Seminary Tuition in the Thirteenth Century

The sale of bib­li­cal teach­ing is si­mony. This is not true just in Sunday School or per­sonal discipleship, but even in the high­est lev­els of the acad­emy. As I men­tioned in the pre­vi­ous mes­sage, sem­i­nary should be free and sem­i­nary tu­ition is si­mony.

Nat­u­rally, it’s worth ask­ing the ques­tion whether those who had a well-de­vel­oped doc­trine of si­mony agreed with this con­clu­sion. With­out giv­ing too much of a spoiler, the an­swer is, “yes, it does.”

How Did Uni­ver­si­ties Come About?§

It will be help­ful to be­gin with the ori­gin and rise of the uni­ver­si­ties. The schools that emerged in the Mid­dle Ages were so di­verse that they re­sist def­i­ni­tion.¹Verger, “Pat­terns,” 45. This makes some ques­tions on the topic hard to an­swer. How many there were there? The an­swer is anywhere from “doz­ens” to a hand­ful.²Ibid., 62–65 pro­vides a list. The main ones are Bo­lo­gna, Paris, Ox­ford, the Eng­lish off­shoot of Paris. When did they start? The an­swer is anywhere from the elev­enth cen­tury to the thir­teenth cen­tury. These had clearer def­i­ni­tions over time, even­tu­ally re­quir­ing pa­pal or im­pe­rial en­dorse­ment to achieve of­fi­cial sta­tus.³Cob­ban, The Me­dieval Uni­ver­si­ties, 32.

The cur­ric­u­lum of me­dieval uni­ver­si­ties be­gan with the seven lib­eral arts: the triv­ium (gram­mar, logic, and rhet­o­ric) and the quad­riv­ium (arith­me­tic, geom­e­try, mu­sic, and as­tron­omy). Upon mas­ter­ing this pre­par­a­tory foun­da­tion, stu­dents could ad­vance to one of the three higher fac­ul­ties: med­i­cine, law (both canon and civil), or theol­ogy, “queen of the sci­ences.”

At Paris that Pe­ter Lom­bard com­pleted the Sen­tences (ca. 1155–57),⁴The Sen­ten­tiae are var­i­ously dated. The range here fol­lows the re­con­struc­tion in Rose­mann, Pe­ter Lom­bard, 55. a work con­sist­ing prin­ci­pally of cat­e­go­rized pro­nounce­ments com­piled from church fa­thers. It was the stan­dard sys­tem­atic theol­ogy text­book of the Mid­dle Ages, and there are ap­prox­i­mately 1,400 known com­men­tar­ies writ­ten on it.⁵Ghellinck, “Re­view of Steg­mül­ler’s Rep­er­to­rium,” 888; cf. Steg­mül­ler, Rep­er­to­rium. It the most fre­quently an­a­lyzed work of Chris­tian lit­er­a­ture out­side the Bible it­self.⁶Rose­mann, The Story of a Great Me­dieval Book, 14. Be­cause he treated si­mony, that means many who com­mented on the Sen­tences did as well.

Teach­ing Li­censes§

Me­dieval uni­ver­si­ties shaped the doc­trine of si­mony not only in pro­vid­ing the ac­a­demic arena for its for­ma­tion, but also in sup­ply­ing an il­lu­mi­nat­ing case study in the econ­omy of re­li­gion. At the lead­ing schools, dif­fer­ent mech­a­nisms of sup­port yielded cor­re­spond­ingly dif­fer­ent in­sti­tu­tional forms. The school at Bo­lo­gna was largely stu­dent-run be­cause the mas­ters took their pay di­rectly from the stu­dents.⁷Cob­ban, The Me­dieval Uni­ver­si­ties, 65–66. The com­mune, the cor­po­ra­tion of cit­i­zens that gov­erned Bo­lo­gna, even­tu­ally took over the bur­den by sal­ary­ing the doc­tors out of civic funds.⁸Ibid., 66–67. The school at Paris, by con­trast, evolved a mag­is­te­rial gov­er­nance be­cause fi­nan­cial lev­er­age cen­tered on in­cep­tion, that cer­e­mony by which a newly li­censed teacher was for­mally in­cor­po­rated into the guild of mas­ters.⁹Rash­dall, The Uni­ver­si­ties of Eu­rope, 1.284–87; cf. Post, “Alex­an­der III, the Li­cen­tia Do­cendi,” 266. These pri­mary mech­a­nisms, how­ever, hardly ex­hausted the fi­nan­cial pic­ture. Any me­dieval uni­ver­sity re­lied on a va­ri­ety of sources of rev­enue.¹⁰See Gieysz­tor, “Man­age­ment and Re­sources,” 133–36 for a de­tailed over­view.

