In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

127 Jan A. Aertsen 4 S Truth in the Middle Ages Its Essence and Power in Christian Thought Introduction 1 In the year 1270 a special disputation was held at the University of Paris, as usual in the season of Advent. Unlike the regular disputations, where the master fixed the question and left it to advanced students to discuss it, in this case the question was determined by the audience and the master had to handle it. Consequently, such kind of disputation could deal with “each topic possible” (de quolibet). We are in possession of a reportatio , a report of the quaestio quodlibetalis concerned.1 The question presented to the master is the following one: “Is truth stronger than wine, king, and woman?” The formulation of this question is not really original. It is taken, as the master observes in his answer, from the apocryphal biblical book III Esdras, c. 3–4.2 Arguments are advanced which play the last three candidates’ trump cards. Wine seems to be stronger, because it changes man most strikingly. We all know: in vino veritas. The king seems to be stronger, because he can induce a person to face what is most difficult, namely, exposing oneself to mortal danger. 1. Thomas Aquinas, Quaestiones de quodlibet XII, q. 13, a. 1 (Opera omnia, Leonine edition , vol. 25/2 [1996], 414–15 [hereafter, “Leonine ed.” with volume and page numbers]). For the dating of this disputation, see Jean-Pierre Torrell, Saint Thomas Aquinas, vol. 1, The Person and His Work, rev. ed., trans. by Robert Royal (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2005), 210–12. 2. Quodl. XII, q. 13, a. 1 (Leonine ed., 25:414): “Dicendum quod hec est questio proposita iuuenibus dissoluenda in Esdra.” Unless stated otherwise, the translations are mine. 128   Jan A. Aertsen But then a fortiori woman seems to be stronger, because she dominates even kings.3 The master who has to solve the quaestio is Thomas Aquinas. Imperturbable as usual, he replies that the four things mentioned as such are not comparable because they do not belong to the same genus.4 Nevertheless , he tries to make sense of the question, and in this effort he proves to be a master of distinction. Only if we consider wine, woman, king, and truth with regard to one effect in which they concur (concurrunt) will it be possible for us to compare them. According to Thomas there does exist such a common effect. He signifies it with the expression that he used to describe the power of wine: “the change of man.” That which changes a human being can be either corporeal or sensible or spiritual. In the physical domain wine is the strongest, whereas at the level of sensitive appetite woman is. With respect to the intelligible we have to make a distinction between the practical and the theoretical (speculativum). In the domain of political practice the king is the most powerful, but in the field of theory truth is the strongest.5 Thus each of the four candidates is the strongest in its own domain. There is, however, a hierarchical order among the different levels: the corporeal powers are subordinate to the sensitive ones, and the sensitive ones are inferior to the spiritual ones; in the last domain the practical is subordinate to the theoretical. So Thomas can conclude: “Therefore, truth is in an absolute sense (simpliciter) more dignified, more excellent and stronger.”6 3. Ibid.: “Et uidetur quod uinum, quia inmutat maxime hominem.—Item, quod rex, quia pellit hominem ad id quod est difficillimum, scilicet ad hoc quod se exponat homo periculo mortis.—Item, quod mulier, quia dominatur etiam regibus.” 4. Ibid. (Leonine ed., 25:415): “Sciendum igitur quod, si consideremus ista quatuor secundum se, scilicet uinum, regem et mulierem et ueritatem, non sunt comparabilia, quia non sunt unius generic.” 5. Ibid.: “Tamen, si considerentur per comparationem ad aliquem effectum, concurrunt in unum, et sic possunt comparari. Hic autem effectus in quem concurrunt et conueniunt et possunt, est inmutatio cordis humani. Quid ergo inter ista magis inmutet cor hominis, uidendum est. Sciendum est igitur quod inmutatiuum hominis quoddam est corporale, et aliud est animale; et hoc est duplex, scilicet sensibile et intelligibile; intelligibile etiam est duplex, scilicet practicum et speculatiuum. Inter ea autem que pertinent ad inmutatiua naturaliter secundum dispositionem corporis habet excellenciam uinum, quod ‘facit per talenta loqui’; inter ea que pertinent ad inmutandum appetitum sensitiuum, excellentius est delectatio, precipue circa uenerea, et sic mulier...

Share