114

IVO Of CHARTRES' PASTORAL CANO'\ LAW

Ivo OF CHARTRES'
PASTORAL CANON LAW
In the Middle Ages, Ivo of Chartres was famous as a saint,
theologian and canonist. Modern historians, however, concentrate very
much on Ivo as the author of the Prologus and the Panormia, and for
many good reasons: both texts are important in their own right and
contributed greatly to the development of canon law. The Panormia is
one of the most important formal sources of Gratian and Ivo's Prologus is
maybe the most sophisticated medieval treatise on canon law method. 1
Both texts were extremely successful, as the enormous figure of more
than 150 extant manuscripts each shows. 2

But too narrow a focus on these two works and their success in
the schools leads to a serious danger: Ivo's canon law activity is
sometimes perceived as an intellectual achievement only,~ \Vith neglect of
the historical context in which both Ivo's collections and his legal
hermeneutics were developed. On the other hand, the extant sources
provide an excellent opportunity to study this very context. Ivos quite
different collections, his sophisticated Prologus and a large number of
legal opinions contained in his correspondence make it possible to study
Ivo's legal thought in great detail. At the same time, almost 300 extant
letters and two dozen sermons allow closer investigations into his
pastorate and theology than in the case of most other eleventh-century
canonists.
In the following, I shall first place the formula of 'mercy and
justice', Ivo's most important principle of legal hermeneutics, in the
context of his pastorate and theology. The subsequent part is then
devoted to the collections proper; I shall expound the pastoral aspect of
This article is based on my ?\!aster's dissertation submitted to the Facul.ty of
Modern History, Oxford University in 2002. I \\'Ould like to thank my supen-isor
Dr Henry 11\tlayr-Harting very much for his generous support and helpful adYice.
and Dr i\fartin Brett. Cambridge, for kindly letting me use his provisional editions
of l\'o s collections and his concordances. - In the subsequent text, references to
canon law canons are in the style of the Kanones-database.
1
P. Landau, 'Neue Forschungen zu ,orgratianischen Kanonessammlungen und
den Quellen des gratianischen Dekrets', /us cummune, 11 (1 l)H2), 1-29 (lvo and
Gratian) and J. de Ghellinck, Le nwuueme111 theulo,!!,ll/lfe du XII' sieclf': Etudes,
recherches et ducuments (Paris 1914), 327-36 (influence of the Prologus).
i For the figures, see B.C. Brasington, 'The Prologue of l\'O of Chartres: A Fresh
Consideration from the Manuscripts'. in S. Cho<lorow (ed.) , Proceedings of the
Eip,hth f 11tenw1 iunal Congress q.f:Hediet 'tt! CllllOn Lau (Vatican City 1992), 3-23,-!
(Prolop,us} and M. Brett, 'Creeping up on the Panormia', in R.H. Helmholz et al.
(eds.), G'm11dlagen des Rechts (Paderborn, 2000), 20-)-"70. 208 (Panorm1t1).
j See for example j.A. Brundage, Medieval u11w11 fall' (London and New York
1995), 39.

lll 'LLETIN 01' MEDIEVAL CANON I.AW

115

lvo's canon law by analysing his lJ<!crellllll (=ID) and by comparing it to

the PaJ1ornzia (:; IP). The latter was undoubtedly much more successful,
but the Decretum is closer to the kind of collection Ivo himself used as a
bishop. Given the weaknesses of Migne's edition,' such an analysis would
not be possible without the provisional editions of Ivo's collections
prepared by Martin Brett. Finally, I shall demonstrate that by virtue of its
formal sources, the Prologus is more closely related to the more pastoral
early collections, the Tripartita and the Decretunz, than to the Panormia.
This analysis also allows a precise relative dating of the Prologus and the
three collections.
MERCY AND JUSTICE' IN

Ivo's PASTORATE AND THEOLOGY

Iva is most famous for his Prologus and the principle of

understanding and reconciling canon law in a pragmatic way according
to 'mercy and justice' This formula is generally seen as the main
contribution Ivo made to the development of scholastic and legal
hermeneutics, inspiring Alger of Liege, Abelard, St Bernard, Gratian, and
many other great ecclesiastics. 5 In fact, there is an abundance of aJlusions
to the relationship of misericordia et iudicium not only in the Prologus
but in all of Ivo's canonical and theological writings, and, above all, in his
correspondence. 6 To highlight its original context, that is to say, the
pastoral aspect, I will first examine Ivo's concern with canonical reform,
4

]. Rambaud-Buhot, 'Les Sommaires de la Panormie et !'edition <le Melchior de

Vosmedian', Traditio 23 0967), 534-6, P. Landau, 'Die Rubriken und
Inskriptionen von Ivos Parnormie', BMCL 12 0982), 31-49 and P. Landau, 'Das
Dekret des Ivo von Chartres: Die handschriftliche Dberlieferung im Vergleich
zum Text in den Editionen des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts', ZRG KA 70 0984), 144.
5
See G. Le Bras, 'Le Liber de misericordia et justitia d'Alger de Liege', NRHDFE
45 0921), 80-118 and R. Kretzschmar, Alger von Li.ittichs Traktat 'De misericordia
et iustitia': Ein kanonistischer Konkordanzversuch aus der Zeit des
Investiturstreits: Untersuchungen und Edition (Sigmaringen, 1985). 59 (Alger); P.
Fournier, 'Yves de Chartres et le droit canonique', Revue des questions
historiques 63 (1898), 51-98 & 384-405, 61 (Bernard); S. Kuttner, 'Zur Frage der
theologischen Vorlagen Gratians', ZRG KA 54 0934), 243-68, 254 (Gratian); de
Ghellinck, Mouvement theologique, 313-5, 22-3 and 29, M. Grabmann, Die
Geschichte der scholastischen Methode: nach den gedruckten und ungedruckten
Quellen (Freiburg 1909-11 ), ii, 243-6, D.E. Luscombe, The School of Peter
Abelard: The Influence of Abelard's Thought in the Early Scholastic Period
(London 1969), 214-7 and S. Kuttner, Harmony from dissonance: An
interpretation of medieval canon law (Latrobe, Penn., 1960), 4 (scholasticism and
legal thought in general).
6
Prologus (p. 112), IDlS.057 (p.118, n. 78); Sermones 6 and 7 (p. 117); epp. 16,
46, 55 (quoting Prologus 19), 57. 60, 67 (ed. Leclercq as ep. 66), 74, 79, 82, 124,
133, 140, 157, 171, 180, 185-7, 189-90, 214, 222, 226, 231, 233-4, 236, 238, 258-60
and 264. for which see also p. 112.

116 '

IVO OF CHARTRES' PASTORAL CANON LAW

his pastorate and his theology.

Ivo became a canon regular around about 1070 after having
studied with Lanfranc at Bee. At this time, the canonical reform that had
started in the early eleventh century was already widely spread. 7 St Ruf,
founded in 1039 near Avignon, was the first famous and most influential
reform community in France; 8 more and more cathedral chapters were
reformed as the century wore on. 9 This reform was mainly an episcopal
task, but at the Lateran council in 1059 Hildebrand, the future Pope
Gregory VII, had made the first move to support it with papal authority.
As a result of the synod, Pope Nicholas II sent encyclical letters
impressing chastity, common property and communal living upon the
whole clergy. 10 These decrees certainly became known in Northern
France very soon; in fact, they were inserted into the Collectio Lanfranci
at Bec. 11 Hildebrand did not succeed in changing the Rule of Aachen
according to his ideas of the total abolition of private property, as
manuscripts of the rule prove. 12 But increasingly, canons were living
according to some rule, whether it be the Rule of Aachen, the
Augustinian Rule or, still very frequently, some kind of adopted monastic
rule.
In 1078, Ivo was appointed abbot' or provost' - the terms are
used interchangeably by contemporary sources - of the newly founded
monastery of St Quentin near Beauvais by bishop Guy of Beauvais. 13 Th.is
is the first occasion where we can study Ivo's pastorate and his own
concern with canonical reform. He compiled a relatively mild rule from
patristic writings and the Rule of St Benedict. As far as we know, Ivo's
reform was successful and the community became a model for other
convents. 14 The exact character of the vita canonica at St Quentin in Ivo's
days is unknown; the earliest papal letter by Gregory VII mentioning the
convent gives no hint at all. 15 A later bull by Urban II addresses the
7

C. Dereine, 'Vie commune, regle de saint Augustine et chanoines reguliers au

Xie siecle', RHE 41 (1946), 365-406, 366-85 .

8
C. Dereine, 'Saint-Ruf et ses coutumes aux Xie et xuc siecles', Revue benedictine
59 0949), 161-82, 168-2.
9
The earliest reform chapter was Reims in 975, for which an Augustinian Rule is
mentioned in 1067 for the first time, see Dereine, 'Vie commune', 366 and 375.
10
JL 4404, 4405 and 4501; see U.-R. Blumenthal, Gregor \ill.: Papst zwischen
Canossa und Kirchenreform (Darmstadt 2001), 101-2.
11
LA 01.132, edited in R. Schieffer, Die Entstehung des papstlichen
Investiturverbots flir den deutschen Konig (Stuttgart 1981), 208-25 .
12
Blumenthal, Gregor VII., 104-5.
13
See H. Labande, 'Le Cartulaire de Saint-Quentin de Beauvais: No 7,-404 de la
Bibliotheque de Sir Thomas Phillips a Cheltenham', Memoires de la Societe
academique de l'Oise 14 (1891), 665-76, 666 and 671-3 for the edition of the
foundation charter.
14
]. Leclercq, 'Introduction', in idem (ed.), Yves de Chartres, Correspondance
(Paris, 1949), VIl-XXXIX, VIII.
15
JL 5261 (PL 148, 704), see Dereine, 'Vie commune', 379.

