Hervaeus Natalis on Angelic Cognition of Singulars

Thought, in a sense, transforms the world. When we think of a particular thing – Charlie the dog, for example – we always think of it in a universal way: as a dog. Through this act of thinking, Charlie comes to exist in our mind and becomes the dog that is the object of our thought. Explaining how our act of thinking relates to and transforms the reality around us is often considered the hallmark of the modern age. Yet the Middle Ages offer illuminating examples of speculation on the human mind and how it functions. This book explores the views on mental acts, concepts and objects of the mind of two of the most eminent Dominican authors of the late Middle Ages: Thomas Aquinas and Hervaeus Natalis, one of his closest followers. By putting Aquinas and Hervaeus Natalis directly in conversation with each other Amerini proposes a new interpretative framework for understanding their philosophy of mind and traces the origins of modern accounts of the intentionality of the mind.

Thomas Aquinas and Hervaeus Natalis (†1323) share a correlational theory of intentionality. When I cognize a thing, I am in a real relation with the thing cognized and at the same time the thing is in a relation of reason with me. Hervaeus coins the term “intentionality” to designate precisely this relation of reason. First and second intentionality express two stages of this relation. First intentionality refers to the relation that a thing has to the mind, while second intentionality indicates the relation that a thing qua cognized has to the mind. Thus, first intentionality involves direct cognition, while second intentionality reflexive cognition. This theory of intentionality has two purposes: first, to de-psychologize the cognitive process and second, to allow the application of Aristotle’s table of categories to the sphere of the mental. Through his detailed analysis of the relation of intentionality, Hervaeus clarifies some of Thomas’s obscurer points, but at the same time he has to solve a delicate problem of circularity entailed by the notion of intentionality as a relation of reason.

