et ego quasi non iudicans paciens fui, 4 quia tem-pus meum nunc appropinquat et exquiram a te negligenciam et auda-ciam temporis tui et, sicut per omnes gradus ascendere te feci, sic de-scendes spiritualiter per alios gradus, quos experieris veraciter in ani-ma et corpore, nisi obedieris verbis meis, 5 et silebit lingua tua magni-loqua, et nomen tuum, quod vocasti in terris, in obliuione et opprobrio erit in conspectu meo et sanctorum meorum. Exquiram eciam a te, quam indigne-permissione tamen mea-ad omnes gradus ascendisti, quod melius ego Deus scio, quam tua negligens consciencia recordatur. 6 Queram quoque a te, quantum in reformacione pacis regum tepuisti et quantum in aliam partem declinasti. Insuper non erit in obliuione, qualiter cupiditas et ambicio in Ecclesia tempore tuo floruit et aucta est et quod multa reformare et emendare potuisti, sed tu, amator car-nis, noluisti. 7 Surge igitur, antequam nouissima hora tua appropin-quans veniat, et negligencias priorum temporum penultimo tempore zelando extingue!

    Si autem dubitas, cuius spiritus verba ista sint, ecce regnum et persona nota sunt, in quibus stupor et mirabilia facta sunt. 8 Iusticia enim et misericordia, de quibus loquor, appropinquant ubique terra-rum. Consciencia enim tua racionabile dicit esse illud, quod moneo, et caritatiuum esse, quod suadeo. 9 Et nisi paciencia mea seruasset te, iam profundius ultra alios predecessores tuos descendisses. Ergo in-quire in libro consciencie tue et vide, si veritatem loquor!"*


    (II)

    Verba Christi ad sponsam mencionem faciencia de papa Innocencio VI, qui fuit post Clementem.

    1 Filius loquitur ad sponsam dicens: "Iste papa Innocencius est de ere meliori quam antecessor eius et materia apta ad suscipiendum colores optimos, sed malicia hominum exigit, ut cicius tollatur de medio. 2 Cui voluntas sua bona reputabitur in coronam et glorie augmentacionem. Verumptamen, si verba mea librorum tibi data audiret, fieret melior, et qui deferrent ad eum verba, sublimius coronarentur."*

    (III)

    Una die antequam papa Urbanus V intraret Romam, habuit domina Brigida infrascriptam reuelacionem in Sancta Maria Maiori in Roma, que tractat de reparacione Ecclesie.

    1 Uni persone videbatur, quasi quod esset in magno choro, et apparuit sol magnus et lucens, dueque sedes quasi predicatorum in choro erant, una a dextris aliaque a sinistris distantes a sole longo spacio et inter-uallo, duoque radii de sole ad sedes procedebant.

    2 Tunc vox audiebatur de sede, que ad sinistram partem erat, di-cens: "Aue, rex in eternum creator et redemptor iustusque iudex, ecce vicarius tuus, qui sedet in sede tua in mundo, reduxit iam sedem in antiquum et priorem locum, ubi sedit primus papa Petrus, qui fuit princeps apostolorum."

    3 Respondit vox de dextra sede dicens: "Quomodo," inquit, "poterit intrare in sanctam Ecclesiam, in qua foramina cardinum sunt plena rubigine et terra? 4 Ideo et postes inclinati sunt ad terram, quia in foraminibus non est locus, ubi uncini imprimantur, qui postes debent sustentare. Uncini quoque sunt extenti ad plenum nichilque curuati ad postes tenendum. 5 Pauimentum vero totum effossum est et conuer-sum in foueas profundas ad modum puteorum profundissimorum, qui nullum omnino habent fundum. 6 Tectum autem est linitum pice et ardet de igne sulfureo stillans quasi pluuia densa. 7 De nigredine vero et spissitudine fumi, qui de abisso fossarum et de stillicidiis tecti ascendit, omnes parietes maculati sunt et ita deformes in colore ad in-tuendum quasi sanguis commixtus putrida sanie. 8 Ideo amiculum Dei non decet mansionem habere in tali templo."*

    9 Respondit vox de sede ad partem sinistram: "Expone," inquit, "spiritualiter que dixisti corporaliter." 10 Tunc ait vox: "Papa similatur et designatur in postibus. In foraminibus vero cardinum significatur humilitas, que sic vacua debet esse ab omni superbia, ut nichil appareat in ea, nisi quod pertinet ad officium humile pontificale, sicut foramen debet esse vacuum totaliter a rubigine. 11 Sed iam foramina, id est humilitatis insignia sunt ita repleta superfluitatibus et diuiciis et facultatibus, que ad nichil aliud custodiuntur et possidentur nisi ad superbiam, quod nichil apparet humile, quia tota humilitas conuersa est ad mundanam pompam. 12 Ideo non mirum, quod papa, qui similatur in postibus, inclinatus est ad mundialia, que significantur in rubigine et in terra. 13 Propterea papa incipiat veram humilitatem in se ipso, primo in apparatu suo, in vestibus, in auro et argento et vasis argenteis, in equis et aliis utensilibus, segregando de eis omnibus sola necessaria sua, alia vero erogando pauperibus et specialiter hiis, quos nouerit amicos Dei. 14 Deinde moderate disponat familiam suam et necessarios habeat famulos, qui vitam suam custodiant, 15 quia licet in manu Dei est, quando {ei} velit vocare eum ad iudicium, iustum tamen est quod habeat famulos propter roborandam iusticiam et ut eos, qui se contra Deum et sancte Ecclesie consuetudinem erigunt, va-leat humiliare.

    16 In uncinis vero, qui postibus coniunguntur, significantur cardi-nales, qui extenti et effusi sunt, in quantum valent, ad omnem super-biam et cupiditatem et carnis delectamentum. 17 Ideo recipiat papa in manu malleum et forpicem et flectat cardin<al>es ad velle suum non permittendo eos habere plura de vestibus, de familia et de utensilibus, nisi quantum requirit necessitas et usus vite, 18 flectatque eos for-pice, id est verbis lenibus et consilio diuino paternaque caritate. Qui si noluerint obedire, recipiat malleum scilicet ostendendo eis seueritatem suam faciendoque quicquid poterit, quod tamen non sit contra iusti-ciam, donec flectantur ad velle suum.

    19 In pauimento autem significantur episcopi et clerici seculares, quorum cupiditas nullum habet fundum. De quorum superbia et vita luxuriosa procedit fumus, ob quem abhominantur omnes angeli in celis et amici Dei in terris. 20 Ista enim emendare potest papa in multis, si unumquemque permittat habere necessaria non superflua precipiat-que unicuique episcopo attendere ad cleri sui vitam. 21 Et quicumque noluerit emendare vitam suam et stare in continencia, priuetur omni-no prebenda sua, quia carius est Deo, quod in illo loco non dicatur missa, quam quod manus meretricee tangant corpus Dei."

    (IV)

    Reuelacio tangens papam Urbanum, quam habuit sponsa Christi in Roma super confirmacione regule Saluatoris et super indulgenciis Sancti Petri ad vincula a Christo concessis monasterio beate Brigide.