BULLETIN OF MEf)IEVAL CANON LAW

117

canons of St Quentin as 'fratrihus regularem vitam professis', but dates

from 1093 when Ivo was already bishop at Chartres. 16 However, while
Ivo's own rule is not extant, there is a version of the rule of St Quentin
from the early twelfth century. 17 Ivo is mentioned as rhe first abbot, 18 and
the canons had pleasant memories of his moderate rule:
Legifer igitur noster, vir moderatae religionis et precipuae
discretionis malens leniter 'lac emungeri' quam durius premendo
sanguinem elicere' [Pro. xxx 33), bis tondere quam semel interficere,
rudes homines conversionis gratia ad eius magisterium undique
confluences non magnopere curavit asperitatum seu austeritatum sarcinis
opprimere quatenus, corde dilato et amplo, viam mandatorum Dei
alacriter possent currere. 19
Compared to many rules of later reform foundations like
Springiersbach, Ivo's was mild indeed. It decreed neither manual work
nor a severe diet. As we can see from his correspondence, Ivo generally
did not value this kind of asceticism very much. 20 He was, on the other
hand, strict concerning the basic norms of obedience, stabilitas loci.
chastity and common property. 21
At Chartres, lvo later aimed at reforming the chapter of his
cathedral. Here, the situation was completely different from that at St
Quentin: the chapter of Chartres was not a newly founded reform
community but an established, relatively large body dominated by the
local nobility of a rich region. 22 Unlike the scribe of the rule of St
Quentin, they did not compare themselves to monks, thus praising Ivo's
leniency, but to their relatives, thus vividly opposing Ivo's endeavour to
introduce communal living or even common property. Moreover, Ivo's
aims for the chapter were probably stricter, too. At St Quentin in 1078, he
had compiled an ad hoe rule; some 25 years later he must have been
aware of recent papal decrees that banned any private property. 23
Whatever the case may have been, his struggle with the chapter lasted for
many years. In 1098 he wrote to Pope Urban II expressing in biblical
imagery how he had cultivated his vineyard for seven years without being

16

JL 5496 (ed. D. Lohrmann, Papsturkunden in Frankreich: Neue Falge 7. Band:

Nordliche He-de-France und Vermandois (Gottingen 1976), 247-51, 247).
17
Ed. C. Dereine, 'Les Coutumiers de Saint-Quentin de Beauvais et de
Springiersbach', RHE 43 0948), 411-42, 433-7.
18
'Primus abbas ecclesiae nostrae, postea Carnotensis urbis episcopus, vitae
regularis ordinem in ecclesia nostra constituisset' (ibid., 435).
19
ibid., 436.
20
See ep. 192.
21
'Districte et immutabiliter observanda decrevit' (ed. Dereine, 'Coutumiers', 436).
22
See R. Sprandel, Ivo von Chartres und seine Stellung in der Kirchengeschichte
(Stuttgart, 1962), 88-9 and 143.
23 See Dereine, 'Vie commune', 381-5 and H. Fuhrmann, Papst Urban II. und der
Stand der Regularkanoniker (Munich, 1984), 7-9.

118

l\'O OF CHARTRES' PASTORAL CA:"<ON LAW

able to harvest yet. 24 A few years later, he bitterly complained about the
opposition of his chapter, 25 and as late as 1114, he wrote to the pope,
that ecclesiastical discipline and religious conviction were still very low at
Chartres. 26 Iva also introduced the Augustinian Rule at St Jean de la
Vallee, 27 a monastery in his diocese, and protected it from the influence
of his own cathedral chapter. He seems to have reformed other churches
and monasteries in the Chartres region.28
For the time of his pontificate, we can as well study Ivos
pastorate from his correspondence in more detail. Here, the dominance
of the vocabulary of 'mercy and justice' is striking. Among the extant
letters, ahout one out of ten contains an allusion to mercy and justice,
most of the time in the context of Ivo's day-to-day pastorate. 29 Often he
uses his favourite biblical quotations on mercy and justice in prominent
places, such as the conclusion of an argument or even the arenga of a
letter. 30 The letters reflect the various questions he was asked: a monk,
having fled four times from his monastery, should be received again, Ivo
wrote to his abbot, even if it was against the Rule, quia superexaltat
misericordia iustitiam" [Jas. ii 13)'. 31 Even if a divorce would be allowed
according to the Bible, he advised against it 'misericordie causa'. 32 Often
he quotes historical examples: against the rigor canonum, Pope Pelagius
consecrated a bishop elect in spite of his having wife and children. 33 And,
although a cleric can normally not become suhdeacon without having the
lesser orders, one could choose to apply misericordia rather than rigor
iustitiae and dispense him .34 It should be mentioned, however, that Ivo
sometimes advised rigor rather than misericordia. 35
All these cases have in common that they were situations where
one had to choose how to apply rules, be it Biblical precepts, the Rule of
St Benedict, ecclesiastical or Roman law. The term misericordia is used
for the judge's right to moderate a severe law, a principle known both to

24

Ep. 67 (ed. Leclercq as ep. 66, 294).

Ep. 133.
1
<' Ep. 219.
27
See Ivo's charcer: 'Canonicos tales esse decrevi. qui propriecate posthabita
canonicam
habeant vitam iuxta beati Augustini institutionem' (PL 162, 294 ); see Dereine, 'Vie
commune', 385.
28
Sprandel, Ivo von Chartres, 144-'1 .
29
See p. 109. n.6 for a list of 31 letters.
30
Epp. 16 (Ps. xxv 10), 57 Qas. ii 13). 67 (arenga Ps. ci 1, ed. Leclercq, 290, as ep.
66). 133 and 140 (Ps. ex! 5), 214 (Ps. ci 1).
:H Ep. 57 (ed. Leclercq, 228); see RB 29 ( CSEL 75, 9--t ).
32
Ep . 188 .
.u Ep . .:;.:; (ed. Leclercq, 224).
34
Ep. 185 CPL 162. 186); cf. ID 06.409.
3
"' Epp. 46 and 70; see Prologus 25 .
25

Ill 'l.l .ETIN OF Ml'OlE\.AL

<.A~ON

LAW

119

secular and canon law. 36 One meaning of misericordia is therefore

'dispense', although not in its modern sense. 37 Faced with ohen very strict
precepts, especially penitential canons, Ivo thought such dispensatio to
be the common case rather than an exception.
But mercy and justice' also played a role in more difficult cases
where there were contradicting authorities. Answering the question,
whether an illicit union could later he legalized by marriage, Ivo quotes a
number of authorities both in favour and against this possibility and
concludes:
Quantum ergo mihi videtur, quod quidam Patres concubinas
uxores fieri vetuerunt, honestatem coniugii commendantes et foedam
concubinatus consuetudinem coercere cupientes, rigorem iustitiae teneri
decreverunt. Quod vero alii aliter scripserunt, hoe intellego, quia intuitu
misericordiae quorumdam imbecillitati occurentes, rigorem canonum
temperare maluerunt. In quibus sententiis non alia mihi videtur esse
distantia nisi ea quam inter se habent 'iudicium et misericordia' (Ps. ci 11,
quae, quotiens in unum negotium conveniunt, in discretione rectorum ita
constituunt ut, habita consideratione salutis animarum pro qualitate
personarum, pro opportunitate locorum et temporum, nunc severitas
canon um possit exerceri, nunc indulgentia, quibus oportebit, impendi. ~ 8
Even shorter is Ivo's conclusion in a similar case brought to him
some years later. Concerning contradictory Biblical precepts, 39 he writes:
Quoniam universae viae Domini misericordia et veritas' [Ps. xxv
101, non intelligimus Scripturas divinas inter se dissentire, cum alia
Scriptura rigorem intendit iustitiae, altera autem dispensationem sequitur
indulgentiae. 40
According to Ivo, it was up to the judge to reconcile contradicting
canons with respect to the circumstances of the cas~ in question, a
principle he discussed at length in his famotis Prologus. These principles,
developed not in an academic context but rather in day-to-day pastorate,
are thus Ivo's answer to the central hermeneutical problem of
contradictions in the Bible, the Fathers or canon law, or among different
authorities. In a more theoretical form, they are also presented in his
Prologus:
In quo prudentem lectorem premonere congruum duximus, ut si
forte que legerit non ad plenum intellexerit, vel sibi invicem adversari
existimaverit, non statim reprehendat, sed quid secundum rigorem, quid
secundum moderationem, quid secundum iudicium, quid secundum
See ID 10.002: 'Soleo audire in potestate esse judicis mollire sententiam, et
mitius vindicare quam leges.' (PL 161, 691) .
.n Ivo contrasts dispens~tio rather than misericordia (or ~oth teni:s) .with justice in
epp. 16, 157, 185, 190, 214, 222, 231 and 234. For d1spensat10 m the earlier
Middle Ages see Kuttner, Harmony from dissonance, 55-67.
38 Ep. 16 (ed. Leclercq, 68).
.
..
39 Ivo seems to think of Deu. iv 1-4, Mt. x1x 3-12 and 1 Co. vu .
40
Ep. 222 (PL 162, 226).

36

120

'

IVO OF CHARTRES' PASTORAL CANON LAW

misericordiam dicatur diligenter attendat. Que inter se dissentire non

sentiebat, qui dicebat: 'Misericordiam et iudicium cantabo tibi, Domine'
[Ps. ci 11, et alibi: 'Universe vie domini misericordia et veritas' [Ps. xxv
10). 41

The concordia Scripturae was guaranteed not bydivineauthorship

- for Scriptura included many human writings - but rather by the promise
of salvation. Unlike later canon lawyers, Ivo did not so much argue that
all contradictions were only apparent ones, but that in any giveri situation
there was a solution meeting the pastoral duties of the judge:
Quicunque ergo ecclesiasticus doctor ecclesiasticas regulas ita
interpretatur aut moderatur, ut ad regnum caritatis cuncta que docuerit
vel exposuerit referat, nee peccat nee errat, cum saluti proximorum
consulens ad finem sacris institutionibus debitum pervenire intendat.
Unde <licit beatus Augustinus de disciplina ecclesiastica tractans: 'habe
caritatem et fac quidquid vis, si corripis corripe cum caritate, si parcis
parce cum caritate' . 'ii
In reconciling contradicting canons, Ivo thus did not strive for a
system of coherent norms; and obviously, he did not at all exclude or
reconcile canons he compiled for his collections, but instead gave an
outline of how to cope with these contradictions in his Prologus. As in
the case of overly strict rules, he puts the stress on the intentio of
contradicting canons - that is to say, the salvation of one's soul. Without
a doubt, Iva saw this as the vital feature of canon law:
Cum ergo omnis institutio ecclesiasticarum legum ad salutem
referenda sit animarum, istarum institutionum transgressiones aut
districtius essent corrigendae, ut saluti prodessent, aut interim silentio
premendae, ne spiritualia vel corporalia commoda supradictis modis
impedirent. 43
The antithesis of mercy and justice is not, however, Ivo's only
hermeneutical principle, as some scholars have assumed. 44 He sometimes
equally mentions a hierarchy of authorities: to understand Old Testament
precepts, one has to take into account the New Testament;-1 5 human
authors and Roman law can never override the Bible;<1 6 and not even the
pope may decree anything against the statuta Patrum. 1 - However, Ivo
mentions this last concept rarely and does not elaborate it any further in
his canonical writing.
The central role of the vocabulary of mercy (misericordia,

41

Prologus 2 (ed. J. Werckmeister (Sources canoniques 1, Paris, 1997), 60).

