Entry 0375: Dating of the Texts in which Aquinas
Uses the Expression actus essendi
1. Dating of the Commentary on the Sentences:
“The difference between the first and the second form was therefore the public,” Torrell adds, “since the students from other schools could attend, and sometimes masters as well. On occasion, they did not refrain from raising difficulties for the colleague engaged in the exercise. In one of its forms,” Torrell continues, “this second genre of disputed questions could even be a solemn public occasion (the famous Quodlibets), which were held twice a year, during Lent and Advent. They interrupted the regular courses at the university. As a result of P. Mandonnet’s labors, we can agree today in dating from this first period of teaching in Paris [1256-1259] Thomas’s Quodlibets VII though XI” (Torrell, Saint Thomas Aquinas, 60-61).
Torrell, for his part, seems to agree with this dating
but is inclined to think that the commentary on Boethius’s De Trinitate was
written first. Thus Torrell writes: “Historians habitually mention these two works
one after another because of their common subject. In the preface to the Leonine
edition, Father Bataillon thinks instead—given the internal data that reveal differences—that
the Expositio libri Boetii De ebdomadibus is probably later than the Super
Boetium De Trinitate. But without external data that would permit us to situate
it better (through dated sources, for example), Bataillon declares himself unable
to propose a precise date” (Jean-Pierre Torrell, Saint Thomas Aquinas: The Person
and His Work - Volume 1, trans. Robert Royal [Washington , D.C.
Aquinas
uses the expression actus essendi in four passages in his Commentary on
the Sentences:
1.
In I Sententiarum, distinction 8, question 1, article 1, corpus.
2.
In I Sententiarum, distinction 8, question 4, article 2, ad 2.
3.
In I Sententiarum, distinction 8, question 5, article 2, corpus.
4.
In III Sententiarum, distinction 11, question 1, article 2, ad 2.
The
Commentary on the Sentences seems to have been written between 1252-1256,
and the date of composition has been framed within the following setting:
After
some difficulties with his blood family concerning his vocation to the Dominican
Order, and “since his resolve remained unbroken, he [Aquinas] was permitted to rejoin
the Dominican confreres and made his way to Paris Paris
he first came into contact with Albert the Great during the period 1245-1248, and
in 1248 he accompanied Albert to Cologne Paris
About
the commentary on the Sentences, Weisheipl for his part writes that “According
to William of Tocco, Thomas composed his Scriptum while he was Baccalaureus
Sententiarum (1252-1256)” (James A. Weisheipl, Friar Thomas D’Aquino: His
Life, Thought, and Works [Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America
Press, 1983], 358).
These
comments are in agreement with what Jean-Pierre Torrell wrote on this subject:
“Upon
his arrival in Cologne, after Naples and Paris (and whatever may have been the details
about his years of study), Thomas already had seven or eight years of formation
behind him, even without counting what he learned on his own during the imprisonment
by his family. Some scholars (De Groot, Berthier, Pelster) even think that he was
already a lecturer in theology and probably the biblical bachelor for Albert (Scheeben,
Eschmann). Weisheipl takes up this hypothesis and suggests that Thomas taught cursorie
on Jeremiah, Lamentations, and a part of Isaiah at Cologne Paris Washington Catholic University of America
Torrell
then adds:
“The ampleness of this work [the Commentary on
the Sentences] fits only with difficulty into the chronological framework
that assigns the two first years in Paris
But
Torrell makes clear that “it was not this return to the subject in Rome that came down to posterity, but the Paris
2. Dating of the Quaestiones disputatae de veritate:
Aquinas
uses the expression actus essendi in four passages in his Quaestiones
disputatae de veritate:
1.
De veritate, question 1, article 1, corpus
2.
De veritate, question 1, article 1, ad 1
3.
De veritate, question 1, article 1, ad sc 3
4.
De veritate, question 10, article 8, ad 13
There
seems to be very little doubt that Aquinas wrote the Quaestiones disputatae de
veritate in the period between 1256 and 1259.
Jean-Pierre
Torrell states simply that “The disputed questions De veritate date from
the three years of Thomas’s first period teaching as a master in Paris, from 1256
to 1259” (Jean-Pierre Torrell, Saint Thomas Aquinas: The Person and His Work
- Volume 1, trans. Robert Royal [Washington. D.C.: The Catholic University
of America
And
in agreement with this John F. Wippel writes: “From 1256 until 1259 Thomas carried
out the functions of a Master (Professor) of Theology at the University of Paris Washington , D.C.