The sale of teach­ing li­censes was a pri­mary point of con­ten­tion. The li­cen­tia do­cendi cer­ti­fied an ac­a­demic pro­fi­ciency that per­mit­ted one to in­struct oth­ers in the schools. Though con­tem­po­raries did not broadly la­bel the sale of teach­ing li­censes “si­mony,”¹¹So As­te­sanus, cit­ing Gof­fre­dus and Hos­ti­en­sis: “I an­swer that it may not; yet there is no si­mony there […] rather there is the crime of ex­tor­tion.” As­te­sanus of Asti, Summa de ca­si­bus, VI, tit. 55, q. 8 (fol. 170r). some have termed it scho­las­tic si­mony on ac­count of the sim­i­lar­ity to si­mony in or­di­na­tions.¹²Post, “Alex­an­der III, the Li­cen­tia Do­cendi,” pas­sim. The shared ap­peal to Mat­thew 10:8Matthew 10:8Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons: freely you received, freely give. is also no­table.¹³E.g., “what is ac­quired by the gift of heav­enly grace ought not to be put up for sale, but ought to be made avail­able freely to all, that what is writ­ten may be ful­filled: ‘Freely you have re­ceived, freely give.’” Alex­an­der III, Ep. JL 12096 (PL 200:840C). Alex­an­der III re­peat­edly pro­hib­ited the sale of teach­ing li­censes, most com­pre­hen­sively in the Third Lat­eran Coun­cil (1179), canon 18.¹⁴Third Lat­eran Coun­cil (1179), can. 18 (Mansi 22:228A–B). Liber ex­tra, 5.5, De mag­is­tris—two ti­tles af­ter 5.3, De si­mo­nia—would be ded­i­cated to this topic. Alex­an­der had first taken up the cause on March 16 of 1166 or 1167,¹⁵Alex­an­der III, Ep. JL 11329 (PL 200:440D); for the date and its iden­ti­fi­ca­tion as Alex­an­der’s first such let­ter, see Post, “Alex­an­der III, the Li­cen­tia Do­cendi,” 258n15. and al­most three dec­ades ear­lier, canon 17 of the Coun­cil of West­min­ster (1138) had con­demned the sim­i­lar prac­tice of a mas­ter’s let­ting out his school for an­other to teach in.¹⁶Coun­cil of West­min­ster (1138), can. 17 (Mansi 21:514A).

Alex­an­der con­nected the sale of teach­ing li­censes to a broader prin­ci­ple that knowl­edge it­self should not be sold.¹⁷E.g., “Suit­able and let­tered men who wish to teach must be per­mit­ted to gov­ern schools with­out any mo­lesta­tion or ex­ac­tion what­so­ever, lest knowl­edge should here­after seem to be set out for a price, that knowl­edge which ought to be be­stowed upon each man freely.” De­nifle and Chate­lain, eds., Char­tu­lar­ium Uni­ver­si­tatis Pa­ri­si­en­sis, pars in­tro., no. 4; cf. X 5.5.3. His rule made fit­ness, not pay­ment, the con­di­tion of the li­cense. In the afore­men­tioned canon 18 of Third Lat­eran, Alex­an­der also re­quired that cathe­dral schools staff a ben­e­ficed mas­ter in or­der that he might pro­vide free ed­u­ca­tion to the clergy and the poor.¹⁸Third Lat­eran Coun­cil (1179), can. 18 (Mansi 22:228A). The con­vic­tion be­hind this de­mand was al­ready cur­rent and would soon harden into a com­mon dic­tum: “Knowl­edge is a gift of God, there­fore it can­not be sold” (sci­en­tia do­num Dei est, unde vendi non po­test).¹⁹See Post et al., “The Me­dieval Her­itage” for an ex­ten­sive sur­vey of the tra­di­tion. Even in the early twelfth cen­tury, Pe­ter Abe­lard, ashamed to beg, took up teach­ing again and lived on what his stu­dents sup­plied of their own ac­cord. Abe­lard, Hist. calam. 26–27. By Alex­an­der’s de­cree, schools such as the one at Paris—then the cathe­dral school of Notre-Dame—were, at least os­ten­si­bly, free of charge.²⁰Cob­ban, The Me­dieval Uni­ver­si­ties, 81; Verger, “Teach­ers,” 151.