Prologus 4 (ibid., 66); the quotation is from Augustinus, In epistolam Iohannis
VII, 8 (SC 75, 328).
43
Ep. 60 (ed. Leclercq, 250).
ii Sprandel, Ivo von Chartres, 29.
'Vi Ep. 222.
1
<' See epp. 221 and 242 for Roman law.
17
Epp. 60 and 77; p. 123, n. 207.
'

BULLETIN OF MEDll\AL CANON I.AW

121

moderatio, dispensatio) and justice (iustitia, iudicium, rigor, veritas), iH in

Ivo's works has often been noted, 19 and several sources of influence have
been suggested: de Ghellinck pointed to Roman Law, 50 Sprandel drew a
parallel to Gregory the Great, -;i while the Psalms seem to be too self-evident to be explicitly mentioned. 52
In addition, it is worth mentioning that the tension between God's
mercy and justice is almost a commonplace in the theology of both
redemption and penance. Since St Augustine, it was seen an answer to
the question why God spares the wicked. 53 In the twelfth century, the
Glossa ordinaria linked both of Ivo's favourite quotations from the Psalter
to Augustine's theology of penance. 54 By analogy, the balance between
mercy and justice was also a responsibility for any priest, as Gregory the
Great reminds the reader of his Regula pastoralis. ss Ivo's contemporary
Bonizo of Sutri describes God's 'mercy within justice'; quoting Augustine,
he notes that nobody would be saved if justice were not supplemented
with mercy. 56 To take another example, Alger of Liege's De misericordia
et iustitia witnesses how widely spread the topos was around about
1100. 57 Almost certainly inspired by Ivo's Prologus, Alger employed an
extensive variety of biblical, patristic, and canon law sources for the very

18

'lustitia' often has a very severe meaning: 'lustitia enim sola damnat.' (PL 40,
1122).
49
Fournier, 'Yves de Chartres', 57; Sprandel, Ivo von Chartres, 28 and 80-1;].
Werckmeister, 'Introduction', in idem (ed.), Yves de Chartres, Prologue (Paris
1997), 11-58, 29.
50
de Ghellinck, Mouvement theologique, 330, speaks of the 'double principe,
qu'Yves, en juriste qu'il etait, empruntait sans dout au droit romain, celui de la
rigeur et celui de la misericorde.'
51
Sprandel, Ivo von Chartres, 80, n. 5.
52
See Ps. xxv 10, lxxxv 11, ci 1, cxvii 2 and cxl 5 for terse formulae.
53
Augustinus, De Civitate Dei XX, 6 ( CCSL 48, 707): 'Nee fecit hie ullam
differentiam bonorum et malorum. [. ..J Omnes itaque mortui sunt in peccatis,
nemine prorsus excepto, sive originalibus sive etiam voluntate additis, vel
ignorando vel sciendo nee faciendo quad iustum est. [. . .J Ista est misericoridiae,
illa iudicii. Propter quod in psalmo scriptum est: "Misericordia et iudicium
cantabo tibi, Domine'' [Ps. ci l].'
1
' Glossa ordinaria, ed. K. Froehlich and M.T. Gibson (Turnhout 1992), ii, 482 (Ps.
cv 10) and 581 (Ps. ci 1).
55 Regula pastoralis II, 6 (SC 381, 214-6) and II, 10 (SC 381, 238); see also Moralia
in lob XX, 5, 14 (CCSL 143A, 1012). Ivo also quotes Gregory twice in his
Prologus 32 QE 1844) and 48 (JE 1843) on dispensation and moderation of
severe precepts.
56 Bonizo De vita christiana I, 2 (ed. Perels, 2): ur null us ab hoe iusto debitoque
supplicio nisi misericordia et indebita gratia liberetur' = Augustinus, De Civitate
Dei XXI, 12 (CCSL 48, 543).
57 The dating of Le Bras, 'Alger de Liege', 96 (c. 1095-1121) is still accepted. For a
discussion and recent literature see Kretzschmar, Alger von Ltittich, 27-30. Both
Le Bras and Kretzschmar think c. 1105 a likely date.

122 '

!VO OF CHARTRES' PASTORAL CA:-.:O"\ LAW

same subject. 58 His--WOrk is even better evidence for the topical character
of 'mercy and justice' if one takes into account that he quoted the same
kind of sources as Iva did, but borrowed neither from the Prologus nor
Ivo's collections. 59
But Ivo's models become more obvious if one takes into
consideration another metaphor Ivo uses very often for penance. namely
medical analogies. 6 Comparing medici spirituales to medici corporales,
Iva argues that different methods should be applied in different cases,
depending on the individual circumstances. 61 Iva links these medical
metaphors with the altercation of mercy and justice quite naturally
through the double meaning of salus as both 'health' and 'salvation'.
Here, he could dra ~ not only on the Bible but also on numerous patristic
sources, namely Gregory the Great and Augustine, 62 and on Hincmar of
Reims. 63 The attributes 'doctor' and medicus' also link the role of an
abhot as judge and as a spiritual teacher in the Rule of St Benedict. 6 ~ But
much closer to Ivo's language is the use of medical metaphors in
eleventh-century penitential theology, where they are equally linked to
'mercy and justice'. Although this is an obvious source for Ivos language,
is has been neglected so far. 65 He most likely knew Fulbert of Chartres'
correspondence, where the topos can be found as well, 66 and also
Burchard of Worms' Corrector sive medicus comgared se\ere and milder
penance to different kinds of medical treatment. 7 But the closest parallel
to Ivos concept and language of penance can be found in another
contemporary treatise on penance, the Pseudo-Augustinian De vera et
falsa poenitentia:
Deus enim qui misericors est et iustus. sicut conservat
misericordiam in iustitia, ita et iustitiam in misericordia. Opus enim est
misericordiae, peccanti peccata dimittere. Sed oportet ut iustus misereatur
58

For Alger's sources, see Kretzschmar, Alger von Li.ittich, '0-140.

ibid. , 77 and 116.
60
To list only a few instances: epp. 60, 1 ')'). 15-:-, 234: Sermones 6, 8. 13 and 23;
Prologus 4-6 and 13; in the Decretum especially ID 1'). cc. 2.3--t. -!7, 51, 57. 59
and 73.
61
Prologus 5 (ed. Werckmeister, 68).
62
Gregory. Moralia in Hiob XX, -t. 11 (CCSL 1-t3A, 1009) and Regula pastoralis I,
1 (SC 381, 128); for Augustine, see p. 113, n. -l 2.
63
PL 125, 413.
64
RB 27-8 (CSEL 75, 89-93); see B.C. Brasington, 'Recte docens Ye! credens:
Glosses to the Prologue to Ivo of Chartres' Panormia and Monastic Study of
Canon Law, in G. Melville (ed.), De ordine vitae (Mi.inster 1996 L 101-2-). 1io-1.
65
Sprandel, Ivo von Chanres, 20-4 discusses the medical metaphors -in lvo's
works, but does not ev<: n mention penitential literan1re as a possible source.
66
Fulbert of Charcres, ep ..11 (ed. Behrends, ')8).
67
BU 19, cc. 5, 8, 29, 33. 4.3. 4'S. 59, 123 and 145. BU 19 is completely contained
in ID 15, see (p. 17, n. 128); it is. however, not certain that ho already knew
Burchard's collection \vhen writing the Prologus. as I shall discuss in detail
he low.
59

BIJLLtlJN OF MEDIEVAL CANON I.AW

123

iuste. Oportet eniinut non sol um quid, sed in quo doleat consideret, si
dignus est, non dico iustitia, sed misericordia. Iustitia enim sola damnat.
Sed dignus est misericordia, qui spirituali lahore petit gratiam. [. .. ] Non
dixit [Dominus, CR], 'Quos putatis ligare et solvere' sed 'in quos exercetis
opus misericordiae et iustitiae. 68
The dominance of the vocabulary of mercy and justice in Ivo's
writings is therefore first of all an indication that, reviving patristic
teaching, he took part in the vihrant development of the theology of
redemption and penance in the -eleventh century. 69 In fact, Iva seems to
be one of its most important thinkers.' 0 Just as the author of De vera et
falsa poenitentia, and similar to Anselm of Canterbury, 71 Ivo links the
topos of mercy and justice to forgiveness of sins by both God and the
Church. And while both the vocabulary of mercy and justice' and
medical metaphors were up to a point theological commonplaces, Iva
seems to be original in applying them to legal and biblical hermeneutics
as well.
According to Iva, the whole Heilsgeschichte and in particular
incarnation are to be understood as the work of God's mercy and justice.
This view can be studied from his sermon, Quare Deus natus et passus
sit, a treatise addressing the very same question to which Anselm gave a
completely new answer at about this time. 72 Ivo writes:
Corrupto peccatis originalibus et actualibus mundo, mundi
Conditor secreto et mirabili consilio per mysterium Verbi incarnati
eiusdem mundi lapsum voluit reparare. [. .. ] Omnipotens quippe figuli
man us, cuius universae viae misericordia et veritas' [Ps. xxv 1O] (. .. ] sic
voluit ruinam vasis fragilis reformare, ut nee peccatum hominis dimitteret
impunitum, quia iustus est; nee insanabile, quia misercors est. [. .. ] Erat
autem contra divinam iustitiam, si reum impoenitentem in pristinum
gradum restituisset, et non usque ad <lignum poenitentiae fructum quo
vellet ratione compelleret. ' 3
On the one hand, God treats man justly, 'that no sin of man
remains unpunished'. But on the other hand, God takes into account
human weakness, answering it by his misericordia to restore the fallen
universe. The highest expressions of this 'mercy within justice' are the
incarnation and the crucifixion, which are also the beginning of the
Christian sacraments. Ivo's stress on God's adaptation to the nature of
fallen mankind while preserving his justice is traditional theology and
68

Devera et falsa poenitentia X, 25 (PL 40, 1122).

p. Anciaux, La theologie du sacrament de penitence au XII" siecle (Leuven and
Gembloux 1949), 31-53; see H.E.J. Cowdrey, The Cluniacs and the Gregorian
Reform (Oxford 1970), 121-4.
70
Anciaux, Sacrament de penitence, 54-5.
71 Anselm, Proslogion c. 9-11 (ed. Schmitt, 96-104); Cur Deus Homo II, 20 (ed.
Schmitt, 152).
72 The date of Ivo's sermon (sermo 6) is unknown.
73
PL 162, 562.
69

124

'

!VO

Of' CHARTH ES'

PASTORAL CA;..;o;-.; LAW

close to ACgustine's teach ing. But concerning the nature of redemption,

Iva seems to be closer to Anselm's idea of satisfaction than Augustine's
ransom theory of redemption. Ivo's general notion is one of redemption
as the restoration of divine order; he does not even mention the devil as
having a just right of possession over man and shares what Southern has
called the pre-scholastic trait of Anselm's thought. 74 But while fallen man
himself was of course not ahle to contribute sufficiently towards this
redemption, the sacrament of penance offered man the opportunity to be
part of the cause of God's mundi Japsi restauratio'. In fact, according to
Ivo, his participation was necessary, because the Fall was a result of
man's free action, so restoration equally demanded an action of free
will. 75 Furthermore, after the inca rnation man was capable of
understanding the logic of the divine plan of Creation. 76 This aspect,
together with the institution of the new priesthood by Christ, links the
theology of redemption to the idea of an ongoing work of salvation to
which mankind contributed. It is very close to the scholastic idea that
77
growing knowledge might promote the salvation of mankind.
In the case of Iva, this also provides us with a key to his
understanding of canon law. Not only does Ivo explain redemption in
juridical terms - God sentencing iuste, man recompensing conveniens but he also describes the salvation of mankind almost exactly like the
reconciliation of a sinning priest. 78 Similarly, the last book in Ivos
Decretum also starts with Creation and the Fall, stressing the lost dignitas
man could regain. 79 But crucially, canon law itself was an instrument to
74