The Thomist 66 (2002): 607-27 THE SCOTIST BACKGROUND IN HERVAEUS NATALIS'S INTERPRETATION OF THOMISM ISABEL IRIBARREN Linacre College, Oxford University Oxford, United Kingdom UNDERLYING HERVAEUS NATALIS'S work is an intelligent development of Thomistic theses that, while not altogether deviating from Thomas Aquinas, prepares the ground for an elaboration of Thomism along the lines ofJohn Duns Scotus's theological insights.1 This is already apparent in Hervaeus's Sentences commentary, and becomes explicit in his quodlibetal questions. Thus, as Thomistic enthusiasm develops within the Dominican order, Hervaeusgraduallyincorporates (and endorses) elements alien to Aquinas's theology-an aspect of Hervaeus's thought worth remarking as it stands in contrast to a meeker image of the Dominican as the "champion of Thomism." As a leading Dominican, Hervaeus2 serves as a good example of the type ofinterpretation ofAquinas's thought undertaken by secondgeneration Thomists. An examination of Hervaeus's work will therefore shed some light on our understanding of the evolution 1 Hester G. Gelber is, to my knowledge, the first to point out this development in Hervaeus's interpretation of Thomism. See her Logic and the Trinity: A Clash ofValues in Scholastic Thought, 1300-1335 (Ph.D. diss., University ofWisconsin, 1974), especially 11026 . 2 Hervaeus Natalis (d. 1323) became provincial of France in 1309 and General Master in 1318. For a biographical study of Hervaeus, see B. Haureau, "Herve Nedelec, general des Frl!res Prl!cheurs," in Histoire litteraire de la France 34 (1915): 308-51; A. De Guimares, "Herve Noel (m.1323): Etude biographique," inArchivum Fratrum Praedicatornm 8 (1938): see esp. 5-77 607 608 ISABEL IRIBARREN of Thomism as a theological authority within the Dominican order.3 Hervaeus's view of relations in Trinitarian theology proves to be a good vantage point from which to appreciate his elaboration of Aquinas's teaching, since it reveals his willingness to borrow from sources alien to Thomism if only to update the material according to the subtleties of the day. In what follows, I shall first give a brief account of Aquinas's view of relations as the main sounding board for Hervaeus's own elaboration of this view; second, I shall present Scotus's notion of 'formality' and the connected notion of 'formal distinction'; third, I shall give an account of Hervaeus's Scotist development of the Thomistic theses in his Sentences commentary and, fourth and finally, in his quodlibetal questions. The question at hand concerns the type of distinction between relation and its foundation, especially in its repercussions on the issue of the distinction between the divine processions. L THOMAS AQUINAS ON RELATIONS With respect to categorical relations,4 Aquinas holds that for each of the nine accidental categories there is a distinction between the accidental being common to all categories and the 3 By 1286 there was already clear evidence that the Dominican order had begun to recognize itself in the figure and teaching of Thomas Aquinas. In that year, the General . Chapter in Paris commanded its friars to teach and defend according to Aquinas, thus actively promoting the Thomistic doctrine within the order. The doctrinal allegiance to Aquinas was repeatedly emphasizedin subsequentDominican legislations, notably in Saragossa in 1309 and in Metz in 1313. See B. M. Reichert, Acta Capitulorum Generalium Ordinis Fratrum Praedicatorum I (Rome, 1889), 235. For a standard history of the order and the significance of Thomism for the shaping of the order's identity, see W. A. Hinnebusch, The History ofthe Dominican Order in the Middle Ages, vol. 2 (NewYork: Alba House, 1966), especially 154ff. See also M. Mulchahey, "First the Bow Is Bent in Study ...": Do-minican E.ducation before 1350, Studies and Texts 132 (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 1998); M. Grabmann, "Die Kanonisation des hi. Thomas von Aquin in ihrer Bedeutung for die Ausbreitung und Verteidigung seiner Lehre im 14. Jahrhundert," in Divus Thomas, 1 (Freiburg, 1923), 233-49. 4 For a comprehensive study of Aquinas's theory of relations, see A. Krempel, La doctrine de la relation chez saint Thomas (Paris, 1952). See also M. Henninger, Relations: Medieval Theories 1250-1325 (Oxford, 1989), 13-39. HERVAEUS'S INTERPRETATION OF THOMISM 609 ratio that defines each particular category.5 The...

After Thomas Aquinas, it became standard to divide “intentio” into first and second intentions (the distinction ultimately derives from Avicenna). Roughly, the distinction captures the intentionality of concepts like “Socrates” or “human being,” which are first intentions, versus concepts like “species” or “genus,” which are second intentions. Hervaeus Natalis (d. 1323) was the first to write an independent treatise on this distinction, and he also introduced and used the word “intentionaliter” in a new way, as well as attempts a definition of the notion of intentionality, perhaps the first such attempt. His treatise is called De secundis intentionibus (On Second Intentions), and can only be described as a treatise on the philosophy of mind and about the problem of intentionality. In this article, I will place Hervaeus in relation to the debate on mental content between Henry of Ghent and John Duns Scotus, and show how he has the resources to define a concept of “intentionality” as “the mark of the mental.”