Torrell
elaborates further on the issue of the date of composition of De veritate by
offering the following remarks: “To return to De veritate … its existence
is attested very early. Well before the deposition during the canonization process
at Naples
According
to Weisheipl the questions De veritate “were disputed in Paris
Thus
there seems to be very little doubt that Aquinas wrote the Quaestiones disputatae
De veritate in the period between 1256 and 1259.
In
his doctoral dissertation, The Philosophical Vocabulary of St. Thomas Aquinas
in De Veritate, James E. Royce explores in greater detail the evidence that
substantiate the assigned date of composition of De veritate.
Royce’s
study relies on the work of Henry Denifle (1844-1905) who collected and edited documents
referring to the history of the University
of Paris
Royce
writes:
“Henry
Denifle, O.P., the great authority on documentary sources for the history of the
history of the University of Paris during the time of St. Thomas Aquinas, makes
the remark in a note in the Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis that the
old lives of St. Thomas agree about one date if about nothing else: St. Thomas was
made a magister in theology at the University of Paris in the year 1256”
(Henrious Denifle et Aemilio Chatelain, Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis,
Delalain, Paris, 1889, I, 307, note 1).
“This
is important, because it clinches beyond all doubt the dating of the Quaestiones
Disputatae De Veritate. Biographers, historians, and critical scholars are in
unanimous agreement that the work was the fruit of his first years of teaching at
the University of
Paris
“The
oldest sources for the life of St Thomas are in remarkable
agreement on the facts of these years of St.
Thomas Berlin
“Bartholomew,
or Ptolemy, or Tolomey, of Lucca was a disciple of
St. Thomas St. Thomas
“Another
early biographer, Bartholomew of Capua (Logotheta), a Sicilian who as a student
followed the lectures of St. Thomas, dates the De Veritate as being written
after St. Thomas was made master and during his first period of teaching· at Paris,
before going to Italy in 1259 (Alexander Birkenmajer, ‘Kleinere Thomasfragen,’ Phi1osophisches
Jahrbuch, 1921, XXXIV, 32).
“The
English Dominican Nicholas Trevet, who died in 1328, made a catalogue of the works
of St. Thomas between the years 1319 and 1323, in which he notes that St. Thomas
‘scripsit etiam primam partem de Quaestionibus disputatis de Veritate et ultra,
quas Parisiis disputavit’ (Mandonnet, Des Ecrits Authentiques, 47-48).
“The
older historians, following these sources, tell us that the young Thomas came to
Paris in 1252 from the school
of Albert the Great at Cologne , and spent the years 1252-1256 as a bachelor in theology
in Paris University
of Paris St. Thomas Italy
“(The
fact mentioned by the Bollandists in the Acta Sanctorum [Martii, I,
‘Commentarius praevius,’ 657b] that St. Thomas was made doctor of theology in the
year 1253, must not be confused with his being made magister at the University
of Paris, for the doctorate was always previous even to the licentiate in those
days, and in this case was probably granted by the Dominican Order rather than by
the University.)
“The
most recent investigations confirm these conclusions. Dr. Martin. Grabmann in his
Thomas von Aquin (F. Pustet, Munchen, 1926, 3-5) states that St. Thomas received his licentiate in 1256 and left Paris Paris saint Thomas
1252-1256
Parisiis, Baccalaureus
1256
Obtenta licentia, fit magister in theologia
1257
a collegiis magister agnoscitur
1259
in Italiam rediit
and
states that the disputed questions De Veritate date at the outside from 1256
to 1259. (See Walz, op. cit., 470.) From all this we gather that it is quite safe
to assign the year 1257 as the extremely probable date for the first question, for
it is certain that St. Thomas was at work on them by that time and it is highly
probable that he at least did not progress very far during 1256.