In the fifth book of the Liber ex­tra, ti­tles three and five con­tain the bulk of the de­tail on this topic. As one sev­en­teenth-cen­tury trea­tise sum­ma­rizes, the Liber ex­tra for­bids as si­mony “mas­ters and preach­ers to teach for money.”²¹Rid­ley, A View of the Ci­vile and Ec­cle­si­as­ti­call Law, 76. A num­ber of com­men­ta­tors who took up these ti­tles ad­dressed re­quests for vol­un­tary gifts in the con­text of teach­ing. A mas­ter al­ready pro­vided for by the church could ac­cept a vol­un­tary gift but not re­quest it, es­pe­cially not of the clergy of his own church or the poor; a mas­ter with­out suf­fi­cient sup­port might ask the rich to con­trib­ute, and some ex­tended even that al­low­ance to the mas­ter al­ready pro­vided for.²²E.g., Rich­ard of Mid­dle­ton, In Sent. IV, d. 25, a. 3, q. 2 (p. 386b); Hos­ti­en­sis, Summa au­rea, ad X 5.5 (fol. 542v); As­te­sanus of Asti, Summa de ca­si­bus, VI, tit. 55, q. 8 (fol. 169v). For the ex­ten­sion and the gloss as Mid­dle­ton and As­te­sanus re­port it, Pa­lu­danus, In Sent. IV, d. 25, q. 5 (p. 320b). How­ever, even these con­ces­sions were not uni­ver­sally ac­cepted.²³E.g., Wil­liam of Saint-Amour, De va­lido men­di­cante, 85; 87.

Teach­ing It­self§

Alex­an­der’s man­date, how­ever well pro­vided for else­where, came up against the lim­its of avail­able re­sources in Paris. Alex­an­der was forced to make a spe­cial ex­cep­tion for the chan­cel­lor of Notre-Dame in 1174, and the prob­lem was so per­sis­tent that In­no­cent III was still fight­ing the is­sue in 1212 and 1213.²⁴Bald­win, Mas­ters, Princes, and Mer­chants, 1.122–23; cf. Bald­win, Paris, 1200, 183. Ac­cord­ingly, the ques­tion fell to the Pa­ri­sian schol­ars, who weighed not only which ac­a­demic fees were morally un­be­com­ing but, more point­edly, which crossed the line into si­mony. The most pro­nounced de­lib­er­a­tions is­sued from Pe­ter the Chanter and his cir­cle, cul­mi­nat­ing in Rob­ert of Cour­son.²⁵See Bald­win, Mas­ters, Princes, and Mer­chants, 1.124; cf. Bald­win, Paris, 1200, 184. Rob­ert, as we have al­ready seen, would go on to serve as the pa­pal leg­ate who gave the Uni­ver­sity of Paris its first stat­utes in 1215. While not all of his con­clu­sions made their way into those rules of op­er­a­tion, it is rea­son­able to sus­pect that they would have been es­pe­cially re­spected on this ac­count.²⁶See Ken­nedy, “Rob­ert Cour­son on Pen­ance,” 292.

The Pa­ri­sians con­ceded that knowl­edge it­self could not be sold, but con­tended that the la­bor of teach­ing could be. This was fur­ther qual­i­fied, how­ever, by the sub­ject mat­ter. While the la­bor of teach­ing the lib­eral arts could be sold law­fully, the la­bor of teach­ing theol­ogy could not, since theol­ogy is di­vine truth, and to sell such a spir­i­tual thing is si­mony. The same re­stric­tion ex­tended to moral phi­los­o­phy, which they like­wise classed as di­vine truth. In these cases, one who had no in­come was per­mit­ted to re­ceive vol­un­tary do­na­tions from his stu­dents, but any al­ready ben­e­ficed by the church for the sake of in­struc­tion com­mit­ted si­mony if he ac­cepted any fur­ther do­na­tion from his stu­dents.²⁷See Bald­win, Mas­ters, Princes, and Mer­chants, 1.124–27; cf. Bald­win, Paris, 1200, 184. Though schol­ars of the civil law at Bo­lo­gna showed lit­tle cor­re­spond­ing in­ter­est in theol­ogy,²⁸Post et al., “The Me­dieval Her­itage,” 207. they reached com­pa­ra­ble con­clu­sions for their own dis­ci­pline.²⁹Ibid., 206, 206n32. They main­tained that law was it­self a di­vine sci­ence, no less sa­cred than theol­ogy.³⁰Ibid., 209n43.

