An Approach to Canonical Procedure: The Compilation of ‘exceptiones’ in British Library Add. 24979

In the course of the high Middle Ages, the ‘exceptio’, an objection raised by the defendant against an accusation, became an increasingly important procedure in canon law. ‘Exceptiones’ could be raised against many aspects of the plaintiff’s case, including the form of the papal letters initiating the trial, the legal officers, or the terms of the accusation.¹ A single peremptory exception could be sufficient to invalidate a whole case, or a series of dilatory exceptions could delay a case for several months, allowing the defendant more time to prepare.² In consequence, it became common practice for proctors to place a string of ‘exceptiones’ in the hope that some at least would be accepted, and papal courts were encumbered with an escalation of business.³ The ‘exceptio’ was a significant enough aspect of canon law procedure for Innocent III to legislate on it several times. He acknowledged its importance by including the ‘exceptio’ in his list of the necessary parts of the trial.⁴ Innocent also sought to limit the scope for frivolous exceptions, ordering judges to set a date before which all exceptions must be placed, and ruling that those who raise unsuccessful exceptions must bear the expenses for that part of the trial.⁵ ‘Exceptiones’ acquired greater prominence in procedural works, and the number of treatises devoted solely to ‘exceptiones’ also increased from the end of the twelfth century.⁶ Given their variety and utility, the use of ‘exceptiones’ did not diminish as a result of Innocent’s legislation. Despite the threat of incurring expense, defendants continued to use ‘exceptiones’ prolifically.

British Library Add. 24979 includes two works on ‘exceptiones’, namely, Sinibaldo dei Fieschi’s (later Innocent IV) Summa de exceptione, and an anonymous compilation of exceptions, Quoniam natura, which directly precedes it. The anonymous compilation, as far as I know, is the only known copy of the work. It is remarkable because, unlike other procedural works on ‘exceptiones’, it does not present ‘exceptiones’ as a well-defined set of procedures, but instead systematically summarizes the Liber extra into a series of objections.

The Manuscript

The codex Add. 24979 is a collection of canon law treatises originating in Italy in the fourteenth century. The works included are varied, and a number of scribes were involved in the book’s production. The order of contents is:

1. 1. A compilation of ‘exceptiones’ Quoniam natura (fol. 2r-10v). This is identified in the medieval contents page as Summa Galfredi (fol. 1v).

   Inc. ‘Quoniam natura cotidie novitates nititur invenire’.

   Expl. ‘quod faciant iusticiam et si adversarius appellaverit, extra. de appellationibus [recusationibus et relationibus], Qua fronte (X 2.28.25)’.

2. 2. Pope Innocent IV (Sinibaldo dei Fieschi), Summa de exceptione: ‘Summa exceptionum Innocencii pape quarti’ (fol. 10v-11v).

   Inc. ‘Excipitur contra litteris vel sigillum si bulla sit falsa vel sigillum’.

   Expl. ‘Si testis aliquid de suo addit .i. de mandato, totam seriem testimonii decolorat in .ix. puta et simplex’.

   Printed edition: TUI (Venice 1584-1585) 3.2, fol. 104ra-105va.⁷

3. 3. Peter Ilerdensis, Breviarium: ‘Breviarium B. ad omnes materias iure canonico in velandas’ (fol. 12r-15v).

   Inc. ‘Verborum superfluitate penitus resecata de talento credito vobis vel in quo socii margaritam’.

   Expl: ‘per totam lxiii. distinctione Salonitane (D.63 c.24), ubi plene de hac materia est notatum a Johanne (Johannes Teutonicus, Glossa ordinaria to D.63 c.24 sub verbo sub excommunicationis interpositione)’.

   Printed Edition: Bernadus Compostellanus, Lectura aurea in primum librum Decretalium cum Apostillis Anthonii de Crevant (Paris: Galliot, 1516).⁸

4. 4. Damasus of Hungary, Summa titulorum extravagantium (fol. 16r-32v)

   Inc. ‘Iuri operam daturum prius nosse oportet quid sit ius’.

   Expl: Last page is damaged and illegible. Last legible words, fol.

   32r: ‘rei deposite possessionem retineat deponens, videlicet Digestum’.

5. 5. Bernard of Montemirat, Lectura in Decretales Gregorii IX and Lectura Novellarum: ‘Apparatus super Decretales’ (fol. 33r-68r, 107r-138v).

   Lectura in Decretales Inc: ‘Gregorius interpretatur vigilans et bene vigilavit’.

   Expl: ‘quia indignum est et a romane ecclesie consuetudine alienum etc.’

   Lectura Novellarum. (fol. 135v) Inc: ‘Cum [in] multis casus est planus quia per...