¹ Kaske, R. E., ‘Dante's “DXV” and “Veltro”,’ Traditio 17 (1961) 204 n. 55. Jeanne Bignami-Odier also briefly referred to the Columbinus prophecy in Études sur Jean de Roquetaillade (Johannes de Rupescissa) (Paris 1952) 149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

We dedicate this article, with affection and gratitude, to the memory of Kaske, Robert E. We wish to express our gratitude to Maurice Keen, to Penelope Bulloch, Librarian of Balliol College, and to the staffs of the Archives Nationales, the Bibliothèque Nationale, Butler Library of Columbia University, the New York Public Library, and the Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana. Elizabeth Brown's research was made possible by grants from the American Council of Learned Societies, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the PSCCUNY Research Award Program. Robert Lerner's was made possible by grants from Northwestern University, the Institute for Advanced Study, and the National Endowment for the Humanities.Google Scholar

The following abbreviations will be used: AN–Paris, Archives nationales; BN–Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale; Vat.–Vatican City, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana.Google Scholar

² For previous work on Columbinus, see Robert Lerner, E., ‘Refreshment of the Saints: The Time After Antichrist as a Station for Earthly Progress in Medieval Thought,’ Traditio 32 (1976) 97–144, esp. 140 and nn. 138, 139; and idem, The Powers of Prophecy: The Cedar of Lebanon Vision from the Mongol Onslaught to the Dawn of the Enlightenment (Berkeley 1983) 40, 192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³ As will soon be seen, another early manuscript contains a short version. For the sake of simplicity we refer to the long form as ‘the Columbinus prophecy,’ and to its author as ‘the Columbinus author,’ even though, as will also be seen, the long form may consist of two different parts written by two different authors, and even though it is presented as an anonymous third-person report of data deriving primarily from a ‘revelation’ or ‘collation’ of ‘frater Columbinus’ rather than as the work of Columbinus himself.Google Scholar

⁴ BN, lat. 12866, brought to the attention of Elizabeth Brown by Jeffrey Denton, H., who found the copy through the Corpus Philippicum, established by Fawtier, Robert and now supervised by Bautier, Robert-Henri with the assistance of Elisabeth Lalou. On the MS, see Appendix, I, A n. 90, to our edition of the text of the Columbinus prophecy; see Appendix I, A n. 91, for the version of the Tripoli prophecy in this MS. The Tripoli prophecy is a late-thirteenth-century reworking of the Cedars of Lebanon prophecy, written ca. 1238–40: see Lerner, , Powers of Prophecy 9–24, 37–61.Google Scholar

⁵ The incipit of the table, which commences on the reverse of the cover, permits this dating: ‘Incipiunt priuilegia. Carte. Et littere super terris et possessionibus ecclesie de Sancti petri monte. facte et ordinate Anno domini. M^°. CC^°. Nonagesimo. ij^°. domino Iacobo eiusdem ecclesie Abbate.’Google Scholar

⁶ There are marked similarities between the script of the prophecies, on the one hand, and, on the other, that of the table (fols. 1^v–2^v, the cover and a single leaf) and the first quire (fols. 3–10). For further details, see Appendix I, A n. 90.Google Scholar

⁷ Its textual variants are closely related to copies made between 1291 and 1300: one made in West Friesland between 1291 and 1296, and another made in Lincolnshire between 1291 and 1300: Lerner, Powers of Prophecy 75–76, 78–80, 214–15, 222–24.Google Scholar

⁸ See Lerner, , Powers of Prophecy 32–33, 78–79, 121–22.Google Scholar

⁹ ‘Notices et extraits de documents inédits relatifs à l'histoire de France sous Philippe le Bel,’ Notices et extraits des manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Impériale 20² (1862) 83–237, at 235–37 no. XLV. Boutaric identified his MS source as ‘Biblioth. impér. fonds des Cartulaires, n^° 170.’ We re-edit the text in Appendix I, B.Google Scholar

¹⁰ BN, lat. 10919, at fols. 102^v–103. For the acquisition of the MS in 1835 by the Bibliothèque royale, see Delaborde, H.-François, Ancienne série des sacs dite aujourd'hui supplément, vol. V of Layettes du Trésor des chartes (edd. Alexandre Teulet, Joseph de Laborde, Elie Berger, and H.-François Delaborde; Paris 1863–1909) xlvij–viij.Google Scholar

¹¹ For Pierre's career, see Delaborde, , Ancienne série xxxviij-lxxiv; and idem, ‘Notice sur le registre de Pierre d'Étampes,’ Bibliothèque de l'École des Chartes 61 (1900) 422–46. See also Elizabeth Brown, A. R., ‘The Marriage of Edward II of England and Isabelle of France: A Postscript,’ Speculum 64 (1989) 373–74 n. 4. The first register is AN, JJ 28, which is beautifully although incompletely decorated with pen-flourished initials. The format of the volumes is the same: each measures approximately 240 mm. in length and 180 mm. in width; they are ruled in drypoint or plummet in two columns for 29 lines of script; the lines are 6 mm. apart. On JJ 28, see Guébin, Pascal and Lyon, Ernest, edd., Pierre des Vaux-de-Cernay, Hystoria Albigensis (Société de l'histoire de France, Publications 412, 422, 442; Paris 1926–39) III xlv-vi.Google Scholar

¹² See fol. 111^v, for a letter of Pierre de La Chapelle Taillefer, cardinal-bishop of Palestrina, on behalf of Gérard Pigalotti, bishop of Arras, dated, with query, 1310, in Baluze, Étienne, Vitae paparum Avenionensium (ed. Guillaume Mollat; Paris 1914–27) III 121–22.Google Scholar

¹³ Elizabeth Brown gratefully acknowledges the counsel of Patricia Danz Stirnemann and François Avril on these points. Both consider 1315 or 1316 too early a date for the decoration of Register XXVIII but admit the possibility of stylistic precocity.Google Scholar

¹⁴ BN, lat. 10919, fols. 101^v–104; see Baluze, , Vitae III 65–66, 71–72. The letter concerning Saint Louis terminates on the last line of fol. 102; the Columbinus prophecy begins at the top of fol. 102^v and is separated from the next letter by three lines. Elisabeth Lalou has kindly informed us that the Corpus Philippicum contains no reference to any other copy of the letter on behalf of Pierre d'Étampes; the late Robert Fawtier penciled in the date 1308 on a card describing the copy in BN, lat. 10919, but he gave no indication of his reasons for doing so.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Arnold of Villanova, Responsio objectionibus que fiebant contra tractatum Arnaldi de adventu Antichristi, ed. Batllori, M., ‘Dos nous escrits espirituals d'Amau de Vilanova,’ Analecta Sacra Tarraconensia 28 (1955) 45–70 at 65: ‘Nam multi doctores … tetigerunt et tradiderunt hunc modum determinandi finalia tempora, scilicet per calculationem determinatarum partium temporis … item Columbinus similiter.’ Any doubts about Arnold's authorship of the Responsio are eliminated by the author's knowledge of anatomy (60), intimate details of Arnold's own life (61), and a very wide range of prophetic data, as well as by the appearance of the treatise together with genuine works by Arnold in the only known MS in which it is found: Rome, Carmelite Archive, MS III, Varia 1. As to dating, 1303 is the terminus post quem because of the internal reference to Arnold's Confessio Ilerdensis of that year (ed. Batllori 68) and 1305 the likely terminus ante because of evidence from the Carmelite Archive MS discussed by Lerner, Robert, ‘The Prophetic Manuscripts of the “Renaissance Magus” Pierleone of Spoleto,’ Atti del III Congresso Internazionale di Studi Gioachimiti (forthcoming); the treatise must have been written before 1311, the year of Arnold's death.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Confessió de Barcelona in Arnau de Vilanova, Obres catalanes I (ed. Batllori, M.; Barcelona 1947) 112: ‘L'altra scriptura és la revelacio de sent Eusebi, lo qual, per compte dels anys de nostre senyor Jesuchrist e per alscuns accidens de regions e de terres, notiffique lo temps damunt dit.’Google Scholar