Canon 11 of the Fourth Lat­eran Coun­cil (1215) re­corded that Alex­an­der’s de­cree had been but lit­tle ob­served, and ac­cord­ingly re­it­er­ated and ex­tended it.³¹Fourth Lat­eran Coun­cil (1215), can. 11 (Mansi 22:999B–C). Even with this re­newed in­sis­tence, the pro­vi­sion of ben­e­fices for free in­struc­tion con­tin­ued to go un­en­forced well into the thir­teenth cen­tury and be­yond.³²Post, “Mas­ters’ Sal­aries and Stu­dent-Fees,” 196–98. The fate of the de­cree, how­ever, need not de­tain us. This ep­i­sode con­cerns us be­cause it ac­counts for what ap­pears in the writ­ings on si­mony of the cen­turies that fol­lowed: echoes of the doc­tri­nal con­clu­sions forged in the pre­mier theo­log­i­cal in­sti­tu­tion at the turn of the thir­teenth cen­tury.

Per­haps 1215 gives us the most in­ter­est­ing mark­ers to con­sider. In that year, Rob­ert of Cour­son pro­mul­gated his stat­utes for Paris, the first reg­u­la­tions to des­ig­nate the stu­dium a uni­ver­si­tas,³³Bald­win, Paris, 1200, 211. and the Fourth Lat­eran Coun­cil ex­plic­itly sided with Lom­bard on a trin­i­tar­ian de­bate, thereby se­cur­ing the Sen­tences as the stan­dard for theo­log­i­cal ed­u­ca­tion.³⁴See Rose­mann, Pe­ter Lom­bard, 119.

Teach­ing§

How far the fore­go­ing pro­scrip­tions reach de­pends on how we in­ter­pret the vo­cab­u­lary of “preach­ing” and “the word of God.” Taken nar­rowly, they gov­ern only the for­mal ac­tiv­ity which takes place in a wor­ship ser­vice or dis­tinctly evan­ge­lis­tic en­coun­ters, but many au­thors seemed to ap­ply these terms to doc­tri­nal in­struc­tion more gen­er­ally. Re­gard­less, some au­thors were ex­plicit in their con­dem­na­tion of the sale of teach­ing.

