Encyclopedia of Medieval Philosophy

Living Edition
| Editors: Henrik Lagerlund


  • Maarten J. F. M. Hoenen
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1151-5_19-2


Albertism is a movement within late-medieval Aristotelianism that distinguished itself from other contemporary philosophical schools by taking Albert the Great as the most reliable interpreter of Aristotle. Its main representatives were Johannes de Nova Domo (Paris) and Heymericus de Campo (Cologne). Albertism was very critical of Nominalism and challenged Thomism and Scotism on a number of issues in the field of logic, natural philosophy, and metaphysics. Its main center throughout the fifteenth century was the Bursa Laurentiana at the University of Cologne, which housed Johannes Hulshout of Mechelen, Gerardus de Harderwijck, and Arnoldus Luyde de Tongeris. They were active in the writing of Albertist manuals and commentaries on Aristotle, most of which were printed in large numbers and distributed at many different universities. In these writings, the Albertists took a well-defined stand on a number of issues without, however, developing an independent, all-embracing philosophical system – an observation that also applies to the other schools of thought. In the modern period, it lost much of its attraction because of its critical attitude toward Nominalism and due to the fact that, unlike Thomism and Scotism, it lacked support from the religious orders. Some of its ideas nevertheless survived within different Thomistic and Scotistic schools.

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


Primary Sources

  1. Anders, P. (Ed.). (1977). Studium Upsalense. Specimens of the oldest lecture notes taken in the mediaeval University of Uppsala. Uppsala: Uppsala Universitet.Google Scholar
  2. Anonymus. (1492, 1496). Promptuarium. Cologne: Henricus Quentell (The edition of 1492 is reprinted and mistakenly attributed to Heymericus de Campo, Frankfurt am Main 1992).Google Scholar
  3. Anonymus. (1494). Reparationes librorum totius naturalis philosophiae secundum processum Albertistarum et Thomistarum. Cologne: Ulricus Zell.Google Scholar
  4. de Campo, H. (1496). Tractatus problematicus. Cologne: Johannes Landen.Google Scholar
  5. de Campo, H. (1497). Invectica. Cologne: Henricus Quentell. (Parts are published in Meersseman (1935), pp. 112–121).Google Scholar
  6. de Campo, H. (2001). De Sigillo aeternitatis (Imbach R, Ladner P (eds.)) and Ars demonstratina (Cavigioli JP (ed)). In R. Imbach & P. Ladner (Eds.), Opera selecta (Vol. 1, pp. 93–167). Freiburg Schweiz: Universitätsverlag.Google Scholar
  7. de Harderwijck, G. (1486). Commentum supra veterem artem Aristotelis secundum viam Albertistarum. Cologne: Henricus Quentell.Google Scholar
  8. de Harderwijck, G. (1488). Copulata super omnes tractatus parvorum logicalium Petri Hispani et nonnullos modernorum secundum viam Albertistarum. Cologne: Henricus Quentell.Google Scholar
  9. de Harderwijck, G. (1496). Epitomata seu reparationes totius philosophiae naturalis Aristotelis. Cologne: Henricus Quentell.Google Scholar
  10. de Monte, G. (1497a). Concordantiae dictorum Thomae Aquinatis et Alberti Magni. Cologne: Henricus Quentell.Google Scholar
  11. de Monte, G. (1497b). Apologia. Cologne: Henricus Quentell. (Parts are published in Meersseman (1935), pp. 122–128).Google Scholar
  12. de Nova Domo, J. (1933). Tractatus de esse et essentia. In G. Meersseman (Ed.), Geschichte des Albertismus, Heft I: Die Pariser anfänge des Kölner Albertismus (pp. 91–200). Paris: Halova.Google Scholar
  13. de Tongeris, A. L. (1496). Epitomata sive Reparationes logicae veteris et novae Aristotelis iuxta viam et expositionem venerabilis domini Alberti doctoris Magni. Cologne: Henricus Quentell.Google Scholar
  14. (Pseudo-) Johannes de Nova Domo (1968). De universali reali. In Weiler AG, Un traité de Jean de Nova Domo sur les universaux. Vivarium, 6, 108–154 (The attribution of this treatise to Johannes de Nova Domo has been challenged by Kaluza (1986) and Rutten (2003)).Google Scholar