R.W. Southern, Scholastic Humanism and the Unification of Europe (Oxford

and Cambridge Mass., 1995/2001), i, 42.
75
'Non enim conveniens erat, ut invitus traheretur ad poenitentiam, qui
~r,onca n eus corruerat in poenam. CPL 162, '56~ ).
) '[. .. ) ut intelligent iustum fuisse conditorem in condemnando. et misericordem
in redimendo: nee potuisse sanari sine misericordia, quod iuste condemnaverat
Omnipotens iustitia' (PL 162, 565).
77
See Southern, Scholastic Humanism, i, 4-).
8
ID 1'5 .057 on the reconcilation of a sinning priest: 'Proinde diligences
misericordiam Dei, metuentesque iustitiam, nee de remissione peccatorum
desperemus, nee remaneamus in peccatis, sciences quia illa omnium hominum
debita sit exactura equitas iustissimi iudicis, que non dimiserit misericordia
clementissimi Redemptoris. Sicut enim misericordia suscipit, absolvitque
converses, ita iustitia repellet et punier obduratos.' (PL 161. 8'2).
79
ID 17.001: 'Tanta dignitas humane conditionis esse scitur, ut non solum
iubentis sermone, ut alia sex diemm opera, sed consilio sancte Trinitatis, et opera
divine maiestatis creatus sit homo, ut ex primo conditionis honore intelligeret
quantum suo Conditori deheret, dum tantum in conditione mox dignitatis
privilegium prestitit ei Conditor ut tanto ardentius amaret Conditorem, quanta
mirabilius se ah eo conditum intelligeret. [. .. ] Quapropter quisque diligentius
prime conditionis sue excellentiam, et verendam sancte Trinitatis in seipso
imaginem agnoscat, honoremque similitudinis divine ad quam creatus est
nohilitate mornm, exercitio virtutum, dignitate meritornm habere contendat, ut

Blll.l.ETIN OF MEDIEVAL CANON LAW

125

define and administer the sacraments in a better way. Namely the

sacrament of penance was founded to give fallen mankind the chance to
contribute to God's restoration of divine order and this contribution
required both insight and free action. The same, however, is true of all
sacraments. In Ivo's time, this was a view not yet backed by
contemporary canon law. Therefore, compiling a new canon law
collection would contribute to a better understanding and application of
the sacraments and, finally, to the salvation of fallen mankind.
More generally, there was a need for more precise definitions of
sacraments. Ivo frequently deals with the question of what actually
constitutes a sacrament in his letters, his sermons and his canonical
collections. Most of the letters on sacraments deal with marriage and lay
investiture, but there are many other examples. The blessing by a monk,
the reconsecration of 1noved altars, a priest's prayer, the consecration of
bishops or abbots, the Eucharist, confession and absolution, penance,
incarnation and crucifixion of Christ, ordination of priests, extreme
unction, baptism, the consecratio virginum and the inauguration of
churches are also discussed - the question of what actually constituted a
sacrament was one Ivo was asked very often. And if this was clear, there
was yet the issue of the circumstances under which the validity of
sacraments was guaranteed. Only priests could administer sacraments, but
did this hold equally true for unworthy, excommunicated and/or simonist
priests? And how did it apply to monks, canons regular, or, even more
complicated, a priest who had become monk?
To answer these questions, more than just theoretical solutions
are necessary. For even if canon law did contain satisfactory solutions, a
profound knowledge of the canons was still exceptional. For example,
writing to abbot William of Fecamp in c. 1099, Ivo settled the question
whether an altar, after having been moved due to construction work, had
to be reconsecrated. 80 As it seems, the addressee had in fact turned to
Anselm of Canterbury before, and he was not able to answer this
question; and neither the pope nor his cardinals were sure about the
matter. 81 Ivo, however, who had dealt with such problems before, 82 gave
a ready canonical solution he himself had copied from Burchard into his
own collections. 83 In general, a church had to be exorcised with water
and salt after reconstruction, but if the altar had been moved, the church
had to be reconsecrated.
Cases like this might have confirmed Ivo that his own canonical
quando apparebit qualis sit, similis ei appareat, qui se mirabiliter ad
similitudinem suam in primo Adam condidit, mirabiliusque in Secundo
reformavit' (PL 161, 967).
80
Ep. 80.
81
R.W. Southern, Saint Anselm: A portrait in a landscape (Cambridge 1990), 2578.
82
Ep. 72.
a3 BU 03 .010-1 = ID 03 .011 and 013, also in Tripartita B and Panormia.

126

IYO OF CHARTRES' PASTORAL CA"<O:'\ LAW

knowledge, letters on particular questions and sermons delivered at

councils alone did not suffice, but that the knowledge ought to be
collected, systematized and finally spread via the schools. In fact, both
the need for definition and for Ivo's authority in these matters is further
witnessed by the taking over of Ivo's solution into the Liber pancrisis, a
twelfth-century collection of theological sententiae. 8 1

Ivo's DECRETIJM

AS A PASTORAL CANON LA w COLLECTION

To demonstrate that not only Ivo's legal hermeneutics but also his
actual canon law collections are expressions of his pastoral concern, I
shall examine his Decretum in some detail. Most of the result will also
hold true for the Tripartita, for it shares many features with the
Decretum. 85 The Decretum is often over-shadowed by Ivo's much more
successful Panormia. Yet it is not only a proper canon law collection, but
also a good example of what I call pastoral canon law' This aspect is in
fact what distinguished the Decretum from the Panormia more than
anything else.
First of all, the Decretum should not he treated depreciatingly. It
is often seen as without any method, as a mere collection of material, and
at best as a preparatory work for the Panormia. 86 Wasserschleben called it
a mere 'private collection' of Ivo and a 'magazine' of canons, a formula
used to this time to characterize the Dec return. 87 But the Decretum is a
proper canonical collection, as its structure and the manuscript tradition
show. The material is grouped thematically in seventeen parts, and

~ Partly ed. F.P. Bliemetzrieder, zu den Schriften Ivos von Chartres

Ct 1116): Ein

literargeschichtlicher Beitrag', Sitzungsberichte der kaisertichen Akademie der

Wissenschaften in Wien. Phil.-hist. Klasse 182, 6 (Vienna 191- l. 3-89, (H.
8
~ The Tripartita consists of two parts: Tripartita A OT 01-2) is an important formal
source of the Decren1m, while Tripartita B (IT 03) is an excerpt of the ID. IT 03
shares the practical' features with its formal source - Roman la"" a penitential,
and a long section on 'lay matters' (see p. 17. n. 136). However. the Tripartita
omits both the synodal order of ID 04 and the theological ID 17.
86
P. Fournier. 'Les collections attribuees a Y\es de Chartres', BEC 571')8
0896/97), BEC 57, 6--+5-t>H: BEC 58, 26-77, 293-326. -!10-+-l & 62+76, BEC 58.
320-1 ('la methode y est tout a fait primitive'); P. Fournier and G. Le Bras.
Histoire des collections canonique en accident (Paris, 1931/)2). ii, 108
('composes [...] sans aucune espece de methode'): A.M. Stickler, Historia iuris
canonici latini (Turin and Zurich, 1950 7q ), i. 182 (sine ordine et methodo, sine
ulla elaboratione intern.a').
s-F.W.H. Wasserschlehen, Beitrage zur Geschichte der vorgratianischen
Kirchenrechtsquellen (Leipzig 1839), 60 ('Privatvorarbeit') and 77 ('Magazin'); see
Fournier, collections, BEC 58, 318 ('un tra,ail preparatoire, un magasin de
documents'): P. Landau, 'Ivo von Chartres, Theologische Realenzyklopadie, vol.
16 (Berlin 1987 l. l22-7. 23 ('Magazin').

BULLETIN OF l\IFDIEVAL CANON I.A\\'

127

whether or not the original had inscriptions and rubrics, 88 any reader
familiar with it would be able to find canons relevant for a particular
question. Even within the individual parts, the canons were arranged
89
~1ccording to su bj et, albeit in an associative rather than a logical or<ler.
Often, however, the canons are givt:n in the order in which Ivo had
copied them from other collections. The resulting repetitiveness and
incoherence hindered but did not prohibit a functional use of the
collection. The same holds true for the many contradictions in the
Decretum; one must remember that this is a common feature of most preGratian collections - and the Prologus, often copied with the Decretum,
provided in fact an appropriate hermeneutics. Sometimes, Iva even seems
to have arranged canons in such way that the contradictions became
obvious. 90 But these instances are rare and the Decretum was certainly not
a book for the schools. Nonetheless, as an episcopal handbook, it was of
practical use. Ivo himself seems to have employed the Decretum more
than his other collections in his correspondence. 91 Actually, there is little
if any evidence that Ivo quotes the Panormia in his letters; but this would
need a closer investigation of the canon law in Ivo's letters that remains
to be done.
As for the manuscript tradition of the Decretum, there are but six
extant copies, of which only four are complete versions; most
manuscripts date from the twelfth century. 92 But nonetheless, it was
copied relatively fast and, what is more, over much of Europe. 93 Several
other collections like the Caesaraugustana made use of it, and a number

88

This has been suggested by R. Deutinger, 'Neue Handschriftenfragmente zum

Dekret Ivos von Chartres', Deutsches Archiv 51 0995), 539-42.
119
For example, in ID 04, a large block of canons on different auctoritates is
followed by a synodal order, possibly because synods as legal authorities were
discussed before.
90
The canons Fournier, 'Collections', BEC 58, 76, n. 2 quotes as evidence for the
Decretum's uselessness (ID 04.105-7) are such a case. For Ivo is genuine in
grouping them closely together, one might assume an intentional effort. In any
case, Fournier's example is of no great value to prove the superiority of the
Panormia, because the very same canons are present in IP 02.124-5 in the same
sequence.
91
See ibid., BEC 58, 319-20 and 323, n. 1.
92
See ibid., 505 and Landau, 'Ivo', 423. For MS 713 not being an abbreviated
form of the Decretum, see M. Brett, 'The Sources and Influence of Paris,
Bibliotheque de l'Arsenal 713', in P. Landau (ed.), Proceedings of the Ninth
International Congress of Medieval Canon Law (Vatican City 1997), 149-67, 154-5
and the in particular p. 12, n. 96.
93 The extant manuscripts are from France, England and Germany; it was
probably known in Dalby (Sweden) in the twelfth century, see Landau, 'Ivo',
423.