Ac­cord­ing to Ge­of­frey of Poi­tiers, the one who teaches theol­ogy for a price sells the word of God and falls un­der the curse of Jer­e­miah 48:10Jeremiah 48:10Cursed be he who does the work of Jehovah negligently, and cursed be he who keeps back his sword from blood. (“Cursed is he who does the work of the Lord fraud­u­lently”).³⁵“It is asked con­cern­ing the mas­ter who teaches for pence, whether he in­curs this curse [the male­dic­tion of Jer­e­miah 48:10Jeremiah 48:10Cursed be he who does the work of Jehovah negligently, and cursed be he who keeps back his sword from blood., un­der dis­cus­sion in the sur­round­ing ques­tions]. We say that he does not, if he does not do it out of av­a­rice or vain­glory. But of theo­lo­gians it is said oth­er­wise, since they are pub­lic per­sons [pub­lice per­sone], whose lec­tur­ing bears wit­ness to the truth. There­fore, since they are teach­ers of the word of God, it is not law­ful for them to teach for a re­ward, lest they be found sell­ers of the word of God. […] Whence the Lord in Mi­cah [3:11], re­count­ing other sins, says: ‘Their priests taught for hire.’” Ge­of­frey of Poi­tiers, Summa, fol. 39va; cf. Bald­win, Mas­ters, Princes, and Mer­chants, 2.86n69. This was first fully ex­pressed by Rob­ert of Cour­son in his Summa.³⁶“As to what Sol­o­mon says, ‘Do not sell wis­dom, doc­trine, un­der­stand­ing,’ we say that he is speak­ing of the un­der­stand­ing, doc­trine, and wis­dom of spir­i­tual or moral things, which pro­ceed from the Spirit of wis­dom, un­der­stand­ing, and knowl­edge; and these can­not be sold, as we have said be­fore, by right.” Rob­ert of Cour­son, Summa, 10.3 (fol. 47va); cf. Bald­win, Mas­ters, Princes, and Mer­chants, 2.86n70. There, he con­tended that not only theol­ogy, but all moral phi­los­o­phy pro­ceeds from the Spirit of wis­dom, and there­fore con­sti­tutes si­mony just as sell­ing Scrip­ture it­self.³⁷“Just as there is si­mony in the sale of the manna, which sig­ni­fies sa­cred Scrip­ture, so by the sale of the lit­tle mea­sure of flour car­ried in their cloaks out of the land of Egypt [Exod. 12:34Exodus 12:34And the people took their dough before it was leavened, their kneading troughs being bound up in their clothes on their shoulders.], which sig­ni­fies the moral teach­ings of the phi­los­o­phers, si­mony is com­mit­ted.” Rob­ert of Cour­son, Summa, 10.4 (fol. 47va); cf. Bald­win, Mas­ters, Princes, and Mer­chants, 2.86–87n71. A cen­tury later, Pe­ter Pa­lu­danus re­layed this as the re­ceived opin­ion, dis­tin­guish­ing be­tween that which comes from man’s spirit and that which comes from the Holy Spirit. Though one can­not sell knowl­edge it­self, one can charge for the act of teach­ing. How­ever, when it comes to mat­ters of theol­ogy—rev­e­la­tion that arises only from the Spirit—one can­not charge.³⁸“But there are other acts for which it is law­ful to re­ceive [pay­ment] for la­bor, such as for teach­ing and other spir­i­tual things from a cre­ated spirit. But for teach­ing it­self, some say that it is not si­mony, be­cause it is not by re­la­tion to the Holy Spirit, but to the hu­man spirit; oth­ers say that it is. But re­gard­ing theol­ogy, it seems to be si­mony.” Pa­lu­danus, In Sent. IV, d. 25, q. 5 (p. 320b). Pe­ter Au­riol ex­plained this dis­tinc­tion:

But if we take a freely given grace [gra­tia gra­tis data; i.e., a spir­i­tual gift]—for ex­am­ple preach­ing, teach­ing, and the like—ei­ther it will be taken with re­spect to the in­trin­sic act, and here no sale takes place, for I can­not sell you the habit of my knowl­edge; or it is taken with re­spect to the ex­trin­sic act—for ex­am­ple the pro­jec­tion of the voice, the move­ment of the body, and the like—and thus in such things a sale does in­deed fall out and have its place; and in this way teach­ing, coun­sel, tes­ti­mony, and the like are sold, and all of these turn out to be sin­ful.³⁹Au­riol, In Sent. IV, d. 25, q. un., a. 2 (p. 166a).

While this pro­hi­bi­tion on the sale of doc­tri­nal in­struc­tion was only oc­ca­sion­ally stated so di­rectly, it is in­ti­mated fre­quently by oth­ers who specif­i­cally ex­cepted in­struc­tion in the lib­eral arts from those things which must not be sold, for “even the hea­then may law­fully teach such arts.”⁴⁰Aqui­nas, Quod­li­bet, VIII, q. 6, a. 1 (p. 175). In each of these cases, the pro­hi­bi­tion of mer­chan­dis­ing theol­ogy, the queen of the sci­ences, is sim­ply pre­sumed by the ex­plicit per­mis­sion to en­gage in com­merce with her hand­maid­ens.⁴¹E.g., Aqui­nas, In Sent. IV, d. 25, q. 3, a. 2, qc. 2, ad 8; Aqui­nas, Quod­li­bet, VIII, q. 6, a. 1 (p. 175).

For Wyc­liffe, not only did proper im­i­ta­tion of Christ re­quire teach­ing freely,⁴²“The faith­ful ought to be mind­ful that it is more blessed to give than to re­ceive, and in im­i­ta­tion of Christ to give freely and gen­er­ously spir­i­tual teach­ing.” Wyc­liffe, De fun­da­cione sec­ta­rum, cap. 2 (p. 21). but the sale of teach­ing was a “nearer and more hate­ful si­mony” than the sale of church of­fice.⁴³Ibid., cap. 11 (p. 56). In a ver­nac­u­lar trea­tise on the seven deadly sins that has been at­trib­uted to him, we see this same con­ten­tion:

But men that should be pro­fes­sors of the sci­ence [knowl­edge] of God sin many ways about this sci­ence. As some men hide this trea­sure and deal it not about; and yet, the more that it is dealt, the more it in­creases. And this is much more sin than to hide gold. […] And so, with beg­ging, and pride of their speech, they sell God’s word, as one would sell an ox. Nev­er­the­less, Christ teaches that, since his sci­ence is freely given to him, it should be freely dealt. And be­cause the tell­ing of God’s law would most profit his Church, the fiend is full busy to hin­der this ghostly [spir­i­tual] profit.⁴⁴Wyc­liffe, Of the Seven Deadly Sins, cap. 3 (p. 123).

