Encyclopedia of Medieval Philosophy

Living Edition
| Editors: Henrik Lagerlund

Gottschalk of Nepomuk

  • Alexander Baumgarten
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1151-5_542-1

Abstract

Gottschalk of Nepomuk was a Bohemian Cistercian monk, trained as a theologian at St. Bernard’s College in Paris in the 1370s. He died shortly after completing his Quaestiones super Libros Sententiarum. His commentary on all four books of Lombard’s Sentences survived in only one manuscript at the Jagiellonian Library (Krakow), and it is currently being edited. In the prologue, Gottschalk discusses the problem of theology as a scientific habitus and confines the object of knowledge as a complexe significabile to the domain of theological knowledge. From a doctrinal perspective, the author belongs to a more general intellectual movement from the latter half of the fourteenth century, along with John Hiltalingen of Basel, James of Eltville, and others. Gottschalk’s work develops themes common to English theologians from the first decades of the fourteenth century (e.g., Walter Chatton, Robert Holcot, Adam of Wodeham), but also relies on the texts of various Parisian theologians, such as Thomas of Argentina, Gregory of Rimini, John Mirecourt, and Henry of Ghent. His doctrinal orientation consists in both the adoption and criticism of Gregory of Rimini’s thought.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Bibliography

Primary Sources

  1. Chatton, W. (1989). Reportatio et Lectura super Sententias: Collatio ad librum primum et Prologus (Studies and texts, Vol. 90., ed.: Wey, J. C.). Toronto: PIMS.Google Scholar
  2. de Altavilla, J. Questiones super librum Sententiarum. Erfurt: UB CA F. 118.Google Scholar
  3. de Argentina, T. (1585). Commentaria in IV libros Sententiarum. Genova.Google Scholar
  4. de Gandavo, H. (1520). Summa quaestionum ordinariarum, art. VI–XV. Paris.Google Scholar
  5. de Gandavo, H. (2005). Summa (quaestiones ordinariae), art. I–V (ed.: Wilson, G. A.). Leuven University Press.Google Scholar
  6. de Nepomuk, G. (2017). Teologia ca dispoziție științifică. Prologul Comentariului la Cartea Sentințelor [Theology as a scientifical disposition. The prologue to the commentary on the book of sentences], critical edition, Romanian translation and study by Alexander Baumgarten, “Biblioteca Medievală”. Polirom, Iaşi.Google Scholar
  7. de Nepomuk, G. Quaestiones super libros Sententiarum. Biblioteca Jagellonska, mss. 1499.Google Scholar
  8. de Wodeham, A. (1990). Lectura secunda in librum primum Sententiarum, Prologus et Distinctio Prima (eds.: Wood, R., & Gál, G.). New York.Google Scholar
  9. Gregory of Rimini. (1979–1984). Gregorii Ariminensis Lectura super primum et secundum Sententiarum (6 vols.; eds.: Trapp, D., Marcolino, V., Eckermann, W., Santos-Noya, M., Schulze, W., Simon, W., Urban, W., & Vendland, V.). Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
  10. Holkot, R. (1518). In quatuor libros Sententiarum quaestiones argutissime. Quaedam (ut ipse auctor apellat) conferentiae. De imputabilitate peccati quaestio longa. Determinationes item quarumdarum aliarum quaestionum, Lyon.Google Scholar
  11. Johannis de Basilea, O. E. S. A. (2016). Lectura super quattuor libros Sententiarum, t. I, Super primum Librum (coll. Cassiciacum (Supplementum), ed.: Marcolino V., cooperantibus Brînzei M., & Oser-Grote C.). Wurzburg: Augustinus-Verlag.Google Scholar

Secondary Sources

  1. Bakker, P. J. J. M. (1999). La raison et le miracle. Contribution à l’étude des rapports entre philosophie et théologie. Nijmegen: Selbstverl.Google Scholar
  2. Baumgarten, A. Godescalc de Nepomuk. Online at http://www.zisterzienserlexikon.de/wiki/Godescalc_de_Nepomuk
  3. Brînzei, M. (2011). Plagium. In I. Atucha, et al. (Eds.), Mots médiévaux offerts à Ruedi Imbach (pp. 559–568). Porto.Google Scholar
  4. Courtenay, W. J. (2000). Parisian theology, 1362–1377. In M. J. F. M. Hoenen & P. J. J. M. Bakker (Eds.), Philosophie und Theologie des ausgehenden Mittelalters: Marsilius von Inghen und das Denken seiner Zeit (pp. 3–19). Leiden.Google Scholar
  5. Doucet, V. O. F. M. (1954). Commentaires sur les Sentences. Supplément au Répertoire de F. Stegmüller. Firenze.Google Scholar
  6. Kozłowska, A., Nowak, L., Sobańska, A., Tatarzyński, R., Zega, R., & Zwiercan, R. (2012). Catalogus codicum manuscriptorum Medii Aevi Latinorum qui in Bibliotheca Jagellonica Cracoviae asservantur (Vol. X). Cracoviae: Bibliotheca Jagellonica, Officina Editoria “Ksiegarnia Akademicka”.Google Scholar
  7. Michalski, K. (1969). La philosophie au XIVe siècle: Six études, herausgegeben und eingeleitet von Kurt Flasch (pp. 224–225 and 246–250). Frankfurt: Minerva GMBH (first edition 1921).Google Scholar
  8. Schabel, C. (2014). Cistercian University Theologians on the Filioque. Archa Verbi, 11, 124–189.Google Scholar
  9. Trapp, D. (1956). Augustinian theology in the fourteenth century: notes on editions, marginalia, opinions and book lore. Augustiniana, 6, 146–274.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IRHTParisFrance
  2. 2.Faculty of History and PhilosophyBabeş-Bolyai UniversityCluj-NapocaRomania