Primary Texts

For a list of manuscripts of Auriol’s works, see here.

Scriptum super primum Sententiarum

Commentariorum in Primum Librum Sententiarum Pars Prima (Rome, 1596)

See The Electronic Scriptum, an ongoing attempt to put all of the Scriptum (as found in Vat. Borgh. lat. 329) on the web in PDF files – includes a question list for the work.

E. M. Buytaert, ed., Peter Aureoli Scriptum Super Primum Sententiarum, 2 vols. (St. Bonaventure, NY 1952-56).

  • Scriptum,Prologue and dd. 1-8 edited from Vat.Borgh. lat 329 (the copy of this work presented by Auriol to Pope John XXII).
  • confer the review of this work by Valens Heynck in Franziskanische Studien 35 (1953), pp. 468-70.

Scriptum, d. 9, part 1 (on concepts and concept formation) in R.L. Friedman, “In principio erat Verbum: The Incorporation of Philosophical Psychology into Trinitarian Theology, 1250-1325″ Ph.D. dissertation, University of Iowa (1997), Appendix 4, pp. 468-96.

Scriptum, d. 23 (on first and second intentions) has been almost completely edited (from Vat.Borgh. lat. 329) in

  • J. Pinborg “Radulphus Brito on Universals” Cahiers de l’Institut du Moyen Age Grec et Latin 35 (1980), pp. 133-137,
  • together with D. Perler, “Peter Aureol vs. Hervaeus Natalis on Intentionality: A Text Edition with Introductory Remarks” Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraire du Moyen Age 61 (1994), pp. 227-62.
  • The entire text of d. 23 has recently been reedited on the basis of Vat. Borgh. lat. 329 by L.M. de Rijk in his Giraldus Odonis O.F.M. Opera Philosophica. Vol II: De Intentionibus. Critical Edition with a Study of the Medieval Intentionality Debate up to Ca. 1350 (Leiden, 2005), pp. 695-747.

Scriptum, d. 27 (part one on the categories of action,passion, and relation; part two on concepts and concept formation) in R.L. Friedman, “In principio erat Verbum” (cit. above), Appendix 2-3, pp. 371-467.

  • preliminary edition based on five mss, manuscript study of d. 27 in ibid., Appendix 1; the versions of the texts found in “In principio” have been superseded by those found on the The Electronic Scriptum.

Scriptum, d. 35, part 4 (on intellectual cognition of singulars) ed. by R. Friedman at this website under Editions & Translations on the Web (and now found as part of The Electronic Scriptum.)

  • preliminary edition based on Vat.Borgh. lat 329.

Scriptum, d. 38-39 in

  • C.D. Schabel, “Peter Aureol on Divine Foreknowledge and Future Contingents: Scriptum in Primum Sententiarum,distinctions 38-39″ Cahiers de l’Institut du Moyen Age Grec et Latin 65 (1995), pp. 63-212.
    Full edition from all known manuscripts; supersedes Ph. Boehner’s edition of Scriptum, d. 38, a. 3 in The Tractatus de praedestinatione et de praescientia Dei et de futuris contingentibus of William Ockham, Together with a Study of a Three-Valued Logic (St. Bonaventure, NY 1945), Appendix IV.

Scriptum, dd. 40 (aa. 1 and 4), 41 (aa. 1 and 3), and 45-47 (on predestination and divine will) in

  • J. Halverson, “Peter Aureol and the Re-emergence of Predestinarian Pluralism in Latin Theology, 1317-1344” (Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Iowa 1993), pp. 295-436
    Preliminary edition based on four mss.

For a list and analysis of all of Auriol’s references in the Scriptum to University scholars, see Chris Schabel’s “Auriol’s Rubrics: Citations of University Theologians in Peter Auriol’s Scriptum in Primum Librum Sententiarum“, in S.F. Brown, T. Dewender, and T. Kobusch (eds.), Philosophical Debates at Paris in the Early Fourteenth Century (Brill, 2009), pp. 3-38.

Reportatio in I Sent.

Rep. I, prologus, q. 1, in

  • Ph. Boehner, “Notitia intuitiva of Non-Existents according to Peter Aureoli, OFM (1322)” Franciscan Studies 8 (1948), pp. 388-416 (also contained in Rivista di filosofia neo-scolastica 41 (1949), pp. 289-307).
    The edition on pp. 411-16 (pp. 304-07 in Rivista).