    1 Filius Dei loquitur ad sponsam: "Qui habet glomeracionem filorum, in qua est intus aurum optimum, non desinit filare, donec inuenerit aurum. Quo inuento utitur eo possessor ad honorem et commodum suum. 2 Sic iste papa Urbanus aurum est ductile ad bona sed sollicitu-dinibus mundi vallatus est. 3 Ideo vade et dic ei ex parte mea: 'Tem-pus tuum breue est. Surge et attende, quomodo anime tibi commisse saluentur! Ego optuli tibi regulam religionis, que fundari et incipi de-bet in loco Watzstenom in Suecia, que de ore meo processit. 4 Nunc autem volo, ut non solum auctoritate tua confirmetur sed et bene-diccione tua, qui vicarius meus es in terris, roboretur. 5 Ego dictaui eam et dotaui spirituali dote, scilicet concedendo indulgencias, que sunt in ecclesia Sancti Petri ad vincula in Roma. Tu ergo approba coram hominibus quod coram exercitu meo celesti est sanctitum!' 6 Si autem queris signum, quod hec ego loquor, hoc iam ostendi tibi, quia quando primum audisti verba mea, anima tua in aduentu nuncii mei spiritualiter fuit consolata. Si autem queris ulterius signum, dabitur tibi, sed non sicut Ione prophete. 7 Tu autem, sponsa mea, cui dictam graciam feci, si non poteris habere litteram et graciam pape et sigillum super concessione dicte indulgencie nisi precedente pecunia, sufficit tibi benediccio mea. 8 Ego enim approbabo et confirmabo verbum meum, et omnes sancti erunt tibi testes, mater mea sit tibi sigillum,

    pater meus confirmator et Spiritus Sanctus adueniencium ad tuum monasterium consolator."

     

    (V)

    Hec est reuelacio, quam habuit sponsa Christi in Roma de eodem papa Urbano, antequam rediret Auinionem anno Domini MCCCLXX, quam ipsa presentauit ei in monte Flasconis.

    1 Vigilante de nocte prefata persona, in oracione visum fuit sibi, ac si una vox loqueretur procedens a quodam circulo splendoris ad modum solis. Que quidem vox dixit sibi hec verba, que sequuntur:

    2 "Ego sum mater Dei, quia sic placuit sibi. Ego eciam sum mater omnium, qui sunt in superno gaudio. Quamuis infantes habeant suam necessitatem secundum suam voluntatem, tamen in augmentum sue leticie cumulatur eis gaudium ex eo, quod vident faciem matris sue blandam. 3 Sic placet Deo dare omnibus in celesti curia gaudium et exultacionem de mee virginitatis puritate et mearum virtutum pulcri-tudine, quamuis habeant incomprehensibiliter ex eius diuinitatis potencia totum bonum. 4 Sum eciam mater omnium, qui sunt in pur-gatorio, quia omnes pene, que debentur purgandis pro peccatis suis, in qualibet hora propter preces meas quodammodo mitigantur. Ita placet Deo, et alique ex hiis penis, que debentur eis de rigore diuine iusticie, minuuntur. 5 Ego sum eciam mater tocius iusticie, que est in mundo, quam iusticiam filius meus dilexit dileccione perfectissima. Et sicut  materna manus parata est ad opponendum se periculis in cordis filii sui defensionem, si aliquis niteretur in sui lesione, ita ego sum parata iugiter iustos, qui sunt in mundo, defendere et de omni spirituali peri-culo liberare. 6 Ego eciam sum quasi mater omnium peccatorum se volencium emendare et habencium voluntatem in Deum amplius non peccare et sum voluntaria ipsum peccatorem in meam defensionem accipere sicut caritatiua mater, dum viderit filium suum nudum ab ini-micis acutos gladios habentibus sibi occurrentem. 7 Nonne ipsa tunc opponeret se periculis viriliter, ut filium suum de manibus inimicorum suorum liberaret et eriperet et in sinu suo gaudenter conseruaret? 8 Ita facio et faciam ego omnibus peccatoribus misericordiam a filio meo petentibus sub vera contricione et diuina dileccione.

    9 Audi tu et attende diligenter, quid ego volo dicere de duobus fili-is meis, quos tibi volo nominare. Primus, quem dico, est filius meus Iesus Christus, qui natus est de mea carne virginea ad hoc, ut suam caritatem manifestaret et animas redimeret, 10 propter quod non pe-percit sui corporis laboribus nec sui sanguinis effusionibus nec dedig-natus est audire contumelias et sustinere sue mortis penam. Ille est ipse Deus et est omnipotens in eterna leticia. 11 Secundus, quem re-puto pro filio meo, est ille, qui residet in papali sede, in sede Dei in mundo, si obedierit preceptis suis et ipsum dilexerit perfecta caritate.

    12 Modo volo aliquid loqui super isto papa, qui nominatur Urba-nus. Propter precem meam obtinuit ipse Spiritus Sancti infusionem, ut deberet ad Romam et Ytaliam declinare ad nichil aliud, nisi ut miseri-cordiam et iusticiam faceret, fidem catholicam roboraret, pacem refor-maret et sic sanctam Ecclesiam innouaret. 13 Sicut mater ducit filium suum ad locum, ubi sibi placet, dum ostendit sibi ubera sua, ita duxi ego Urbanum papam mea prece et opere Spiritus Sancti de Auinione ad Romam sine quouis suo periculo corporali. 14 Quid fecerat ipse michi? Iam vertit ad me dorsum et non faciem et intendit a me rece-dere, et ducit eum ad hoc malignus spiritus cum sua fraude, nam tedium habet de diuino labore et libitum ad suum commodum corporale. 15 Item trahit eum dyabolus cum delectacione mundiali, nam nimis desiderio est sibi terra nacionis sue mundano more. Item trahi-tur carnalium amicorum consiliis, qui magis attendunt suam delecta-cionem et voluptatem quam Dei honorem et voluntatem vel anime sue profectum et salutem. 16 Si contigerit ipsum redire ad terras, ubi fuit electus papa, ipse habebit in breui tempore unam percussionem siue alapam, quod dentes sui stringent seu strident, visus caligabit et fus-cus erit et tocius sui corporis membra contremiscent, 17 ardor Spiritus Sancti paulisper tepescet in eo et recedet et omnium amicorum Dei preces, qui pro ipso orare decreuerunt lacrimis gemebundis, torpebunt et corda ad eius dileccionem frigescent, 18 et de duobus coram Deo reddet racionem: primo de hiis que fecerat in papali sede, secundo de hiis que omiserat ex hiis, que potuisset in Dei honore fecisse in sua magna maiestate."

    (VI)

    Hec que sequitur est reuelacio prima que fuit missa domino Gregorio pape XI per dominum Latinum de Ursinis.