¹⁷ Batllori proposes that the reference is to Saint Eusebius of Alexandria: Confessió de Barcelona 60–61. But this Eusebius was a minor Greek saint of no arguable relevance to the Western prophetic tradition, and the Greek sermon on the Last Judgment that Batllori adduces as Arnold's possible source (PG 61.775–78) was not consistently attributed to Eusebius of Alexandria, nor does it in any way fit Arnold's description.Google Scholar

¹⁸ A rare fourteenth-century ‘Eusebius prophecy’ has hitherto been known only from John of Rupescissa's reference to it in his Liber ostensor of 1356: ‘Eusebium, id est unum librum quem fecit doctor eximius catolicus Eusebius Sezariensis … doctor catolicus et verax qui construxit unum librum per spiritum propheticum de futuris, quem numquam merui videre usque ad istam diem’; Liber ostensor, Vat. Rossianus 753, fol. 24^r. This prophecy must be the one found in Nuremberg, Stadtbibliothek, MS Cent. IV, 32 (second quarter of the fourteenth century, apparently of Italian Spiritual Franciscan provenance), fols. 62^v–70^v (rubric ‘Eusebius’; inc. ‘Dominus audivit auditum legentium’). For at least three reasons, however, this cannot be the ‘revelation of Saint Eusebius’ cited by Arnold of Villanova. First, far from telling of ‘regions and lands,’ it only refers to Italian cities; second, it does not mention the coming of Antichrist; finally and most conclusively, internal evidence shows that it was written well after 1305.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Liber horoscopus (text and commentary), as in the best currently known manuscript, Berlin, Staatsbibliothek MS 116, fol. 3^v. On the Horoscopus and the possibility that the commentary on it was written by Arnold of Villanova, see Lerner, Robert E., ‘On the Origins of the Earliest Latin Pope Prophecies: A Reconsideration,’ in Fälschungen im Mittelalter V: Fingierte Briefe, Frömmigkeit und Fälschungen, Realienfälschungen (MGH Schriften 33; Hanover 1988) 611–35 at 623–24 nn. 30, 31, and 629–31 nn. 44–45. The four authorities all appear in works which Arnold wrote in the same period: for his citations of Methodius and Hildegard, see his Confessió de Barcelona, ed. Batllori 111–12; for his citation of Cyprian (unlike Methodius and Hildegard an unusual source — we know of no other examples from the early fourteenth century), see his Prima denunciatio Gerundensis (of 1302/3), in Arnaldo da Vilanova, Escritos condenados por la Inquisicion (edd. and tr. E. Cànovas and F. Piñero; Madrid 1976) 91.Google Scholar

²⁰ Assisi, , Biblioteca comunale 442, fol. 185^r. See Appendix I, C, below.Google Scholar

²¹ We exclude detailed consideration of the fortunes of the Columbinus prophecy in England and Wales, treated by Kerby-Fulton, Kathryn and Randolph Daniel, E., ‘English Joachimism, 1300–1500: The Columbinus Prophecy’ (forthcoming in Atti [see n. 15 above]); we are grateful to the authors for allowing us to read this paper in typescript. Suffice it to say that we agree with Kerby-Fulton and Daniel in assuming that the prophecy (i.e., the long version as found in the Saint-Pierremont cartulary) originated on the continent. All nine known medieval British copies, moreover, appear to descend from a single continental progenitor. Thus, for example, all, with one exception, have ‘1271’ or corruptions of this date instead of the surely original ‘1261,’ and the exception shows no signs of descending directly from a different continental base. Possibly the oldest British MS — British Library, Cotton Cleopatra C X, fols. 157^r–158^r — must date from the early fourteenth century and probably from the papal interregnum of 1304/5, since its verse on popes seems to demonstrate knowledge of Boniface VIII and Benedict XI but not Clement V, and since the verse would most likely have circulated during a long conclave.Google Scholar

²² In reviewing the contents of the complete Columbinus prophecy we draw on the text in the Saint-Pierremont cartulary, noting important variant readings from other MSS. The Saint-Pierremont MS refers to Columbinus’ ‘revelation,’ whereas all the other texts we know have ‘collation.’Google Scholar

²³ Although many MSS later than the Saint-Pierremont copy alter these and other dates to make them more relevant to the times when they were copied, we ignore this phenomenon in our summary.Google Scholar

²⁴ For the assumption that Antichrist would parody Christ by manifesting himself in his thirtieth year, see Lerner, , Powers of Prophecy 44; and John of Rupescissa, Liber ostensor, Vat. Rossianus 753, fol. 146^v (‘omnes [doctores] communiter estimant quod XXX annorum incipiat apparere’). For Antichrist's three-and-a-half-year reign, based on Dan. 7.25, 12.11, and Rev. 11.3, 12.6, 12.14, see Augustine, , Civ. Dei 20.23, and John of Paris, in Franz Pelster, ‘Die Quaestio Heinrichs von Harclay über die zweite Ankunft Christi und die Erwartung des baldigen Weltendes zu Anfang des XIV. Jahrhunderts,’ Archivio italiano per la storia della pietà 1 (1951) 25–82 at 38.Google Scholar

²⁵ This evil emperor must be the notorious Frederick II, although he died in 1250. The tragic effects of Frederick's rule outlived him, and the author may be suggesting that Frederick loosed Satan before dying, rather than being himself Satan incarnate. Alternatively, he may have been alluding to the false Frederick, Giovanni di Cocleria, who appeared in Sicily in 1261, only to be defeated by the vicar of Frederick II's bastard son and successor, Manfred. See Léonard, Emile G., Les Angevins de Naples (Paris 1954) 38–41, esp. 41 n. 3; Robert Lerner, E., ‘Frederick II, Alive, Aloft, and Allayed, in Franciscan-Joachite Eschatology,’ in Werner Verbeke et al., The Use and Abuse of Eschatology in the Middle Ages (Mediaevalia Lovaniensia, ser. I, stud. 15; Louvain 1988) 369–72; and for other false Fredericks in Germany in the 1280s, idem, Powers of Prophecy 53, 73. Although the allusion is not entirely clear, it leaves no question of the prophet's animosity toward the Ghibellines.Google Scholar

²⁶ See Appendix I, A n. g, for the Vuandelici or Wandalici, mentioned by John of Rupescissa and the early English MSS of the prophecy. The early-fourteenth-century version in London, British Library, Cotton Cleopatra C X, fols. 157–158, substitutes ‘burdegalenses’ for ‘aragonenses,’ doubtless a reference to the revolt against Philip the Fair that occurred in Bordeaux in January 1303: see Trabut-Cussac, J.-P., ‘Bordeaux sous Philippe le Bel,’ in Bordeaux sous les rois d'Angleterre (ed. Yves Renouard), vol. II of Histoire de Bordeaux (ed. Charles Higounet; Bordeaux 1965) 206–12.Google Scholar

