GREGORY OF RIMINI ON THE INTENSION AND REMISSION OF CORPOREAL FORMS Can L. LOEWE Abstract The goal of this paper is to provide an account of Gregory of Rimini’s (1300- 1358) theory of the intension and remission of corporeal forms. Under the influence of new Oxford ideas of the fourteenth century Gregory adopts a highly quantitative approach to intensive change. The paper discusses Gregory’s defense of the addition theory, especially in light of Walter Burley’s counter- arguments. It also considers Gregory’s account of the continuity of intensive change, as well as his views on the possibility of the co-presence of contrary qualities in the same subject. Introduction The goal of this paper is to provide an account of Gregory of Rimini’s (1300-1358)1 theory of the intension and remission of corporeal forms,2 as laid out in book 1, d. 17, qq. 2-4 of his Sentences commentary 1 On the author, see R.L. FRIEDMAN – C. SCHABEL, “Gregory of Rimini,” in: H. LAGER- LUND (ed.), Encyclopedia of Medieval Philosophy. Philosophy Between 500 and 1500, Vol. 1, Dordrecht 2011, pp. 439-444. All references are to the critical edition: GREGORY OF RIMINI, Lectura Super Primum et Secundum Sententiarum, 6. Vols. (= Spätmittelalter und Reformation. Texte und Untersuchungen, vols. 6-11), ed. A.D. TRAPP – V. MARCOLINO – W. ECKERMANN – M. SANTOS-NOYA – W. SIMON – W. SCHULZE – W. URBAN – V. WEND- LAND, Berlin 1979-84. I refer to Gregory’s Sentences commentary as Sent. All translations from the Latin are mine. (NB: I do not necessarily respect the punctuation and orthography of any text I use.) 2 By ‘corporeal forms’ Gregory means those forms that inhere in extended surfaces. He contrasts those with spiritual (or psychological) forms such as charity or courage; see Sent., 1, 17, 2, vol. 2, p. 250. He thinks, however, that his account of the intension and remission of corporeal qualities can be extended without any significant alterations to spiritual qualities (see pp. 277-278 below and n. 17 for references). Recherches de Théologie et Philosophie médiévales 81(2), 273-330. doi: 10.2143/RTPM.81.2.3062082 © 2014 by Recherches de Théologie et Philosophie médiévales. All rights reserved. 997666.indb7666.indb 227373 222/01/152/01/15 113:273:27 274 C.L. LOEWE (1346).3 This theory was devised to explain how changes of degree within a given quality occur, e.g., how the shade of a color changes, or how an object becomes hotter. Although this topic initially seems to be a narrowly natural philosophical one, in the Middle Ages it had a theological dimension, too. Specifically, the scholastics were concerned with the issue of how to account for the increase of the theological virtue of charity.4 The discussions of this subject matter were extensive, and it is no great exaggeration when Anneliese Maier calls the debate surrounding intension and remission of forms one “of the highest rank” in scholastic thought.5 Gregory of Rimini’s discussion occupies an important place in this debate. His discussion is one of the longest of the fourteenth century,6 and it is characterized by a level of detail and sophistication that was, in many ways, unprecedented. In Gregory’s times and centuries to follow this did not go unnoticed. Gregory’s views on the topic of intension and remission became so influential that the three questions, which Gregory dedicated to this topic, were made available in a separate treatise entitled Tractatus de intensione et remissione formarum corporalium.7 Despite its great sophistication and influence, Gregory’s account of the intension and remission of corporeal forms has, unlike other 3 1346 is the date of release. Gregory lectured on the Sentences in Paris in 1343-44. See V. MARCOLINO, “Der Augustinertheologe an der Universität Paris,” in: H.A. OBERMAN (ed.), Gregor von Rimini. Werk und Wirkung bis zur Reformation, Berlin 1981, pp. 127- 194, esp. 170-171; P. BERMON, “La Lectura sur les deux premiers livres des Sentences de Grégoire de Rimini O.E.S.A (1300-1358),” in: G.R. EVANS (ed.), Mediaeval Commentar- ies on the Sentences of Peter Lombard. Current Research, vol. 1, Leiden 2002, pp. 267-285, esp. 268. 4 See A. MAIER, Zwei Grundprobleme der scholastischen Naturphilosophie (= Studien zur Naturphilosophie der Spätscholastik, vol. 2), 3rd ed., Rome 1968, pp. 10-11. 5 See ibid., p. 5. 6 The three questions that Gregory dedicates to this topic (Sent., 1, d. 17, qq. 2-4, vol. 2, pp. 250-417) comprise 167 pages in the critical edition. 