Petrus Helias's Summa on Cicero's De inventione

PETRUS HELIAS'S SUMMA ON CICERO'S DE INVENTIONE By KARIN MARGARETA FREDBORG Petrus Helias is well known as a grammarian since his commentary, or rather summa, of Priscian's lnstitutiones Grammaticae enjoyed a lasting popularity in the Middle Ages. However, his rhetorical summa, too, should be taken into consideration, since it was widely read in the Middle Ages, and was as popular as the earlier, rhetorical commentaries by William (of Champeaux ?) and Thierry of Chartres (from the turn of the century and the 1130s).1 We do not know much about Peter's life, but according to William of Tyre he came from Poitiers and was a pupil of Thierry of Chartres; in both cases, the information is substantiated by other sources.2 Doctrinally 1 The following abbreviations will be employed: CIMAGL = Cahiers de Îinsiitut du moyen-âge grec et latin (Copenhagen). Menegaldus = Menegaldus in Primam Rethoricam Ciceronis, Cologne, Erzbisch. Diöz.-u. Dombibliothek, MS 197. Petrus Helias, Super Priscianum = Petrus Helias, Petrus Helias Summa super Priscianum, ed. Leo Reilly, Studies and Texts (Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies) 113 (Toronto, 1993). Priscian = Prisciani Grammalici Caesariensis Institulionum Grammaticarum libri 18, ed. Martin Hertz, Grammatici Latini, ed. Heinrick Keil, 2-3 (Leipzig, 1855-59; repr. Hildesheim, 1961). Thierry, Rhetorical Commentaries = The Latin Rhetorical Commentaries by Thierry of Chartres, ed. Karin Margarete Fredborg, Studies and Texts (Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies) 84 (Toronto, 1988). Victorinus. ed. Halm = Q. Fabii Laurentii Victorini Explanationum in Rhetoricam M. Tullii Ciceronis libri duo, in Rhetories Latini Minores, ed. Karl Halm (Leipzig, 1863), 153-304. Victorinus, ed. Ippolito = Marii Victorini Explanationes in Ciceronis Rhetoricam, ed. A. Ippolito , CCL 132 (Turnhout, 2006). Ward, Ciceronian Rhetoric = John O. Ward, Ciceronian Rhetoric in Treatise, Scholion and Commentary, Typologie des sources du Moyen Age occidental 51 (Turnhout, 1995). William = texts in Karin Margareta Fredborg, "The Commentaries on Cicero's De inventione and Rhetorica ad Herennium by William of Champeaux," CIMAGL 17 (1976): 1-39. In this article, I am indebted to the kindness of Mary Sirridge, and to John O. Ward, who made the study of Petrus Helias's rhetoric possible in the first place. My earlier study, "Petrus Helias on Rhetoric," CIMAGL 13 (1974): 31-41, is long out of print, and certainly out of date since Ward, Ciceronian Rhetoric; Petrus Helias, Super Priscianum; Thierry, Rhetorical Commentaries; and The Rhetoric of Cicero in Rs Medieval and Early Renaissance Commentary Tradition, ed. Virginia Cox and John O. Ward (Leiden, 2006). 2 See Robert B. C. Huygens, "Guillaume de Tyr étudiant. Un chapitre (XIX. 12) de son 'Histoire' retrouvé," Latomus 21 (1962): 811-29, at 822; Margaret Gibson, in "The Summa of Petrus Helias on Priscianus Minor," ed. James J. Toison with an introduction by Mar- 140TRADITIO he was influenced by Thierry in both grammar and rhetoric, as well as by the twelfth-century humanist, philosopher, and grammarian, William of Conches.3 Peter's school was sought by such ambitious students as John of Salisbury, William of Tyre, and many others. He is mentioned by the author of the Metamorphosis Goliae (ca. 1140) among the famous Parisian masters.4 It is the purpose of this article to return to Petrus Helias's rhetoric once again, discuss the novelties he introduced as well as his use of his predecessors ' works, and to look at him also in a larger geographical context beyond his northern French setting of twelfth-century rhetoric.5 For Peter's fields of interests, grammar and rhetoric, invite comparison with the tradition of Italy, where grammar joined forces with rhetoric rather than with dialectic, as was the case in northern France. What gave Petrus Helias's rhetorical summa such influence on par with those by (Abelard's teacher) William (of Champeaux), the Platonist and influential teacher of the trivium and the quadrivium, Thierry of Chartres, and Alanus (possibly Alan de Lille)? Even though Peter's grammar was more spectacular, widely quoted, and extant in more than twenty manuscripts (as well as five fragments), the total of the eight manuscripts for the rhetoric is a token of considerable success.'1 Here one must pay particular attention to Peter's choice of format. Instead of quoting verbatim the passages (lemmata) under discussion...