    1 Una persona vigilans et non dormiens sed in oracione persistens in spiritu rapta fuit, et tunc omnes eius corporis vires quasi deficere vi-debantur, sed cor ipsius inflammabatur et exultabat caritatis ardore eiusque anima consolabatur, et quodam diuino robore confortabatur spiritus eius, ac eciam tota consciencia eius replebatur intellectu spiri-tuali. 2 Cui persone tunc apparuit visio talis. Audiebat enim ipsa tunc quandam vocem dulcisonam eam taliter alloquentem: "Ego sum illa que genui Dei filium, verum Deum, Iesum Christum. 3 Quoniam alias dixi tibi aliqua verba, que Urbano pape deberent nunciari, nunc eciam dico tibi aliqua, que mittenda sunt pape Gregorio. Sed ut melius intel-ligantur, dicam tibi ea per quandam similitudinem.4 Sicut enim pia mater dilectum videns filium suum nudum et frigidum in terra iacen-tem et ad erigendum se vires corporis nullas habentem, sed pre desi-derio fauoris et lactis materni querulis vocibus cum vagitu plorantem, 5 que tunc tenera dileccione compassa filio festine accurrit et, ne de-ficeret frigore, pia manu materna de terra eleuauit eundem, quem sta-tim leniter fouit et materno calore sui pectoris mitissime calefecit eumque dulciter mamillarum suarum lacte cibauit, 6 sic ego mater mi-sericordie facere volo pape Gregorio, si in Romam et Ytaliam redire voluerit animo permanendi et voluntatem habuerit ibidem, ut pius pastor, plangendi compassionis lacrimis gemebundis animarum sibi ouium commissarum eternam perdicionem et earum dampna et dis-pendia dolorosa et innouare proposuerit statum Ecclesie cum humili-tate et pastorali debita caritate.

    7 Tunc enim ego sicut pia mater eleuabo eum de terra velut nu-dum filium frigidum, id est separabo eum et totum eius cor ab omni delectacione terrena et ab omni mundano amore, que sunt contra Dei voluntatem, et calefaciam eum suauiter materno calore scilicet carita-tis mee, que est in pectore meo. 8 Saturabo eciam eum lacte meo, id est oracione mea, que similis est lacti. O, quam innumerabiles sunt illi, qui lacte oracionis mee sustentantur et dulciter saturantur! 9 Isto enim lacte saturabo eum, id est oracione mea, quam faciam pro eo ad Dominum et Deum meum, qui est filius meus, ut ipse dignetur miscere et unire spiritum suum sanctum cum interno sanguine cordis eiusdem Gregorii pape. 10 Tunc autem ipse saciabitur vera sacietate perfecte in tantum, quod ulterius ad nichil aliud desiderabit in hoc seculo viuere, nisi ut possit Dei honorem totis suis viribus augmentare. 11 Ecce iam nunc ostendi ei maternam caritatem, quam sibi faciam, si obedierit, quia voluntas Dei est, ut transferat sedem suam ad Romam cum humi-litate. 12 Modo eciam, ne in posterum ipse ignorancia excusetur, ego precauens eum caritate materna annuncio ei ista, que sequuntur, vide-licet quod si predictis ipse non obedierit, indubitanter senciet iusticie virgam, id est filii mei indignacionem, quia tunc abbreuiabitur vita eius et vocabitur ad iudicium Dei. 13 Nulla tunc ei temporalium potes-tas auxiliabitur dominorum, non eciam sapiencia et sciencia ei prod-erunt medicorum nec flatus aeris sue natalis patrie proficiet ei ad eius vitam aliquatenus prorogandam."

    (VII)

    Sequitur alia visio, quam portauit dominus comes de Nola eidem pape Gregorio XI.

    1 Laus sit Deo pro omni dileccione sua et seruicium et honor sanctis-sime Marie, preciose virgini, sue matri pro compassione, quam habet super omnes, quos filius suus redemit suo sanguine precioso! 2 Pater sancte, hinc est quod cuidam persone, quam vos bene nostis vigilando in oracione existenti contigit, quod senciebat cor suum totum inflam-mari diuine caritatis ardore et quadam visitacione Spiritus Sancti. 3 Que quidem persona tunc audiuit quandam vocem sibi dicentem: "Audi tu, que vides spiritualia et dicito illud, quod tibi modo precipitur, et scribe Gregorio summo pontifici hec verba, que modo audies. 4 Ego, que modo loquor tibi, sum illa, quam Deo placuit sibi in matrem eli-gere, qui de carne mea sibi assumpsit corpus humanum. Ipse quidem filius meus fecit cum Gregorio papa magnum opus misericordie, quando scilicet per me fecit sibi dici sanctissimam suam voluntatem, quam in priori reuelacione sibi transmissa ei plenius intimaui, 5 et hoc factum est pocius propter oraciones et lacrimas amicorum Dei quam propter eius aliqua merita precedencia. Ideo ego et dyabolus, inimicus eius, grande certamen habuimus super eum, 6 nam ego monui eundem Gregorium papam in alia littera, ut festinanter ad Romam seu Ytaliam se transferret cum humilitate et diuina caritate et ut ibidem suam sedem poneret et usque ad mortem omnino permaneret. 7 Dyabolus vero et alii consiliarii eiusdem pape consuluerunt ei tardare et in illis, ubi nunc est, partibus demorari et hoc propter carnalem amorem et eciam propter parentum et amicorum carnalium mundanam delecta-cionem et consolacionem. 8 Et ideo dyabolus maiorem nunc habet iusticiam et occasionem temptandi eum, quia magis obediuit consilio dyaboli et amicorum carnalium quam Dei et mee voluntati.

    9 Verum quia ipse papa desiderat de voluntate Dei adhuc plenius certificari, ideo iustum est, ut tale suum desiderium impleatur. Nouerit ergo certissime hoc, quod infra sequitur, esse voluntatis Dei, 10 vide-licet quod sine dilacione quacumque ipse veniat ad Ytaliam seu Ro-mam et omnino taliter faciat et acceleret iter suum cum festinancia ad veniendum, quod in mense Marcii vel ad ultimum in toto Aprili proxime futuro ipse personaliter in predicta urbe seu prouincia Ytalie omnino sit ingressus, si ipse umquam in matrem voluerit me habere. 11 Si autem in predictis inobediens fuerit, veraciter sciat, quod num-quam amplius tali consolacione, id est alia mea visitacione seu reuela-cione visitabitur in hoc mundo sed post mortem suam respondebit coram diuina iusticia, cur mandatis meis noluerit obedire. 12 Si vero in predictis obedierit, tunc eciam ego complebo ea, que promisi in re-uelacione illa a me sibi primitus destinata.

    13 Notum eciam facio eidem pape, quod numquam erit sic firma et tranquilla pax in Francia, quod habitantes in ea plena securitate et concordia possint ullatenus congaudere, antequam populus illius regni placauerit Deum filium meum per aliqua magna opera pietatis et hu-militatis, quem suis multis peccatis et offensionibus ad indignacionem et iram hactenus prouocauerunt.

    14 Propterea nouerit, quod iter seu passagium illorum armige-rorum de iniquis societatibus iniquorum, quod ipsi facere volunt ad sanctum sepulcrum filii mei, non magis placet eidem filio meo vero Deo quam aurum illud, quod populus Israel proiecit in ignem, de quo dyabolus conflatilem vitulum compaginauit, quia in eis est superbia et cupiditas. 15 Et si aliquam habent voluntatem eundi ad memoratum sepulcrum, magis est propter superbiam et cupiditatem pecunie quam propter amorem et honorem Dei." Et hiis dictis hec visio disparuit.