BOOK REVIEWS 351 bias by inventing something that is fictitious. But again the author's methodology is too limited and preordained to deal with this option. Finally, the phenomenon of celibacy in its many forms past and present within the Christian community is a constant irritant for the author. His criticism of some of the theology on celibacy and its justification in the Christian lives of men and women is quite valid at times. But his contribution to the present debate is minimal. If those who seriously question the present discipline of the Church on this point need the support of this book, they could be in serious intellectual difficulty. In conclusion, one wonders who the author has in view as the readers of his work. It seems impossible that he could expect any intelligent and knowledgeable reader to be satisfied with the feeble and offensive polemics of his study. And what is the value of appealing to those who already agree with him about the distortion of Jesus' life and morality perpetrated by the Church? The author should be informed that a " celibate" is the author of this review (the word might be added to the list of pejoratives in the English language after its usage in this book) ; this may allow him to dismiss the preceding observations as Pavlovian responses to his conclusions . But I looked forward to more from this book; I am disappointed that it was much less than it could have been. The topic is too serious to be handled in the way in which it was in this book. The Catholic University of America Washington, D. C. JAMES P. CLIFTON, c. F. X. Hervaeus Natalis, 0. P. and the Controversies over the Real Presence and Transubstantiation. By KENNETH PLoTNIK. Paderbom: Verlag Ferdinand Schoningh, 1970. Pp. 83. DM 9,80. Once again the name of the Grabmann Institute is associated with a valuable contribution to the history of theology. This time, in connection with the Theological Faculty of the University of Munich, the Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies in Toronto, and St. John's Abbey in Collegeville, Minnesota, the spirit of the Grabmann Institute finds expression in a study of medieval controversies over the Eucharist. Kenneth Plotnik reviews the positions of Hervaeus Natalis, 0. P. and his opponents in the questions of the mode of the Real Presence and Transubstantiation, offering interpretations of important texts and evidence for possible reconciliations among the adherents of opposing schools of thought. 352 BOOK REVIEWS Plotnik addresses himself to a segment of the rational effort of medieval theologians to express the richness of the Christian doctrine of the Eucharist. Evident in his work are the strange interaction and interdependence of the medieval disciplines which forced commitments to set formulas and produced contrived philosophical positions ostensibly in defense of orthodoxy. However remote in time its subject might be from current Process Theology, this study provides a useful link between the simplistic presentation of New Testament doctrine and the expected complexities of the sophisticated theology common to speculative thinkers today. The work is divided into three chapters. The first introduces the reader to the life of Hervaeus Natalis, his basic writings, and the character of the controversies over the Real Presence and Transubstantiation after the death of Thomas Aquinas. The second offers a brief treatment of the views of Aquinas and Hervaeus concerning the mode of Christ's presence, discusses in some detail Hervaeus's conception of relational presence , and considers the positions of Durand of St. Pourgain and Giles of Rome. It takes up the problem of quantity in the Eucharist and concludes with an overview of the relevant disputations between Hervaeus and Durand. The third chapter treats the question of Transubstantiation as decided by Giles of Rome, Henry of Ghent, Godfrey of Fontaines, James of Metz (through an anonymous commentator), and Durand; and the question of consubstantiation as decided by John Quidort of Paris and William of Occam. Plotnik succeeds in presenting clearly the positions of the opponents, even though, at times, they appear to be over-simplified, and he sets in good historical perspective their textual bases. It is his purpose to bring to the attention of current...

Thought, in a sense, transforms the world. When we think of a particular thing – Charlie the dog, for example – we always think of it in a universal way: as a dog. Through this act of thinking, Charlie comes to exist in our mind and becomes the dog that is the object of our thought. Explaining how our act of thinking relates to and transforms the reality around us is often considered the hallmark of the modern age. Yet the Middle Ages offer illuminating examples of speculation on the human mind and how it functions. This book explores the views on mental acts, concepts and objects of the mind of two of the most eminent Dominican authors of the late Middle Ages: Thomas Aquinas and Hervé de Nédéllec, one of his closest followers. By putting Aquinas and Hervaeus Natalis directly in conversation with each other Amerini proposes a new interpretative framework for understanding their philosophy of mind and traces the origins of modern accounts of the intentionality of the mind.