Bib­li­og­ra­phy§

• Abe­lard, Pe­ter. His­to­ria ca­la­mi­ta­tum. In Petri Abae­lardi op­era hac­tenus se­or­sim ed­ita, edited by Vic­tor Cousin, Charles Jour­dain, and Eu­gène De­spois, vol. 1, 3–37. Paris: Du­rand, 1849.
• Alex­an­der III. Epis­to­lae et priv­i­le­gia. In Pa­tro­lo­gia La­tina, edited by Jacques-Paul Migne, vol. 200, 69–1320. Paris: J.-P. Migne, 1855.
• Aqui­nas, Thomas. Quod­li­bet. Edi­tio ter­tia Tau­ri­nen­sis. Vol. 5. Tu­rin: Ex Of­fi­cina Petri Ma­ri­etti, 1921.
• ———. Scrip­tum su­per li­bros Sen­ten­tiarum. Vol. 13. Venice: Jo­seph Bet­ti­nelli, 1750.
• As­te­sanus of Asti. Summa de ca­si­bus con­sci­en­tiae. Edited by Bar­to­lo­meo Bel­lati. Venice: Jo­hannes de Colo­nia and Jo­hannes Man­then de Gher­ret­zem, 1478.
• Au­riol, Pe­ter. Com­men­tar­ius in li­bros Sen­ten­tiarum. Rome: Ex Ty­po­gra­phia Aloisij Zan­netti, 1605.
• Bald­win, John W. Mas­ters, Princes, and Mer­chants: The So­cial Views of Pe­ter the Chanter and His Cir­cle. Prince­ton, NJ: Prince­ton Uni­ver­sity Press, 1970.
• ———. Paris, 1200. Stan­ford, CA: Stan­ford Uni­ver­sity Press, 2010.
• Cob­ban, Alan B. The Me­dieval Uni­ver­si­ties: Their De­vel­op­ment and Or­ga­ni­za­tion. Lon­don: Me­thuen, 1975.
• Coun­cil of West­min­ster (1138). In Sa­cro­rum con­cil­io­rum nova et am­plis­sima col­lec­tio, edited by Gio­vanni Do­menico Mansi, vol. 21, 507–518. Venice: An­to­nio Zatta, 1776. Lega­tine coun­cil held at West­min­ster, De­cem­ber 1138; Mansi heads it Con­cil­ium Lon­do­ni­ense.
• De­nifle, Hein­rich, and Émile Chate­lain, eds. Char­tu­lar­ium Uni­ver­si­tatis Pa­ri­si­en­sis. Vol. 1. Paris: De­lalain, 1889.
• Fourth Lat­eran Coun­cil (1215). In Sa­cro­rum con­cil­io­rum nova et am­plis­sima col­lec­tio, edited by Gio­vanni Do­menico Mansi, vol. 22, 981–1068. Venice: An­to­nio Zatta, 1778.
• Ge­of­frey of Poi­tiers. Summa. Paris, Bib­lio­thèque na­tionale de France, MS lat. 3143.
• Ghellinck, Jo­seph de. “Re­view of Rep­er­to­rium com­men­tar­i­o­rum in Sen­ten­tias Petri Lom­bardi.” Re­vue belge de Philolo­gie et d’His­toire 27, no. 3–4 (1949): 888–892.
• Gieysz­tor, Alek­san­der. “Man­age­ment and Re­sources.” In A His­tory of the Uni­ver­sity in Eu­rope, edited by Wal­ter Rüegg and Hilde de Rid­der-Symoens, vol. 1: Uni­ver­si­ties in the Mid­dle Ages, 108–143. Cam­bridge: Cam­bridge Uni­ver­sity Press, 1992.
• Greg­ory IX. Liber ex­tra. Edited by Emil Fried­berg. Vol. 2. Leip­zig: Bern­hard Tauch­nitz, 1881.
• Hos­ti­en­sis. Summa au­rea. Lyon, 1537.
• Ken­nedy, V. L. “Rob­ert Cour­son on Pen­ance.” Me­di­ae­val Stud­ies 7 (1945): 291–336.