128

'

IYO OF CHARTRES' PASTORAL CANON LAW

of abridged versions also show its popularity. 94 Most abbreviated forms

follow the sequence of the Decretum 'more or less slavishly'; 95 this seems
to strengthen the idea of its use for administration rather than teaching.
Furthermore, the bulky Decretum was more likely to be replaced by
Gratian's Decretum; so probably a smaller fraction of its medieval copies
is extant than of the Panormia. This ghes the impression of a collection
that was relatively successful as an episcopal handbook, at least in the
short term. It was, however, not at all successful in the schools, and was
soon regarded as old-fashioned after Gratian's Decretum became
available.
This argument of the pastoral use of the Decretum should be
checked against its content. To begin with, Ivo's Decretum contains
almost the whole Decretum of Burchard of Worms ( = BU) and therefore
the same kind of legal sources. The second fons formalis is the Tripartita
A, containing especially Pseudo-Isidore. For the scattered remaining
material, namely ius novum like the decretals of the Collectio Britannica,
an industrious collection of canons was necessary. It seems that as a
preparation for Ivo's Decretum a collection very similar to what is today
Paris, Bibliotheque de !'Arsenal, MS 713, was compiled to gather the
material not contained in Burchard. 96
But the Decretum does not only contain canon law in the narrow
sense. Like Burchard, Ivo included his own penitential book as well as a
book on speculative theology. ~r He also included a substantial quantity of
Roman law mainly taken from the Collectio Britannica into a selfcontained part on 'lay matters'. 98 And as a reflection of the theological and
political controversies of his time and his personal concern with
sacraments, Ivo also included a great number of canons on simony, the
validity of sacraments, the Berengar controversy and the definition of
sacraments in general. 99 Most strikingly, he puts 44 canons from St
Augustine on sacramental issues at the very beginning of the Decretum;
in fact an unusual high proportion of patristic canons was received into

94

See Landau, 'Dekret Ivos', 32-4. L. Fowler-Magerl. Kanones: Ausgewahlte

Kanonessammlungen ausserhalb Italiens zwischen 1100 und 1140: Eine
Aufarbeitung mittels EDV (Piesenkofen. 1998), -49 and Brett, 'Panormia', 207, n. 6.
9
~ Brett, 'Panormia', 207.
96
Brett. 'Sources and Influence', passim and R. Somerville. 'Papal Excerpts in
Arsenal MS 7138: Alexander II and Urban ff, in P. Landau (ed.), Proceedings of
the Ninth International Congress of Medieval Canon La~ (\'atican City 199~).
169-84.
r ID 15 (seep. 17, n. 128) and ID 17, containing BU 20. The only canon from
BU 20 missing in Migne's edition of ID 17 (BU20.104) is present in the
manuscripts. I owe this information to Dr Martin Brett.
98
ID 16 'de officiis laicorum et causis eorumdem
99
See ID 01.153-75 and ID 02.084-100 for the validity. of schismatic sacraments '
and ID 02.009-10 for the Eucharist controversy.

BULLt.llN OF MEDIEVAL CANON LAW

129

canon law via Ivo's collections. 10Furthermore, while adding theological

texts, Ivo reduces the proportion of Biblical canons, a process typical of
the collections of his time. 101
Ivo often copied Burchard en bloc, so that the single books of his
Decretum are sometimes little more than one of Burchard's books with
additions at the beginning and end. In fact, this sandwich' structure can
be found in all but the first six books of Ivo's Decretum. In the middle of
such a 'sandwich' book there is normally a large block of Burchardian
canons, for the most part in the same sequence as in Burchard. Most of
Ivo's books contain one book of Burchard or the greater part of one;
some contain two or three. 102 Before and after them, Ivo copied canons of
various origins, very often from a collection similar to MS 713. 103 The first
six books, however, are more complex; the sequence of the canons
follows less closely the order of the respective fans formalis, indicating a
certain reworking of this first part of the Decretum. There are still quite
extensive blocks of canons in the same sequence as in the relevant
formal source, but they are distributed in more sections than in the
'sandwich' books. Typically, there are five to six medium-sized series, as
compared to two or at the most three large blocks in the eleven other
books; and within these series, the sequence follows the formal source
less slavishly.
But although the individual structure of most books is more or
less Burchardian, the arrangement of the whole collection is somewhat
different. The fact that the revised part of the Decretum consists of the
very books that deal with sacraments of the church highlights the special

C. Munier, Les sources patristiques du droit de l'eglise du vuie au XIIIe siecle

(Mulhouse 1957), 39-41 and P. Landau, 'Wandel und Kontinuitat im kanonischen
Recht bei Gratian', in]. Miethke and K. Schreiner (eds.), Sozialer Wandel im
Mittelalter (Sigmaringen 1994), 215-33.
101
sprandel, Ivo von Chartres, 57.
102
BU 01 is almost completely contained in ID 05, BU 02 in ID 06, BU 03 in ID
03, BU 04 in ID 01, BU 05 in ID 02, BU 06 in ID 10, BU 07 in ID 09, BU 08 in ID
07, BU 09 in ID 08, BU 10 in ID 11 and ID 13, BU 11 in ID 14, BU 12 in ID 12,
BU 15 in ID 16, BU 19 in ID 15 and BU 20 in ID 17. ID 09, 13 and 15 contain
canons from two or three Burchardian books rather than only one as the middle
part.
103
ID 12 and 14 have only two large blocks, the first from MS 713, the second
being the complete BU 12 and BU 11, respectively. In ID 16, the canons from BU
15 come at the beginning, then a large block from MS 713 and finally a long
sequence of Roman law from the CB. In ID 17, the middle part is Burchardian
(the complete BU 20), but augmented with St Augustine rather than canon law. I derived this information from Martin Brett's concordances and the Kanones
database. In all cases I neglect short sequences of canons of others or unknown
origin. Normally at least 80% of the canonical material of a 'sandwich' book can
be found in the main blocks.
100

130

'

!VO Of CHARTRES' PASTORAL CANON LAW

attention Ivo paid to sacramental canon law. 104 And crucially, Ivo does
not start with a chapter on the Roman primacy but rather with faith and
the sacraments of the faith. Given the very conservative nature of canon
law collections, this modification of arrangement is remarkable. It
supports the idea that Ivo's concept of the Church was very much
focussed on the administration of the sacraments, as can be seen from his
correspondence and as well his sermons. ~ 05 At the same time, it separates
Ivo from 'Gregorian' canon law collections that put the stress on papal
primacy. Concerning ecclesiastical hierarchy, Ivo is as much opposed to
most typical Gregorian ideas in his collections as he is in his politics. He
certainly recognised papal primacy as such. But he also sticks to a
hierarchy of bishops, archbishops, and the pope as the appropriate
organisation of the Church. Therefore, he is very sceptical about primates
and papal legates, 106 of which Gregory VII made special use for his
French affairs, causing conflicts of authority. Ivo was also very reluctant
concerning the papal making of new laws, and saw it restricted to cases
of 'new dangers' only. 107 That all is not to say that Ivo was opposed to
Gregory; but he certainly had a different concept of hierarchy and law. As
a canonist, he made but little use of Gregory's decrees; 108 and if he did
quote such canons in his collections or his letter, he chose decrees which
modern historians would regard as quite atypical. The only longer
quotation of Gregory in Ivo's correspondence, for example, is the synodal
decree Quoniam multos of 1078 that moderated Gregory's former
excommunication decrees. 109 On the other hand, those canons on lay
investiture modern scholars especially associate with Gregory VII are

104

ID 01 (baptism), ID 02 (Eucharist), ID 03 (churches) and ID 05-06 (bishops,

priests and ordinations). ID 04 deals not with sacraments, but with all kind of
auctoritates. Some other books do also deal with sacraments, but only with those
which are relevant for lay peoples, such as marriage and penance.
105
See above .
106
Epp. 59-60, 64 (ed. Leclercq as ep. 67) and 236; see Fournier and Le Bras,
Histoire, ii, 112-3 for other examples.
107
In ep. 60, Ivo initially concedes that it were legitimate quod contra novas
excessus nova promulgare mandata' (ed. Leclercq, 240), but then quotes at
length a number of authorities stressing tradition and to the disadvantage of any
kind of new laws, making it very clear that not even the pope might decree
anything 'contra statuta Patrum' (ibid., 240-4, 2-+0): this formula is repeated in ep.
77 (PL 162, 99). In ep. 195 he stresses that the power of the Church to bind and
to lose is limited to 'quae liganda ligandi et quae sunt sohenda solvendi' (PL 162,
204).
108
See ].T. Gilchrist, 'The Reception of Pope Gregory VII into the Canon Law
(1073-1141)", ZRG KA 90 (1973), 34-82.
109
Ep. 186 (PL 162, 188). Despite the meagre impact Gregory VII had on
canonical collections, Quoniam multos was copied into l-! of the 38 collections
Gilchrist examined, including the three Ivonian collections; see the (unpaginated)
appendix of Gilchrist's article.

BUl.l.ETIN OF MEDIEVAL CANON LAW

131

absent from Ivo's collections, although he certainly new them. 110

To highlight the pastoral character of the Decretum, I shall now
inquire into the relationship of the Decretum and the Panormia in some
detail. Despite the numerous works on Ivo as a canonist, this will take
some effort, for many comparisons made so far are not satisfying for my
purpose as they are centred on methodological aspects. Even if the
Decretum is not perceived as a 'magazine' fQr the Panormia only, any
comparison based on mere method is likely to show the superiority of
the Panormia. To avoid this, I shall take into account all kinds of
evidence for the different roles of the collections, that is to say, their
material and formal sources, their content, the arrangement of the
material, and the fate of their copies.
To begin with, the shorter Panormia was much more successful.
There are more than 150 extant copies of the Panormia, compared to
only four complete manuscripts of the Decretum. 111 It contains about a
third of the Decretum's canons, plus a few canons from other sources. 112
As early as 1839, Wasserschleben established the view that the Panormia
was an abridged version of the Decretum, later confirmed by the studies
of Fournier. 113 The absence of more recent texts in the Panormia, namely
canons from the council of Clermont in 1095, was Fournier's reason for
dating both collections shortly before 1096. 114 This argument is to date not
disproved, and standard works of reference still maintain it. 115 But many
historians think a later date to be more likely; 116 sometimes even Ivo's
authorship is questioned. 117 The main reason for these doubts is the
apparently different nature of the Panormia. In the following, I will not
aim at solving the puzzle of the relative dating of Decretum and
Panormia. Nonetheless, I think both collections to have quite different
roles, whatever the exact date for their compilation might turn to be.
To start with, the Panormia was a book of the schools, while the
Decretum was definitely not so. Its conciseness made the Panormia an
110

See Gilchrist, 'Reception', 61-4 and Kanones. ID 05.081 (= IU 03.009.001) and

ID 05.011 (= IU 01.055.032) are both from the autumn synod in 1078 where the
most important ban on lay investiture (Quoniam investituras, see Schieffer,
Entstehung, 171-3) was promulgated. Ivo, however, did not include it into his
collections. IU is the numbering of the future edition of the Tripartita prepared
by Dr Martin Brett.
111
Brett, 'Panormia', 208.
rn See the concordance table ibid. ,.222-60. The most important formal sources of
the Panormia are an early form of the Decretum and MS 713; besides, the
Collection in Four Books was used for the Panorr:nia.
113
Wasserschleben, Beitrage, "59-76; Fournier, 'Collections', BEC, 58, 557-76.
11 1
Fournier, 'Collections', BEC 58, 75 and 574.
11
'Fournier and Le Bras, His to ire, ii, 95-7; Landau, 'lvo', 423; see also most
recently Werckmeisrer, introduction', 22.
116
Sprandel , Ivo von Chartres, 73 and Brett, 'Sources and Influence', 159-60.
117
Luscombe , School of Abelard, 216, n. 6; Southern, Scholastic Humanism, i,
260.