Secondary Sources

  1. Hamann, F. (2006). Das Siegel der Ewigkeit. Universalwissenschaft und Konziliarismus bei Heymericus de Campo. Münster: Aschendorff.Google Scholar
  2. Hoenen, M. J. F. M. (1992). The Thomistic principle of individuation in fifteenth-century Thomistic and Albertist sources. Medioevo Rivista di storia della filosofia medievale, 18, 327–357.Google Scholar
  3. Hoenen, M. J. F. M. (1993). The Reparationes librorum totius naturalis philosophiae (Cologne 1494) as a source for the late medieval debates between Albertistae and Thomistae. Documenti e studi sulla tradizione filosofica medievale, 4, 307–344.Google Scholar
  4. Hoenen, M. J. F. M. (1995a). Late medieval schools of thought in the mirror of university textbooks. The Promptuarium argumentorum (Cologne 1492). In M. J. F. M. Hoenen, J. H. J. Schneider, & G. Wieland (Eds.), Philosophy and learning. Universities in the Middle Ages (pp. 329–369). Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
  5. Hoenen, M. J. F. M. (1995b). Heymeric van de Velde (†1460) und die Geschichte des Albertismus. Auf der Suche nach den Quellen der albertistischen Intellektlehre des Tractatus problematicus. In M. J. F. M. Hoenen & A. de Libera (Eds.), Albertus Magnus und der Albertismus. Deutsche philosophische Kultur des Mittelalters (pp. 303–331). Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
  6. Hoenen, M. J. F. M. (2008). Comment lire les grands maîtres? Gérard de Monte, Heymeric de Campo et la question de l’accord entre Albert le Grand et Thomas d’Aquin (1456). Revue Thomiste, 108, 105–130.Google Scholar
  7. Hoenen, M. J. F. M. (2011). Nominalism in Cologne. The student notebook of the Dominican Servatius Fanckel. With an edition of a Disputatio Vacantialis held on July 14, 1480: Utrum in Deo uno simplicissimo sit trium personarum realis distinctio. In S. E. Young (Ed.), Crossing boundaries at medieval universities (pp. 85–144). Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
  8. Kaluza, Z. (1986). Le De universali reali de Jean de Maisonneuve et les epicuri litterales. Freiburger Zeitschrift für Philosophie und Theologie, 33, 469–516.Google Scholar
  9. Kaluza, Z. (1988). Les querelles doctrinales à Paris. Nominalistes et realistes aux confins du XIVe et XVe siècles. Bergamo: Pierluigi Lubrina Editore.Google Scholar
  10. Kaluza, Z. (1995). Les débuts de l’Albertisme tardif (Paris et Cologne). In M. J. F. M. Hoenen & A. de Libera (Eds.), Albertus Magnus und der Albertismus. Deutsche philosophische Kultur des Mittelalters (pp. 207–295). Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
  11. Kneepkens, C. H. J. M. (2003). Nam defectum vas quandoque servat amatum. Elementary aids-to-study. An unconventional access to late-medieval university philosophy. Bulletin de philosophie médiévale, 45, 105–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Löhr, G. M. (1926). Die theologischen Disputationen an der Universität Köln im ausgehenden 15. Jahrhundert nach den Angaben des P. Servatius Fanckel OP. Harrassowitz: Leipzig.Google Scholar
  13. Meersseman, G. (1933). Geschichte des Albertismus, Heft I: Die Pariser Anfänge des Kölner Albertismus. Paris: Haloua.Google Scholar
  14. Meersseman, G. (1935). Geschichte des Albertismus, Heft II: Die ersten Kölner Kontroversen. Rome: Sabinae.Google Scholar
  15. Meliadò, M. (2012). Scientia peripateticorum. Heymericus de Campo, the ‘Book of Causes’ and the debate over universals in the 15th century. Recherches de Philosophie et Théologie Médiévales, 79, 195–230.Google Scholar
  16. Meliadò M, & Negri, S. (2011). Neues zum Pariser Albertismus des frühen 15. Jahrhunderts. Der Magister Lambertus de Monte und die Handschrift Brussel, Koninklijke Bibliotheek van België, ms. 760. Bulletin de Philosophie Médiévale, 53, 349–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Palazzo, A. (2004). Ulrich of Strasbourg and Denys the Carthusian: Textual analysis and doctrinal comments. Bulletin de Philosophie Médiévale, 46, 61–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Palazzo, A. (2006). Ulrich of Strasbourg and Denys the Carthusian (II): Doctrinal influence and implicit quotations. Bulletin de Philosophie Médiévale, 48, 163–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rutten, P. (2003). Contra occanicam discoliam modernorum. The so-called De universali reali and the dissemination of Albertist polemics against the viam modernam. Bulletin de Philosophie Médiévale, 45, 131–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rutten, P. (2005). Secundum processum et mentem Versoris. John Versor and his relation to the schools of thought reconsidered. Vivarium, 43, 292–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rutten, P. (2007). Duae opiniones probabiles. Der Kölner Wegestreit und seine Verbreitung an den Universitäten des 15. Jahrhunderts. In L. Cesalli, N. Germann, & M. J. F. M. Hoenen (Eds.), University, council, city. Intellectual culture on the Rhine (1300–1550) (pp. 113–134). Turnhout: Brepols.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Senger, H. G. (1981). Albertismus? Überlegungen zur via Alberti im 15. Jahrhundert. In A. Zimmermann (Ed.), Albert der Große. Seine Zeit, sein Werk, seine Wirkung (pp. 217–236). Berlin: Gruyter.Google Scholar
  23. Tewes, G.-R. (1993). Die Bursen der Kölner Artisten-Fakultät bis zur Mitte des 16. Jahrhunderts. Köln: Böhlau.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wels, H. (2004). Aristotelisches Wissen und Glauben im 15. Jahrhundert. Ein anonymer Kommentar zum Pariser Verurteilungsdekret von 1277 aus dem Umfeld des Johannes de Nova Domo. Studie und Text. Amsterdam: Grüner.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wels, H. (2007). Einige Spezifika des albertistischen Universalienrealismus bei Johannes de Nova Domo und in einem anonymen Tractatus de univeralis natura. In L. Cesalli, N. Germann, & H. MJFM (Eds.), University, council, city. Intellectual culture on the Rhine (1300–1550) (pp. 97–111). Turnhout: Brepols.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departement Künste, Medien, PhilosophieUniversität BaselBaselSwitzerland