“It
must be noted that the controversies which raged for some time in the various European
learned periodicals between Grabmann, J. Koch, Mandonnet, P. Synave, and others
regarding the chronology of the disputed questions does not touch the date of the
De Veritate at all, but centers rather around the dating of De Anima,
De Spiritualibus Creaturis, and De Unione Verbi Incarnati. A good
idea of these discussions can be obtained from the reviews in the Bulletin Thomiste
for 1924 and 1926. (See Bulletin Thomiste, 1924, I, 58-61; III, 1-21 especially.)
All the authorities, as well as all of the old catalogues, especially two ‘book
lists’ of the University of Paris dating from 1275-1286 and 1292-1294 respectively,
assure us that the De Veritate is the first of the disputed questions of
St. Thomas. (See Denifle-Chatelain, Chart. Univ. Paris, I, 646.)
“The
historical facts being established, it remains to interpret them in terms of their
setting. The De Veritate represents the work of St. Thomas Lombard ’s
books of Sentences since 1252 and had committed the fruits of this teaching
to writing. He had composed some seven or eight small philosophical works, including
the De Ente et Essentia. He was by then a veteran of the battle which grew
out of the antagonism which the secular clergy and laity of the University of Paris University of Paris
“This
meant a very active engagement in the public scholastic life of that violently intellectual
atmosphere. For in the Paris Lombard , had formed the basis of the
lecture of the master. This easily turned into a discussion or dispute. The dispute
finally detached itself from the lesson and became a separate exercise in its own
right, being known as the ‘ordinary disputation.’ Every master in theology at Paris
“The
subject was fixed in advance, and was usually confined to a single topic although
more than one might be discussed if they were related. All the classes of the other
bachelors and masters ceased for that morning, and we may imagine with what curiosity
they flocked to the disputation hall of the brilliant young disciple of the Aristotelian
Albert, already making a name for himself. At this session, however, the magister
only presided; he might summarize and otherwise help, but the bachelors did the
arguing. The next day, or the first day on which nothing prevented, there followed
the magisterial ‘determination,’ the formal recapitulation and pronouncement of
the master upon the subject of the previous disputation. Bachelors could not ‘determine,’
this being the sole right of the master, though the preliminary arguments which
he presented were usually those proposed by the bachelors the day before. The Quaestiones
Disputatae as we have them are the written form, then, not of the disputation
but of the determinatio of the master. (See Hastings Rashdall, The Universities
of Europe in the Middle Ages [new ed. Rev. F. M. Powicke], Clarendon Press,
Oxford, 1936, I, 490-496; Mandonnet, Quaestiones Disputatae, ‘Introduction,’
I, 8-15.) Each article of the present form represents one such determination. We
possess 510 of these written by St. Thomas, of which 253 are under the general title
De Veritate, though only twelve are included under the first question which
really forms the treatise bearing that name.
“These
disputations with their magisterial determinations gave St. Thomas a chance to work
out at great length and in a controversial atmosphere much of what he was later
to set forth more positively and succinctly in the two Summas. They do not, it is
true, represent his best period, namely that from 1268 (when he got hold of certain
material in translation from the Greek) until his death in 1274. Yet they do form
an important part of his writings being often his fullest treatment of a topic.
The De Veritate shows a decisiveness and a firmness of touch not observed
in the commentaries on the Sentences. The problems essayed are difficult, the manner
of their treatment profound and skillful. Since in them historical background is
more prominent than in the Summa Theologica, they reflect better the doctrinal
milieu in which he was working.”
See
James E. Royce, “The De Veritate: Circumstances and Date of Its Composition,” chapter
I in The Philosophical Vocabulary of St. Thomas Aquinas in De Veritate I,
Doctoral Dissertation, Loyola University, Chicago, Illinois, 1945, 1-7.
3. Dating of the Summa theologiae, part I:
Aquinas
uses the expression actus essendi in the Summa theologiae only once
in part I, question 3, article 4, ad 2.