132 '

IVO OF CHARTRES' PASTORAL CANON LAW

ideal textbook; due to the grouping of the canons according to subject, it

was easy to look it up, even without the rubrics added later. 118 At the
same time, this arrangement also brought the existing contradictions to
light which made it a suitable textbook for applying the art of reconciling
canons according to 'misericoridia et iudicium' taught by the Prologus.
These arguments are supported by manuscript.evidence. As noted above,
the Decretum was rarely copied as a whole, but sometimes adopted or
used for other collections. However, the copies both of the Decretum and
the variant derivatives show little sign of intellectual independence. As far
as we know, there are barely any glosses, rubrics, significant
rearrangements or even additions in these texts. 119 Thus, the Decretum
was used but not discussed. On the contrary, the very numerous extant
copies of the Panormia have a wide range of variant readings, change of
sequence and frequent omission or addition of canons. 120 Evidently, the
Panormia was constantly augmented and glossed from a very early time
on, which indicates a use in the schools. 121
In his fundamental study on Ivo, Rolf Sprandel suggested that the
main difference between the Decretum and the Panormia was the
suppression of the 'lay legislation' (Laienrecht), that is, Roman Jaw,
penitential canons and other legislation for lay people, in the latter. 122 He
rightly highlighted the much smaller share of Roman law canons in the
Panormia and the omission of penitential canons. 123 Concerning the latter,
Sprandel's account could be strengthened by a more detailed examination
of lvo's use of penitential canons. To begin with, Sprandel claimed that
Ivo made no use of book 19 of Burchard's Decretum, the famous
penitential book called Corrector sive medicus. 124 But in fact book 15 of
Ivo's Decretum contains all but the first nine canons of Burchard's

118

Most rubrics in the Migne's edition are copied from Gratian, see RambaudBuhot, 'Les Sommaires de la Panormie et !'edition de Melchior de Vosmedian',;
he compounded the weaknesses of the editions he used, see Landau, 'Rubriken
und Inskriptionen', 35-40. However, canons on a certain subject were written
close up, which was equally useful, see G. Fransen, 'La tradition manuscrite de la
Panormie d'Yves de Chartres', in S. Chodorow (ed.), Proceedings of the Eighth
International Congress of Medieval Canon Law (Vatican City 1992), 23-5, 24-5.
119
Brett, 'Panormia', 207-8.
120
See the introduction to the provisional edition of M. Brett and B. Brasington,
accessible
online
since
recently:
http://wtfaculry.wtamu.edu/- bbrasington/Panormia . html.
121
See B.C. Brasington, 'Glossing Strategies in Two Manuscripts of Pre-Gratian
Canonical Collections', in R.H. Helmholz et al. (eds.), Grundlagen des Rechts
(Paderborn 2000), 155-62, 157-8 and Brett, 'Panormia', 208-9.
122
Sprandel, Ivo von Chartres, 64-9.
3
l.? ibid., 68.
124
1'bd
1 " 67 .

BULLETIN OF MEDIEVAL CANON LAW

133

1r

Corrector. _.., However, none of these canons was copied into the
Panormia. A closer examination shows that the Panormia omits
penitential canons from the whole Oecretum very deliberately indeed.
Besides the canons of Burchard's Corrector, there are some more
penitential canons in the Oecretum in part 15 of Ivo's Decretum: 15 Ex
poenitentiale Theodori, 11 Ex poenitentiale Romano and two containing
the short penitential ascribed to Fulbert of Chartres. 126 These are scattered
all over the Decretum; eight out of the seventeen parts contain at least
one of these canons. However, all the canons but one were left out in the
Panormia, indicating an assiduous reworking that aimed at the exclusion
of penitential canons. 127 And there are even more penitential canons from
other sources; namely book 13 on stealing and robbery contains an
unusual high ratio. About a third of its canons, 35 in total, deal with
penances for single sins. 128 Not one of these is taken over into the
Panormia. This perfectly suits Sprandel's idea of the exclusion of 'lay
legislation'.
Furthermore, the more sophisticated character of the first part of
the Decretum also supports Sprandel's idea, for even in the Oecretum
itself there seems to be a certain awareness of a differentiation between
Laienrecht and ecclesiastical law in the narrow sense. These first six parts
deal with sacramental law, legislation for the clergy, and the hierarchy of
the Church. The rest of the Decretum shows less modification; namely,
part seven on monks and monasteries, is obviously not at all reworked. 129
Without overestimating this kind of evidence, this points more towards a
differentiation between priests and non-priests than between laity and
non-laity. As we know from his correspondence, Ivo was very strict
concerning the impossibility for monks to administer sacraments, thus
stressing the difference between monks and lay people on the one hand
and priests on the other. 130
As a result, the examination of secular law, penitential canons and
125

BU 19.010-25 = ID 15.190-205; BU 19.026-159 = ID 15.045-167. Some canons

(BU 19, cc. 27, 35, 38, 40, 42 and 71) are missing in Migne's edition but can be
found in the manuscripts. I owe this informa tion to Dr Martin Brett.
126
Ivo's inscriptions are not very reliable for he copies Burchard's; but all of
these canons are penitential canons.
ir IP 01.122. There is a second canon ascribed to Theodorus in the Panormia (IP
03.019), but this is not a penitential canon.
128
ID 13, cc. 4, 13, 25, 42-7, 49-67, 70, 76-77, 79 and 81-3. ID 13.004 is an
Augustinian definition of true penance, cc. 42, 44 and 76 are from the
Poenitentiale Theodori, ID13.081 is from the Poenitentiale Romanum and ID
13.082 from Pseudo-Bede's penitential.
129
The book begins with 25 canons of various origin, often copied from Tripartita
A; the middle part (ID 07.026-119) equals BU 08. The third part, save for the ten
last canons, is from MS 713. All but very few canons are presented in the same
sequence as in their formal sources.
t3see epp. 36, 41 ('Monacus in hoe officio sibi soli prodest', ed. Leclercq, 164),
73, 88, 108 and 197.

134

'

IYO OF CHARTRES' PASTORAL CANON LAW

the different degree of revision of the single books confirms Sprandel's

model for the difference between the two collections. What follows from
this? Sprandel claimed that Decretum and Panormia represented different
stages of Ivo's perception of ecclesiastical law and that he had
fundamentally changed his mind between the compilation of the two
collections. Unlike before, Ivo now saw lay legislation as not forming part
of canon law. 131 This is also the reason why Sprandel supported a later
date of the Panormia. u 2 However, one should note that the Tripartita B
has very much the same content and structure as the Decretum; if Ivo
really changed his mind about Laienrecht in canon law, this must have
happened after the compilation of the Tripartita rather than that of the
Decretum. 133
But it is not necessary to link the examination of the different
character of the collections to the discussion of their relative dating.
Instead, I prefer to put the stress on their different functions. As stated
above, the Panormia concentrates more on sacraments and legislation for
the clergy and in general excludes the Laienrecht. But even with regard to
ecclesiastical law in the narrow sense, the Panormia is not just an
abridged and enhanced version of the Decretum but has a different
approach. The rich liturgical, moral and practical contents tend to be
omitted, while the more juridical canons are copied into the Panormia.
For example, the Decretum handles synods both in book four and five;
the last section of part four is a synodal order, while part five outlines the
place of a council in the hierarchy of the Church and its doctrinal
authority. 134 The Panormia deals with synods in the last framework only,
and none of the liturgical canons is copied. 135 Part six of the Dec return 'de
clericorum conversatione, et ordinatione, et correctione, et causis', is
vastly repetitive on the conduct of priestly life; it is very Burchardian in
nature and even similar to tenth-century episcopal handbooks. 136 It deals

131

Sprandel, Ivo von Chartres, 74: 'Inhaltlich gehbrte fi.ir Ivo der Laienteil in dem
alten Sinne nicht mehr in eine Sammlung von Kirchenrecht. Das ist die
Erkenntnis, zu der Ivo zwischen dem Dekretum und der Panormia gekommen
ist.'
l.Uibid., 73, n. 61.
133
First, IT 03.029 'De causis laicorum' equals ID 16; this section contains c. 87%
of the material of ID 16 - an unusual high ratio compared to the average rate of
c. 30% of ID that is copied into IT 03. There is also a particular penitential, taken
from ID 15 CIT 03.028). and some penitential canons are scanered all over the
collection. The proportion of penitential canons is slightly lower than in ID, but
c. 20% of the canons from ID 15 are copied into the IT 03; certainly they are not
eliminated as in IP. Furthermore. the proportion of Roman law canons in IT is
even slightly higher than in ID.
l.H ID 04.246-57 and ID 0').1 ';3-69.
13
~ IP 04.013-22.
136
ID 06 contains the complete BU 02 and thereby many canons from Regino of
Prum.

BULLETIN OF MEDIEVAL CA!\ON LAW

135

extensively with particular moral precepts, roughly structured by different

virtues and vices; liturgical duties are also dealt with, including detailed
prescriptions and suggestions for preaching. 137 The Panormia, however,
reduces the moral material and completely omits the liturgical parts. What
remains is mainly copied into book three of the Panormia, and thereby
placed in a different context, namely in a book on the hierarchy of the
Church rather than a separate section on the duties and moral obligations
of priests as in the Decretum. The same holds true for monks: part seven
of l\'o's Decretum deals exclusively with monks and their conduct of life;
but in the Panormia, the canons on monks are also contained in book
three. 138 In both cases, the moral and edifying perspective is thus replaced
by a more hierarchical and juridical one. Even the canons on the Roman
pontiff show a similar turn towards juridical handling. While the first
canon on the papacy in the Decretum gives the classical biblical
justification of the Roman primacy, the Panormia begins with the 1059
papal election decree of Nicholas II that is absent from the Decretum.139
This all shows the Panormia's nature as a book of the schools. From a
scholar's point of view, the authority of a synod and the hierarchy of
different legal sources might have been the most important aspects of
canons on synods; for a bishop, however, the opening prayers and the
rules of procedure were equally important. Likewise, in the schools the
hierarchical organisation of the Church was far more important than
repetitive canons on the conduct of clerical life.
The Decretum, however, is the working book, or rather working
library, of Ivo as a bishop, and thus suitable for other bishops, too. It is
more than a mere collection of sources, for it includes the very kind of
material Ivo needed for his pastoral and administrative duties . In essence,
the Decretum contains the Roman law lvo often used in his legal
opinions, 140 the penitential canons he a p plied as a judge, 141 the kind of
speculative theology he quoted in his sermons and letters, 142 liturgical
material and other texts like model charters that would have been useful
for administrative proposes.143 Like Burchard, Ivo included all material
that could be needed for his pastoral and administrative duties; but unlike
Burchard, he did not put the stress on Roman primacy so much. The
Decretum is an 'episcopal' collection, both in its practical aspects and its
13

" See ID 06.176-84 (church service, pastoral care, vita canonica) and ID 06.15469 (preaching).
138
IP 03.174-215.
139
Compare ID 05 .001 to IP 03 .001.
140
Epp. 99 , 171, 186, 221 and 242; see Sprandel , Ivo von Chartres, 73.
141
See ep. 135, where Ivo imposes 14 years of penance for the castration of a
priest. Castration of a priest is not dealt with in Ivo's collections, but 14 years
were the penance for killing a cleric Ps .-Fulberc CPL 141, 339) prescribed, a canon
copied into Ivo's De cretum (ID 15.187).
142
ID 17. Compare for example ID 17.001 to Sermo 6.
1 3
, ID 06 .128-31 and 433-5.