²⁷ The copy of the prophecy in the Saint-Pierremont MS reads ‘radicanda dissipet & euellat,’ but the Liber ostensor of John of Rupescissa preserves what is surely the better reading, ‘eradicanda dissipet & euellat.’ See Appendix I, A, below; and, for the Liber ostensor, Vat. Rossianus 753, fol. 147.Google Scholar

²⁸ This is a composite reading of the hortatory section, drawn from the Saint-Pierremont text (which seems to some degree corrupt) and the version reported in John of Rupescissa's Liber ostensor, Vat. Rossianus 753, fol. 146^r. The fact that much of this section is absent from all British copies of the text suggests that a corruption arose in this section very early in the transmission and that the progenitor of the British MS family dealt with the difficulty by omitting the whole passage.Google Scholar

²⁹ In the Saint-Pierremont copy the name of the new emperor is illegible; it is supplied from other copies. The prophecy's formulation ‘quondam imperator’ probably alludes to Frederick II's deposition by the Council of Lyon.Google Scholar

³⁰ The texts of the British family add in conclusion a generalized moral lament: Tunc homo erit velox ad mensam, tardus ad ecclesiam; potens ad potandum, eger ad candandum; pronus ad dissoluciones, tardus ad orationes; in alio festucam prospiciens, in seipso trabem non videns.’Google Scholar

³¹ We assume that if part two was written by someone other than the author of part one, that person was responsible for merging the two parts; if this was the case, he would have repeated the name Columbinus to create some semblance of unity.Google Scholar

³² Hugo de Novocastro, Tractatus de victoria Christi contra Antichristum (Nuremberg 1471, unpaginated) bk. II ch. 27. The text of this incunabulum is corrupt, but comparison with two independent MSS, BN, lat. 16393, and Vat. Barb. lat. 489, shows that it is sufficient for our present purposes. On the dating of Hugo's treatise see Lerner, , Powers of Prophecy 55–56 n. 36.Google Scholar

³³ See the unique MS, Vat. Rossianus 753, fols. 146–147.Google Scholar

³⁴ Vat. Rossianus 753, fol. 147^r-v.Google Scholar

³⁵ The MSS are Basel, Universitätsbibliothek A V 39, fol. 130^r-v; Bremen, Universitätsbibliothek (formerly Stadtbibliothek) b. 35, fols. 185^v–186^v; and Wolfenbüttel, Herzog August Bibliothek 366 Helmstedt, fols. 58^v–59^r. The Basel MS was copied in the Charterhouse of Basel between 1356 and ca. 1390. On the Bremen MS, see Offler, H. S., Guillelmi de Ockham, Opera politica I (2nd ed. Manchester 1974) 273–74; Matthias Flacius Illyricus is the earliest known owner of the MS, which must have been copied shortly after 1356; the contents suggest south-German provenance. On the Wolfenbüttel MS, which includes part one of the Columbinus prophecy copied in 1467, see von Heinemann, Otto, Die Handschriften der herzöglichen Bibliothek zu Wolfenbüttel I (Wolfenbüttel 1884) 294–95; it was also owned by Illyricus, Flacius, who acquired it from the Augustinian cloister at Regensburg; in this MS all dates found in the other two MSS are postponed by a century.Google Scholar

³⁶ For a summary of the contents of the Vade mecum, Bignami-Odier, Études sur Jean de Roquetaillade (n. 1 above) 157–72.Google Scholar

³⁷ Specifically, the Saint-Pierremont copy; the British transmission; and the appearance of both parts in a prophetic pastiche found in Florence, Biblioteca Nazionale MSS Magl. VII, 1081, fols. 21^v–24^r, 31^r–33^v, and Magl. XXV, 344, fols. 37^r–41^r. All three copies of the pastiche were made by the Florentine grammarian Luca Bernardi, apparently in the latter part of the fifteenth century (the dating problems are too complicated to resolve here); see Rusconi, Roberto, ‘“Ex quodam antiquissimo libello”: La tradizione manoscritta delle profezie nell’ Italia tardomedioevale,’ in Verbeke, et al., Use and Abuse (n. 25 above) 441–72 at 444–49. An edition of the copy from Magl. XX, 344, is found in Hermann Grauert, ‘Meister Johann von Toledo,’ Sb. Akad. München 1901 No. 2 300–305. Assuming that the ‘Eusebius’ prophecy mentioned by Arnold of Villanova in his Confessió de Barcelona was our Columbinus text, it too would have been the full version, since Arnold refers to a revelation that tells both of chronology and of ‘events in regions and lands.’Google Scholar

³⁸ On the advent of Antichrist in his thirtieth year, see n. 24 above. The prophecy quotes the popular thirteenth-century jingle about the birth of Antichrist in 1261, on which see Reeves, Marjorie, The Influence of Prophecy in the Later Middle Ages: A Study in Joachimism (Oxford 1969) 49–50. Cf. the prophecy's words ‘… vbi dicitur quod A.D. 1261 post partum virginis alme solvetur Sathanas, non dicit Iohannes quod nascetur Antichristus’ with the words of the jingle: ‘Cum fuerint anni completi mille ducenti / Et decies seni post partum virginis alme, / Tunc nascetur Antichristus demone plenus.’ Although the jingle seems to have originated in the mid-thirteenth century, it was associated with eschatological expectations for ca. 1290, as can be seen from its interpolation into the copy of the Joachite Epistola subsequentium figurarum in MS Vat. lat. 3822, a text that has other alterations pointing to Antichrist's advent around 1290: see the edition of the interpolated version of the Epistola in Bignami-Odier, Jeanne, ‘Notes sur deux manuscrits de la Bibliothèque du Vatican,’ Mélanges d'archéologie et d'histoire 54 (1937) 211–41 at 224–26, and the commentary by Reeves, Marjorie and Hirsch-Reich, B. in The Figurae of Joachim of Fiore (Oxford 1972) 110. For two other sources referring to fears of Antichrist's coming in 1290 or 1291, see the reference in the commentary that Peter of John Olivi wrote in 1297, in Burr, David, ‘Olivi's Apocalyptic Timetable,’ Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies 11 (1981) 237–60 at 251; and the reference in the De Antichristo of John of Paris, written in 1300, in Pelster, , ‘Die Quaestio Heinrichs von Harclay’ 39. The prophecy of the birth of Antichrist in 1261 that is based on Revelation 12 should not be confused with the prophecy deriving from Joachim of Fiore's generational arithmetic of Antichrist's death and the beginning of an earthly Sabbath in 1260. A clear statement concerning the latter appears in the contemporary chronicle of Salimbene (MGH SS 32.293): ‘1260: … quo etiam anno, ut Ioachite dicunt, inchoatus est status spiritus sancti.’ On the Joachite reckoning for 1260, see also Töpfer, Bernhard, Das kommende Reich des Friedens (Berlin 1964) 50 esp. n. 11; and Lerner, ‘Frederick II’ (n. 25 above), in Verbeke, et al., Use and Abuse 359–84.Google Scholar