Rep. I, dist. 2, p. 1, qq. 1-3 et p. 2, qq. 1-2, in

  • S. Brown, ed., “Petrus Aureoli: De unitate conceptus entis”, Traditio 50 (1995), pp. 199-248.

A complete edition of the hitherto unpublished Rep. in I currently in preparation by R. Friedman, L. Nielsen, and C. Schabel.  For a discussion of the extant versions of this text see

  • L.O. Nielsen, “Peter Auriol’s Way with Words: The Genesis of Peter Auriol’s Commentaries on Peter Lombard’s First and Fourth Books of the Sentences”,in G.R. Evans (ed.), Mediaeval Commentaries on the Sentences of Peter Lombard (Brill, 2002), pp. 149-219, supplemented by
  • C.D. Schabel, Theology at Paris 1316-1345: Peter Auriol and the Problem of Divine Foreknowledge and Future Contingents (Ashgate, 2000), Ch. 3.

Reportationes in II, III, IV Sent. and Quodlibet

Commentariorum in Secundum, Tertium, Quartum Libros Sententiarum Pars Secunda (Rome, 1605)

  • edition of a version of these books and the Quodlibet, often unreliable, available through the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek in Munich: book II, book III, book IV, Quodlibet.

For a list of questions for Auriol’s II Sent. based on the text found in the 1605 edition, see here.

For a list of questions for the extant versions of Auriol’s III Sent., see here.

For a list of questions for Auriol’s IV Sent. based on the text found in the 1605 edition, see here.

For at least books III and IV (and possibly book II) there are several extant versions of Auriol’s commentary.

  • On book IV, see L.O. Nielsen, “Peter Auriol’s Way with Words: The Genesis of Peter Auriol’s Commentaries on Peter Lombard’s First and Fourth Books of the  Sentences, in G.R. Evans (ed.), Mediaeval Commentaries on the Sentences of Peter Lombard (Brill, 2002), pp. 149-219.
  • On book III, see V. Heynck, “Die Kommentare des Petrus Aureoli zum dritten Sentenzenbuch”, Franziskanische Studien 51 (1969), pp. 1-77, and W. Duba, “The Immaculate Conception in the Works of Peter Auriol”, Vivarium 38 (2000), pp. 5-34.
  • On book II see Schabel’s article referred to above.
  • On the Quodlibet, see most recently L.O. Nielsen, “The Quodlibet of Peter Auriol”, in Chris Schabel (ed.), Theological Quodlibeta in the Middle Ages. The Fourteenth Century (Brill, 2007), pp. 267-331.

Modern critical editions in print:

II  Sent., d. 2, part 3, q. 1 (on place), in

  • C. Schabel, “Place, Space, and the Physics of Grace in Auriol’s Sentences Commentary”, Vivarium 38 (2000), pp. 117-61, esp. 143-54.

II Sent., d. 4, q. 3 “Utrum mali angeli potuerunt peccare”

  • T. Hoffmann, “Peter Auriol on Practical Judgment and Angelic Sin”, in G. Alliney, M. Fedeli, A. Pertosa (eds.), Contingenza e libertà: Teorie francescane del primo Trecento (Macerata, 2012), pp. 65-75.

III Sent., d. 3, qq. 1-2, in

  • E.M. Buytaert, ed., “Aureoli’s Unpublished Reportatio III, d. 3, q. 1-2” Franciscan Studies 15 (1955), pp. 159-74.
    Critical edition of the unprinted (and more popular) version of book III, d. 3, qq. 1-2 (dealing with the immaculate conception).

IV Sent., d. 49, qq. 3-5, in

  • Th. Jeschke, Deus ut tentus vel visus. Die Debatte um die Seligkeit im reflexiven Akt (ca. 1293-1320) (Leiden, 2011), pp. 803-816.

Biblical commentaries

Compendium litteralis sensus totius scripturae, an extremely popular work, of which we have (according to Stegmüller’s Repertorium of Biblical commentaries, s.v. Petrus Aureoli + nr. 8883 in suppl. volume s.v. Petrus Aureoli) some 60 manuscripts and which was printed some 15 times between 1476 and 1896.

  • the most recent edition is: Ph. Seeboeck, ed., Compendium sensus litteralis totius divinae Scripturae a clarissimo theologo fr. Petro Aureoli O. Min. (Quaracchi 1896).