    16 Post hec autem subiunxit et dixit michi mater Dei: "Item dic episcopo meo heremite, quod claudat istam litteram et sigillet eam et postea scribat in alia papiro copiam eius et ostendat eandem copiam apertam illi abbati nuncio pape et Nolano comiti, ut ipsi legant illam et sciant, quid continetur in ea. 17 Postquam vero ipsi eam legerint, di-mittat eis supradictam litteram clausam, sigillatam, quam ipsi statim mittant pape Gregorio sine mora. Sed copiam illam apertam postquam legerint, non dimittat eis, sed volo, quod dilaceret et rumpat eam coram oculis eorum in frusta. 18 Quia sicut littera illa, que est una, di-lacerabitur in multa frusticula, sic, nisi papa tempore et anno prefixo venerit in Ytaliam, terre Ecclesie, que sub una eius obediencia et sub-ieccione modo eidem obediunt, diuidentur in plures partes in manus tyrannorum. 19 Et firmissime scias, quod in augmentum tribulacionis ipsius pape non solum ipse audiet sed et videbit oculis suis esse vera que dico, nec poterit cum tota manu potencie sue reducere terras pre-dictas Ecclesie ad pristinum statum sue obediencie et pacis. 20 Ista enim verba, que nunc tibi dico, adhuc non sunt dicenda nec scribenda illi abbati, quia semen occultatur in terra, donec fructificet in spicam."

    (VIII)

    Reuelacio quam habuit domina Brigida in Neapoli in festo Sancti Poli-carpi, quando rediit de Ierusalem, sed hanc reuelacionem non misit pape, quia non fuit ei preceptum diuinitus.

    1 Christus apparuit domine Brigide oranti pro papa Gregorio XI et dixit ei: "Attende, filia, ad verba que loquor! Scias enim, quod iste papa Gregorius est similis paralitico, qui non mouet manus ad operandum nec pedes ad ambulandum. 2 Sicut enim infirmitas paralisis generatur ex sanguine et humore corrupto et frigore, sic istum papam tenet quasi ligatum et impeditum immoderatus amor sanguinis sui et frigus tepiditatis mentis sue ad me. 3 Sed scias, quod adiutorio oracionis virginis matris mee iam ipse incipiet mouere manus et pedes, scilicet faciendo voluntatem meam et honorem meum in veniendo Romam. Ideo scias certissime, quod ipse veniet Romam et ibi inchoabit viam ad aliqua bona futura, sed non consumabit."

    4 Tunc autem respondit domina Brigida: "O, domine Deus meus, regina Neapolis et multi alii dicunt michi, quod impossibile est eum venire Romam, quia rex Francie et cardinales et alii quamplurima ei ponunt impedimenta ad veniendum. 5 Et audiui, quod multi insurgunt ibi dicentes se habere spiritum Dei et diuinas reuelaciones et visiones, qui pretextu illarum dissuadent ei venire, et ideo timeo multum, quod impediatur aduentus eius."

    6 Respondit dominus: "Audisti legi, quod Ieremias erat in diebus illis in Israel. Qui habebat spiritum Dei ad prophetandum, et multi erant tunc, qui habebant spiritum sompniorum et mendacii, quibus rex iniquus credidit, et ideo venit ipse rex in captiuitatem et populus cum eo, nam si rex credidisset soli Ieremie, ablata fuisset ira mea ab eo. 7 Sic eciam et nunc est, quia siue surgant sapientes siue surgant somp-niatores siue surgant amici non spiritus sed carnis ipsius Gregorii pape et suadeant et dissuadeant contrarium. Nichilominus tamen ego Domi-nus preualebo eis et ducam ipsum papam ad Romam non ad eorum consolacionem. 8 Sed utrum tu videbis eum venire vel non, tibi non est hoc licitum scire."

    (IX)

    Hec fuit reuelacio in Neapoli predicte sponse Christi in mense Februarii pro eodem papa Gregorio anno domini MCCCLXXIII. Quam portauit ei quidam heremita, qui episcopatum renunciauerat.

    1 Pater sancte, illa persona, quam bene nouit sanctitas vestra, existens in oracione vigilans, cum staret tunc in raptu mentis contemplacione suspensa, vidit in spiritu similitudinem throni, in quo sedebat simili-tudo hominis, inestimabilis pulcritudinis et incomprehensibilis poten-cie dominus, 2 et in circuitu throni stabat multitudo magna sanctorum et innumerabilis exercitus angelorum, et ante sedentem in throno sta-bat remote quidam episcopus indutus pontificalibus ornamentis.

    3 Ipse autem dominus, qui in throno sedebat, michi loquebatur sic dicens: "Michi data est omnis potestas in celo et in terra a patre meo. Et licet tibi videor loqui quasi de uno ore, attamen non solus loquor, quia Pater loquitur mecum et Spiritus Sanctus, que tres persone unum sumus in diuinitatis substancia."

    4 Deinde ad illum episcopum loquebatur dicens: "Audi, Gregori pa-pa undecime, verba, que ego loquor tecum, et diligenter attende ad ea que tibi dico!5 Cur tantum odis me aut quare tanta est audacia tua et presumpcio tua contra me? Nam curia tua mundana depredatur celes-tem curiam meam. Tu vero superbe spolias me ouibus meis. Bona quo-que ecclesiastica, que mea propria sunt, et bona subditorum Ecclesie mee tu indebite extorques et surripis, et das illa amicis tuis temporali-bus. 6 Tu eciam bona rapis et recipis iniuste a pauperibus meis, et illa das et distribuis indecenter diuitibus tuis, propter quod nimia est audacia et presumpcio tua, eo quod tu tam temere intras curiam meam et non parcis eis, que mea propria sunt. 7 Quid feci tibi, Gregori? Ego quidem pacienter permisi te ascendere ad summum pontificatum et predixi tibi voluntatem meam per litteras de Roma tibi diuina reuela-cione transmissas, ammonendo te per illas de salute anime tue, et pre-cautaui te in eis de magno dispendio tuo. 8 Quid igitur pro tantis bene-ficiis rependis michi? Et quid facis hoc, videlicet quod in curia tua reg-nat superbia maxima, cupiditas insaciabilis et luxuria michi execrabilis ac eciam vorago pessima horribilis symonie? 9 Insuper et tu eciam rapis et depredaris a me innumerabiles animas, nam quasi omnes, qui veniunt ad curiam tuam, mittis in Gehennam ignis ex eo, quod non diligenter attendis ea que pertinent ad curiam meam, quia tu es pre-atus et pastor mearum ouium, 10 et ideo culpa tua est, quod non dis-crete consideras ea que ad spiritualem salutem ipsarum facienda et corrigenda sunt.