³⁹ See 226 above. For the capture of Acre by Saladin in 1187, see Prawer, Joshua, Le royaume latin de Jérusalem (tr. Nahon, G.; 2nd ed. Paris 1975) I 655–58; for its recapture by the Christians in 1191, see ibid. II 46–68. In explicating Columbinus’ chronology, Rupescissa wrongly said that Tripoli fell in 1287 and Acre three years later: Vat. Rossianus 753, fols. 147^v–148. The death in October 1287 of Bohemond VII, count of Tripoli and titular king of Antioch, set the stage for the fall of Tripoli in 1289; in 1287 an earthquake (a phenomenon dear to prophets) occurred in Latakia, , and the port was subsequently taken. These events led directly to the fall of Acre in 1291. See Lerner, , Powers of Prophecy 37–38; and Prawer, , Royaume latin II 533–57.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ See Lerner, , Powers of Prophecy 38–40; Powicke, Maurice, The Thirteenth Century, 1216–1307, Oxford History of England (ed. George Clark) IV (2nd ed. Oxford 1962) 266–69; and Tyerman, Christopher, England and the Crusades, 1095–1588 (Chicago 1988) 230, 236, 238–39.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Fawtier, Robert, L'Europe occidentale de 1270 à 1380, pt. 1, De 1270 à 1328, vol. VI of Histoire du Moyen Age (ed. Gustave Glotz; Paris 1940) 283–84, 305–307; Joseph Strayer, R., The Crusade Against Aragon’ (first pub. 1953), in Medieval Statecraft and the Perspectives of History: Essays by Joseph Strayer, R. (edd. Benton, John F. and Bisson, Thomas N.; Princeton 1971) 107–22; idem, The Reign of Philip the Fair (Princeton 1980) 27–30, 368–69; Elizabeth Brown, A. R., ‘The Prince Is Father of the King: The Character and Childhood of Philip the Fair of France,’ Mediaeval Studies 49 (1987) 282–334 at 293–94, 300–301.Google Scholar

⁴² Strayer, , Reign of Philip 317–18, 321–24; Brown, ‘Prince Is Father’ 292, 296; Fawtier, , L'Europe occidentale 319–20, 323–25.Google Scholar

⁴³ Funck-Brentano, Frantz, Les origines de la guerre de Cent ans: Philippe le Bel en Flandre (Paris 1897) 97–212, 351–508, esp. 498–508, for the peace of Athis-sur-Orge; see also Fawtier, , L'Europe occidentale 323–34, 347–52.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Fawtier, , L'Europe occidentale 395–97, 399–400; Strayer, , Reign of Philip 267–79; Cazelles, Raymond, ‘Une exigence de l'opinion depuis saint Louis: la réformation du royaume,’ Annuaire-Bulletin de la Société de l'Histoire de France (1962–63) 91–99; Brown, ‘Prince Is Father’ 291; eadem, ‘Charters and Leagues in Early Fourteenth Century France: The Movement of 1314 and 1315’ (diss. Harvard and Radcliffe 1960) 6–70. For the importance of the Great Ordonnance of reform, see eadem, ‘Reform and Resistance to Royal Authority in Fourteenth-Century France: The Leagues of 1314–1315,’ Parliaments, Estates and Representation 1 (1981) 109–37. For Boniface's threats, which the prophecy echoes, see below, following n. 73.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Brown, , ‘Charters and Leagues’ 52–79.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ See Léonard, , Angevins (n. 25 above) 140, 148, 164, 179, 182–87, 194–96; Steven Runciman, The Sicilian Vespers: A History of the Mediterranean World in the Later Thirteenth Century (Cambridge 1958) 274–75; Amari, Michele, La Guerra del Vespro siciliano (ed. Francesco Giunta from 1886 ed.; Palermo 1969) I 601–18, II² 346–48.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ That Frederick remained a Ghibelline hero can be seen from a manifesto of Fra Dolcino, apparently dating from 1304–1305, that referred favorably to his coming three-and-a-half-year reign: see Töpfer, , Das kommende Reich (see n. 38) 304. Whether Dolcino's expectation derived from the Columbinus prophecy is impossible to tell. In that case even after the peace of Caltabellota Frederick might have remained a villain for Guelfs.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ For the origins and early circulation of the Tripoli prophecy, see Lerner, , Powers of Prophecy 37–83. The Tripoli prophecy drew verbatim on at least three earlier texts but shows no debt to the Columbinus prophecy, whereas the reverse is possible. The Columbinus author, thus, may have decided to place the birth of Antichrist in 1287 because he knew the Tripoli prophecy. The appearance of both prophecies on the flyleaf of the Saint-Pierremont cartulary reveals nothing directly about the authorship of the Columbinus prophecy, but it does show that the Tripoli prophecy came to Saint-Pierremont first and thus was probably slightly older. The proximity also suggests that at least one early reader perceived common traits.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ X 5. 7. 12: Cum ex iniuncto, § Quod si forte quis argute (also in PL 214.695–98). Innocent rules that ‘someone … should not be believed if he says he is sent by God, unless he produces a special testimony about himself from Scripture or works an obvious miracle.’ Note also Pelster, ‘Die Quaestio Heinrichs von Harclay’ (n. 38 above) 48, for the theologian Henry of Harclay's ironical comment on Arnold of Villanova's claim to illumination: ‘sed iste magister fuit inspiratus, ut dixit, et bene novit.’Google Scholar

⁵⁰ A particularly strong attack on the likelihood of new revelation appears in the Contra divinatores of 1310/11 by the Augustinian friar Augustinus Triumphus. See Giglioni, Pierangela, ‘Il “Tractatus contra divinatores et sompniatores” di Agostino d'Ancona: Introduzione e edizione del testo,’ Analecta Augustiniana 48 (1985) 7–111 at 62–63: ‘Nam in veteri lege ubi Veritas Evangelii non erat manifestata, et in ecclesia primitiva, ubi fides catholica non erat confirmata, Deus multa per sompnia et aliis modis suis fidelibus revelavit, et per eos multa miracula demonstravit; sed nunc, quod Veritas Evangelii est plene revelata et declarata, et fides catholica plene confirmata, videmus expresse quia Deus destitit ab operatione miraculorum; ergo sic debemus arguere quod destiterit a revelatione sompniorum et visionum.’Google Scholar

⁵¹ It is found in Jerome's Latin translation of Eusebius’ Chronicle. On ‘Eusebius–Jerome,’ see Landes, Richard, ‘Lest the Millennium Be Fulfilled: Apocalyptic Expectations and the Pattern of Western Chronography 100–800 CE,’ in Verbeke, , Use and Abuse (n. 25 above) 137–211 at 149, 165. For evidence that the dating of the Incarnation to A.M. 5199 was a commonplace around the time of the Columbinus prophecy, see Oppaviensis, Martinus (Martin of Poland), Chronicon, in MGH SS 22.398.Google Scholar

⁵² We proceed here on the assumption that the Saint-Pierremont reading of ‘revelation’ (‘secundum fratrem Columbinum in revelatione sua’; ‘in revelatione fratris Columbini’), rather than ‘collation,’ is the original, since there would have been more reason to change revelation to collation than the reverse. On the distinction between the ‘spirit of intelligence’ and the ‘spirit of prophecy,’ see Robert Lerner, E., introduction to Johannes de Rupescissa, Liber secretorum eventuum (forthcoming).Google Scholar

⁵³ For the events surrounding the debate and a review of the positions of Arnold of Villanova, John of Paris (who took a moderate line in his De Antichristo of 1300), and Peter of Auvergne, see Pelster, , ‘Die Quaestio Heinrichs von Harclay’ 32–43. See also Arnold's statement in his De adventu Antichristi, ed. Heinrich Finke, Aus den Tagen Bonifaz VIII. (Münster 1902) cxli–cxlii: ‘Si Augustinus … supponeret quod Christus per illa verba [Acts 1.7] respondent ad interrogationem factam de tempore Antichristi, quod est omnino falsum ad litteram…. Non ergo per illa verba respondit Christus ad interrogationem factam de tempore Antichristi, sed de consummatione seculi, vel ultima conversione Judeorum ad Christum.’Google Scholar

