The Library of Hélion Jouffroy a Survey and Some Additional Identifications

Quærendo 47 (2017) 199-221

brill.com/qua

The Library of Hélion Jouffroy A Survey and Some Additional Identifications

Gregory Hays University of Virginia Charlottesville, VA, United States [email protected]

Abstract

One of the notable libraries of early sixteenth-century France was that of the Rodez lawyer and canon Hélion Jouffroy (†1529), nephew of the better known cardinal Jean Jouffroy. The younger Jouffroy’s books, which included both printed volumes and manuscripts, were dispersed after his death. Our knowledge of his holdings depends on a 1530 inventory, first published in 2012 by Matthieu Desachy. This article briefly surveys Jouffroy’s intellectual interests as they emerge from his collection, and offers some new identifications of texts and editions listed in the inventory.

Keywords

Hélion Jouffroy – libraries – inventories

Hélion Jouffroy (†1529) was a doctor of civil law and canon of Rodez Cathedral. Like his better-known uncle, the cardinal Jean Jouffroy, he was a prodigious book collector: at the end of his life he owned well over six hundred manuscripts and printed volumes. Our knowledge of his library rests on a 1530 inventory, first published in 2012 by Matthieu Desachy.1

* I am grateful to David Whitesell for comments on an earlier version of this article. 1 M. Desachy, Deux bibliophiles humanistes. Bibliothèques et manuscrits de Jean Jouffroy et d’Hélion Jouffroy (Paris 2012), pp. 105-150. The introduction to this book is largely identical to Desachy’s earlier article, ‘Bibliophiles d’oncle à neveu: livres et bibliothèques de Jean et Hélion Jouffroy (vers 1460-1530),’ in: Bulletin du bibliophile, n.s. 1 (2010), pp. 36-61. See also my review of the 2012 volume, in: Speculum, 88 (2013), pp. 506-7 and that by Malcolm Walsby, in: Médiévales, 64 (2013), pp. 215-16. I refer to items in the inventory by Desachy’s

Desachy’s characterization of the younger Jouffroy’s library as ‘l’une des plus riches de tout le royaume au début du XVIe [siècle]’ is no exaggeration.2 Hélion’s holdings are particularly impressive since for the most part they must represent his own accumulation; most, if not all, of his uncle’s rich manuscript collection had passed to the papal library at his death in 1473. A few books may have remained at Albi to descend ultimately to Hélion. Given the date, however, these are not likely to have included many printed books, which appear to make up the vast majority of Hélion’s collection. In what follows I offer a brief survey of the library, followed by identifications of some items in the inventory not identified (or identified incorrectly) by Desachy. Not surprisingly, a large proportion of the library—well over a third—con- sisted of books relating to law. Jouffroy was well equipped with copies of the basic texts of civil law (the Digest, Codex, Institutes) and their commentators (Alexander de Imola, Bartolus of Saxoferrato, Baldus de Ubaldis, Paulus de Castro, Jason de Mayno and others). He was also well supplied with the essential texts of canon law (Gratian’s Decretum, the Decretals of Gregory IX, Boniface’s Sextus, the Clementinae), along with the major commentators (Bernardus de Montemirato or ‘Abbas,’ Guido de Baisio or ‘Archidiaconus,’ Nicolaus de Tudeschis or ‘Panormitanus,’ etc.), and related works. These entries are so numerous and repetitive that it does not seem worthwhile to analyze them in detail. Jouffroy owned, for example, no less than seven copies of the Sextus, in print (37; 207; 224; 291) and manuscript (265; 556; 569), as well as three copies of the commentary on it by Domenico of San Geminiano (190; 427; 567), and one each of those by ‘Archidiaconus’ (192), ‘Abbas’ (620), and Johannes Andreae (640). Also predictable, given Jouffroy’s clerical status, is the large number of reli- gious books. Here we can start with scripture. The inventory lists two apparently complete bibles, one printed (449) and one in manuscript (570); the latter was perhaps a portable ‘Paris’ bible. There is also a glossed psalter (249), and copies of other individual books: Ecclesiastes (261, a manuscript), Titus (402)

numbering. Abbreviations: FB = Andrew Pettegree, Malcolm Walsby, and Alexander Wilkinson, French Vernacular Books. Books Published in the French Language before 1601 (Leiden 2007); Andrew Pettegree and Malcolm Walsby, eds. French Books III & IV. Books Published in France before 1601 in Latin and Languages other than French (Leiden 2012); GW = Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, online at ; ISTC = Incunabula Short Title Catalogue, online at ; USTC = Universal Short Title Catalogue, online at . 2 Desachy, op. cit. (n. 1), p. 54. He describes the collection in general terms at pp. 54-8 but does not attempt a full analysis.

QuærendoDownloaded from 47 Brill.com09/29/2021 (2017) 199-221 04:48:31AM via free access The Library of Hélion Jouffroy 201 and the Pauline Epistles (562). These too were presumably glossed. Jouffroy also owned a set of the Glossa Ordinaria (371-43), the commentaries of Hugh of St. Cher (321-7)4 plus an additional copy of the commentaries on the Gospels (384-5), and at least some of the Postillae of Nicholas of Lyra (312-313; 628), including the sections on Kings and on the minor prophets. These were supplemented by Guido da Vicenza’s Margarita Bibliae (163), Giovanni Marchesini’s Mammotrectus super Bibliam (197) and several unidentified finding aids and repertories (320; 453). There are two manuscript breviaries (179; 435). Works on the liturgy and sac- raments include Hugh of St. Victor’s De sacramentis (184), Durandus’s Rationale divinorum officiorum (399), and the Manipulus Curatorum of Guido de Monte Rocherii (417). General theology is represented by Antoninus of Florence’s Summa theologica (375-8; 381-2; 531) and Confessorum refugium (436; 451), the Summa Angelica of Angelo di Chivasso (180-1), the Pantheologia of Raynerius de Pisis (230-1), a manuscript Tractatus super Pater Noster (600), and a Liber Christi (48) tentatively identified by Desachy as Thomas à Kempis.5 Popular spirituality is also represented by Jacobus de Teramo’s Processus Luciferi contra Iesum (155). Marian literature includes Johannes Vitalis, Defensorium Beate Marie Virginis (364) and a Corona Virginis (478).6 Hagiography includes a volume of (Jerome’s?) Vitas Patrum (446), and a Textus sanctorum (188). Jouffroy’s duties as canon might well have included preaching, and there are books related to this area as well. Thus we find volumes of sermons by Peter the Venerable (452), Bernard of Clairvaux (530), Johann Herolt (461), and Leonardo of Udine (357), as well as Paul the Deacon’s Homiliarius doctorum (477) and various collections not further identifiable (203; 254; 263; 488, all manuscripts). Preaching needs may also explain the presence of a small number of books related to fables or proverbs: the Speculum sapientiae sive quadripartitus apolo- geticus of Ps. Cyril, now identified as Boniohannes de Messana (489), the Cato moralisatus (589), and the mysterious Proverbia Vulgurium (596). To these could be added the Fabulae of Francesco Filelfo (490), although here Jouffroy’s interest may have been at least partially literary; he also had Filelfo’s orations and two volumes of his letters (see below).

3 For 373 as part of this grouping see p. 214 below. 4 See p. 212 below for this item. 5 Other possibilities would be the Meditationes vitae Christi of Giovanni di Cauli (but sometimes attributed to St. Bonaventura) or Ludolphus of Saxony’s Liber de vita Christi. 6 Probably the anonymous Corona Mystica Beate Virginis Marie, which appeared in various French editions (e.g. Paris: Pierre Le Caron, not before 1492 or ca. 1495 [ISTC ic00927000, GW 7576]).