    11 Et quamuis ex predictis possem secundum iusticiam licite con-dempnare te, tamen ex misericordia adhuc iterum moneo te de salute anime tue, videlicet ut venias Romam ad sedem tuam, quam cicius poteris. Tempus enim pono in arbitrio tuo. 12 Scias tamen, quod quanto plus tardaueris, tanto plus diminuuntur profectus anime tue et omnium tuarum virtutum, et quanto cicius ad Romam veneris, tanto cicius accrescent tibi virtutes et dona Spiritus Sancti et inflammaberis

    diuino igne caritatis mee. 13 Veni igitur et noli tardare! Veni non cum superbia solita et mundana pompa sed cum omni humilitate et ardenti caritate! Et postquam sic veneris, extirpa, euelle et dissipa omnia vicia de curia tua! 14 Remoue eciam a te consilia carnalium et mundanorum amicorum tuorum et sequere humiliter consilia spiritualia amicorum meorum. Aggredere ergo et noli timere, consurge viriliter et induere fortitudine confidenter! 15 Incipe renouare Ecclesiam meam, quam ego acquisiui meo proprio sanguine, ut renouetur et spiritualiter redu-catur ad pristinum statum suum sanctum, quia iam nunc magis vene-ratur lupanar quam sancta mea Ecclesia.

    16 Si autem non obedieris predicte voluntati mee, firmiter scias, quod tali sentencia et spirituali iusticia comdempnaberis a me coram tota mea celesti curia, 17 quali condempnatur et punitur temporaliter prelatus degradandus, qui publice exuitur sacris vestibus pontifica-libus glorie cum pudore et malediccione et repletur ignominia et con-fusione. 18 Sic ego faciam tibi, nam deponam te de celesti gloria, et omnia, que modo tibi sunt ad pacem et honorem, erunt tibi ad male-diccionem et eternam confusionem, 19 et quilibet inferni dyabolus ra-piet morsellum de anima tua, quamuis ipsa immortalis et inconsump-tibilis sit, et pro benediccione repleberis eterna malediccione. Et quam-diu paciar te inobedientem michi, quamdiu prosperaberis.

    20 Verumptamen, fili Gregori, adhuc moneo te, ut humiliter con-uertaris ad me, et obedi consilio meo, patris tui et creatoris tui, quia si tu predicto modo obedieris michi, ego ut pater pius misericorditer sus-cipiam te. 21 Aggredere igitur viriliter viam iusticie et prosperaberis. Noli contempnere diligentem te, quia et si tu obedieris, faciam tecum misericordiam et benedicam te ac eciam vestiam te et ornabo te preci-osis ornamentis pontificalibus veri pape et induam te me ipso ita, quod tu eris in me et ego ero in te et glorificaberis in eternum." 22 Hiis autem sic visis et auditis hec visio disparuit.

     

    (X)

    Reuelacio quarta, quam domina Brigida misit domino pape in mense Iulii anno Domini MCCCLXXIII. Et ipsa scripsit cuidam heremite, qui olim fuit episcopus, qui tunc erat cum domino papa super hoc in Auinione.

    1 Dominus noster Iesus Christus dixit michi, domine episcope, quod ego scriberem vobis infrascripta verba, que debetis ostendere summo pontifici:

    2 "Papa petit signum. Dic ei, quod Pharisei petierunt signum. Qui-bus respondi, quod sicut Ionas fuit in ventre ceti tribus diebus et tri-bus noctibus, sic ego, filius virginis, fui in terra mortuus tribus diebus et tribus noctibus. Post vero signum promissum ego filius Dei fui passus, mortuus et sepultus et resurrexi et ascendi in gloriam meam. 3 Sic papa iste Gregorius accepit signum ammonicionis mee, ut saluet animas. Faciat ergo opere que honoris sunt mei et laboret, quomodo saluentur anime et ut ecclesia mea veniat in pristinum statum et meli-orem disposicionem, et tunc experietur signum et fructum eterne con-solacionis. 4 Secundum habebit signum, quod nisi obedierit verbis meis et venerit in Ytaliam, non solum perdet temporalia sed eciam spi-ritualia et senciet tribulacionem cordis, quamdiu viuet. Et quamuis quandoque cor eius videatur habere releuamen, tamen remorsus con-sciencie et interna tribulacio remanebit sibi. 5 Tercium signum est, quod ego Deus loquor cum una muliere verba mirabilia. Ad quid hoc et ad quem fructum, nisi ad animarum utilitatem et ut mali emendentur et ut boni fiant meliores?

    6 De discordia vero inter papam et Barnabonem respondeo, quod ultra modum est michi odiosa, quia infinite anime de illa periclitantur.

    7 Ideo placitum est michi, quod concordia fiat, nam eciam si papa expulsus esset a papatu suo, melius esset, quod papa humiliaret se et faceret concordiam, quacumque occasione posset fieri, antequam tot anime perirent in eternam dampnacionem. 8 De emendacione vero regni Francie non habebit scire, antequam personaliter papa venerit in Ytaliam.

    9 Itaque sicut si staret patibulum, super quod penderet funis, quem ex una parte infiniti traherent, ex alia vero non nisi unus, sic dampnacio animarum aperta est et quasi ad illam plerique laborant. 10 Ideo papa iste respiciat ad me unum, quia, licet omnes dissuadeant ei venire Romam et obsistant, in quantum possunt, confidat in me uno et iuuabo eum et nulli preualebunt in eum. 11 Sed sicut pulli in nido, veniente matre, eleuant se et clamant et gaudent, sic ego gaudenter occurram ei et eleuabo eum et ad animam et ad corpus honorabo."

    12 Item ait Dominus: "Quoniam dubitat papa, an debeat venire Romam pro reformacione pacis et ecclesie mee, volo quod omnino veniat in proximo sequenti autumpno, et sciat eciam, quod nichil gracius potest michi facere, quam quod in Ytaliam veniat."

    (XI)

    Paulo ante mortem habuit sponsa Christi subscriptam reuelacionem a Christo, que tangit dictum dominum papam Gregorium super aduen-tum ad Romam.

    1 Contigit quinque diebus ante diem obitus domine Brigide, sepedicte sponse Christi, quod apparuit ei dominus noster Iesus Christus ante altare, quod erat in camera sua, et leta facie se ostendens ei dixit: 2 "Ego feci tibi, sicut sponsus solet facere, qui abscondit se a sponsa sua, ut ab ea ardencius desideretur. Sic ego te non visitaui consolacionibus isto tempore, quia tempus probacionis tunc erat. 3 Ideo nunc iam probata procede et para te, quia iam tempus est, quod adimpleatur illud, quod promiseram tibi, scilicet quod ante altare meum in mona- cam vestieris et consecraberis. Et amodo reputaberis non solum sponsa mea, sed monaca et mater in Waztenum. 4 Verumptamen scito, quod corpus tuum depones hic in Roma, donec venerit in locum sibi paratum."

    5 Et conuersus ad Romam quasi conquerendo dixit: "O Roma mea, o Roma mea, papa contempnit me et non attendit ad verba mea, sed recipit dubia pro certis. Ideo non amplius audiet fistulam meam, quia tempus misericordie posuit in arbitrio suo."

    6 Et post aliqua alia verba subiunxit dominus et dixit sponse: 7 "Scias, quod venient homines illi, quando michi placuerit, qui cum sua-uitate et gaudio recipient verba ista celestium reuelacionum, que hac-tenus tibi facte sunt, et complebuntur omnia illa, que dicta sunt. 8 Et licet multis subtracta est gracia propter ingratitudinem eorum, alii tamen venient, qui surgent in loco illorum et obtinebunt graciam meam."

    10 Hiis autem dictis et multis aliis, que hic non scribuntur, mencio-nem fecit et ordinacionem dicta sponsa Christi aliquarum personarum secum existencium, quas ante mortem coram Deo se vidisse dicebat.