⁵⁴ On the exegetical tradition, founded by Bede, , of interpreting the vision of seven seals (Rev. 5.1–8.1) as seven periods in the history of the Church with the last an earthly Sabbath, see, inter alia, Lerner, ‘Refreshment of the Saints’ 103–15; and Kaske, R. E., ‘The Seven Status Ecclesiae in Purgatorio XXXII and XXXIII,’ in Dante, Petrarch, Boccaccio: Studies in the Italian Trecento in Honor of Charles Singleton, S. (edd. Bernardo, A. S. and Pellegrini, A. L.; Binghamton 1983) 89–113 at 93–94.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ On the Augustinian opposition to chiliasm, see Lerner, , ‘Refreshment of the Saints’ 97–98, 101–102, and idem, ‘Joachim of Fiore's Breakthrough to Chiliasm,’ Cristianesimo nella storia 6 (1985) 489–512 at 502–504, 510–11.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ On Joachim's use of the scheme, see Reeves, Marjorie and Hirsch-Reich, B., ‘The Seven Seals in the Writings of Joachim of Fiore,’ Recherches de théologie ancienne et médiévale 21 (1954) 211–47. For the brevity of the seventh time in Joachim, see Liber de concordia, bk. III, 2, ch. 7, p. 306: ‘Brevissimum autem esse puto tempus septime apertionis, quia et in Apocalypsis scriptum est: “Et cum aperuisset sigillum septimum factum est silentium in celo quasi media hora.” Ego autem mediam horam in loco isto pro dimidio anno accipiendam esse puto.’ See also Joachim of Fiore, Expositio super Apocalypsim (Venice 1527) fol. 123^rb; and Töpfer, Das kommende Reich (n. 38 above) 83–87.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Olivi's analysis of the length of the Sabbath is most fully discussed in Töpfer, Das kommende Reich 230, and Burr, ‘Olivi's Timetable’ as cited in n. 38. The interpolated version of the Pseudo-Joachite Epistola subsequentium figurarum (n. 38 above), datable to roughly 1290, toys with the notion of a long Sabbath after the death of Antichrist: ‘Quod tempus dicitur in Daniele xlv dierum. Sapientes interpretantur mensem pro die, alii annum, alii seculum….’ Yet it still leaves the final time open: ‘erit in Dei voluntate quando erit finis mundi.’ Moreover, the final time in this text is only marginally chiliastic, since it emphasizes penance in preparation for the day of judgment.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ See Burr, , ‘Olivi's Timetable’ 258 (a century of ‘exaltation of the cross,’ on the authority of the De semine scripturarum); ibid. 256–57, 260, and Töpfer, , Das kommende Reich 230 (six hundred to seven hundred years, primarily on the assumptions that Antichrist would be destroyed sometime in the fourteenth century, and that the world would last from then until the year 2000).Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Cited in Burr, ‘Olivi's Timetable’ 258. In fact Olivi's caution proved unavailing, for in 1319 papally appointed theologians declared that his commentary on Revelation contained numerous errors. See Littera magistrorum, in Miscellanea sacra (edd. Baluze, E. and Mansi, J. D.; Lucca 1761) II 270: ‘Item quod dicit quod septigenti vel sexcenti anni sint dandi septimo statui quem supra dixit incipere a morte Antichristi, tum ratione determinationis, tum ratione prolongations, erroneum reputamus.’Google Scholar

⁶⁰ On the ex eventu prediction, see Lerner, , Powers of Prophecy 185–86. In 1356 John of Rupescissa found the specificity and intelligibility of the second part of the Columbinus prophecy distinctive: ‘Nichil in prefatis verbis Ioachim video exponendum, quia destructio jam facta ciuitatis Aconensis anno Christi M. CCXCI sub papa fratre minore ac hodierne guerre Francorum et Anglorum, et vilitas proditorum multorum nobilium regni verificant oraculum…. Hic nichil est exponendum, sed totum est mirandum et Dei iudicio et propinque experiencie pocius reliquendum’: Vat. Rossianus 753, fol. 146^v.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Lerner, , Powers of Prophecy 38–41, refers to ‘Columbinus’ and two other prophecies of ca. 1300 that treat the fall of the Holy Land ex eventu: the Tripoli prophecy and ‘Ve mundo in centum annis.’Google Scholar

⁶² See Lerner, , ‘Frederick II’ (n. 25 above) 372–80.Google Scholar

⁶³ Robert Lerner, E., ‘Medieval Prophecy and Religious Dissent,’ Past & Present 72 (August 1976) 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁶⁴ Brown, , ‘Prince Is Father’ (n. 41 above) 287; eadem, ‘Persona et Gesta: The Image and Deeds of the Thirteenth-Century Capetians. The Case of Philip the Fair,’ Viator 19 (1988) 219–46 at 227–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁶⁵ Le Maire was also in constant conflict with petty local lords. See Le Livre de Guillaume le Maire (ed. Célestin Port), in Mélanges historiques. Choix de documents, vol. XI² of Collection de documents inédits sur l'histoire de France publiés par les soins du Ministre de l'Instruction publique (Paris 1877) 187–569 at 322–31, 344–63, esp. 329, 337, 350–51; Petit, Joseph, Charles de Valois (1270–1325) (Paris 1900) 300–308; Brown, Charters and Leagues (n. 44 above) 32–34.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ ‘… multorum tam plebis quam nobilium & baronum animos qui malorum consilio incitati iam pene deficere uolebant in sui amoris gracia confirmauit’: Vat. lat. 4598, fol. 201^v (Universal Chronicle of Guillaume de Nangis to 1307); Léopold Delisle, ‘Documents parisiens de la bibliothèque de Berne,’ Mémoires de la Société de l'histoire de Paris et de l'Ile-de-France 23 (1896) 252; Brown, , Charters and Leagues 66–67, 559–60 nn. 172–73, esp. n. 172, referring to BN, fr. 5611, fol. 63^v, for the war between Foix and Armagnac which the king stopped; eadem, ‘Royal Commissioners and Grants of Privilege in Philip the Fair's France: Pierre de Latilli, Raoul de Breuilli, and the Ordonnance for the Seneschalsy of Toulouse and Albi of 1299,’ Francia 13 (1985) 151–90 at 183–85.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Joseph Strayer, R., ‘Consent to Taxation under Philip the Fair,’ in idem and Taylor, Charles H., Studies in Early French Taxation (Harvard Historical Monographs 12; Cambridge 1939) 46–75; Brown, , Charters and Leagues 67–81.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ We follow here Rupescissa's version: ‘nisi faciat quod subditi sui, sicut franchi vocantur franchi sint’; the alternative reading in the Saint-Pierremont text seems internally contradictory: ‘nisi faciat quod subditi sui sicut franchi vocantur et non sunt sibi subiciantur.’Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Brown, , ‘Prince Is Father’ (n. 41 above) 296–98.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ ‘Hinc mos surrexit ut terra illa quae antea vocabatur Gallia, nunc vocatur Francia, id est, ab omni servitute aliarum gentium libera. Quapropter Francus liber dicitur, quia super omnes gentes alias decus et dominatio illi debetur’: Historia Karoli Magni et Rotholandi ou Chronique du Pseudo-Turpin (ed. Meredith, C.-Jones; Paris 1936) 221. For the popularity of the Pseudo-Turpin among the aristocracy, see Gabrielle Spiegel, M., ‘Pseudo-Turpin, the Crisis of the Aristocracy and the Beginnings of Vernacular Historiography in France,’ Journal of Medieval History 12 (1986) 207–23; on its fortunes in French royal circles, see Elizabeth Brown, A. R., ‘Saint-Denis and the Turpin Legend,’ in The Codex Calixtinus and the Shrine of Saint James, edd. Alison, M. Stones and John Williams (forthcoming).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁷¹ For complex reasons the passage concerning Gaul and France does not appear in the quasi-official histories written at Saint-Denis which utilized the Pseudo-Turpin. Nonetheless the Dionysian historians emphasized the freedom from servitude that Charlemagne was believed to have bestowed on the French. Moreover, in 1317 Yves, monk of Saint-Denis, maintained that this liberty included immunity from taxation: BN, lat. 13836, fols. 39–41, where Yves employs an incident from the history Anthenor et alii (PL 163.925–26), and Brown, , ‘Saint-Denis and the Turpin Legend.’Google Scholar