Quærendo 47 (2017) 199-221 Downloaded from Brill.com09/29/2021 04:48:31AM via free access 202 Hays

We also find a variety of patristic texts: Origen (396-7), Eusebius (170; ?213; 226; 408), Ambrose’s De virginitate (185) and other works (456), Jerome’s letters (307-8; 331-2; 624) and other works (659), Augustine’s Enarrationes in Psalmos (160; 472-37), De Trinitate (622), and City of God (658); Chrysostom (306; 400- 1), Orosius (501), Cassian’s Institutes (454), Epiphanius/Cassiodorus’s Historia Tripartita (507), Gregory’s Dialogues (563).8 The three Greek authors (Origen, Eusebius, and Chrysostom) were no doubt in Latin translation. Among medieval thinkers St. Bernard is notably prominent (482; 517; 530; 553). There also appears to have been a volume of Anselm (455).9 Apart from some Aquinas (379-80), a commentary on him (257), and a volume of Duns Scotus (480), there is little in the way of scholastic theology, although we do find a small cluster of books on Aristotelian logic: Peter of Spain (210), Georgius Bruxellensis (172),10 along with an unidentified glosa logices (193) and unspecified textus logices, both in manuscript. So far there is nothing very unexpected; all of the above are, in some sense, the tools of Jouffroy’s trade. But his interests did not end with law and the church. The library includes a rich selection of classical Latin authors: Terence (222), Sallust (204), Caesar (252; 316), Cicero’s speeches (586;11 613), rhetorical works (221), Tusculan Disputations (471) and Ad Atticum (534), Vergil (183; 621), Ovid’s Remedia (174) and Ex Ponto (557), Livy (229), Valerius Maximus (195; 218), Curtius (219; 540), Pomponius Mela (176), Pliny’s Natural History (214), Persius (520), Seneca’s tragedies (585) and philosophical works (585; 587), Lucan (462), Quintilian (646), Juvenal (159; 392; 543), Suetonius (208; 314), Florus (593), Gellius (47), Eutropius (522), and Boethius (486). There are Greek authors too: Herodotus (311; 42312), Plato (407), Aristotle’s Ethics (182) and Metaphysics (469), plus an unidentified work (52), Diodorus (508), Dionysius of Halicarnassus (541), Plutarch (318-19; 412; probably 577), Josephus (223; 256), Arrian (315), Ptolemy’s Geography (136; 158), Lucian (220), Diogenes Laertius (243), Herodian (187), Ps. Phalaris (511). At least some and probably all of these were Latin translations.13

7 See Hays, art. cit. (n. 1), p. 507 for the combination of 472 with 473. 8 Notable gaps are Lactantius and Isidore. 9 For the interpretation of Ausebini as Anselmi rather than Eusebii (as Desachy has it), see Hays, art. cit. (n. 1), p. 507. 10 Not George of Trebizond, as Desachy supposes; see Hays, art. cit. (n. 1), p. 507. 11 See Hays, art. cit. (n. 1), p. 507. 12 See Hays, art. cit. (n. 1), p. 507 for this identification. 13 Apart from anything else, it seems doubtful that the compiler could have read Greek titles or incipits. On Jouffroy’s own knowledge of Greek see below.

QuærendoDownloaded from 47 Brill.com09/29/2021 (2017) 199-221 04:48:31AM via free access The Library of Hélion Jouffroy 203

Italian humanism is also well represented: Petrarch’s De vita solitaria (450), Pietro Crinito (46; 500), Guarino on Vergil and Terence (205), Ps. Fenestella De magistratibus (439), Bartolomeo Platina’s lives of the Popes (421; 479), Pico della Mirandola (619), the Commentaria rerum urbanarum of Raffaello Maffei of Volaterra (588), and a striking number of volumes of Francesco Filelfo (302; 468; 481; 490; 544).14 The spread of humanism north of the Alps is represented by Rodolphus Agricola (566), Albrecht von Eyb’s Margarita Poetica (201), Reuchlin’s De verbo mirifico (255; 414), Guillaume Budé (246), and a good deal of Erasmus (523-9; 558-61; 644). As Desachy notes, there are also two works by the humanist theologian Alain de Varènes (504-5), an associate of Jouffroy’s at the Cathedral of Rodez. Jouffroy owned little poetry, even classical poetry. As we have seen, he had Vergil, Lucan, and the satirists Persius and Juvenal, but no Catullus, Tibullus, Propertius, or Martial; also no Statius, no Valerius Flaccus, and no Silius Italicus. Ovid is represented not by the Metamorphoses, Heroides, Amores, or Ars Amatoria, but by the ostensibly more respectable Remedia Amoris and the sober Epistulae Ex Ponto. The absence of love poetry, epigram, and mythologi- cal epic may suggest a rejection of authors viewed as immoral and/or frivolous (though it is a little surprising not to find any Horace). In the same way, Latin drama is represented by Terence and Seneca’s tragedies, but not by Plautus. In this context a copy of the twelfth-century15 pseudo-Ovidian elegiac comedy Pamphilus de amore (612) comes as something of a surprise. Jouffroy evidently had a stronger interest in history and geography. Here he appears to have preferred the broad to the deep: we find Livy but not Tacitus, Herodotus but not Thucydides. The world chronicle seems to have been a fa- vorite form. Along with Diodorus, the Chronicle of Eusebius (226, no doubt in its Latin version by Jerome), and Orosius, there are medieval compendia: Peter Comestor’s Historia Scholastica (250) and the Speculum Historiale of Vincent of Beauvais (232; 234-6), as well as the Chronicon of Sigebert of Gembloux (532). Also the popular chronicles of the incunable era, like Filippo da Bergamo’s Supplementum Cronicarum (171; 212) and Werner Rolewinck’s Fasciculus Temporum (173; 409). Not so far identified are volumes of Cronice breves (227) and Cronice mondi (643), and the mysterious Parve ystorie Assiriorum en parchemin (330).16

14 To these can be added 491 Mathey Breocii, if Desachy is right (as seems likely) in seeing here the Veronese canon regular Matteo Bosso, a friend of Filelfo and Hermolao Barbaro. 15 Not tenth-century, as Desachy, op. cit. (n. 1), p. 148 n. 343 wrongly says. 16 Desachy identifies Martinasi en parchemin (470) with Martin of Troppau—perhaps his Tabula decretalium, but possibly his Chronicon. This seems less than certain. Another

Quærendo 47 (2017) 199-221 Downloaded from Brill.com09/29/2021 04:48:31AM via free access 204 Hays

Geography proper includes Mela and Ptolemy; there is also, of course, a strong geographical element in some of the ancient historians (Herodotus, Diodorus, and Orosius, as well as Curtius’s history of Alexander the Great), as there is in books 2-12 of Raffaello Maffei’s encyclopedic Commentaria. Other books in this area include Fracanzano da Montalbodo’s Itinerarium Portugallensium (564) and an unidentified work or works De origine mundi et de scitu orbis (196: on this see below). The presence of all this material perhaps strengthens the possibility that the mysterious Esleabo (310) conceals Strabo.17 Given Jouffroy’s humanist leanings it is not surprising to find a significant interest in letters and epistolary theory: along with the letter collections of Cicero, Seneca, Ps. Phalaris, Jerome, and St. Bernard, the library includes a number of contemporary or recent practitioners: Lorenzo Lippi (168), Gasparino da Barzizza (465), Filelfo (468, 481), Piero Crinito (500), Erasmus (525), a so- far unidentified Marcellus (590), and Robert Gaguin (591), along with the Ars conficiendi epistolas of Jacobus Publicius (387), the epistolary form-book of Karolus Maneken (552),18 and a text described vaguely as quoddam repertorium modi dictandi litteras (474). There is a small cache of political theory: Giles of Rome’s De Regimine principum (329), Pietro Monti’s De Monarchia (413), and Claude de Seyssel’s De republica Galliae et regum officiis (383). Various books hint at the Jouffroys’ political involvements, both civil and ecclesiastical: Consuetudines parlamen- torum (510) and a similar volume apparently in French (512), a volume relating to the Council of Constance (626), and two copies of Charles VII’s Pragmatic Sanction of 1438 (50; 502); the elder Jouffroy had been instrumental in its abrogation. Other areas are more thinly stocked. Natural history is represented by Pliny and a French translation of Bartholomaeus Anglicus (652), medicine by John of Seville’s De regimine sanitatis (228), an unspecified work of Jacques Despars (538), a Consilium pestis (499), and a set of antidota in manuscript (597). There is virtually no science, unless one counts a computus manuscript (186) or Gabriele Pirovano’s Deffensio astronomie (614), where astronomia is what we would now call astrology. Grammatical works and dictionaries include a Priscian in manuscript (415), Eberhard’s Graecismus (509), Balbus’s Catholicon (645), Tortellius’s

mystery is the entry given by Desachy as Cronica Beati Magni (225), and which he puz- zlingly identifies with Einhard: on this see Hays, art. cit. (n. 1), p. 507. 17 So Hays, art. cit. (n. 1), p. 507. Also suggestive is the brevity of the entry, typical for classical authors (see on 631 below). 18 For this last see Hays, art. cit. (n. 1), p. 507.