    11 Post ista audita subiunxit Dominus dicens: "In mane diei quinti postquam sumpseris sacramenta, conuoca sigillatim personas tecum existentes, quas tibi nominaui modo, et dicas illa, que facere debent. 12 Et sic inter verba et manus eorum venies ad monasterium tuum, id est in gaudium meum, et corpus tuum locabitur in Waztenum." 13 De-inde appropinquante die quinta in ipsa aurora iterum apparuit ei Christus consolando eam. Dicta vero missa et sacramentis perceptis cum maxima deuocione et reuerencia inter verba et manus predicta-rum personarum emisit spiritum.

     

    (XII)

    Visio ostensa sponse pertimenda de quodam summo pontifice circa mortem eiusdem pontificis.

    1 Paulo ante mortem cuiusdam pontificis mirabili casu comburebantur campane Sancti Petri in Roma. Que audiens sponsa stupefacta orabat. Et tunc apparuit ei Christus dicens: 2 "Vere, filia, magnum signum est istud, nam scriptum est, quod elementa omnia quasi compaciebantur michi in morte, quando splendorem et solitum effectum suum retraxe-runt. 3 Sic elementa et creature quandoque pugnant et iudicant pro Deo et ostendunt in cursibus <suis> iram <Dei> et signa euentuum futu-rorum, sed nunc ecce comburuntur campane et quasi clamant omnes: 4 'Dominus mortuus est. Dominus pontifex recessit. Sit dies ista bene-dicta, sed non dominus iste benedictus!' O mirabile! Ubi enim omnes clamare deberent: 'Viuat diu et viuat feliciter iste dominus!', ibi cla-mant et gaudenter dicunt: 5 'Descendat et non consurgat!'. Nec mirum, nam ipse, qui clamare debuerat: 'Venite, et inuenietis requiem anima-rum vestrarum!', ipse clamat: 6 'Venite et inuenietis me in pompa et ambicione plus quam Salomonem! Venite ad curiam meam et exhau-rite bursas vestras, et inuenietis perdicionem animarum vestrarum!" Sic enim clamat exemplo et facto. Et ideo iam appropinquat tempus ire, et iudicabo eum sicut dissipatorem gregis Petri. O, o, quale iudicium in-stat ei! Verumptamen, si adhuc voluerit conuerti ad me, ego occurram ei in media via sicut pius pater."

     

    (XIII)

    Visio, quam habuit sponsa Christi de iudicio anime cuiusdam summi pontificis defuncti.

    1 Videbat sponsa quasi unam personam pontificis vestitam scapulari, que stabat in domo luto platearum respersa, cuius domus tectum fere iacebat super cerebrum dicte persone compressum, 2 et Ethiopes nigri habentes uncos et alia instrumenta nocendi circumuallabant domum, sed non valebant tangere personam illam, licet terrebant eam terrore maximo. 3 Et tunc audiui vocem dicentem michi: "Hec est anima illius magni pontificis, quem tu nosti. Domus enim ista est retribucio eius spiritualis, nam aliqua mundana tractabat et ideo remuneracio eius nondum lucida est, donec in purgatorio mundetur et dealbetur spiri-tualibus oracionibus et caritate Dei. 4 Quod vero tectum quasi compri-mit cerebrum eius, signum misterii est, quia tectum significat carita-tem Dei, que quanto maior est, tanto lacior est et sublimior ad spiritua-lia et feruorem Dei, 5 sed quia caritas anime huius in aliquibus mun-dialibus operibus ardebat et magis sequebatur voluntatem propriam, ideo tectum, quod luminosum et altum est electis Dei, angustum est sibi, donec sanguine filii Dei et celestis curie interuentu dilatetur. 6 Quod vero anima induta est scapulari, signum est, quod studuit se con-formare religioni sue monastice et vocacioni sue, sed non tantum cona-tus est, quod esset exemplar proficiencium et forma perfectorum.

    7 Nunc autem licitum est tibi scire tria de operibus, que fecit in vita sua, propter que nunc patitur penam. Primum est, quod fecit quandam inobedienciam contra Deum et conscienciam suam, de quo contricionem habuit et remorsum consciencie sue. 8 Secundum est,

    quod dispensabat in aliquibus cum quibusdam propter carnalem amorem sequendo voluntatem suam. Tercium est, quod dissimulabat aliqua, ne offenderet quos diligebat, que corrigere potuisset.

    9 Verumptamen scias, quod anima ista non est cum illis, qui descendunt in infernum nec cum illis, qui veniunt ad grauiora examina purgatorii sed cum illis qui cotidie festinanter appropinquant gracie et visioni maiestatis Dei omnipotentis."

    4. Results and discussion

    4.1. The title and the content of the Tractatus

    In modern works of scholarship, the Tractatus has been referred to as either the Tractatus de summis pontificibus, as did Prior Peter once in his testimony to the canonization commission (p. 14), or as the Liber ad summos pontifices, which was the title originally used by the Con-fessor General of Vadstena Monastery, Magnus Petri, in a letter dated 1384-91. Neither of these titles has manuscript authority, however. As established above, the authentic title is much longer and indicates clearly the scope and aim of the collection:

  • Reuelaciones infrascriptas habuit in visione spirituali diuinitus de-uota ancilla Christi sancte memorie Domina Brigida, principissa de regno Suecie, stando in oracione. Que diriguntur ad summos ponti-fices Clementem VI, Innocencium VI, Urbanum V, Gregorium XI. Que tractant de reducendo Sedem Apostolicam et Romanam curiam ad Ro-mam et de reformacione ecclesie ex precepto Dei omnipotentis.

  • In the Tractatus, there are thus revelations to popes Clement VI, Innocent VI, Urban V and Gregory XI concerning the return of the Papal See to Rome and a reform of the Church. Alfonso seems to have been most anxious to maintain the authority of the collection: St. Bridget speaks as directed by God the Almighty, ex precepto Dei omnipotentis; as Alfonso had proved in his previous work, the Epistola solitarii, she is a pious servant of Christ, deuota ancilla Christi, but also a princess from the Kingdom of Sweden, principissa de regno Suecie (cf. his In-formaciones § 3 and his Prologus Libri Celestis § 2), so that nobody would confuse humility with obscurity.

    To be sure, it might have seemed natural to assume that when Prior Peter spoke about the "tractatus de summis pontificibus" in his testimony, it was the title of the collection he gave, but since we find another title in the manuscripts, we must conclude that this was not the case. Perhaps Peter felt that the original title was too long to be used, or it was not really a title, and just referred to the work as "the thematic collection concerning popes", which seems to be the most ad-equate translation of Peter's words.

    In the printed editions, the Tractatus was integrated into the corpus reuelacionum, which meant that the duplicate revelations were not entered. Revelation II became IV: 136, etc., as showed in the table on p. 19. The title of the original Tractatus was enlarged by the addi-tion of the original chapter heading for rev. II and used as a rubric to IV: 136. Domina Brigida was changed into Sancta Birgitta.