⁷² See Strayer, , Reign of Philip (n. 41 above) 262–64.Google Scholar

⁷³ See Brown, , ‘Prince Is Father’ 312–15; for background, eadem, ‘La notion de la légitimité et la prophétie à la cour de Philippe Auguste,’ in La France de Philippe Auguste: le temps des mutations. Actes du Colloque international organisé par le C.N.R.S. (Paris, 29 septembre – 4 octobre 1980) (ed. Robert-Henri Bautier; Paris 1982) 77–110; and eadem, ‘La généalogie capétienne dans l'historiographie du Moyen Age: Philippe le Bel, le reniement du reditus et la création d'une ascendance carolingienne pour Hugues Capet,’ in Religion et culture autour de l'an Mil: royaume capétien et Lotharingie. Actes du colloque Hugues Capet 987–1987. La France de l'an Mil. Auxerre, 26 et 27 juin 1987 — Metz, 11 et 12 septembre 1987 (edd. Dominique Iogna-Prat and Picard, Jean-Charles; Paris 1990) 199–214 at 199–202.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Kay, Richard, ‘“Ad nostram praesentiam evocamus”: Boniface VIII and the Roman Convocation of 1302,’ Proceedings of the Third International Congress of Medieval Canon Law, Strasbourg, 3–6 September 1968 (Monumenta Iuris Canonici, ser. C, Subsidia, 4; Vatican City 1971) 165–89 at 171–84; Ronald Steckling, A., ‘Cardinal Lemoine's Legation to France, 1303: A Diplomat's Dilemmas,’ Res Publica Litterarum 5² (1982) 203–25.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ See n. 44 above, and also Brown, , ‘Royal Commissioners’ (n. 66 above) 179–81.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ Donckel, Emil, ‘Visio seu prophetia fratris Johannis. Eine süditalienische Prophezeiung aus dem Anfang des 14. Jahrhunderts,’ Römische Quartalschrift 40 (1932) 361–79 at 374.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ The text is edited by Maria Pou, José y Marti, , Visionarios, Beguinos y Fraticelos Catalanes (Siglos XIII–XV) (Vich 1930) 54–55.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ See the introduction to Elizabeth Brown, A. R., Adultery, Charivari, and Political Criticism in Early-Fourteenth-Century France: Les livres de Fauvel (forthcoming).Google Scholar

⁷⁹ ‘… & qui se jactare dicuntur ex quibusdam auguriis & sacrilegiis recepisse & alia duo regna sue debere subjici ditioni & exinde se ad partes orientales transferre’: Claude de Vic and Jean-Joseph Vaissete, Histoire générale de Languedoc … (ed. Auguste Molinier; Toulouse 1872–93) X preuves 397–99 at 398; see Georges-Alfred-Laurent Digard, Philippe le Bel et le Saint-Siège de 1285 à 1304, 2 vols. (Paris 1936) II 122–23. The letter reflects and probably reproduces the message Philip the Fair had ordered the archbishop to transmit.Google Scholar

⁸⁰ For relations between Philip the Fair and England, see above. Philip's relations with Ferri († 31 December 1303 at the age of 90) and his son and successor Thibaut II, dukes of Lorraine, were excellent: see Henneberg, Hermann, Die politischen Beziehungen zwischen Deutschland und Frankreich unter König Albrecht I. 1289–1308 (Strasburg 1891) 130–31. In an exhaustive study of Philip the Fair's relations with the Empire, Benton, John F. shows that imperial attempts to detach Lorraine from the French camp in 1295 failed, and that both Ferri and Thibaut supported Philip in his struggles against Boniface VIII and Flanders: ‘Philip the Fair and the Empire’ (research report prepared at Princeton University for Joseph Strayer, R. in 1957; available in Firestone Library, Princeton University) 89–90, 179–80; see also 95, 102, 117; and Calmet, Augustin, Histoire de Lorraine (new ed. Nancy 1745–57) III 149–53.Google Scholar

⁸¹ See, for example, Stanislao de Campagnola, ‘Dai “viri spirituales” di Gioacchino da Fiore ai “fratres spirituales” di Francesco d'Assisi,’ Picenum seraphicum 11 (1974) 24–52.Google Scholar

⁸² Reeves, , Influence of Prophecy (see n. 38) 143.Google Scholar

⁸³ In the 1240s the Franciscan exegete Alexander Minorita, drawing on the Pseudo-Joachite Jeremiah commentary, viewed the Franciscans as the order of the dove: see Reeves, , Influence of Prophecy 178, and Bernard McGinn, Visions of Prophecy (New York 1979) 162–63, for the relevant passage in the Jeremiah commentary. See also the Franciscan Pseudo-Joachite prophecy ‘Erunt duo viri’ (probably dating from the 1240s) cited by Stanislao da Campagnola, ‘Dai “viri spirituales” '37: ‘Erunt duo viri … qui duos ordines interpretantur; unus italus alter hispanus, primus columbinus alter corvinus.’Google Scholar

⁸⁴ ‘Item dixit idem testis se audiuisse alium sermonem dicti fratris Bernardj quem fecit quadam die dominica uel alio festo, congregato populo burgi Carcassonae in Ecclesia Sancti Vincentij eiusdem burgi, in quo quidem sermone recitauit Sibillam et eius prophetiam et locutus fuit de ordine coruino et columbino…. Et addidit quod dictus frater Bernardus dixit in dicto sermone, In consilio nostro habemus aliquos proditores et mascaratos qui omnia quae dicimus et tractamus reuelant mascaratis inimicis nostris, credens ipse testis quod hoc uoluit dicere de inquisitoribus et fratribus praedicatoribus’: BN, lat. 4270, fol. 235^r-v, testimony given in 1319 by the Dominican Raymond Arnaud, a member of the congregation of Carcassonne, regarding events that had occurred sixteen years earlier. For background, see de Dmitrewski, Michel, ‘Fr. Bernard Délicieux, O.F.M.: Sa lutte contre l'Inquisition de Carcassonne et d'Albi, son procès, 1297–1319,’ Archivum Franciscanum Historicum 17 (1924) 183–218, 313–37, 457–88, and 19 (1925) 3–32, esp. 214–18, 313–18, 332. Alan Friedlander, J. will shortly publish an edition of the account of the trial of Bernard Délicieux preserved in BN, lat. 4270, a copy of the original documents in Carcassonne made for Étienne Baluze; we are grateful to him for advice on the questions we treat here.Google Scholar

⁸⁵ Donckel, , ‘Visio seu prophetia fratris Johannis’ (see n. 76 above) 376: ‘vix aliquis clericus tonsuram suam ostendere audebit.’Google Scholar