QuærendoDownloaded from 47 Brill.com09/29/2021 (2017) 199-221 04:48:31AM via free access The Library of Hélion Jouffroy 205

Orthographia (410; 601), Perotti’s Cornucopiae (54; 216), Junianus Maius’s De priscorum proprietate verborum (191), and unidentified ‘vocabularia’ in manuscript (459). Surprising absences are Donatus and Alexander of Villa Dei’s Doctrinale. The only suggestion that Jouffroy had any acquaintance with Greek (unless one counts the Graecismus) is the Lexicon graeco-latinum of Johannes Crastonus (406). But this may have been merely for elucidating scriptural or theological terms. We do not find any books that would suggest sustained en- gagement with Greek grammar (e.g. Constantine Lascaris’s Erotemata), or any texts identified as being in Greek. Not all the books are scholarly. Those listed above were all housed in Jouffroy’s study, but in another room we find a few books in the vernacular, including the Histoire de Mélusine (2) and some twenty volumes identified only as ‘petitz livres a plaisances’ (4-23). Were these for Jouffroy’s recreational reading, or were they read by the ‘niece’ (in reality his illegitimate daughter) with whom he lived?19 Finally we might note a striking feature of the library, evident even from the survey above: Jouffroy’s apparent willingness to own multiple copies or editions of the same work. Some of the redundancy may be merely apparent. In the case of law books, an old edition might be supplemented by one perceived as new and improved (or even just less tattered). The three copies of Juvenal or the two of Valerius Maximus may have included commentaries, making them in effect different books. The corpus of Filelfo’s Epistole ran to over two thousand letters, so there may have been no overlap between the two volumes thus denominated. But why would Jouffroy have needed two copies of Rolewinck’s Fasciculus temporum, or Reuchlin’s De verbo mirifico? Desachy suggests a Grolier-like willingness to lend volumes to friends, a reflection of the early modern idea that a man’s books were not just his own but et amicorum.20 Or the second copy might have been acquired by mere happenstance—as a gift or legacy, for example.21 In any case, this phenomenon adds a complication to the process of identifying mystery entries, since possible candidates cannot be ruled out by the presence of the same author or text elsewhere in the list. Desachy’s edition of the inventory is an important contribution, but there is still room for improvement. Desachy generally identifies the authors and texts named, but only occasionally does he suggest a particular edition. To be sure,

19 For Jouffroy’s daughter Catherine see Desachy, op. cit. (n. 1), pp. 52-3. 20 Desachy, op. cit. (n. 1), p. 57. For Grolier’s ex libris and the ideology that underlies it see G.D. Hobson, ‘“Et Amicorum,”‘ in: The Library, 5th series, 4 (1949), pp. 87-99. 21 See Natalie Zemon Davis, ‘Beyond the Market: Books as Gifts in Sixteenth-Century France,’ in: Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th series, 33 (1983), pp. 69-88.

Quærendo 47 (2017) 199-221 Downloaded from Brill.com09/29/2021 04:48:31AM via free access 206 Hays this is often difficult or impossible to do, especially for the classical authors: la- conic entries like ‘Iuvenalis’ or ‘Quintilianus’ give us nothing to go on.22 But in many cases we can make some guesses based on the title form given. After all, the inventory’s compilers were not out to make extra work for themselves. They might abbreviate the form found in the opening or title page in front of them, and they often garble it,23 but they had no incentive to engage in extensive rewording. In my review of Desachy, I made a number of corrections or addi- tions to the editor’s notes. In what follows I offer some additional suggestions. As noted above, Jouffroy owned both manuscripts and printed books (not surprising at this period). Desachy assumes that an entry refers to a manuscript if it is described either as ‘a la main’ or as ‘en parchemin’ (vel sim.).24 While this seems a reasonable conclusion where such a comment is present, the absence of such a notation is no guarantee that we are dealing with a printed book.

84. Repertorium breve super abcde. 85. Repertorium breve super fghiklmno. 86. Repertorium breve super pqrstuxyz. All the other items on this shelf are law books, so it is a fair guess that this work is too. Desachy’s note identifies it as ‘Bartholomaeus Brixiensis, Casus Decretorum,’ but I cannot find any evi- dence that that work ever appeared under such a title.25 A better fit would

22 So Walsby, art. cit. (n. 1), p. 216: ‘l’imprécision des entrées limite l’analyse qu’on peut faire de chaque titre.’ 23 Some sample errors: 158 exitu for situ (sim. 176); 173 Faciculus for Fasciculus; 191 tritorum for priscorum; 217 chalatorius for exhortatorius; 229 Thulii for T. Liuii; 243 Licertus for Laertius; 258 Sposio for Expositio; 306 Grisostomi for Chrysostomi; 318 Putarco for Plutarcho; 415 Pricianus for Priscianus; 445 Innoscensis for Innocentis; 454 Cassionus for Cassianus; 471 Tusculanie for Tusculane; 520 Pertius for Persius; 545 Stercorum (!) for scachorum; 553 meditionum for meditationum; 557 puncto for Ponto; 564 Itineralium for Itinerarium; 601 Tertelius for Tortellius. At least some of these may reflect mishearing rather than misreading. According to its heading the inventory was taken by a pair of officials (Desachy, op. cit. (n. 1), p. 107: ‘nous juge et commissaire procedant aud. inventaire’), although the writ- ten record is in a single hand. The most efficient procedure would surely have been for one person to hold up each volume and read off the title while the other recorded it. This may account for baffling entries like 653 liber manseydes, and for the apparent confla- tion of two books at certain points. It is, for example, difficult to envision 392 Juvenalis et eorum qui in operibus Gersonis continentur as a single volume. 24 He prints all such entries in italics except for 254 Sermones Adventus et Kadragesime en parchemin (presumably an oversight). 25 Desachy seems to have been misled by 336 Repertorium Brixiensis, for which see on 334 below.

QuærendoDownloaded from 47 Brill.com09/29/2021 (2017) 199-221 04:48:31AM via free access The Library of Hélion Jouffroy 207 be Giovanni Bertachini, Repertorium iuris utriusque, the numerous editions of which are regularly split into three parts, divided as in the inventory. Jouffroy possessed two other copies of this work (287-9; 334-5 + 370). Less likely, but still possible is the similar work of Petrus de Monte, found in three parts in at least some editions (see on 334 below). Jouffroy owned another copy of this work also (336 + 361 + 367), as well as the same author’s De monarchia (413). I cannot account for the inventory’s breve, which seems an odd adjective for any work in three volumes, and certainly for Bertachini’s, whose first volume alone runs to nearly seven hundred pages in the 1483 Nuremberg edition by Koberger (ISTC ib00498000, GW 4153).

100. Baldus modernus de Dole. Desachy adds a ‘(sic)’ but offers no explana- tion; he indexes the entry not under the author but under the apparent title De Dole. This must be Baldus de Bartolinis, De dotibus et dotatis mulieribus. The singular form dote is found in some editions, e.g. the 1515 Pavia edition by Bernardino Garaldi (USTC 812420) or the 1527 Lyons edition by Jean de Moylin (USTC 155753, FB 56004). The adjective modernus evidently differentiates the fifteenth-century author (sometimes also referred to as Baldus Novellus) from the more famous Baldus de Ubaldis (1327-1400), some of whose works follow immediately after in the inventory (101-107).