Concerning
the dating of the Prima Pars, there seems to be very little doubt that Aquinas
wrote it in Rome
Wippel
writes that “Thomas returned to Italy
In
1259 Aquinas took part in the General Chapter of the Dominicans in Valenciennes , France
Soon
after that, Aquinas returned to Italy Corpus Christi
From
1265 until 1268 Thomas Aquinas lived in Rome Paris
Franklin
T. Harkins reports more precisely that “From his inception at Paris
in the Spring of 1256 until he stopped writing in Naples
“On
8 September 1265, not quite a decade into his teaching career, Thomas was charged
by his Dominican provincial chapter at Anagni ‘for the remission of his sins’ with
establishing and directing a studium at Rome Saint Thomas [Toronto : Pontifical
Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1982], 8-15; Jean-Pierre Torrell, Saint Thomas
Aquinas, vol. 1: The Person and His Work, rev. ed., trans. Robert Royal
[Washington , D.C. Toronto
“Having
served the previous four years as conventual lector at Orvieto where he was responsible
for the pastoral formation of the fratres communes, Aquinas had by this time
become quite well aware of the deficiencies then characterizing Dominican education,
particularly its narrow emphasis on applied and moral theology. (See Mulchahey,
‘First the Bow is Bent in Study….’, 184-203; Boyle, The Setting of the
Summa theologiae, 1-8; and Torrell, Saint Thomas Aquinas 1, 117-20.)
“As
head of his studium at Santa Sabina in Rome Master Thomas took terrific advantage
of the opportunity to devise a new, more comprehensive theological curriculum for
his young Dominican students by beginning to compose—and presumably teach—the Summa
theologiae. (See Boyle, The Setting of the Summa theologiae.)”
This
passage is from Franklin T. Harkins, “Primus doctor Iudaeorum: Moses as Theological
Master in the Summa Theologiae of Thomas Aquinas,” The Thomist 75 (2011):
91-92.
Regarding
the Prima Pars of the Summa theologiae, Weisheipl writes that Aquinas “did
not begin work on the Summa until 1266, when he discarded his plan to rework
his commentary on the Sentences. The prima pars was completed in 1268,
before Thomas was sent to Paris
And
Torrell points out that “It seems certain that during the time he was at Rome [from
1265] until September 1268, Thomas composed the Prima Pars in its entirety and that
this portion [of the Summa theologiae] was in circulation in Italy even before
his return to Paris [in 1269]” (Jean-Pierre Torrell, Saint Thomas Aquinas: The
Person and His Work - Volume 1, trans. Robert Royal [Washington. D.C.: The Catholic University
of America
4. Dating of the Quaestiones disputatae de potentia:
Aquinas
uses the expression actus essendi in the Disputed Questions on the Power
of God (De potentia) only once, in question 7, article 2, ad 1.
Scholars
seem to have fixed the date of composition of De potentia. After returning
to Italy in 1259, Aquinas first
worked in Orvieto from 1261 to 1265, and then he moved to Rome Rome
Referring
to this teaching activity of Aquinas in Rome , Torrell
accordingly remarks that “the disputed questions De potentia are precisely
situated in this period” (Jean-Pierre Torrell, Saint Thomas Aquinas: The Person
and His Work - Volume 1, trans. Robert Royal [Washington Catholic
University of America
Weisheipl
for his part comments that “De potentia is chronologically and speculatively
the immediate predecessor of the first part of the theological Summa” (James
A. Weisheipl, Friar Thomas D’Aquino: His Life, Thought, and Works, 2nd
ed. [Washington Catholic University of America Rome
And
concurring with this, Susan C. Selner-Wright begins the introduction of her translation
of De potentia, question 3, by saying that “Thomas Aquinas wrote his Disputed
Questions On the Power of God (Quaestiones disputatae de potentia Dei
or De potentia) in Rome
5. Dating of the Quodlibet 9:
Aquinas
uses the expression actus essendi in the quodlibetal questions only once,
in Quodlibet 9, question 4, article 1, corpus.
There
seems to be very little doubt that Quodlibet 9 was written between 1256 and 1259
when Aquinas was regent master in theology at the University of Paris
Wippel,
for example, writes that “From 1256 until 1259 Thomas carried out the functions
of a Master (Professor) of Theology at the University of Paris Washington , D.C.
About
the dating of Quodlibet 9,
Weisheipl writes that the quodlibetal questions “fall into two groups, the earliest
of which is the grouping 7-11 in a never varying series, and 1-6, which often vary
in the manuscripts. … The group 7-11 belongs to Thomas’s first Parisian regency,
[1256-1259]” (Weisheipl, Friar Thomas D’Aquino, 367).