⁸⁶ For Odonis (Guiral Ot), see ‘Prophetia inventa per fratrem Gerardum Odonis, Ordinis Minorum,’ in an appendix to Joachim of Fiore, Psalterium decem chordarum (Venice 1527) fol. 279^r: ‘rustici devincent clericos et suppeditabitur ecclesia Romana tantum quod non erunt ausi portare tonsuram nec ipsi eos nominabunt clericos.’ The same prophecy (inc.: ‘Ad evidentiam quindecim signorum’) is edited from BN lat. 8023, fols. 59^v–60^v, by Langlois, C.-V., in Histoire littéraire de la France 36 (1927) 213–14. On the dating, see Teetaert, A., in Dictionnaire de théologie catholique 11² (1932) 1658–63. For John of Winterthur, see Töpfer, , Das kommende Reich (see n. 38) 178.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ See Olivi's, letter to the sons of Charles II of Naples, ed. Ehrle, F., ‘Petrus Johannis Olivi, sein Leben und seine Schriften,’ Archiv für Litteratur- und Kirchengeschichte des Mittelalters 3 (1887) 409–552 at 537–38.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ Grundmann, Herbert, ‘Liber de Flore: Eine Schrift der Franziskaner-Spiritualen aus dem Anfang des 14. Jahrhunderts,’ Historisches Jahrbuch 49 (1929) 33–91, in idem, Ausgewählte Aufsätze, 2: Joachim von Fiore (Stuttgart 1977) 101–65; see 40 (109) for dating and 80–81 for text and virtually contemporary commentary.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ Grundmann, , ‘Liber de Flore’ 58–60 (128–31).Google Scholar

⁹⁰ See nn. 5–6 above. We are grateful to Patricia Danz Stirnemann and Françoise Gasparri for help with this MS. Henri Stein proposed that the first part of the MS (fols. 1–66) comprised a single cartulary from Saint-Pierremont: Bibliographie générale des cartulaires français ou relatifs à l'histoire de France (Manuels de bibliographie historique 4; Paris 1907) 484–85 no. 3254; for the cartulary of Saint-Pierre de Riremont (dioc. Toul [Saint-Dié], Vosges) which follows (fols. 67–110), see ibid., 435 no. 3178; almost a century later than the MS from Saint-Pierremont, it was (like the Saint-Pierremont MS) acquired by Saint-Germaindes-Prés and was probably bound with it there (see fol. 1, ‘S. Germ. 1.447’). Comparison of lat. 12866 with the fine contemporary copy of the cartulary of Saint-Pierremont now in the BN (n.a. lat. 1608 [Libri 1438]) shows that the situation is more complicated than Stein indicated; on n.a. lat. 1608, acquired by the BN in 1888, see Léopold Delisle, Bibliothèque nationale. Catalogue des manuscrits des fonds Libri et Barrois (Paris 1888) 56–57 no. XXXVIII. BN, n.a. lat. 1608 is the full, finished, elegantly decorated copy of the cartulary of which the first portion of lat. 12866 (fols. 1^v–34^v) is a partial draft; the dimensions and layouts of the two volumes are virtually identical. The same scribe who was responsible for the table of contents (fols. 1^v–2^v) and fols. 3–10 (and possibly fols. 11–34 as well) of lat. 12866 copied the body of n.a. lat. 1608. BN, n.a. lat. 1608 includes the contents of the quire now missing from lat. 12866 between fol. 10/viii and fol. 11/xxij; it extends beyond fol. 34^v of lat. 12866 (see n.a. lat. 1608, fol. 46^v, line 4), ending eight folios later, on fol. 54 (following various documents, on fols. 61–101 is a list of lands and rents of 1292, in the same hand). The table of lat. 12866 (fols. 1^v–2^v) shows that that MS originally extended to fol. 53. The next section of lat. 12866 (fols. 35–66), copied in different fourteenth-century hands, also comes from Saint-Pierremont. At some time when it was at Saint-Germain-des-Prés it bore the shelf-number 446.3 (271.2 canceled), whereas the first section (fols. 1–34^v) was numbered 446.2 (406.2 canceled) (see fol. 1). On fols. 35–38 are copied four letters (dated 1282, 1307, and 1321) relating to Saint-Pierremont; beginning on fol. 39 (the conjugate of fol. 38) and continuing through fol. 62^v is a section copied in a distinctive bold black script with modest decorations in red (with additions in another fourteenth-century hand on fols. 57^v–58^r), consisting of documents relating to the lands of Saint-Pierremont; on fols. 63^v through 66^v (the final pages of the quire that begins on fol. 59) yet another early-fourteenth-century scribe copied privileges dating from 1272 through 1317.Google Scholar

⁹¹ ‘Anno domini. m^° cc^°. lxxxvij^°. Facta est quedam uisio mirabilis in claustro Grisei ordinis. in ciuitate tripolis. Monachus quidam dicebat. missam coram abbate suo. & vno ministro. presente. & inferret ablutionem / & communionem misse. apparuit quedam manus scribens in altari super corporale. litteris aureis in q'predictus monachus corpus dominj confecerat. Cedrus alta libani succidetur. & tripolis in breui destruetur. & acchon capietur. & mars saturnum superabit. & saturnus insidiabitur iouj. & vespertilio subiugabit dominum apum. Infra .XV. annos. erit vnus deus. & vna fides. & alter deus euanescet. Filij israel a captiuitate liberabuntur. Gens quedam ueniet sine capite. & tunc / ve clero. & tibi christianitas. Naui[cula] petri iactabitur in ualidis fluctibus. sed euadet. & dominabitur in fine. In mundo multa erunt prelia. & strages maxima. & fames valida. & hominum mortalitas. per loca. & regnorum mutationes. & terra barbarorum conuertetur. Ordines mendicorum. & alie secte quamplurime adnichilabuntur. Bestia occidentalis. & leo orientalis. vniuersum mundum subiugabunt. & tunc pax erit in toto orbe terrarum. & copia fructuum per quindecim annos erit. & tunc passagium erit commune ab omnibus fidelibus ultra aquas congregatas. ad terram sanctam. & vincent. & ciuitas iherusalem glorificabitur. & sepulchrum domini ab omnibus honorabitur. & in tanta transquillitate. noua audientur de antichristo. & alia dei mirabilia. Ergo vigilate.’ For the texts of the prophecy to which this copy is related, see Lerner, , Powers of Prophecy 214–15, 222–24; see also n. 7 above.Google Scholar

⁹² John 21.20: ‘et recubuit in cena super pectus eius.’ Cf. also John, 13.25.Google Scholar

⁹³ Rev. 5.1–8.1.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ Cf. Rev. 12.6: ‘Et mulier fugit in solitudinem, ubi habebat locum paratum a deo, ut ibi pascant eam diebus mille ducentis sexaginta’; and Rev. 12.9: ‘Et proiectus est draco ille magnus, serpens antiquus, qui vocatur Diabolus et Satanas.’Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Cf. Rev. 14.4: ‘Hi sunt, qui cum mulieribus non sunt coinquinati.’Google Scholar

⁹⁶ Cf. Rev. 20.7: ‘Et cum consummati fuerint mille anni solvetur Satanas de carcere suo, et exibit, et seducet gentes, quae sunt super quatuor angulos terrae, Gog, et Magog, et congregabit eos in praelium, quorum numerus est sicut arena maris.’Google Scholar

⁹⁷ Rev. 11.4: ‘Hi sunt duae olivae et duo candelabra in conspectu Domini terrae stantes.’Google Scholar

⁹⁸ Rev. 11.7–11, esp. 11, ‘Et post dies tres et dimidium, spiritus vitae a Deo intravit in eos.’Google Scholar

⁹⁹ Rev. 20.9: ‘Et descendit ignis a Deo de caelo, et devoravit eos.’Google Scholar