126. Primo ung livre appellé George Valle Tractatus de arimethica, de musica, de geometria, de tota astrologia, de aphissiologia in papire. Desachy: ‘Giorgio Valla … a traduit et commenté Aristote, Ptolémée … Galien et Psellus …: il s’agit ici probablement d’un recueil de ces traductions.’ But the contents make clear that this is Valla’s De expetendis et fugiendis rebus opus (Venice: Aldus Manutius, 1501), in which these are the first five components, collectively making up the first volume. (aphisiologia is of course for phisiologia). The next section would be de medicina, and this links up nicely with item 496, Residuum Georgii Valle tractatus de medicina.

155. Processus Lucifferi contra Jesum, Andreas Gurier (?). Super auctionibus sacramenta pauperum. Desachy identifies the first item as the popular tract by Jacobus de Teramo (1349-1417) and suggests that ‘Andreas Gurier’ conceals the Latin grammar of Andreas Gut(t)erius, i.e. Andres Gutierrez de Cerezo (ca. 1450- 1503). Both seem reasonable guesses, but what of the last four words? A footnote keyed to ‘pauperum’ cites ‘Jean d’André, glossateur du droit canonique.’ This is the canonist Giovanni d’Andrea or Iohannes Andreae (ca. 1270-1348). Jouffroy owned various copies of his works (164; 269; 341-2; 578; 581; 639-42)

Quærendo 47 (2017) 199-221 Downloaded from Brill.com09/29/2021 04:48:31AM via free access 208 Hays but I cannot find anything in his output to connect him with this entry.26 I suspect these four words represent two distinct texts. The Super actionibus is probably by Jason de Mayno (another copy is listed two items later at 157). The sacramenta pauperum might be Adam of Alderspach’s Summula pauperum, a metrical précis of the Summa sacramentorum of Raymundus de Pennaforte. Jouffroy owned a copy of Raymundus’s Summa de matrimonio (420) and two manuscripts described only as Summa (domini) Ramundi (239; 442), probably his Summa de casibus poenitentiae.

189. Colius. Desachy’s note implausibly suggests the lost Roman historian Coelius Antipater. In my review I tentatively suggested Coelius Sedulius or Coelius Rhodiginus. Another possibility might be the oratorical writer Matthaeus Colatius, whose works were printed at least three times before 1500.27 However, the single-name format suggests that we are dealing with a major classical author (see on 631 below). The compiler elsewhere spells Seneca as Ceneca (584-5; 587), so perhaps we should consider Colius, i.e. Solinus.

196. De origine mundi et de scitu orbis de numero en parchemin. Desachy identifies at least part of this entry as Strabo, in the Latin translation of Guarino and Gregory of Terni.28 This is possible, but by no means certain. De situ orbis could also be Pomponius Mela, Ptolemy (cf. 158 Tholomeus de exitu orbis), Solinus, or Dionysius Periegetes. De origine mundi (if that is a separate work) could conceivably be Jordanes or Avitus; De numero is still harder to pin down. The manuscript could also have been a miscellany of excerpts, e.g. from Isidore.

199. Liber incipiens Incipit Andreas et Historia de receptione capitis sancti Andree. ‘La première partie, d’après l’incipit, correspond peut-être aux Miracula sancti Andreae [BHL no. 431].’ In reality, the entry represents a single title: the Andreis, idest Historia de receptione capitis sancti Andreae ascribed to Aeneas Silvius Piccolomini (Pius II) (BHL no. 439). I can find no trace of a printed edition, so this may have been a manuscript, albeit not specified as such.

26 Was this perhaps a first attempt by Desachy at identifying ‘Andreas’ which accidentally survived subsequent revisions? 27 ISTC lists De fine oratoris disputatio in Quintilianum (Venice: Jacobus de Fivizzano ca. 1476-77 or Milan: Antonius Zarotus ca. 1485 [ISTC ic00749000]); Responsio de fine oratoris (Padova: Bernardinus Celerius 1478 [ISTC ic00749500]); Opuscula (Venice: Bernardinus Rizus, ?1486 [ISTC ic00750000]). 28 His footnote is placed after orbis, implying that de numero is a separate work; whether he takes De origine mundi et de scitu orbis as one work or two is not clear to me.

QuærendoDownloaded from 47 Brill.com09/29/2021 (2017) 199-221 04:48:31AM via free access The Library of Hélion Jouffroy 209

215. Antiquitatum varia volumina. Unidentified by Desachy. This unpromising- looking entry must be the Antiquitatum variarum volumina XVII of Annius of Viterbo (Giovanni Nanni), printed at Paris by Badius and/or Jean Petit in 1512 (USTC 143895, FB 80441; USTC 187212, FB 80442) and 1515 (USTC 144370, FB 80443; USTC 187261, FB 80444). This is another indication of Jouffroy’s interest in world history (or in this case ‘history’; most of Annius’s work is fantasy and fabrication).

221. Retorica Tulii nova et ejusdem Tulii retorica vetus in pargameno. Desachy identifies these merely as ‘Cicéron, Rethorica.’ But we can be more precise. At this period, nova and vetus designate the Rhetorica ad Herennium and the De inventione, respectively.29

233. Pollidori Virgilii libri tres. Desachy: ‘Polydorus Virgilius est un humaniste italien, auteur d’un fameux De rerum inventoribus libri octo.’ He does not explain the divergence in book numbers. This must have been the first edition of De inventoribus (Venice: Christophorus de Pensis, 1499 [GW M50152; ISTC iv00146000]), which comprised only three books; the remaining five were added in 1521.

240. Sebellici ystorici prima pars + 241 Sebellici ystorici secunda pars + 242 Sebellici ystorici tercia pars. Desachy’s footnote refers readers to his note on 220 (Liber Sabellici exemplorum) which consists only of a reference to the Exemplorum libri decem. The historical work in three parts must be the Enneades sive Rhapsodia historiarum (Venice: Bernardinus Venetus and Matthaeus Venetus, 1498, and later edd.).

246. Guilhelmi Budey regis secretarii. Desachy does not venture a guess at the work, but the title form would fit Epistolae Gulielmi Budaei regii secretarii (Paris: Badius, 1520 [USTC 181953, FB 59356] or 1520-22 [USTC 182029, FB 59355]). For Jouffroy’s interest in letters see introduction above.

253. Epistole super cace glosate en parchemin. No comment from Desachy, but glosate suggests a biblical text. This in turn suggests that cace should be ex- panded to canonice and super is an error (the compiler’s or Desachy’s) for sep- tem. These are the seven Catholic Epistles, i.e. James, 1-2 Peter, 1-3 John, and

29 See, e.g. J.J. Murphy, Rhetoric in the Middle Ages (Berkeley 1974), p. 18 n. 31.

Quærendo 47 (2017) 199-221 Downloaded from Brill.com09/29/2021 04:48:31AM via free access 210 Hays

Jude. So, e.g., Epistole canonice glosate in John Whytefelde’s 1389 catalogue of Dover Priory.30

259. Beda super Ve librorum Moysi en parchemin. Desachy’s note identifies Bede as an ‘auteur … de commentaires et sermons sur la Bible,’ but does not attempt to identify the work. It is in fact a Pseudo-Bedan commentary on the Pentateuch (Stegmüller Repertorium Biblicum, 2: 186-187, no. 1647-1651). The title form and attribution to Bede place it in the β branch, thus far identified in three manuscripts: Boulogne, Bibliothèque Municipale, MS 16 bis (s. IX); Brussels, Bibliothèque Royale, MS 9327-28 (s. IX); Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS e Mus. 36 (s. XII). Another (lost) manuscript of this family was the source of the first printed edition, Commentaria D. Venerabilis Bedae in quinque libros Moysis iam primo in lucem edita (Antwerp: Guilielmus Montanus, 1542 [USTC 400696]). On the work’s origins and manuscript tradition see M. Gorman. ‘The Commentary on the Pentateuch Attributed to Bede in PL 91.189-394,’ in: Revue Benedictine 106 (1996), pp. 61-107 and 255-307. The entry thus provides new evi- dence for the circulation and survival of this relatively rare text.