And
towards the end of his book, Torrell writes that “Thomas’s Quodlibets can be divided
into two groups, according to the two periods of teaching in Paris Washington Catholic University of America Paris
Earlier
Torrell was more specific about the dating of the quodlibetal questions: “As to
dates, after the first tentative steps, the researchers have reached agreement on
dividing the Quodlibets into two groups according to the two Parisian sojourns:
Quodlibets VII-XI belong to the first period [1256-1259], while Quodlibets I-VI
and XII (the reportatio of this latter was not revised by Thomas) belong
to the second [1268-72]” (Torrell, Saint Thomas Aquinas, 208-209).
Torrell
explains that at the time of Aquinas at the University of Paris
“The difference between the first and the second form was therefore the public,” Torrell adds, “since the students from other schools could attend, and sometimes masters as well. On occasion, they did not refrain from raising difficulties for the colleague engaged in the exercise. In one of its forms,” Torrell continues, “this second genre of disputed questions could even be a solemn public occasion (the famous Quodlibets), which were held twice a year, during Lent and Advent. They interrupted the regular courses at the university. As a result of P. Mandonnet’s labors, we can agree today in dating from this first period of teaching in Paris [1256-1259] Thomas’s Quodlibets VII though XI” (Torrell, Saint Thomas Aquinas, 60-61).
6. Dating of the Commentary on Aristotle’s Metaphysics:
Aquinas
uses the expression actus essendi only once in his Commentary on Aristotle’s
Metaphysics, in the commentary on book 4, lecture 2, paragraph no. 6.
Aquinas’s
Commentary on the Metaphysics seems to have been written between 1270 and
1272. Here are some remarks concerning the date of composition of this work.
Commenting
on the derivation of the predicaments reported in the Commentary on Aristotle’s
Physics and in the Commentary on Aristotle’s Metaphysics, John F.
Wippel notes that “While there is no substantial disagreement between these two
attempts on Thomas’s part to derive the ten predicaments, we may wonder which comes
later in time. It is as difficult to answer this question with certainty as it is
to determine whether the Commentary on the Metaphysics is prior to the Commentary
on the Physics, or perhaps vice versa. In fact, Weisheipl suggested that
Thomas may have been working on the two commentaries at approximately the same time
-- the Physics (at Paris from 1270 to 1271)
and the Metaphysics (at Paris , and possibly
at Naples Paris Washington , D.C.
Torrell
points out that by the end of 1271, Thomas had adopted the numbering of the books
of the Metaphysics of William of Moerbeke’s translation. “This fact,” Torrell
explains, “is too little known by the average reader of Saint Thomas Saint Thomas
Torrell,
however, affirms that “The date and place of composition for the commentary on Aristotle’s
Metaphysics pose numerous problems. The designation of Book Lambda
as Book XII, a title that Thomas adopted toward the middle of 1271, invites us to
date the commentary on Books VII-XII after that date. The beginning of the commentary
may date from the academic year 1270-71. The commentary on Books II and III may
be the fruit of self-correction or of later editing. Begun in Paris ,
the composition of this work may have been finished in Naples
7. Dating of the Commentary on Boethius’s De
ebdomadibus:
The
expression actus essendi appears twice in Aquinas’s commentary
on Boethius’s De Hebdomadibus.
This
work seems to have been composed between 1257 and 1259, during Aquinas’s first regency
in Paris
The
Oxford Handbook of Aquinas also situates
the composition of the commentary on Boethius’s De Hebdomadibus around 1257-1259,
the same date that they report for the composition of the commentary on Boethius’s
De Trinitate. (See The Oxford Handbook
of Aquinas, ed. Brian Davies and Eleonore Stump [New York :
Oxford University
Brendan
Thomas Sammon places the composition of this commentary on 1258. (See B. T. Sammon,
The God Who Is Beauty [Eugene ,
Oregon
Concerning
the dating of Expositio libri Boetii De ebdomadibus, Weisheipl affirms that
this commentary is generally dated in conjunction with the Super Boetium De trinitate
“as being written during the first Parisian regency, 1256-1259” (Weisheipl, Friar
Thomas D’Aquino, 382). Earlier in the book Weisheipl had remarked that in the
catalogues, the In librum Boethii De hebdomadibus “is listed with
In Boethium De trinitate, and many scholars accept the association, dating
both around 1256-1259” (ibid., 138).
