The 9th-century debate over predestination (c. 849-860) illustrates how extensively the rhetorical constructions of Augustine’s authority and practices of citation and quotation of Augustine varied among individual scholars working within the second generation of the Carolingian reforms. In examining the representations of Augustine within this nearly decade-long controversy, this paper explores aspects of the texualization and authorization of Augustine within broader patterns of Carolingian reception and consolidation of the patristic tradition. Special attention will be paid to scribal representations of Augustine in contemporary manuscript witnesses to the texts produced within the context of this debate.
To an unusual degree among medieval chroniclers, Adam of Bremen was eager to cite his sources. However, he did not do so uniformly, and it has been suggested that those passages for which he did not cite any source might be particularly suspect of intentional falsification and distortion on Adam’s part. In this paper, I intend to take a preliminary look at this hypothesis, using Adam’s Book II as an example.
When Ricoldus de Monte Crucis (around 1243-1320), a Dominican friar from Florence, travelled to the Middle East at the end of the 13th century and witnessed the fall of the Crusader states, he also underwent a serious religious crisis – at least according to his own account, which has been disputed by recent scholars. His Epistulae ad Ecclesiam triumphantem – Letters to the Church Triumphant, which are the main source of this personal crisis, have been called ‘unique’ and ‘without parallel or model’. On the contrary, this paper aims to prove the influence of the Christian prototype of a spiritual crisis, Augustine’s ‘Confessiones’, on Ricoldus’s work. The close examination of the links between those two texts will not only show how Ricoldus adopts the mask of Augustine, but also how Augustine’s Confessiones could be read in the Late Middle Ages.