Supposition is a controversial logical theory. Scholars have investigated many points of this doctrine such as its historical origin, its use in theology, the logical function of the theory, or the relationship between supposition and signification. In the article I focus on this latter aspect by discussing how some Italian, and in particular Florentine, Dominican followers of Aquinas—Francis of Prato (d. 1348), Girolamo Savonarola (d. 1498), and Georgius Rovegnatinus (d. after 1500)—explained the relation between the linguistic terms’ properties of signifying and suppositing, and hence the division of supposition. After sketching out Thomas Aquinas, Hervaeus Natalis, and William of Ockham’s positions on the relationship between signification and supposition, I closely examine Francis’s criticism of Ockham. Francis follows Walter Burley’s account of supposition and considers the statement that a term has simple supposition when (i) it is taken not significatively and (ii) stands for an intention of mind as the weak point of Ockham’s explanation of supposition. According to Francis, if this were the case, there would be no semantic basis for differentiating simple from material supposition. Francis is however hesitant about the full subordination of supposition to signification, especially with regards to material supposition, when a term, suppositing for itself, is taken to signify itself besides its meaning. More than one hundred years later, Girolamo Savonarola and Georgius Rovegnatinus have no doubt about the fact that terms may supposit only for what they signify.

In the texts in which he discusses the relationship between essence ( essentia ) and existing ( esse ), Hervaeus Natalis rejects Henry of Ghent’s intentional distinction and Giles of Rome’s real distinction. The Dominican instead adopts Godfrey of Fontaines’s distinction according to modes of signifying. This article argues that the distinction between objective potency and subjective potency is a key element in Hervaeus’s rejection of opposing views on the distinction between the creature’s essence and esse . It also proposes that paying attention to the subjective/objective potency distinction highlights philosophical commitments of the three takes in discussion. Finally, the article argues that the highlighting of those ontological principles sheds new light on various questions regarding Thomas Aquinas’s view on the esse / essentia distinction.

Thomas Aquinas and Hervaeus Natalis on Concepts and Intentional Objects

This paper explores Latin medieval accounts of intentionality developed after Thomas Aquinas, focusing in particular on the theories of mental presence and mental directedness defended by Hervaeus Natalis and Peter Auriol. As the paper aims to show, these two authors distinguish between the intentional and the real presence of objects to the mind, and consequently between intentional directedness and real directedness towards objects. The paper argues that their theory, which combines detailed phenomenological insights with careful considerations about the way our mind relates to objects and reality, constitutes a valuable alternative to Aquinas’s views on presence and directedness as reconstructed by Therese Cory.

This book explains how the authority Thomas Aquinas's theological teachings grew out of the doctrinal controversies surrounding it within the Dominican Order. The adoption and eventual promotion of the teachings of Aquinas by the Order of Preachers ran counter to every other current running through the late thirteenth-century Church; most scholastics, the Dominican Order included, were wary of the his unconventional teachings. Despite this, the Dominican Order was propelled along their solitary via Thomas by conflicts between two groups of magistri: Aquinas's early Dominican followers and their more conservative neo-Augustinian brethren. This debate reached its climax in a series of bitter polemical battles between Hervaeus Natalis, the most prominent of early defenders, and Durandus of St. Pourçain, the last major Dominican thinker to attack Aquinas's teachings openly. Elizabeth Lowe offers a vivid illustration of this major shift in the Dominican intellectual tradition.

The controversy between the Dominican Durandus of St Pourcain and his order plays a central role in explaining how Thomas Aquinas became one of the most influential medieval theologians. Covering a period of almost twenty years in the early fourteenth century, this controversy saw the confrontation of two first-rate Dominican theologians, at a time when the order was fully engaged in promoting the doctrine of Aquinas. Hervaeus Natalis was a hard-line follower of Aquinas, who saw in Durandus an independent spirit and a threat to the order’s sense of doctrinal identity. Through a close examination of the central issues from unpublished manuscript sources, this book reveals a picture of the debate which challenges the standard accounts of a clear-cut clash between ‘Thomists’ and ‘anti-Thomists’. Aquinas did not rise to canonical status on a Dominican platform alone. Franciscan intellectual achievements had much to contribute, an aspect which recasts the role played by the rival mendicant order in the development of a Dominican intellectual tradition. A ‘maverick’ within his order, yet actively supported by the papacy, Durandus lived a career which illustrates the currents at work in the fourteenth-century church. Unconcerned about Dominican internal quarrels, the Avignonese papacy was more preoccupied with forming its own theological entourage away from the subverting forces of the new Franciscan spirituality.