    As far as the question of the content of the Tractatus is con-cerned, it has been demonstated above that the Florence and London manuscripts, which have been supposed to show that Alfonso's origi-nal compilation contained twenty-one or fifty-seven revelations re-spectively, did not do so, but in actual fact can be used as evidence for the same thirteen-revelations-version that we find in the source man-uscripts of the corpus reuelacionum.

    In this third collection, Alfonso resorted to re-editing four reve-lations from the Liber Celestis in addition to nine unpublished ones. Alfonso had proceeded in a similar way when editing the Liber Celes-tis Imperatoris ad Reges, which in his redaction consisted of twenty-four re-edited revelations and thirty-four thitherto un-edited ones.

    The revelations of the Tractatus are in the main arranged chro-nologically: Alfonso begins with the revelation to Pope Clement VI that Bridget had received in 1348. This revelation had already been pub-lished in the Liber Celestis as VI: 63, but Alfonso now revises the heading, adding information about the dating and about who was en-trusted with the task of bringing the message to Pope Clement. In the end of the revelation, there is an allusion to the grandiose beginning of the prologue to Book I (stupor et mirabilia facta sunt in terra nostra) written by St. Bridget's earlier confessor, the learned theologian Mas-ter Mathias, who vouches there for her divine calling and the authen-ticity of the revelations.

    Rev. II concerns Clement's successor, Innocent VI. We are not given any information in Alfonso's other works, the Informaciones and the Conscripcio, about contacts with this pope, and the entry here gives the impression of being a space-filler. However, judging from the last lines, Bridget seems to have sent books of revelations to him.

    Revs. III-V concern Pope Urban V. Rev. III had already been published as IV: 49. This revelation, too, is now given a new heading with information about where ("in Sancta Maria Maiori in Roma") and when ("Una die antequam papa Urbanus intraret Romam", sc. 15 Octo-ber 1367) Bridget had it. In the Liber Celestis, the message itself was all-important; in the Tractatus it is felt to be important to give details about the historical context. Rev. V is the one St. Bridget in person handed over to the pope in Montefiascone, when he was on his way back to Avignon. The Virgin Mary is very displeased with the pope, and tells him that he will be punished if he fails her and returns to Avignon.

    Revs. VI-XI are addressed to Pope Gregory XI or are about him. The message is the same as before: removal of the Papal See from Avignon back to Rome and reform of the Church. The pope was, how-ever, good at procrastination, as is witnessed by the revelations, and gradually, a tone of aggressive frustration becomes clearly noticeable. In the headings, we are given some information about the context in which the revelations were received and this is supplemented by Al-fonso's more detailed report in the Informaciones and the Conscripcio. We are, thus, in a good position to observe the developments all the way until St. Bridget's death. The last revelation to Gregory, rev. XI, is the one she received five days before her death and which had been published in the Liber celestis as VII: 31 (see above pp. 28-29). Christ appears and complains about the pope who does not listen to his words and leaves Rome in the lurch, but now he will get no more mes-sages.

    Rev. XII-XIII do not fit in chronologically-they are about the judgement of Clement VI and Urban V-but have been placed in con-clusion as a warning to neglectful and disobedient popes, a message clearly brought out by the headings of these revelations.

     

    4.2. The aim and the date of the Tractatus

    It has been assumed that after the editing of the Liber celestis, which is a voluminous and heterogeneous collection, Alfonso began to make compilations in which the revelations were arranged according to sub-ject matter, in order to make St. Bridget's revelations well-known and appreciated in wider circles. The Liber celestis imperatoris ad reges may well have been compiled for this reason, but the editing of the Tractaus was certainly motivated by much more specific and urgent reasons, as is clearly indicated by the title: this collection was an ele-ment in Alfonso's efforts to gain support for Pope Urban VI in his con-flict with the anti-pope Clement VII, who had been elected after the cardinals had declared Urban's election null and void. The Tractatus is closely linked to the Informaciones, the memorandum Alfonso wrote (probably for an inquest in November 1379) to defend the validity of Urban VI's election as pope. In the Informaciones, Alfonso refers to eight of the thirteen Tractatus revelations in support of his argumen-tation. One line of argument in the Informaciones is that God had re-vealed in his revelations to St. Bridget that it is His will that the pope reside in Rome. Her insistence on Rome as home of the popes, the vili-fication of everything connected with Avignon, the call for reform, the violent protest against simony and a clear anti-cardinalism were mes-sages with renewed relevancy after the out-break of the great schism, and was particularly applicable after Clement's departure for Avignon in the summer of 1379, when the anti-Avignon revelations gained rel-evance in a new context.

    The terminus ante quem for the dating of the Tractatus is, of course, January 30th, 1380, the date of Prior Peter's deposition. In a previous work, I suggested that the fact that Alfonso in the Informa-ciones did not refer to the revelations in the Tractatus by title and number indicated that they had not been published yet. As the edi-tion above shows, that argument is totally irrelevant, since the revela-tions are not numbered in the Tractatus, and it is thus perfectly pos-sible that the Tractatus was compiled before the Informaciones was written, i. e., somewhat earlier in the autumn of 1379.

     

    4.3. The codification of the revelations

    As mentioned above, the Tractatus is not included in Alfonso's redac-tions of the St. Bridget's revelations, and the reason for this has been discussed, for instance, by Schück and Undhagen, who suggest that it was omitted "by way of ecclesiastical precaution" (above pp. 15-16). This is a suggestion that gives rise to questions rather than answers: why on earth did Alfonso compile a work he is supposed to have con-sidered suspicious? Why did he consider these revelations unobjec-tionable when he referred to them in his Informaciones, but inoppor-tune when he made the codification? Why did Prior Peter himself re-fer to this very collection in his statement to the canonization commis-sion, if there were the faintest risk that it could be considered suspi-cious? These are difficult questions to answer.

    Before we try and find the motives for the exclusion, the ques-tion of the dating of the codification has to be scrutinized. To be sure, Undhagen dates Alfonso's second redaction to "about 1380". If we take this as meaning "1379 or later", it is reasonable to speculate about why the Tractatus is missing in the codified books of revelations. Und-hagen's point of departure for the dating is based on the assumption that it was the first Alfonso redaction that was submitted to the sec-ond papal commission in 1378/79. Undhagen's reason for assuming this is that since "the first examining commission does not seem to have had any objections to the revelations they had been given to ex-amine, it would seem unlikely that Alfonso would have found it neces-sary to revise the text of the 1377 redaction." Since, however, the second redaction can have been finished as early as 1377, we cannot exclude the possibility that it was this redaction that was presented to the papal authorities. Be that as it may. Even if it was the first redac-tion that was presented, it is quite clear that the second edition must have been finished not later than 16 September 1379, when Alfonso in his testimony for the canonization commission referred to the Epis-tola solitarii, in which there are references not only to the Liber ce-lestis but also to the Liber celestis imperatoris ad reges and the Sermo angelicus. Thus, it is perfectly possible that Alfonso's work of codifi-cation was finished before the Tractatus was compiled and this is why it was not included. Generally speaking, there is no reason whatsoever to assume that the father confessors found parts of Bridget's revela-tions objectionable and thus had to be suppressed.

