Mattia Cipriani

In the Prologus to his Liber de natura rerum (1225 ca.-1260 ca.), the Dominican Thomas of Cantimpré lists the 15 sources he used most during the writing of the encyclopedia. In the penultimate place on this list, he puts the Physiologus and describes it as an auctoritas “quite succinct and useful on several occasions”. Starting from this indication, the present article investigates therefore two aspects of this relationship. First, how and how much the Alexandrian treatise is actually used in the Dominican encyclopedia. Second, what version of this didactic work was on Thomas’ desk during the drafting of the Liber.

Even though encyclopedists of the thirteenth century used a common corpus of sources, each had a precise and personal way to choose, ‘tailorize’ and arrange the contents taken from these auctoritates. The peculiar and custom modi scribendi permitted the compiler (who collects authoritative materials from others) to become an author (who in turn becomes authoritative), while also reflecting accurately the different forme mentis and purposes behind the encyclopedic texts. Through the analysis of the exclusive way in which the Flemish Dominican friar Thomas of Cantimpré (1201-1270/1271) copies dialogical treatises – such as Adelard of Bath’ Questiones naturales and the anonymous questiones salernitane – in both authorial versions of his encyclopedia, Liber the natura rerum (approximately 1242/1247-1255/1260), this essay shows how Thomas uses these particular sources to reach his own pragmatic and dominican goals.

Even though all thirteenth century encyclopaedists used a common corpus of sources, each of them had a precise and personal way to choose, « tailorize » and arrange the contents taken from these auctoritates. These peculiar and custom modi scribendi reflect accurately the different formae mentis and purposes behind the encyclopedic texts, while also permitting the compiler (who collects authoritative materials of others) to become an author (who in turn becomes authoritative). Through the analysis of the structure, contents and sources of De lapidibus pretiosis – the fourteenth book of the widespread encyclopedia Liber the natura rerum (approximately 1242/1247-1260) –, this essay will show the exclusive « encyclopedic style » and goals of its author, the Flemish Dominican friar Thomas of Cantimpré (1201-1270/1271).

Like other contemporary encyclopaedists of his time, Thomas of Cantimpré (1200 ca.–1270/72) used a vast number of sources in his Liber de natura rerum (completed between 1241 and 1260 ca.), which he meticulously selected to copy, cut and ‘paste’ in order to create a solid, well-argued, coherent and ‘Dominican’ discourse on nature. Among these auctoritates, the friar also uses a mysterious and anonymous libellum, which he qualifies as “liber rerum,” in his work. Consequently, the paper explains this auctoritas through a careful consideration of all the objective aspects that can be acquired from the Liber de natura rerum. Secondly, the work shows how the anonymous source was Thomas’ privileged vehicle through which to introduce in his encyclopaedia ‘alternative’ information borrowed from non-canonical sources (direct observations, personal experiences, etc.). The analysis therefore identifies the particular textual typology of the anonymous libellum, while also demonstrating how the friar of Cantimpré was a curious and actual auctor on nature, observing everyday reality directly and thereby distinguishing himself from his contemporary compilatores.