260. Quodam libela de fontibus en parchemin. Desachy suggests Boccaccio’s De montibus, silvis et fontibus. In my review I proposed Vibius Sequester as a possible alternative. But neither of these really fits Jouffroy’s readerly profile. I wonder whether this might be a legal or theological work of some sort (e.g. Bernard of Clairvaux De quatuor spiritualibus fontibus). An outside possibility would be a work by the thirteenth-century philosopher and theologian Godfrey of Fontaines (Godefridus de Fontibus).

262. De Officiis Seneca en parchemin. Desachy’s note gives Seneca’s dates and identifies him as a ‘philosophe latin.’ While Seneca indeed wrote a De officiis, only three words of it survive. Jouffroy’s De officiis must be either Cicero or Ambrose, followed by a work by (or ascribed to) Seneca. At least two extant fifteenth-century manuscripts open with Cicero’s De officiis and close with Pseudo-Seneca (i.e. Martin of Braga) De quattuor virtutibus, also known as the Formula honestae vitae.31 A fourteenth-century codex contains Cicero followed

30 BM1.65 in William P. Stoneman, Dover Priory. Corpus of British Medieval Library Catalogues, vol. 5 (London 1999), p. 21. 31 El Escorial, Real Biblioteca, MS V.III.4; London, British Library, MS Harley 2784. Intervening in both are Cicero’s Paradoxa, De senectute and De amicitia; the Harley manuscript adds Augustine De vero cultu.

QuærendoDownloaded from 47 Brill.com09/29/2021 (2017) 199-221 04:48:31AM via free access The Library of Hélion Jouffroy 211 by the De remediis fortuitorum.32 Yet another has Cicero plus the apocry- phal Seneca/Paul correspondence.33 Ambrose’s De officiis is followed by the Pseudo-Senecan Formula in at least two incunabula.34 Jouffroy’s manuscript might have been copied from one of these printed editions (a not uncommon phenomenon at this period), or might have been related to the exemplar from which their text was derived.

277. Desabe super Clementine. Desachy offers no note on the mysterious ‘Desabe,’ which does not seem to be indexed either. I think it must be a mishearing of ‘De Zabarellis,’ i.e. the Italian canonist Francesco Zabarella. Jouffroy owned two other editions of his Lectura super Clementinis (424, 632).

301. Prepositus super Feudis ibidem de Appelatione. ‘Johannes Antonius de Sancto Gregorio (Praepositus), Tractatus appellationum, Côme, 1474.’ This rightly identifies the author, vulgariter Giovanni Antonio Sangiorgio. The volume evidently contained not only his Tractatus appellationum but also his Super usibus feudorum. I have not found any edition containing both works, so this may have been two books bound together (as ibidem might also suggest). Antonius de Carcano printed the Tractatus appellationum at Pavia in 1488 (GW M39945, ISTC is00141000) and the Super usibus feudorum in 1490 (GW M39971, ISTC is00131000). Both works were also printed at Venice by Pincio, the Tractatus appellationum in 1497 (GW M39947, ISTC is00141500) and the Super usibus feudorum in 1498 (GW M39975, ISTC is00133000). Carcano’s editions have no title pages; those in Pincio’s are close, though not identical, to the formulation in the inventory: Prepositus super usibus feudorum; Prepositus super titulo de Appellationibus.

302. Epistola Philelphi poete in vitam atque gesta. ‘L’exemplaire cité peut être rapproché de l’exemplaire conservé à la BM de Millau …: Epistolae, Venise, 1493.’ The copy in question has an ex-libris for ‘Anthonius Joffridi.’ But the title in the inventory points rather to Filelfo’s translation of Plutarch’s Vita Thesei, preceded by the Epistola Philelphi poete In vitam atque gesta Thesei viri claris- simi, as in Campano’s edition of the Vitae illustrium virorum (Strassburg: Adolf Rusch, after 1470-71 [GW M34477; ISTC ip00831000]).

32 El Escorial, Real Biblioteca, MS T.II.3 (also containing Justin/Trogus). 33 Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, MS lat. 6344 (from the royal library at Naples). 34 Paris: Ulrich Gering, Martin Crantz and Michael Friburger ca. 1472 (GW 1609, ISTC ia00559400); Louvain: Johannes de Westfalia, ca. 1479-80 (GW 1610, ISTC ia00559600).

Quærendo 47 (2017) 199-221 Downloaded from Brill.com09/29/2021 04:48:31AM via free access 212 Hays

321. Prima pars Cardinalis; 322. Secunda pars Hugonis Cardinalis super Psalterium; 323. Tertia par [sic] Hugonis Cardinalis super Proverbia; 324. Quarta pars domini Hugonis Cardinalis super libris Ysaye et Yeremie; 325. Quinta pars Cardinalis; 326. Sexta pars Cardinalis; 327. Septima pars Cardinalis. As Desachy saw, this is Hugh of St. Cher’s biblical commentary. He refers to ‘plusieurs éditions incunables’, but in fact the work was not especially popular with early printers (unlike Hugh’s Expositio Missae). From the inventory we know that Jouffroy’s set was in seven volumes, and that vol. 2 began with the Psalms, vol. 3 with Proverbs, and vol. 4 with Isaiah and Jeremiah. These criteria neatly fit the 1498-1502 Basel edition by Amerbach for Koberger (GW 4285, ISTC ib00610000, USTC 689051).35 The title form given for vol. 4 is also a good match for that edition, where the corresponding volume is identified as Quarta pars hui(us) operis: co(n)tine(n)s textu(m) unacu(m) [i.e. una cum] postilla d(omi)ni Hugonis Cardinalis.

328. Prologus Yeronimi. ‘Prologue sur les Évangiles de saint Jérôme.’ In reality this could have been any one of a number of works, e.g. the Vitas patrum, of which one edition opens Incipit prologus sancti Hieronimi cardinalis presbiteri in libros vitaspatrum.36 The inventory-taker will have simply followed the opening words. Similar is 333 Prefatio Jeronimi, where Desachy wisely ventures no identification. See also on 373 below.

334. Secunda pars Repertorii utriusque juris domini Johannis Barlogini. 335. Prima pars solempni Repertorii utriusque juris. 336. Repertorium Brixiensis super p r s t u x y z. […] 361. Repertorium. […] 367 Repertorium Brisensi super f g h j k l m n o. […] 370. Tertia pars solempnis Repertorii utriusque juris. As Desachy saw, ‘Barlogini’ in 334 is Giovanni Bertachini (see above on 84-6). The compiler apparently had difficulties with this name, which appears elsewhere as ‘Barthicani’ (141) and ‘Bartini’ (142-3). Desachy identifies ‘Brixiensis’ in 336 as Bartolomeo of Brescia, but in fact this must be the Repertorium utriusque iuris of Petrus de Monte, who in early editions is referred to as ‘Petrus

35 The 1504 Basel edition by Petri and Frobenius (USTC 686528) was in six volumes. Otherwise I find only partial editions: Postilla super evangelia (Basel: Bernhard Richel, 1482 [GW n0223, ISTC ih00529000]); Postilla super psalterium (Venice: Johannes and Gregorius de Gregoriis for Stephanus and Bernardinus de Nallis, 1496 [GW n0229, ISTC ih 00530000]); Postilla super psalterium (Nuremberg: Koberger, 1498 [GW n0227, ISTC ih00531000]); Postilla super epistolas et evangelia ([Paris], Jean Petit, 1506 [USTC 143187, FB 74549]; Divina expositio in altos quattuor evangeliorum apices (Paris: Ulrich Gering and Berthold Rembolt, 1508 [USTC 143376, FB 74550]). 36 Strassburg: Printer of the 1483 ‘Vitas Patrum’ 1483 (GW M50879, ISTC ih00204000).

QuærendoDownloaded from 47 Brill.com09/29/2021 (2017) 199-221 04:48:31AM via free access The Library of Hélion Jouffroy 213 episcopus Brixiensis’. The three-part format suggests either the ‘1465’ [i.e. 1475] Bologna edition of Andreas Portilia (GW M25363, ISTC im 00841500) or the 1476 Nuremburg edition of Johann Sensenschmidt and Andreas Frisner (GW M25368, ISTC im00843000).37 The six entries above would make up two sets, shelved (like many of Jouffroy’s books) in a rather disorderly fashion: 335 + 334 + 370 = Bertachini; 361 + 367 + 336 = Petrus de Monte.