7 According to Heiko Oberman, two of the 27 manuscripts of the first book of the Sentences (specifically, manuscripts N, Oxford Bodleian Library, Can. Misc. 177, and X, Venice, Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana MS. VI, 160 [2816]) contain this separate treatise. These manuscripts were for some time in the possession of the Italian philosophers Johannes de Marchanova († 1467) and Nicolettus Vernias Theatinus († 1499). See H.A. OBERMAN, Introduction to Lectura, vol. 2 (d. 7-17), ed. A.D. TRAPP et al., Berlin 1982, p. 5. For more information on the manuscripts of Gregory’s commentary as well as the so-called additiones, i.e., those passages that Gregory did not include in the definitive version of his commentary (ordinatio), see V. MARCOLINO, Introduction to Lectura, vol. 1 (d. 1-6), ed. A.D. TRAPP et al., Berlin 1981, p. 95; BERMON, “La Lectura,” pp. 269-271. 997666.indb7666.indb 227474 222/01/152/01/15 113:273:27 GREGORY OF RIMINI ON CORPOREAL FORMS 275 aspects of his natural philosophy, not received much attention by scholars.8 At least, there has not been, to my knowledge, any study that considers Gregory’s discussion in its entirety.9 In this paper, I will try to fill this gap. What makes Gregory’s discussion particularly interesting is that it is one of the first discussions on the Continent to be extensively influenced by new Oxford ideas, which, as is well known, Gregory was one of the first to introduce.10 Under this influence Gregory adopts a highly quantitative approach to qualities, which, although presented in Aristotelian terminology, is in many ways closer to the account of qualities typically associated with early modern science. To avoid misunderstandings I should say that I do not mean by Gregory’s ‘quantitative approach’ that he uses mathematical formulas to describe physical states of affairs (although some mathematics is present in his account). Unlike the early-fourteenth-century Oxford Calculators, Gregory is not interested in formulating kinematic laws 8 Scholars have studied in depth several of Gregory’s contributions to natural phi- losophy such as his groundbreaking ideas on the continuum and the infinite. Gregory claimed that actual infinites were not only possible, but in fact existed, and that every continuum was an actual infinite. Furthermore, he claimed that one infinity could be greater than another according to a relation that comes very close to the contemporary set-theoretical relation between set and subset. On Gregory’s theory of the comparison of infinities, see J.E. MURDOCH, “Mathesis in Philosophiam Scholasticam Introducta. The Rise and Develop- ment of the Application of Mathematics in Fourteenth Century Philosophy and Theology,” in: Actes du Quatrième Congrès International de Philosophie Médiévale, Montréal 1969, pp. 215-246, esp. 223-224; On infinity and the continuum see J.M.M.H. THIJSSEN, “Het Continuum-Debat bij Gregorius van Rimini (1300–1358),” in: Algemeen Nederlands Tijd- schrift voor Wijsbegeerte 77 (1985), pp. 109-119; K. SMITH, “Ockham’s Influence on Gregory of Rimini’s Natural Philosophy,” in: V. SYROS – A. KOURES – H. KALOKAIRINOU (eds.), Διαλέξεις. Ακαδημαϊκό έτος 1996-7, Lefkosia 1999, pp.107-142; R. CROSS, “Infinity, Continuity, and Composition: The Contribution of Gregory of Rimini,” in: Medieval Philosophy and Theology 7 (1998), pp. 89-110. 9 Some parts, however, have been discussed. Edith Sylla discusses Gregory’s views on minima and maxima as laid out in q. 2. See E.D. SYLLA, “Disputationes Collativae: Walter Burley’s Tractatus Primus and Gregory of Rimini’s Lectura super primum et secundum Sententiarum,” in: Documenti e studi sulla tradizione filosofica medievale 22 (2011), pp. 383- 464, esp. 404-410. Onorato Grassi and Francesco Fiorentino, in separate articles, explored Gregory’s arguments in q. 4 against Giles of Rome’s theory of intension and remission. See O. GRASSI, “Gregorio da Rimini e l’agostinismo tardo-medievale,” in: Gregorio da Rimini filosofo (Atti del Convegno - Rimini, 25 novembre 2000), Rimini 2003, pp. 66-96, esp. 85-89; F. FIORENTINO, “Gregorio da Rimini a confronto con Egidio Romano e gli egidiani,” in: Analecta Augustiniana 68 (2005), pp. 6-58, esp. 24-35. 10 See BERMON, “La Lectura,” p. 280. 997666.indb7666.indb 227575 222/01/152/01/15 113:273:27 276 C.L. LOEWE such as the middle degree theorem.11 Nor does he provide anything like a geometrical representation of intensities as can be found in Nicole Oresme.12 What I mean by Gregory’s ‘quantitative approach’ is rather that Gregory treats intensities ontologically as if they were quantities, and that, in this ontological respect, his account is close to that of early modern science (although early modern science drops the as if and, basically, treats intensities as quantities tout court). It is one goal of this paper to shed light on the ontology behind the as if. Section 1 of this paper will provide a brief overview of the structure of Gregory’s discussion of intension and remission in light of the Aristotelian and the medieval background. Section 2 will then discuss Gregory’s account and defense of the then prominent addition theory of intension and remission and his refutation of rival theories (cor- responding to q.