In the middle ages 143

the work matters, and the name of the worker

necessarily disappears in face of the grandeur of

truth. Hence their philosophy attaches little im-

portance to the name of its collaborators. "Unus

dicit" "aliquis elicit" they say in speaking of con-

temporaries. It is, as it were, the law of humility

and si lence. It was necessary for a writer to be

known by everyone to have his name mentioned at

all (allegari) . One can count on one's fingers those

who received such an honour in the thirteenth cen-

tury.

On such principles the textual interpolations

made by the copyists were not regarded as any vio-

lation of the original; rather they were intended

and taken to improve the expression of truth which

the author sought to convey." Similarly, literary

theft was not stealing; it was the utilization of a

common treasure. In the twelfth century a monk

by the name of Alcher of Clairvaux had written a

small book on psychology, and in order to ensure

it a wide circulation the copyists of the time as-

cribed it to Augustine. William of Auvergne,

Bishop of Paris in 1229, reproduced almost word

for word in his De Immortalitate A^iimae the simi-

lar work of Dominicus Gundissalinus, the arch-

deacon of Toledo. There are numerous examples

of the same kind. If we recall, further, that the

10 For a striking example of such interpolation, in the Summa

contra Gentiles of Thomas, see A. Pelzer, Rev. N4o-Scol., May, 1920,

p. 231.

144 PHILOSOPHY AND CIVILIZATION

negligence of copyists or the modesty of authors

set in circulation a mass of manuscripts without any

well-determined status, we can readily understand

some of the insurmountable difficulties which the

recorder of mediaeval ideas faces; for instance, in

identifying opponents or in attributing texts or in

detecting literary theft.

With tills understanding of the matter, we are

little surprised to learn that the predominant scien-

tific classification represented such an amalgama-

tion that the names of all those who were connected

with its origin or perfection or promulgation were

either neglected or forgotten. As with popular

music, so here; each composer appropriates and

fashions in his own way.

This same understanding also enables us to see

just why and in what measure the scholastic phi-

losophy itself is the soul of a collective body, made

up of men belonging to different peoples. To be

sure, there were some among them who opposed

their mighty personalities to this fund of ideas

which was the common heritage of all, — for ex-

ample, Thomas Aquinas, Duns Scotus, Henry

of Ghent, and others. But apart from these, as

the documents show, the great host of men of aver-

age ability taught and developed the same doctrine,

without either opposing it or adding anything of

their own. They were ennobled by it; their little-

ness was redeemed by its grandeur. Like dwarfs