Commentarius in Iohannem sive compendiosa expositio evangelii Iohannis (ca. 1314) ed. Friedrich Stegmüller in Franziskanische Studien 33 (1951), pp. 207-219.

  • See, however, Duba 2014 (“The Man in the Middle”), where the attribution of this commentary to Auriol is disputed.

Separate treatises

De conceptione B. M. V. /Repercussorium editum contra adversarium innocentiae matris Dei (composed in Toulouse 1314/15) Ed. [Lemmen, ed.] Fr. Guilielmi Guarrae, Fr. Ioannis Duns Scoti, Fr. Petri Aureoli Qq. disputatae de immaculata conceptione BMV, Bibliotheca Franciscana Scholastica medii aevi 3 (Quaracchi 1904), pp. 23-94/95-153.

  • A new edition taking into account all of the extant manuscripts would be advantageous; cf. W. Duba, “The Immaculate Conception in the Works of Peter Auriol”, Vivarium38 (2000), pp. 5-34, esp. p. 34.

De paupertate et usu paupere published by Bonifacius Cera (Ceva) in  Firmamenta trium ordinum beatissimi Patris nostri sancti Francisci(Paris 1512), IV, ff.116r-130.

  • E. Longpré, “Le Quolibet de Nicholas de Lyre, OFM”, Archivum Franciscanum Historicum 23 (1930), pp. 42-56 edited a question on the subject of poverty from ms. Vat. lat. 869, claiming that it was q. 8 of a quodlibet of Nicholas of Lyra; this question was reattributed to Auriol by F. Pelster, who (in “Nikolaus von Lyra und seine Quaestio de usu paupere”, Archivum Franciscanum Historicum46 [1953], pp. 211-50, esp. pp. 213-14) claimed that it is in actuality a second redaction of Auriol’s treatise De usu paupere; Pelster argued at length for his claim in “Zur Überlieferung des Quodlibet und anderer Schriften des Petrus Aureoli OFM” Franciscan Studies 14 [1954], esp. pp. 408-11.

Other works of Auriol’s that are still unedited

De principiis naturae (Auriol’s only work of “pure philosophy”; edition underway by Martin Bauer in Stuttgart).

  • Avignon, B.M. 1082 (=A), ff. 4-46
  • Madrid, B.N. 517 (=D), ff. 71ra-100rb
  • Padua, B. Anton. 295, Scaff XIII (=P), ff. 27rb-42vb
  • Rome, B. N. fondo Sessoriano 100 (1405) (=R), ff. 44v-128v
  • Vatican, Vat. lat. 901 (Va), ff. 136-145v [excerpts]
  • Vatican, Vat. lat. 3063 (V)
  • Wellcome Library, ms. 103 (W)

Recommendatio S. Scripturae: BnF 14566, ff. 2-7.

Postilla in Apocalypsim

  • Firenze, Bibl. Laurentiana, Conv. sopp. 135, fol. 147-156v
  • ms de Little (anc. Phillipps 12290, fol. 181-201)
  • Benz, “Die Geschichtstheologie” announced an edition.

Non-existent and spurious works

Quaestiones in Metaphysicam

  • Lohr, “Medieval Latin Aristotelian Commentaries”, s.v. ‘Petrus Aureoli’ (in Traditio 28, 1972, pp. 346-47), citing Doucet, “L’oeuvre scolastique de Richard de Conington, OFM”, Archivum Fratrum Praedicatorum 29 (1936), pp. 396-442, at pp. 415-16, attributes to Auriol a Quaestiones in Metaphysicam of 22 questions in ms. Padova Biblioteca Universitaria 1580, ff. 167r-228v (see the list of questions in Doucet’s article, loc. cit.), with stray questions also found in Munich, SB Clm. 8717, f. 102r-v (q. 9) and in Padova, Bibl. Antoniana 173, ff. 45v-47v (q. 1, ascribed).
    But this isn’t an independent work of Auriol’s on the metaphysics; rather we find here 22 physical and metaphysical questions some of which are drawn from Auriol’s II Sent. (as Doucet notes, art. cit., p. 416; see C. Schabel, “Place, Space, and the Physics of Grace in Auriol’s Sentences commentary”, Vivarium 38/1 (2000), pp. 117-61, esp. 155-56).