¹⁰⁰ John 10.16: ‘Et alias oves habeo, quae non sunt ex hoc ovili: et illas oportet me adducere, et vocem meam audient, et fiet unum ovile et unus pastor.’Google Scholar

¹⁰¹ Rom. 9.27: ‘Si fuerit numerus filiorum Israel tanquam arena maris, reliquiae salvae fient.’Google Scholar

¹⁰² The Saint-Pierremont text is the only one of the MSS we have consulted that mentions the king's superbia; the other MSS refer only to the superbia of the nobles.Google Scholar

¹⁰³ Rupescissa: ‘in sedicione regni imperare.’Google Scholar

¹⁰⁴ This word is omitted in the other MSS we have consulted.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁵ Rupescissa: ‘super abusu per usurpationem inter deiectionem reprimat eorum superbiam.’Google Scholar

¹⁰⁶ Rupescissa: ‘Et nisi faciat quod subditi sui, sicut Franchi vocantur, franchi sint, a Deo iudicatus.’ The passage & nisi faciat … scientiam Iohannis’ is lacking in the British MSS.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁷ Rupescissa: ‘secundum fratrem Columbinum et scientiam Iohannis euangeliste.’Google Scholar

¹⁰⁸ Rupescissa: eradicanda. Google Scholar

¹⁰⁹ Rupescissa: effugere. Google Scholar

¹¹⁰ Boutaric: transactis. Google Scholar

¹¹¹ Boutaric (‘Notices’ 236 n. 1) states that the text reads ipsos processuros, but the words seem clearly to be tps' processur’; note tps' (temporis) in the preceding line.Google Scholar

¹¹² Boutaric: incubuit. Google Scholar

¹¹³ Boutaric omits this word.Google Scholar

¹¹⁴ Boutaric: annum. Google Scholar

¹¹⁵ The index finger of a hand sketched in the space between the two columns points toward this date.Google Scholar

¹¹⁶ Boutaric: quare. Google Scholar

¹¹⁷ Boutaric: vero. Google Scholar

¹¹⁸ Boutaric omits this word.Google Scholar

¹¹⁹ Boutaric: terestri. Google Scholar

¹²⁰ 2 Thess. 2.8: ‘Et tunc revelabitur ille iniquus, quem Dominus Iesus interficiet spiritu oris sui.’Google Scholar

¹²¹ Cf. Rev. 14.1: ‘et ecce Agnus stabat supra montem Sion.’Google Scholar

¹²² Here and below, Boutaric reads tranquillitas. Google Scholar

¹²³ For a description of this MS, see Cenci, Cesare, Bibliotheca manuscripta ad Sacrum Conventum Assisiensem 1 (Assisi 1981) 226–28. The MS consists of several originally separate fascicles. The present text is preceded by an extract from the Revelation commentary of Alexander Minorita (fol. 184^v), and followed by extracts from the Pseudo-Joachite De semine scripturarum (fol. 185^r-v) and the Pseudo-Joachite Jeremiah commentary (fol. 185^v–186^r). These are all Franciscan eschatological texts copied at the same time and in the same hand; we posit a German hand because of the ‘w’ in ewangelium and elsewhere in these folios, and because Alexander Minorita's commentary and the De semine scripturarum both originated in Germany. The date of 1312 appears internally and also in the lower margin of fol. 185^v. We are grateful to Professor Richard Kieckhefer for his expert advice on editorial questions.Google Scholar

¹²⁴ Cf. Columbinus prophecy, Saint-Pierremont copy: ‘Cujus signaculi finis / cunctis grauior. & erit plenus doloribus. & angustiis. plusquam scribi / seu dici posset.’Google Scholar

¹²⁵ We cannot identify this reference.Google Scholar

¹²⁶ Cf. Rev. 7.9, 11.9.Google Scholar

¹²⁷ John 10.16.Google Scholar

¹²⁸ Cf. Luke 21.25: ‘Et erunt signa in sole … et in terris pressura gentium.’Google Scholar

¹²⁹ See Kerby-Fulton, and Daniel, , ‘English Joachimism’ (n. 21 above), which cites Joachim, Enchiridion super Apocalypsim (ed. Burger, Edward K.; Toronto 1986) 12, and also Joachim, Expositio in Apocalypsim (Venice 1527; repr. Frankfurt 1964) fol. 3^r-v.Google Scholar

¹³⁰ See Robert Lerner, E., ‘Antichrist and Antichrists in Joachim of Fiore,’ Speculum 60 (1985) 553–70, and esp. 562–65, for the centrality of the distinction in Joachim's Revelation commentary.Google Scholar

¹³¹ Arnold of Villanova, writing in 1306, implicitly criticized Joachim and sided with Columbinus regarding the relationship between the great Antichrist and Gog and Magog. In his Expositio super Apocalypsi he wrote, ‘Hic [Rev. 20.7] enim non describitur alia persecutio Ecclesiae Christi, quam illa quam fiet per Antichristum. Et illi expositores, qui sunt opinati quod post persecutionem Antichristi patietur Ecclesia durissimam persecutionem per Gog et Magog, decepti fuerunt….’ See Expositio super Apocalypsi, ed. Carreras, J. i Artau (Arnaldi de Villanova, Scripta spiritualia 1; Barcelona 1971) 257.Google Scholar

¹³² See, e.g., Joachim of Fiore, Liber de concordia Novi ac Veteris Testamenti (ed. Randolph Daniel, E., Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 73⁸; Philadelphia 1983) bk. III, 2, ch. 6, p. 304: Tempus autem quando hec erunt, dico manifeste quia prope est; diem autem et horam dominus ipse novit.’ (We slightly emend the editor's reading because of the clear echo of Matt. 24.36.) See also Grundmann, Herbert, Studien über Joachim von Fiore (Leipzig 1927; repr. Darmstadt 1966) 64–65, and Reeves, and Hirsch-Reich, , Figurae 136–38, showing that an unqualified prediction about the significance of the year 1260 in the Liber figurarum is exceptional and may constitute evidence that this work was not written by Joachim himself; see n. 38 above.Google Scholar

¹³³ See n. 56 above.Google Scholar

¹³⁴ On the seven seals in the Pseudo-Joachite Praemissiones, see Reeves, and Hirsch-Reich, , Figurae 280–81; for the seals in the Pseudo-Joachite Epistola subsequentium figurarum, see Bignami-Odier, , ‘Notes’ (n. 38 above) 225.Google Scholar

¹³⁵ See Lerner, , ‘Frederick II’ (n. 25 above).Google Scholar

¹³⁶ Attention to the significance of the year 1261 may have derived originally from Joachim himself. See his Liber de concordia, ed. Daniel, bk. II, 1, ch. 16, p. 100: ‘Igitur generationes ecclesie sub spatio triginta annorum singule sub singulis tricenariis accipiende sunt … maxime cum hoc ostendatur significatum in numero dierum quo … mulier amicta sole, que designat ecclesiam, mansit abscondita in solitudine a facie serpentis, accepto aut dubium, die pro anno et mille ducentis sexaginta diebus pro totidem annis.’ Note, however, that Joachim takes the ‘woman clothed with sun’ to be the Church, not the Blessed Virgin. At any rate, the jingle for 1261 (quoted in n. 38 above) was often spuriously attributed to Joachim: see Reeves, , Influence of Prophecy, as cited in n. 38 above. Since the Columbinus author accepts the twelve hundred and sixty days of Rev. 12.6 as twelve hundred and sixty years of ‘safety’ for Christianity, he is arguing within the same Joachite framework.Google Scholar