136

IVO OF CHARTRES' PASTORAL CANON LAW

view of the Church.

The comparison of the Decretum to the Panormia accentuates the
pastoral character of the Decretum even more, for the omission of those
canons that constitute its pastoral nature in the Panormia may be
explained by the distinct role of both collections. The higher ratio of lay
legislation in the Decretum does not necessarly indicate a particular
perception of canon law, but may also be explained by the need of an
ecclesiastical judge for such material. Similarly, the liturgical material of
the Decretum would not have been of great use for the twelfth-century
canon lawyers who glossed, augmented and copied the Panormia, but
bishops like Ivo himself might have found it very useful. And while a set
book for teaching could manage with a few clear statements on the vita
canonica, a bishop struggling with his chapter might have been glad to
have every authority on these matters he could possibly get. 144

Ivo's COLLECTIONS AND THE PROLOGUS

The distinct roles of the Decretum and the Panormia also once
more raise the perennial question which collection the Prologus was
affiliated to. As I have argued above, Ivo's canonical method was
embedded in his pastorate, and the Decretum has a distinct pastoral
character. Examining the material and formal sources of the Prologus, I
shall now demonstrate that the Prologus has more in common \Vith the
Decretum and the Tripartita than with the Panormia. In fact, it was almost
certainly written before the Panormia was compiled.
Fournier himself did not examine the formal sources of the
Prologus, 145 but argued that the content supported an affiliation of the
Prologus to the Panormia and thus a date after the compilation of the
latter. 146 This view was contested by Bliemetzrieder, who thought the
Prologus to be a prologue to the Decretum but was concerned with
neither the dating nor the Prologus' formal sources. h 7 While
Bliemetzrieder's position never gained much currency, Fournier's main
argument, namely that the Prologus made an allusion to the subheadings
of the Panormia, was refuted on the grounds that these subheadings are
absent from the manuscripts. 148 Since the polemical discussion of both
these scholars, no new arguments have been brought forward concerning
the affiliation of the Prologus to either collection. Namely French legal
144

See for example the twelve canons in ID 06 stating that a cleric should not
only be chaste but also avoid women in general (cc. 52, 77, 81, 89, 184, 186-92),
of which only one is copied in the Panormia.
1
;~ But see the hints Fournier, 'Collections', BEC 58, 322-3 gives discussing the
authorship of the Tripartita.
1
< See ibid., BEC 57, 314 (Panormia) and 319-20 (Prologus).
1 7
Bliemetzrieder, 'Schriften Ivos', 17.
8
1-< Fournier and Le Bras, Histoire, ii, 107, n. 2; see Fransen, 'Tradition manuscrite',
24-5.
1

BUl.l.ETIN OF MEDIEVAL CANON LAW

137

historians remained faithful to Fournier's arguments during the whole of

the last century, 149 while other legal scholars tended to give no definite
answer, and some historians argued for an attachment to the Decretum. 150
However, the references to a subsequent collection are too vague and
ambiguous to settle the question through this kind of evidence.
In more recent times, the ambiguity of the Prologus has been the
starting point for some attempts to date it earlier than Fournier did. Peter
Landau argued that the very indistinctness of the Prologus indicates that it
was written before either collection was finished, although the text might
later have been altered when copied with the collections. 151 In addition,
Bruce Brasington pointed out that any references to a subsequent
collection are limited to the very beginning and the very end of the
Prologus, and might be later additions. 152 The final paragraph at least is
indeed absent from a number of manuscripts. 153 Brasington also drew to
attention a Prologus manuscript now preserved at Liege, most likely
already used by Alger of Liege, 154 that does not lack the last paragraph
but rather the opening chapter which contains most information on a
subsequent collection. As Brasington argues, this manuscript is not an
abridged version but close to the primitive form of the Prologus, that is, a
methodological treatise of Ivo's. 155 But it should be noted that whatever
might be the case, the adoption of this lost Urtext must have happened
very early, for the prologue form is extant in most of the c. 170
manuscripts, while the Liege form is unique.
Analysing the material and formal sources of the Prologus in his
doctoral thesis, Brasington also demonstrated that the Prologus has more
canons in common with the Tripartita than with any other of Ivo's
collections. However, having identified but a few formal sources, he was
reluctant to draw any radical conclusions. Too many sources remained
obscure, and namely Prologus 43 seemed to him to be an obstacle. 156
149

See Fournier and Le Bras, Histoire, ii, 105-8, Stickler, Historia iuris canonici
latini, I, 183, C. Munier, 'Yves de Chartres', Dictionnaire de spiritualite, vol. 16
(Paris 1994), col. 1551-64, col. 1555, and most recently Werckmeister,
'Introduction', 23-4.
150
L. Chevailler, 'Yves de Chartres', Dictionnaire de droit canonique, vol. 7 (Paris
1965), col. 1641-66, col. 1647 and Southern, Scholastic Humanism, i, 260.
151
Landau, 'Ivo', 424.
152
Brasington, 'The Prologue [MIC 9]', 7.
153
See ibid., 10-9 for a list of nine manuscripts and a discussion of their early
features.
,; .. The manuscript is Universite Liege, Bibliotheque Generale, 230, for which see
also Kretzschmar, Alger von Lilnich, 115, n. 272.
l'iS Brasington, 'The Prologue [MIC 91', 7-9.
156 B.C. Brasington, 'The Prologue to the "Decretum" and "Panormia" of Ivo of
Chartres: An Eleventh-Century Treatise on Ecclesiastical Jurisprudence' (Ph.D.
Thesis, 1990), 332: 'By virtue of the number of uniquely shared texts, the
Prologue stands closest to the Tripartita A. [. .. ] Despite their shared texts, a
crucial difference between the two cannot be ignored: aH the Prologue

138 '

rvo

OF CHARTRES' PASTORAL CANON LAW

Therefore, he did not use the formal sources of the Prologus as an

argument for its dating at all.
In the following, I shall take a similar approach rather than
discussing the content of the Prologus or any particular manuscripts.
Here, I rely very much on the work of Brasington and Werckmeister for
the Prologus and equally on Martin Brett's editions and concordances for
Ivo's canonical collections. Besides that, the Kanones database has also
proved to be extremely useful for my purpose.
In total, the Prologus quotes 33 canonical pieces scattered all over
the text save for the first twelve paragraphs. 157 To begin with, no less than
21 of these have a parallel in Ivo's collections. Almost all of these can be
found in the Decretum and the Tripartita, only some in the Panormia. In
total, 18 have a parallel in the Tripartita, 13 in the Decretum, but mere
three in the Panormia. 158 Seven canons the Prologus shares with the
Tri partita only, and one each uniquely with the Decretum and with the
Panormia, respectively. Ten of them are common to Prologus, Tripartita
and Decretum as opposed to the Panormia, while there is but one canon
quoted in the Prologus that is also present in the Panormia but not the
other two collections.
That canon is Prologus 41, of which the material source is the
Uber pontificalis. It has a parallel in the Panormia only, and despite some
textual differences, I cannot totally exclude the possibility that this ~vas
also the formal source. But there are two other candidates that present
themselves: first, the Liber pontificalis was relatively common itself, and
second, the passage in question was copied into the Panormia from MS
713. 159 The text of MS 713 and the Panormia is almost identical, but there
are several variants to the Prologus. 160 Therefore, Prologus --t 1 could be
independent of the collections. Even if not, MS 713 rather than the
Panormia was its formal source. In either case, the compilation of the
Panormia cannot be taken as a terminus ante quern of the Prologus.
The two other instances where there is a parallel between
Prologus and Panormia constitute even less of an evidence for its use.
manuscripts examined [ ... ] transmit a longer text in the restitution of bishops
than in the Tripartita. This suggests that the collection cannot be the direct formal
source of the Prologue. One must conclude that the Prologue was at least
partially produced from the same fund of sources gathered for Ivo's research that
produced the Tripartita, but that the collection did not sene as the direct formal
source for the treatise.'
157
For the sake of convenience, I refer to the edition of Werckmeister unless
otherwise stated.
158
For these figures and the following references to the Prologus' sources, see
the appendix.
159
IP 03.052.001 = MS 713, fo. 132v (LP 0282).
160
Two sentences appear in different sequence in the Prologus, one sentence
(Item Iohannes iiii - dies x et viiii) is omitted, and there are some minor variant
readings.

BULLETIN Of MEOIEVAI. CANON LAW

139

Prologus 51 has a parallel in the Collectio Britannica, MS 713, Decretum

and Panormia, so there is no reason to assume the use of the Panormia
either. 161 And in the case of Prologus 30, the canon itself is common to all
three Ivonian collections, but was certainly not copied from the
Panormia. First, the Panormia has a variant reading; second, Tripartita and
Decretum share not only the version quoted in the Prologus 30, but are
also the source for the three subseq uent paragraphs in the Prologus ,
which are all absent from the Panormia. 162 It is therefore not necessary to
assume the employment of the Panormia for the compilation of the
Prologus in a single instance.
But while there are but three canons which might, at least
theoretically, have been copied from the Panormia, there are no less than
20 canons the Prologus has in common with the Tripartita and/or the
Decretum which are absent from the Panormia. Even if one would not
assume that the Prologus was written by the author of the Tripartita and
the Decretum, this would be very strong support for such a claim. A
closer look not only confirms the idea that these collections were the
most important material sources, but shows over and above that, that
early forms of both were employed. The first evidence for an early date
of the Prologus is that by far the most quotations - twelve in total - stem
from the oldest Ivonian collection, that is, the Tripartita A. Despite the
relatively large number of canons the Tripartita and the Prologus share,
no major variant readings occur. A striking detail is that the Prologus not
only quotes the Tripartita A, but twice also its rubrics and inscriptions.
The first instance is less significant, for both text only share a correct
inscription and de eodem' as the rubric. 163 But the second case leaves no
do ubt about the use of the Tripartita A, for the Prologus inserted this rare
rubric in the main text before quoting the canon from the Tripartita. 164
The next formal source of the Prologus is Ivo's Decretum, that has
13 canons in common with the Prologus. Five of these are also contained
in Tripartita A, another one was probably copied from the Collectio
Britannica or MS 713, and one is uniquely found in the Decretum. The
remaining six canons were later copied into Tripartita B. Thus, the
Prologus employs the Decretum in at least seven instances, for it was not
written before the Decretum was finished and hence not before the
Tripartita B was available, as I will show here. For it is striking that not a
single canon that could have been copied from lvo's Decretum has a
parallel in Burchard's Decretum. Given that Burchard is the formal source
for almost half of Ivo's Decretum, this can hardly have happened

161

MS 713, fo. 142v (LP 0506) =ID 04.173 = IU 03.024a =IP 02.147. Note that MS
713 counts two pages as 142v; the canon is on the second one.
162
See the appendix for Prologus 30a to 31a.
163 Prologus 35 (ed. Werckmeister, 100) = IU 02.014.004 ( = IT 02.017.002).
164 Prologus 21 (ed. Werckmeister, 84) = rubric and text of IU 01.043.046 ( = IT
01.045.046).