Reviewed by: Cajetan on Sacred Doctrine by Hieromonk Gregory Hrynkiw Thomas M. Osborne Jr. Cajetan on Sacred Doctrine. By Hieromonk Gregory Hrynkiw. Foreword by Andrew Hofer, O.P. Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2020. Pp. xxii + 330. $75.00 (hardcover). ISBN 978-0-8132-3347-5. In this book, Gregory Hrynkiw provides a thorough account of the theology of Thomas de Vio Cajetan (1469-1534) and its relationship to faith. Hrynkiw pays special attention to Cajetan's understanding of the subject of theology, theological method, and biblical exegesis. The topic itself is difficult, and it seems to me that its difficulty is increased by three extrinsic factors. First, for much of the twentieth century many scholars largely dismissed Cajetan both as a thinker and as an expositor of St. Thomas Aquinas. Although more recent scholars such as Joshua Hochschild, Lawrence Feingold, and Steven Long have shown that such scholars frequently misunderstood Cajetan and the issues that he addressed, Cajetan's work is largely unknown. Second, Cajetan's readers need to be familiar with late medieval and Renaissance Scholasticism. Frequently Cajetan is not expounding Thomas's texts in their context but rather defending Thomas in light of difficulties raised by such figures as John Duns Scotus (ca. 1265/6-1308), Durandus of St.-Pourçain (ca. 1275-ca. 1332/34), and Petrus Aureol (ca. 1280-1322). Third, Cajetan is only one figure in a long Thomistic tradition. He often relies on the writings of earlier Thomists such as John Capreolus (ca. 1380-1444), and many of his own teachings were rejected or modified by later Thomists of equal or perhaps even greater stature, such as Domingo Bañez (1528-1604) and John of St. Thomas (1589-1644). Hrynkiw deftly guides the reader through these difficulties. He shows how Cajetan's account of sacred doctrine differs from that attributed to him by many twentieth-century scholars and provides an alternative account to that of theologians such as Scotus. Moreover, he shows how Cajetan responds to and builds on theologians such as Hervaeus Natalis (ca. 1260-1323) and Capreolus, and comes into conflict with some of his Thomistic contemporaries and immediate successors, such as Sylvester Mazzolini Prierias (ca. 1456/7-1527). [End Page 498] The book has two parts. The first is entitled "Sacred Doctrine Is the Framework." This part consists of three chapters about what sacred doctrine is in relation to faith, the Church, and the Apostles' Creed. The second part is entitled "Sacred Doctrine as the Habit of Theology." It consists of three chapters that in some way correspond to the various articles of question 1 of the Summa theologiae, which is on sacred doctrine. A conclusion indicates Cajetan's importance in the history of theology and as a resource for contemporary theology. Hrynkiw draws not only on Cajetan's famous commentary on the Summa theologiae, but also on many of Cajetan's theological opuscula and his later works on biblical exegesis. One historical controversy has been over the very meaning of "Sacred Doctrine" and its relationship to theology. For instance, article 1 of the Prima pars's question on sacred doctrine considers the necessity of revelation, which seems to be about faith, whereas the remaining articles are on sacred doctrine as a science, which is how Thomistic theologians understood theology. The argumentative nature of theology is discussed only in article 8. In chapter 1, Hrynkiw shows that some early Thomists, such as Capreolus and Natalis, held that the principles of faith are the principles of the science of theology, which draws conclusions from them. On this view, faith and theology would be distinct. In contrast to this earlier interpretation, a prominent contemporary Thomist, Sylvester Prierias, argued that faith and theology were both the same habit. Cajetan developed and defended the earlier position in his description of theology as a scientific habit that is distinct from the habit of faith even though it depends on it. Hrynkiw shows that the same issues were debated during the Thomistic revival of the twentieth century. He indicates how Marie-Dominique Chenu, who changed his mind over precisely this issue, would have benefited from a more careful...