339. Enricus Boyc super IIII et V Decretalium cum repertorio. Desachy identifies the author as the Breton canonist Henri Bohic (or Bouhic, or Boich), but does not specify an edition. This appears to be the second volume of a copy bound in two volumes. There is no sign of the first one, which would presumably have contained the commentary on Decretals 1-3. There are only two pre- 1530 editions: Lyons 1498 by Johannes Siber for Jacques Buyer (GW 4964, ISTC ib01049000), published in six parts (Decretales 1-5 + repertorium), or the 1520 Lyons edition by Vincentius de Portonariis, which was split into three volumes (USTC 145252, FB 58421; USTC 200076, FB 58422; USTC 200077, FB 58423) containing, respectively, Decretales 1-2, 3-4 and 5 + repertorium. It is hard to see why anyone would have rebound the latter into two volumes, so the 1498 edition looks like a better bet. A split after Decretals 3 would give 292 folios for vol. 1 and 182 folios for vol. 2.

357. Sermones fratris Leonardi de Utino. Correctly identified by Desachy as Leonardo of Udine. He adds that ‘l’édition de ses sermons est de 1501.’ In fact there are dozens of editions, going back to the early 1470s. I do not think we can be sure which one Jouffroy owned.

358. Barbatius de Re ecclesie non alienanda. Desachy identifies the author as ‘Barbatius de Sulmona.’ Barbato of Sulmona was a friend and correspondent of Petrarch, but the Latin form of his name is Barbatus. In fact this is the fifteenth-century jurist Andreas Barbatia (Andrea Barbazza) of Messina. His Repetitio rubricae De rebus Ecclesiae alienandis vel non was printed at Parma by Stephanus Corallus, c. 1475-6 (GW 03369; ISTC ib00106460); there are several later Italian editions.38

37 The 1476 Rome editions apud Sanctum Marcum (Vitus Puecher) (GW M25374, ISTC im00842000) and the 1480 Padova edition by Johannes Herbort (GW M25372, ISTC im00844000) were in two volumes. 38 Naples: Jodocus Hohenstein 1476 (GW 3370, ISTC ib00106480); Bologna: Ugo Rugerius 1488 (GW 3371, ISTC ib00113000); Pavia: Antonius de Carcano 1497 (GW 3372, ISTC ib00114000).

Quærendo 47 (2017) 199-221 Downloaded from Brill.com09/29/2021 04:48:31AM via free access 214 Hays

373. Epistola sancti Jeronimi presbiteri. This is indexed by Desachy as a copy of Jerome’s letters (of which Jouffroy certainly had more than one copy). But the singular Epistola suggests it might actually be one portion of a glossed bible. In the Vulgate, Proverbs is preceded by Jerome’s epistle to Chromatius and Heliodorus. Note that the preceding item 371 is described as Prima pars glose ordinarie, and 372 as Quarta pars glose ordinarie, while the following item 374 is listed as Secunda pars glose ordinarie. But where is the tertia pars? Right here, surely, surrounded by its siblings. Proverbs would be exactly at the start of volume 3 in a four-volume edition, just as it begins the second volume of the modern two-volume edition by Robert Weber, Biblia Sacra iuxta Vulgatam Versionem (2d edn. Stuttgart 1975).

388. Primo unum volumen intitulatum prima pars dictionarum. 389 Aliud volumen secunda pars dictionarii. 390. Tertia pars dictionarii. At first glance the title dictionarium might suggest Calepinus, or perhaps Albericus de Rosate, Dictionarium iuris civilis et canonici. But the title form and three-part format point rather to the Repertorium Morale of Pierre Bersuire (Petrus Berchorius), published with the title Prima [secunda, tertia] pars dictionarii in qua dictio quelibet per literas alphabeti iuxta congruentiam distinguitur (Lyons: Jacques Sacon impensis Anton Koberger 1516-17 [USTC 144622, FB 56816; USTC 200060, FB 56818] or Prima [secunda, tertia] pars dictionarii moralis seu theologia (Paris: Claude Chevallon 1521-2 [USTC 186895, FB 56819; USTC 145550, FB 56820]). Like Bersuire’s better known Reductorium Morale, the alphabetically arranged Repertorium was intended as an aid to preaching.

398. Opuscula de Mellinis. Desachy does not comment on this entry (which also seems to be missing from his index). It might be In Celsi Archelai Melini funere amicorum lacrimae (Rome: Giacomo Mazzocchi, c. 1520 [USTC 802216]). The Roman aristocrat Celsus Mellinus died aged nineteen or twenty and was mourned by the litterati of the day. Some addressed their compositions to his brother Petrus: hence, perhaps, the plural Mellinis.

411. Orationes philosophi cujusdam epistole. Unidentified by Desachy. I have not found any title that matches this, and the vague description seems peculiar. (If the compiler had an author’s name, why not give it? If he had none, how did he know the author was a philosopher?) I wonder if this might actually be Orationes philelphi; ejusdem epistole. Jouffroy owned other copies of both Filelfo’s letters (468; 481) and orations (544). 416. Modus legendi abreviaturas in utroque jure. Not identified by Desachy. This text is a somewhat fluid collection of aids and mnemonics for reading legal texts. Some of the components appear to have circulated separately in

QuærendoDownloaded from 47 Brill.com09/29/2021 (2017) 199-221 04:48:31AM via free access The Library of Hélion Jouffroy 215 manuscript, but the collection as such is probably a product of the print era. It appeared in numerous printed editions on either side of 1500 (e.g. Paris: Jean Petit, 1506 [USTC 182739, FB 91085]). The compiler is sometimes wrongly identified as Werner von Schussenried, based on an acrostic identified by Victor Scholderer.39 But only the small portion containing the acrostic can be attributed to Werner, who was active around 1200, rather than in the fifteenth century (as Scholderer believed).40

422. Casus breves decreti VI Clementinarum. Not identified by Desachy. Probably Michael de Dalen, Casus summarii Decretalium, Sexti et Clementinarum, of which there are at least eight incunabular editions. The title here is close to the title page of Strassburg: [Printer of the 1483 Jordanus de Quedlinburg (Georg Husner)], 1485 (ISTC im00533000, GW M23140) Casus breves Decretaliu(m) Sexti & Clementinarum, as also of Strassburg: [Georg Husner?] 1493 (ISTC im00535000, GW M23142).

425. Rubrice juris. Not identified by Desachy, but surely the Rubricae iuris civilis et canonici first published at Rome before 1485 by Stephan Plannck (GW M39044, ISTC ir 00341000) and often subsequently.

426. Casus longi super Decretalium. Not identified by Desachy, but almost certainly Bernardus Parmensis, Casus longi super quinque libros decretalium, published in over a dozen editions between 1475 and 1500.

429. Consilia domini Benedicti de Paruso. ‘Peut-être Bartholus de Sassoferrato, juriste à Bologne et à Pérouse (1313-1357).’ But this is surely the Consilia super materia ultimarum voluntatum, a treatise on wills by Benedictus Capra (d. 1470). There were two incunable editions.41

463. Le lapidaire en Françoys compres par monsieur Jehan de Mandanea. Desachy correctly identifies the author as Mandeville. Eight early editions of

39 V. Scholderer, ‘The Author of the ‘Modus legendi abbreviaturas,’ in: The Library 3d ser. 2 (1911), pp. 181-182. 40 See further R. Feenstra, ‘La genèse du “Modus legendi abbreviaturas in utroque iure.” Éditions incunables et manuscrits,’ in: P. Linehan, ed. Life, Law and Letters (Rome 1998), vol. 1, pp. 221-248 = Feenstra, Histoire du droit savant (13e-18e siècle) (Aldershot 2005), no. X; idem, ‘La diffusion du Modus legendi abbreviaturas in utroque iure: éditions des XVIe et XVIIe siècles,’ in: ZSS, Kanon. Abt. 84 (1998), pp. 345-385 = Feenstra, op. cit. (2005), no. XI. 41 Perugia: Johannes Schriber 1476 (GW 3815, ISTC ib00305400); Pavia: Franciscus de Guaschis de Stradella for Johannes de Legnano 1498 (GW 3816, ISTC ib00305600).