• Pa­lu­danus, Pe­ter. Com­men­tar­ius in li­bros Sen­ten­tiarum. Sal­a­manca: An­dreas à Por­to­na­riis, 1552.
• Post, Gaines. “Alex­an­der III, the Li­cen­tia Do­cendi, and the Rise of the Uni­ver­si­ties.” In An­niver­sary Es­says in Me­di­ae­val His­tory by Stu­dents of Charles Homer Hask­ins, edited by Charles H. Tay­lor and John L. La Monte, 255–277. Bos­ton: Houghton Mif­flin, 1929.
• ———. “Mas­ters’ Sal­aries and Stu­dent-Fees in the Me­di­ae­val Uni­ver­si­ties.” Spec­u­lum 7, no. 2 (1932): 181–198.
• Post, Gaines, Ki­mon Gio­cari­nis, and Rich­ard Kay. “The Me­dieval Her­itage of a Hu­man­is­tic Ideal: ‘Sci­en­tia do­num Dei est, unde vendi non po­test.’” Tra­di­tio 11 (1955): 195–234.
• Rash­dall, Hast­ings. The Uni­ver­si­ties of Eu­rope in the Mid­dle Ages. Edited by F. M. Pow­icke and A. B. Em­den. New ed. Lon­don: Ox­ford Uni­ver­sity Press, 1936.
• Rich­ard of Mid­dle­ton. Com­men­tar­ius in li­bros Sen­ten­tiarum. Vol. 4. Bres­cia, 1591.
• Rid­ley, Thomas. A View of the Ci­vile and Ec­cle­si­as­ti­call Law. Lon­don: Printed for the Com­pany of Sta­tion­ers, 1607.
• Rob­ert of Cour­son. Summa. Paris, Bib­lio­thèque na­tionale de France, MS lat. 14524.
• Rose­mann, Phil­ipp W. Pe­ter Lom­bard. Great Me­dieval Thinkers. New York: Ox­ford Uni­ver­sity Press, 2004.
• ———. The Story of a Great Me­dieval Book: Pe­ter Lom­bard’s Sen­tences. Pe­ter­bor­ough, ON: Broad­view Press, 2007.
• Steg­mül­ler, Fried­rich. Rep­er­to­rium Com­men­tar­i­o­rum in Sen­ten­tias Petri Lom­bardi. Würz­burg: Schön­ingh, 1947.
• Third Lat­eran Coun­cil (1179). In Sa­cro­rum con­cil­io­rum nova et am­plis­sima col­lec­tio, edited by Gio­vanni Do­menico Mansi, vol. 22, 210–467. Venice: An­to­nio Zatta, 1778.
• Verger, Jacques. “Pat­terns.” In A His­tory of the Uni­ver­sity in Eu­rope, edited by Wal­ter Rüegg and Hilde de Rid­der-Symoens, vol. 1: Uni­ver­si­ties in the Mid­dle Ages, 35–76. Cam­bridge: Cam­bridge Uni­ver­sity Press, 1992.
• ———. “Teach­ers.” In A His­tory of the Uni­ver­sity in Eu­rope, edited by Wal­ter Rüegg and Hilde de Rid­der-Symoens, vol. 1: Uni­ver­si­ties in the Mid­dle Ages, 144–170. Cam­bridge: Cam­bridge Uni­ver­sity Press, 1992.
• Wil­liam of Saint-Amour. De va­lido men­di­cante. In Mag­is­tri Guil­lielmi de Sancto Amore op­era om­nia, 80–87. Con­stance [Paris], 1632. Com­posed 1255.
• Wyc­liffe, John. De fun­da­cione sec­ta­rum. In Polem­i­cal Works in Latin, edited by Ru­dolf Bud­den­sieg, Wyc­lif So­ci­ety, vol. 1, 1–80. Lon­don: Trüb­ner & Co., 1883.
• ———. Of the Seven Deadly Sins. In Se­lect Eng­lish Works of John Wyc­lif, edited by Thomas Ar­nold, vol. 3, 119–167. Ox­ford: Clar­en­don Press, 1871.