     

    4.4. Alfonso's rôle as editor

    Much has been written about how St. Bridget's message was transmitted-and perhaps transformed-by her father confessors when translating and editing her revelations. There has been a tendency in recent scholarship to attach great importance to Alfonso's rôle as edi-tor of the revelations. No wonder, since Christ-or Bridget- entrusted him with this task in terms that seemingly gave him quite extensive authority to make a revision (Rev. ex. 49):

  • trade omnes libros reuelacionum eorundem verborum meorum episcopo meo heremite, qui conscribat et obscura elucidet et catholicum sensum spiritus mei teneat.

  • All books of revelation were thus to be handed over to Alfonso, who would elucidate them and guard the Catholic sense of Christ's spirit. How did Alfonso fulfil that task? Diverse answers have been advanced. In his edition of book V, which, to be sure, was revealed to Bridget many years earlier when she was still in Sweden, Bergh concluded that Alfonso may not even have read much of that book. On the other hand, Gilkær in his study of St. Bridget's and Alfonso's political ideas and attitudes used Alfonso's compilation, the Liber celestis imperatoris ad reges, as a source to Alfonso's, not Bridget's, ideas. In so doing, he was inspired inter alia by Aili's research. By comparing some revelations that are available in two different editions, viz. in the Li-ber celestis and in the Liber celestis imperatoris ad reges, Aili claims to have pin-pointed some examples of Alfonsine manipulation with the Bridgettine message, for instance the following: when Alfonso re-publishes Rev. IV: 4 in the Liber celestis imperatoris ad reges (ch. 13), he adds in the rubric and in the revelation itself the information that the person in question was "a queen", whereas, writes Aili, "the older version of the Revelations text offers no such information at all". Here Aili seems, however, to have jumped to conclusions. To be sure, it is true that it is not explicitly stated in the original version that the lady mentioned is a queen, but other details given clearly indicate that that was the case: for instance in § 29, we learn that the lady wears a crown and is dressed in purple. Another fact pointing in the same direction is that a princess, St. Elizabeth of Hungary, is mentioned as model for the lady, since that saint got greater consolation and a more sublime crown, when living in poverty than if she had remained in worldly honour and consolation.

    In this context it is interesting to see what liberties-if any- Alfonso took when quoting from St. Bridget. In the Conscripcio there is a long quotation from the Tractatus:

     

    Tractatus, rev. 7:

  • 16 …"Item dic episcopo meo heremite, quod claudat istam litteram et si-gillet eam et postea scribat in alia papiro copiam eius et ostendat eandem copiam apertam illi abbati, nuncio pape et Nolano comiti, ut ipsi legant illam et sciant, quid continetur in ea. 17 Postquam vero ipsi eam lege-rint, dimittat eis supradictam litteram clausam, sigillatam, quam ipsi sta-tim mittant pape Gregorio sine mora. Sed copiam illam apertam post-quam legerint, non dimittat eis, sed volo, quod dilaceret et rumpat eam coram oculis eorum in frusta. 18 Quia sicut littera illa, que est una, dila-cerabitur in multa frusticula, sic nisi papa tempore et anno prefixo ve-nerit in Ytaliam, terre Ecclesie, que sub una eius obediencia et subiec-cione modo eidem obediunt, diuidentur in plures partes in manus tyran-norum.

  • Quoted in Conscripcio, p. 87:

  • [16] Dic Alfonso heremite olim episcopo, quod scribat hanc revelacio-nem et clausam et sigillatam portet ad illum abbatem, quam ipse statim mittat ad papam. Scribat eciam ipse Alfonsus dicte revelacionis copiam in papiro et portet secum apertam et ostendat eam dicto abbati, ut ipse abbas eam legat, et videat quid continetur in ea. [17] Postea vero in pre-sencia dicti abbatis ipse Alfonsus dilaceret ipsam copiam in frusticula, [18] quia, sicut ipsa revelacio tunc dilacerabatur in frusticula, ita, si pa-pa non veniat tempore sibi assignato ad Romam, omnes terre Ecclesie, que modo sub una obediencia sunt, dilacerabuntur in frusticula per ma-nus tyrannorum et inimicorum Ecclesie.

  • A few remarks can be made: in the quotation, the name of the bishop and hermit is given, just as in the example above from the Liber celes-tis imperatoris ad reges, the identity of the lady was clarified by the information that she was a queen. § 17 is shortened, the instructions about sending the letter to the pope are omitted in the quotation, but Alfonso tells us a little later in the text that the Count of Nola brought the letter to the pope, so that information is not really missing. There are also signs of slight stylistic revision, as in the quod-sentence in § 16, which in Alfonso's Conscripcio version is much more elegant than in the original version. What we can learn from this comparison is that to be sure Alfonso did not quote word for word, but that he never-theless was quite close to the actual wording and did not change the message itself.

    Generally speaking, I am very sceptical about attempts to make Alfonso a moulder, not only a transmitter, of Bridget's message. How-ever, in the absence of an edition of the Liber celestis imperatoris ad reges, it would be premature to try and make a general assessment of Alfonso's rôle as editor, so I feel justified in confining myself to re-peting some remarks I have made earlier on the basis of an examina-tion of the Tractatus.

    In the Tractatus, Alfonso's influence can be recognized primarily in the selection and presentation of the texts. Alfonso wrote new chap-ter headings for revelations I and XI that changed the emphasis con-siderably, above pp. 22 and 28-29, and omitted two passages in ch. 11 that were irrelevant in the new context. Obviously, he felt he had the freedom, or possibly the duty-in the above-mentioned rev. ex. 49, he had been given the office of an evangelist-to apply St. Bridget's principles in the way he felt most suitable and adapt them to new con-texts. As regards the great schism, there could not be any doubt about what position Bridget would have taken, had she lived. The return of the popes from Avignon to Rome and a reform of the Church were causes that had motivated her all her life. *


    STUDIA GRAECA ET LATINA LUNDENSIA

    Ediderunt Birger Bergh et Jerker Blomqvist

    1. Arne Jönsson, Alfonso of Jaén. His Life and Works with Critical Editions of the Epistola Solitarii, the Informaciones and the Epistola Serui Christi. 1989. 207 pp.

    2. Bengt-Arne Roos, Synesius of Cyrene. A Study in His Personality. 1991. 157 pp.

    3. Brita Larsson, Johannes Magnus' Latin Letters. A Critical Edition with Intro-duction and Commentary. 1992. v + 193 pp.

    4. Lars Nyberg, Unity and Coherence. Studies in Apollonius Rhodius' Argonau-tica and the Alexandrian Epic Tradition. 1992. xviii + 182 pp.

    5. Dimitrios Karadimas, Sextus Empiricus against Aelius Aristides. The Conflict between Philsophy and Rhetoric in the Second Century A. D. 1996. xx + 270 pp.

    6. Arne Jönsson, St. Bridget's Revelations to the Popes. An edition of the so-called Tractatus de summis pontificibus. 1996. 69 pp.


    This text is part of the Internet Medieval Source Book. The Sourcebook is a collection of public domain and copy-permitted texts related to medieval and Byzantine history.

    Unless otherwise indicated the specific electronic form of the document is copyright. Permission is granted for electronic copying, distribution in print form for educational purposes and personal use. If you do reduplicate the document, indicate the source. No permission is granted for commercial use.

    Paul Halsall, November 1997
    halsall@murray.fordham.edu