Quærendo 47 (2017) 199-221 Downloaded from Brill.com09/29/2021 04:48:31AM via free access 216 Hays this work are listed by D.J. Shaw.42 Two of these (1544 and 1561 = Shaw’s nos. 7 and 8) are clearly too late to have been owned by Jouffroy. Two undated editions are placed by USTC and FB in 1530, which would also be too late: these are Lyons: Jacques Moderne (USTC 34831, FB 36076 = Shaw’s no. 5) and Paris: Alain Lotrian (USTC 34832, FB 36077 = Shaw’s no. 6). Shaw’s no. 4 (n. pl., n.d.) appears to lack the ‘messire’ found in other editions and present in the Jouffroy inventory in the form of ‘monsieur.’43 This would leave three possibilities: Shaw’s no. 1 = Lyons, Printer of Bernardus de Gordonio (Martin Havard?), c. 1495 (GW M2046350; ISTC im00176520); Shaw’s no. 2 = Paris: Michel Le Noir, c. 1500 (GW M20463; ISTC im00176530); Shaw’s no. 3 = Lyons: Louis Lanchart, [c. 1515?] (USTC 29051, FB 36072). We cannot, of course, rule out another edition not elsewhere recorded.

476. Mirabilia a la main. This might be Solinus’s De mirabilibus mundi (for another possible copy see 189 above), but is more likely the Mirabilia Urbis Romae, a text enormously popular in the later middle ages and the incunable period.

490. Fabule Philelphi. Desachy only identifies the author. Presumably this is the editio princeps (Pavia: Antonius de Carcano, 1480 [GW M33019; ISTC ip00603000]), which appears to have been the only one published before 1529.

498. Alphabetum juris. Not identified by Desachy. Perhaps Albericus de Rosate, Dictionarium sive alfabetum juris civilis et canonici. Jouffroy owned three other works by Albericus (368; 548-9). Or Petrus de Ravenna (i.e. Pietro Tommai) Alphabetum aureum utriusque iuris.

499. Consilium pestis. (So Desachy’s text; the index entry gives the first word as Concilium.) Unidentified by Desachy. This might be Angelo Camillo Decembrio, Consilium de curatione pestis. If so, it may have been a manuscript. The 1521 Pavia edition published by Bernardino Garaldi (USTC 812895) has the work third in the volume, and the inventory compiler would surely have given the title as Consilia Baverii, after the opening work.

42 D.J. Shaw, ‘An Unidentified French Incunable: Sir John Mandeville, Le Lapidaire en fran- coys, [Lyon, c. 1495-1496],’ in: Electronic British Library Journal (2012), art. 6, pp. 6-7. 43 Note, however, that this edition appears to be known only from J.C. Brunet, Manuel du libraire et de l’amateur de livres (Paris 1862), vol. 3, p. 1361.

QuærendoDownloaded from 47 Brill.com09/29/2021 (2017) 199-221 04:48:31AM via free access The Library of Hélion Jouffroy 217

501 Opus Pauli Orosi. This title form (as opposed to Adversus paganos, Historiae or the like) points to the 1506 Paris edition by Jean Marchant for Jean Petit (USTC 143179, FB 81131), or one of several later Paris editions. In these the work is identified as Opus prestantissimum.

503. Sophologium sapientis magistri Jacobi Magni. Desachy identifies the author as Jacques Legrand and points to ‘[u]ne édition incunable à Strasbourg, vers 1474 … Hain no 10471.’ But the latter (GW M17665, ISTC im00040500) does not match the title form. The compiler’s sapientis derives from a misreading (or -writing) of Sophologium sapientie magistri Jacobi Magni, the title given in the 1500 Paris edition by Baligault (GW M17653; ISTC im 00049000), the Paris 1515 edition (n.pr. for Jean Petit [GW M17649 which dates it ‘um 1495’; ISTC im00050000]), and other editions.

511. Epistole Falaridis. Desachy identifies this with the Albi edition of ca. 1475 by the Printer of Aeneas Sylvius (GW M3283910, ISTC ip00555300). But the title forms do not match. The Albi edition begins with Aretino’s prefatory letter: Francisci Aretini phalaridis Agrige(n)tini in epistolas ad illustre(m) principem Malatestam novellu(m) de malatestis p(ro)hemium Incipit. This is surely one of many later editions that have the title as it appears in the inventory, e.g. Jacobus Thanner: Leipzig, 31 May 1498 (GW M32853, ISTC ip00565000): Epistole Phalaridis per Franciscum aretinum traducte. Desachy is eager to link books from Jouffroy’s library with the two printing shops active at nearby Albi between 1475 and 1483, that of the so-called Printer of Aeneas Silvius and that of Jean Neumeister.44 But the only local books Jouffroy seems certainly to have owned are a number of breviaria … romana impressa Albie not mentioned in the inventory but which his will bequeaths presbyteris indigentibus.

514. Bonifaci opera. ‘Il s’agit soit du pape Boniface VIII … ou de Boniface (v. 675-754), auteur de traités de grammaire.’ The likelihood of the second op- tion seems vanishingly small, particularly in the absence of a pre-1529 printed

44 Desachy, op. cit. (n. 1), pp. 59-63, esp. 60: ‘[Jouffroy], rappelons-le avec force, conserve dans sa bibliothèque plusieurs titres sortis des presses albigeoises.’ But of the items he refers to (200. Summa pizanella; 354. Repertorium domini Nicholay de Milis; 405. Decisiones Rote; 417. Manipulus curatorum; 511. Epistole Falaridis; 605. Cipola de Servitutibus) none can be shown to be the Albi edition. I note that in Desachy, art. cit. (n. 1: 2010), p. 58, the corresponding sentence has ‘exemplaires … des éditions sorties des presses albigeoises’ (my italics). It is not clear to me whether the alteration to ‘titres’ in the 2012 version represents a weakening of the original claim.

Quærendo 47 (2017) 199-221 Downloaded from Brill.com09/29/2021 04:48:31AM via free access 218 Hays edition. Considering the amount of canon law Jouffroy owned, Boniface VIII might seem a better candidate. Yet opera would be an odd title; Boniface’s major work is generally identified simply as the Liber Sextus Decretalium or Sextus, and the inventory has multiple copies so identified (see introduction above). I think this must be the Franciscan Bonifacius de Ceva (Bonifacio da Ceva). A number of his works were printed at Paris between 1513 and 1518.45

518. Compendium moralium. Unidentified by Desachy, but probably Geremia de Montagnone, Compendium moralium notabilium (Venice: Peter Liechtenstein, 1505: USTC 832289). The title page of this edition has Epytoma Sapientie, but the first page begins Incipit compendium moralium.

519. Practica stilum. Unidentified by Desachy. I suspect this conceals Bernardus de Gorgonio, Practica seu Lilium medicinae, first printed in 1480 (Naples: Francesco del Tuppo for Bernardinus Gerardinus [ISTC ib00447000]). Jouffroy might have owned the 1491 Lyons edition by Antonius Lambillon and Marinus Saracenus (GW 04082, ISTC ib00449000, USTC 202502, FB 56963) or any of several later editions.

547. Consilia domini Angeli de Perusio. Not identified by Desachy. This is the jurist Angelo degli Ubaldi (1328-1407). The title given matches the explicit-title in the edition published at Venice by Johannes Rubeus in 1487 (GW M48393, ISTC iu00004000).

553. Liber meditionum [sic] beati Bernardi. With the obvious correction to meditationum the title matches the edition printed at Venice after 1492 by Bernardinus Benalius (GW 04033, ISTC ib00405000) as well as a 1508 Cologne printing by Martin von Werden (USTC 672841).