BRIEF NOTICES Hervaeus Natalis. The Poverty ofChrist and theApostles. Translated byJohn D. Jones. [Mediaeval Sources in Translation, 37; Studies in Moral Teaching, 2.] (Toronto: Pontifical Institute ofMediaeval Studies. 1999. Pp. Lx, 184. $28.95 paperback.) In 1322 and 1323 Pope John XXII issued a series of bulls rejecting the view of apostolic and Franciscan poverty held, not only by the spiritual Franciscans, but by leaders of the Franciscan order and by previous popes as well. The Franciscans did not surrender without a fight, and the result was a large body of polemical material. Here JohnJones translates two contributions to the debate: first and foremost, a treatise by the illustrious Dominican scholar Hervaeus Natalis supporting the pope's position; and then, in an appendix, a contemporary scribe's summary of arguments to the contrary presented by eight Franciscan scholars including the major figures Bertrand de la Tour andVital du Four.Jones prefaces the translations with a useful introduction tracing the evolution of the controversy and analyzing Hervaeus' treatise. His comments on the divergence of Hervaeus from his purported model, Thomas Aquinas, are especially instructive . Jones explains that he has attempted "to provide a fairly direct, rather than a highly idiomatic, translation of the Latin text," one that "captures Hervaeus' analysis and language in a precise and appropriately literal manner." Anyone who has translated scholastic Latin knows that unremitting commitment to literal translation can result in prose that, instead of being precise, seems absolutely opaque to the modern reader, and it is toJones's credit that he normally avoids this result, although there are moments when one wishes he had diverged a bit from this program and followed his sense of what Hervaeus actually meant to say. David Burr Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Blacksburg, Virginia 564 BRIEF NOTICES365 Polzer, Charles W, SJ. Kino:A Legacy: His Life, His Works, His Missions, His Monuments. (Tucson, Arizona: Jesuit Fathers of Southern Arizona. 1998. Pp. x, 198; one folding map. Paperback.) Kino:A Legacy appears to have been a labor of love for its author, Charles W. Polzer, SJ. A long-time Arizona resident, Father Polzer is curator ofThe Arizona State Museum, directs the American Division of the Jesuit Historical Institute in Tucson, and served on the Christopher Columbus QuincentenaryJubilee Commission . This biography seems to have a role in the effort to bring about the beatification of Padre Eusebio Francisco Kino, SJ. After a four-page summary of his birth and education in Europe, the next ninety pages of the biography are very detailed reports of Kino's trip to America , his unsuccessful efforts to start missions in Baja California, and his exploratory , diplomatic, architectural, and mission success in Pimería Alta. The second half of the book includes sections on PimeríaAlta before and after Kino, the Franciscans' era, and recent eras of discovering, preserving, and honoring Kino's remains. The book ends with a chapter on Kino representations in art. Unfortunately, the biography does not have any citations or an index and contains only a brief list of suggested readings. In addition to providing details of Kino's life and work, the book includes many maps,with two maps made by Kino,and numerous photographs. The text is easy to read, and Polzer has made Kino's life an interesting story. Even with sections on context, however, this biography is obviously sympathetic to Kino, using his own diary as the primary source, and the reader is left to look elsewhere for an understanding of the Pirnas' circumstances and reasons for allying with the Spanish and adopting Christianity. Native peoples contributed immensely to Kino's explorations as key informants and guides, as well as servants . Native laborers constructed his huge churches and Pima warriors protected his wealthy missions. Kino's contemporary detractors, whether within the Society of Jesus, such as Father Francisco Xavier Mora, or civil authorities and Sonora miners are dismissed as having personality weaknesses or selfish motivations. Father Kino's familiar story survives: He was the padre on horseback, traveling great distances quickly even in old age; persistently exploring regions and routes unfamiliar to Europeans; devoting himselfto Christianize and minister to native people; and optimistically persevering with prolific letter-writing...