560. Ludus litie […]. So Desachy prints this entry, which he describes as ‘diffi- cilement lisible.’ The entry is preceded by two works of Erasmus and followed by another, so Desachy hesitantly suggests Lucubratiunculae, which does not seem very close. I previously proposed Ludus Lidie, noting that Jouffroy also owned a copy of Pamphilus (612). However, Desachy notes that ‘il y avait

45 Viatice excursiones (Paris: Berthold Rembolt for Jean Petit 1515 [USTC 144521, FB 58641]; Paris: Jean Petit 1518 [USTC 183801, FB 58648]); De perfectione Christiana (Paris: Berthold Rembolt for Jean Petit 1517 [USTC 144729, FB 58643]); Sermones quadragesimales (Paris: Jean Frellon [1518] [USTC 209000, FB 58651]; Paris, Michel Moules [1518] [USTC 209019, FB 58652]; Paris, Pasquier Lambert [1518] [USTC 209115, FB 58653]; and several others).

QuærendoDownloaded from 47 Brill.com09/29/2021 (2017) 199-221 04:48:31AM via free access The Library of Hélion Jouffroy 219 probablement quelques lettres entre les deux mots qui ne sont plus lisibles.’ Perhaps Laus litie, which could be identified with the De militiae laudi- bus oratio of Marcellus Vergilius (Basel, 1518). But even more likely, given the Erasmian surroundings, would be Laus titie, the famous Praise of Folly.

579 = 592. Tractatus munerum. Unidentified by Desachy. This must be Petrus Antibolus, Tractatus munerum (Lyons: Jacques Maillet, 1493 [GW 2049, ISTC ia00766000]).

596. Proverbia Vulgurium. Desachy rightly rules out Charles de Bouelles’ Proverbiorum vulgarium as first published in 1531 (a year after the inventory was compiled). Could this be the Proverbia of Virgilius Polydorus (Venice, Christophorus de Pensis, 1498 [GW M50148, ISTC 00147000] and many later editions)?

600. Tractatus super Pater Noster a la main. This is not easily identifiable with- out an incipit, but some possibilities are Franciscus de Mayronis (François de Meyronnes), Thomas Aquinas, or the fourteenth-century Dominican preacher Siboto.46

609. Tractatus de modo vaccandi benefficiis. Desachy tentatively suggests the Libellus de beneficiis in curia vacantibus of Juan Lopez Palacios Rubios (Salamanca: [Juan de Porras], 1517 [USTC 339475]). Much more likely is the anonymous but often-printed Modus vacandi et acceptandi beneficiorum (Rome: Ulrich Han, 1470-71 and many later edd.). The edition printed by Henricus Mayer at Toulouse ca. 1490 (GW M25105, ISTC im00785950, USTC 200979, FB 64096) has a title form very close to that found here (beneficiorum for benefficiis), as do a good many others. This would have been a work of more than purely academic interest to Jouffroy. Desachy notes the uncle’s ‘goût im- modéré des bénéfices,’ and the nephew’s career shows that the apple did not fall far from the tree.47

611. Compendium ad omnes materias in jure ciuili inveniendas. Unidentified by Desachy. This is the work known as the Margarita legum, published by Eberhard Frommolt at Vienne in 1480 or 1481 (GW M20994; ISTC im00264700,

46 For Siboto see M. Bloomfield, et al., Incipits of Latin Works on the Virtues and Vices (Cambridge, Mass. 1979), pp. 667-8 (no. 9084). 47 Desachy, op. cit. (n. 1), p. 23; 48.

Quærendo 47 (2017) 199-221 Downloaded from Brill.com09/29/2021 04:48:31AM via free access 220 Hays

FB 79052).48 Some eight manuscripts are known, but this is the only known printed edition, and its incipit corresponds to the title given here.

613. Ciceroni orationes. ‘Ce titre est à mettre en relation avec le manucrit Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana, C 175 inf., ayant probablement appartenu à Jean Jouffroy’. I cannot see any particular reason to connect what was probably a printed book with either the manuscript mentioned, or with another manuscript of Cicero apparently owned by the elder Jouffroy, The Hague, Koninklijke Bibliotheek (National Library of the Netherlands (KB), 75 C. 63 (no. 23 in the list of his library at Desachy, op. cit. [n. 1], p. 73).

621. Virgilii varia opera. The compilers typically designate major classical authors by name alone: Curtius (540), Diodorus Siculus (508), Herodianus (187), Juvenalis (159; 392; 543), Lucanus (462), Pertius, i.e. Persius (520), Quintilianus (646), Suetonus [sic] Tranquillus (208), Valerius Maximus (195; 218), and so too—for Jouffroy’s other copy of Virgil—Virgilius (183).49 A particular work may be specified when the volume includes only part of a larger corpus, e.g. Ciceroni orationes (613), Ovidius de Remedio (174), or to preclude ambiguity for some other reason. Thus Plinius de Naturali historia (214) distinguishes Pliny the Elder from his nephew. But presumably any edition of Virgil would have included Eclogues, Georgics and Aeneid, so Virgilii varia opera says nothing that would not have been adequately conveyed by a simple Virgilius. And those three works on their own do not seem numerous or diverse enough to be described as varia. This suggests that the volume was more expansive.50 A plau- sible candidate, for example, would be the unassigned ca. 1511 Lyons edition (USTC 862736), which include various poems from the Appendix Virgiliana and epigrams ascribed to Virgil. The title page describes it as follows:

Vergilius. In hoc volumine continentur opera vergiliana inferius scrip- ta. Bucolica. Georgica. Aeneidos libri xii una cum Mapphei Veggii libro xiii eiusdem Vergilii opuscola: uidelicet Culex. Dirae. Aethna.

48 See further R. Feenstra, ‘Le Margarita legum ou Compendium ad omnes materias iuris civilis inveniendas faussement attribué à Oldrade (= Aldracus),’ in: B. Durand and L. Mayali, ed. Excerptiones iuris (Berkeley 2000), pp. 177-203 = Feenstra, op. cit. (n. 40: 2005), no. XIII. 49 There are a few cases with more recent authors: Johannes Tertalinus (410), Albertus Magnus (495), Rodolphi Agricola (566), Tertelius (601). 50 It is unlikely that the entry refers to Polydore Virgil; the volume would have been either the Proverbiorum libellus or the De inventoribus rerum, which do not seem to have been printed together.

QuærendoDownloaded from 47 Brill.com09/29/2021 (2017) 199-221 04:48:31AM via free access The Library of Hélion Jouffroy 221

Cyris ad Messalam. Moretum. Hortulus & elegia de obitu Mecoenatis. Epigrammata. Vir bonus. de ludo. De liuore. De venere e uino. De litterae Y Pythagorae. Coppa et rosa. Est & non. Aetates animalium. Aerumne & labores Herculis. De musarum inventis. De cantu syrenum et de die festo. De fortuna. De Orpheo. De seipso. De speculo et fonte: et experientia. De glacie et plaustro et arcu coelesti quam irim uocat. De quattuor temporis anni: et de ortu solis. De signis coelestibus. Quaedam idyllia. Carmen ad Priapum. Vergilii varia epitaphia.

One can well understand how a compiler faced with something like this might have fallen back on a simple varia opera.

Jouffroy’s library was dispersed after his death. Of the more than six hundred volumes in the inventory, only four are now certainly identifiable: a four-volume set of Alexander of Hales’s Summa universae theologiae (648; 654-5; 657) which passed to the Charterhouse at Rodez and is now in the Bibliothèque Municipale there.51 Yet the attempt to reconstruct this vanished collection can help us better understand not only the intellectual culture of its owner, but also the spread and reception of printed books in France in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries. It illustrates too the considerable value in such studies of recently developed online databases, including the ISTC and USTC, and of various programs (notably that of the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek) to scan early printed editions and make them available on the web. Such initia- tives will surely continue to improve our picture of early modern libraries, Jouffroy’s included, in large ways and small.

51 For this see Desachy, op. cit. (n. 1), p. 58. Desachy, ibid. with n. 57, attempts to identify three more items with books now at Millau or Rodez. These are 302. Epistola Philelphi poete in vitam atque gesta; 544. Orationes Francisci Philelphi; 166. Vocabularium juris. The first of these, at least, must be wrong: see above on 302.

Quærendo 47 (2017) 199-221 Downloaded from Brill.com09/29/2021 04:48:31AM via free access