REVIEWS 239 Krug completes the book with a chapter on nuns and literate culture at the Bridgettine convent Syon Abbey. Charting changes related to reading habits and book ownership from the convent’s founding to the sixteenth century, Krug’s main argument unfolds the ways in which spiritual advisors harnessed feminine notions of family and reading habits imparted by the aristocratic household to shape literate practices within the greater community. The process resulted in a special emphasis on private devotion and a heightened awareness of the material importance of personally owned books to the institution’s collective identity. When a woman entered Syon, she exchanged one family for another, breaking ties with her worldly family and forging new connections with her spiritual one. Problem was that Syon recruited its members from a fairly limited pool of candidates, so often sisters had blood relatives in their midst, a fact that sometimes hindered bonding with the rest of the convent. Thus select devotional texts were to help them envision kinship as vehicle to enlarge religious experience and to “redirect emotional attachments from the secular to the spiritual” (182). Additionally, the program created a strong connection between the reader, the book, and God. Looking at a volume prepared for Joan Sewell, Krug apprehends that reading privately evolved into divine conversation, the act of hearing and speaking to God. Eventually, Krug contends , these literate practices turned around and influenced lay reading habits. This fact is significant because it substantiates the existence of the ideological permeability of cloister walls and unimpeded exchange between women, something often oversimplified, misunderstood or disregarded even in current scholarship . For quite some time, many have wondered why so few women produced textual works, when enough of them possessed the necessary skills. Most attribute the lack to the incompatibility between femininity and the authority of the written word or to our too narrow and uninformed definition medieval authorship (as acts of resistance and submission for women). Krug’s book offers a different explanation. She believes that our assumptions as to why someone learns to read—in order to generate texts—interfere with our ability to accurately comprehend what literate culture meant medieval women and how it impacted their lives. Krug rightly believes that we arrogantly see literacy too much in terms of “consumption” and “production,” an outlook which has come to negate or depreciate the “transformative” experience of written texts. For this alone, Krug’s book is worth reading. Some might complain her approach is overly Darwinist, but her refreshing perspective sheds light upon the many varieties of literacy and the choices involved in developing literate skills, making it a wonderful contribution to both women’s history and the history of literacy . STEPHANIE VOLF, English, Arizona State University Elizabeth Lowe, The Contested Theological Authority of Thomas Aquinas: The Controversies between Hervaeus Natalis and Durandus of St. Pourçain, Studies in Medieval History and Culture 17, series ed. Francis G. Gentry (New York: Routledge 2003) xviii + 259 pp. When the Dominicans weren’t bickering with the Franciscans in the early fourteenth century, they appeared to enjoy bickering amongst themselves. Duran- REVIEWS 240 dus of St. Pourçain particularly exasperated his opponent and mentor Hervaeus Natalis by calling him an “idiot” and a “carping critic” and referring to his proThomistic arguments as “asinine” (72, 79). In The Contested Theological Authority of Thomas Aquinas: The Controversies between Hervaeus Natalis and Durandus of St. Pourçain, Elizabeth Lowe merges the perspectives of intellectual and institutional history to explore the intra-fraternal dispute between Natalis and Durandus, investigating how their quarrel contributed to the Order’s eventual appropriation of Thomistic theology and philosophy, along with his auctoritas. Between 1307 and 1323, Natalis defended the teachings of Thomas Aquinas against the attacks of Durandus, but this perhaps conveys too gentle a description of their debate: because of the opponents’ “shared propensity to rant and rave,” “vitriol has rarely been engaged with so much dash and vigor” (74). In her first chapter, Lowe elucidates the early development of the Dominican intellectual tradition by scrutinizing how the friars perceived their role within the church and how their administrative and educational structures contributed to their sense of a corporate identity...