140

IVO OF CHARTRES' PASTORAL CANON LAW

coincidentally.165 However, an intentional exclusion of the Burchardian

canons would have been almost impossible; once the Decretum was
augmented with the vast Burchardian material, there was no hint as to
which canons were taken from Burchard's Decretum and which not.
So the most economical explanation seems that the Burchardian
canons were only absent from the version of the Decretum Ivo used
when writing the Prologus. Although no such collection is extant, the
existence of such a collection as a pre paration for the compilation of the
Decretum is very plausible. 166 Summing up, one could say that Ivo
probably had a collection at hand that contained most non-Burchardian
material later used for his Decretum, name! y the Tripartita A and a very
early lost form of the Decretum. This alone explains 20 canon law
quotations in the Prologus, by far the largest share, by assuming only two
closely related material sources that undoubtedly existed at Chartres in
the 1090s.
While two thirds of the canonical quotations in the Prologus can
be explained like this, some further canonical quotations of various
origins remain. As noted above, there is one canon from the Liber
pontificalis of which the exact transmission is unclear; the text is also
contained in MS 713 and may have been known early at Chartes. The
scattered quotations of Urban II in Prologus 18-20 have a parallel in the
Collectio Britannica and probably this collection was Ivo s source. 16 ~ It
seems to me very unlikely that the direction of dependence should run
the other way, for the Britannica gives the full letter, while the Prologus
has only some canonical quotations without any hint to the original
context. 168 The presence of these two collections at Chartres at the time
when Iva compiled the Decretum is generally assumed, so this is a ready
solution for three more quotations. Thus, a total of 24 quotations in the
Prologus can be tracked back to the material known to have been
employed for the compilation of the Decretum and the Panormia.
There are two more sections in the Prologus quoting six canons
that, having no parallel in Ivo's collections, have at least sources that
165

ID has c. 3,760 canons, of which c. 1,600 (c . 43%) are from BU. The chance
that a random sample of seven ID canons does nor contain a single BU canon is
therefore below 0.3%.
166
In fact, MS 713 is such a collection or a copy of one. The hypothetical ID
version used for the Prologus, however,. has but a few canons in commo n with
MS 713.
167
Prologus 18a (Per apostolos enim-vobis nihil proderit), 19 and 20, quotingJL
5383 = CB , fo. 147r-v, ed. R. Somerville and S. Kuttner, Pope Urban II, the
Collectio Britannica, and the Council of Melfi (1089) (Oxford 1996), 105-7. For
the controversy between Fournier and Kuttner see Somerville's comment in
Somerville and Kuttner, Colleccio Britannica, 109-13.
168
Contrary S. Kuttner, 'Urban II and the Doctrine of Interpretation: A
Turning Point?' Srudia Graciana 15 0972), 55-86, 71-2, who thought the letter in
the CB (JL 5383) to he forged from quotations from Iva.

BULLETIN Of MEDIEVAL CANON LAW

141

were known at Chartres. Prologus 44-7 quotes from a famous Jetter of

John VIII to Constantinop]e, of which two very short quotations can also
be found in the Decretum and MS 713. 169 None of them could possibly
have been the formal source of the Prologus, but possibly Iva had a fuller
version at hand. Prologus 36-7, again, is doser related to Ivo's collections,
without being copied from there either. It continues a quotation of Cyril
of Alexandria, of which the first part, Prologus 35, is not only found in
both the Tripartita A and the Decretum, both almost certainly copied from
the Tripartita into the Prologus. In both the collections and in the
Prologus, the canons come after two canons quoting another letter of
Cyril. The Prologus has the same sequence and the same inscriptions as
the collections for both letters. And Prologus 35 even has the same rubric
as in Tripartita A. 170 Thus, the letter of Cyril at least seems to have been
known at Chartres in its fuller form, which was copied into the Prologus,
but abridged for the collections. Such an explanation is not unlikely, for
earli~r, lost versions of the Decretum, MS 713 and the Collectio Britannica
had presumably fuller versions of many canons. 171
Of the remaining paragraphs, Prologus 42-3 is a more difficult
case. The material source is Cassiodorus, but the formal transmission to
Iva is obscure. 172 Brasington called attention to the first book of
Burchard's Decretum, where both canons can be found in the very end.
But, since the two canons appear in reversed order in the Prologus, he
argued that Burchard was definitely not Ivo's formal source. 173 In
addition, he also noted a parallel to a ninth-century collection De
episcoporum transmigratione, but did not think it to be Ivo's source
either. 174 Werckmeister, on the contrary, claimed that Burchard was the
intermediate source by which the two canons were transmitted from De
episcoporum transmigratione to the Prologus. 175 The latter possibility can

169

The letter is JE 3271, quoted by MS 713, fo. 136r (LP 0340-1) =ID 04.076-7.
Prologus 35 = IU02.014.004, with the same rubric and inscription. See the
appendix for all parallels between Prologus 33-7 and the Tripartita A.
171
See Landau, 'Dekret Ivos', 17-27 (ID) and M. Brett, 'Urban II and the
Collections attributed to Ivo of Chartres', in S. Chodorow (ed.), Proceedings of
the Eighth International Congress of Medieval Canon Law (Vatican City 1992), 2742, 32-4 (ID and MS 713). Somerville and Kuttner, Collectio Britannica, 15-7 (CB).
72
i
Cassiodore, Historia Tripartita XII, 8 (PL 69, 1208-10), see Brasington, 'The
Prologue [thesis]', 334.
173
ibid., 333-4; BU 01.233.
174
ibid., 334. The parallel between BU 01.233 and De episcoporum
transmigratione was first dicovered by P. Fournier, 'Etudes critiques sur le Decret
de Burchard de Worms', NRHDFE 34 (1910), 41-112, 213-21, 89-331 & 564-84,
110.
175
Prologus 42 (ed. Werckmeister, 107, n. 78). But see De episcoporum
transmigratione (ed. 1.P Pozzi, 'Le manuscrit Tomus XVIIIus de la Vallicelliana et
le libelle "De episcoporum transmigratione et quod non temere judicentur regule
quadruginta quatuor'", Apollinaris 31 (1958), 313-48, 329 and 333) and M. Kerner,
110

IVO Of CHARTRES' PASTORAL CANON LAW

be rejected, for both Burchard and Ivo have a fuller text than this
collection, and there are major variant readings. 176 Given the total lack of
any other quotations from Burchard, I assume that Burchard was not the
immediate source either. Ultimately, therefore, the formal source of
Prologus 42-3 remains undecided.
Finally, Prologus 32 quotes a letter from Gregory the Great that is,
to my knowledge, not quoted in any other collection related to Ivo,
neither his own nor the Collectio Britannica nor MS 713. 177
Nonetheless, almost all quotations in the Prologus can be traced
back to their sources. While it is not at all necessary to assume the use of
the Panormia for the drafting of the Prologus, an employment of the
Tripartita A and the Decretum is evident. Furthermore, Burchard's
Decretum was not yet known at Chartres. This provides a precise relative
dating of the Prologus. It was written after the Tripartita A was finished,
during the compilation of the Decretum, but before the latter was
augmented with Burchard and in particular before the Panormia was
compiled. MS 713 in its present form did not yet exist either; its material,
however, most likely was already known to Ivo at this time. Thus, an
earlier date of the Prologus or a later date of the Panormia become more
likely by the evidence of the formal sources of the Prologus' canonical
quotations. The Prologus was therefore not written as a prologue to the
Panormia.
The relative dating itself would not be of outstanding importance;
but it reinforces the idea that Ivo's canonical method was a pastoral one.
For the formula of 'mercy and justice', Ivo drew on theological topoi
linking it to the theology of redemption and penance. Furthermore, to
Ivo, canon law was in general an instrument to administer the sacraments
in a better way, as his theological works and the important role of
sacramental issues in his collections show.
This concern with sacraments and pastoral duties rather than
juridical theory places Ivo in the context of the eleventh-century reform
rather than the twelfth-century intellectual history. This is confirmed by
the contrast of Ivo's concept of mercy and justice' to the Roman law
concept of aequitas that was received into canon law only some decades
later. Even in Gratian, equity is still explained in 'IYonian' terms, 178 and
Ivo and reformers like him were not at all aware of the Roman law

et al., 'Textidentifikation und Provinienzanalyse im Decretum Burchardi', Studia

Gratiana 20 0 976). 19-63, 28-9.
176
For differences, see ihid.; in addition, De episcopomm transmigratione (ed.
Pozzi, 333) lacks the sentence 'Cirillus Hierosolomitanus episcopus - ecclesie
sue' of Prologus 43 (ed. Werckmei.ster, 112), present also in BU 01.233 (PL 140,
616).
IT' JE

178

1844.

'Iuste iudicans misericordiam cum iustitia servat' (rubric to D.

4-),

c. 10).

BULLETIN OF MEDIEVAL CANON LAW

143

concept of aequitas, which had no currency before c. 1125. 179 But the
main difference is that the latter is a purely juridical concept, while Ivo's
concept is a pastoral one. Recently, Kathleen Cushing has pointed out
that the reformers normally contrasted 'mercy' and individual discretion to
a strict interpretation of the law:
Aequitas, however, was not a familiar concept to Damian and the
reformers, who continued to counterpoise their understanding of
Christian charity, of benignity and especially of misericordia against the
full rigour of the canons. Lacking both the ideology and the terminology
of jurisprudence, Damian effectively conceded misericordia to papal
discretion. 180
Ivo was of higher legal learning and less papist than Damian; thus
his terminology is more sophisticated and he conceded the decision to
episcopal rather than papal discretion. But just like Damian and similar to
Gregory VII, 181 Ivo was less concerned with the solution of legal problems
than with pastoral care, and therefore stressed the 'mercy within justice'
that any ecclesiastical judge, and in particular the pope, should show. In
the case of Ivo, it was certainly not the 'lack of ideology and terminology'
that made him turn to the concept of 'mercy and justice'; this confirms the
idea that the latter was a typical reform concept. Ivo's Prologus reflects
this concern very much; despite its success in the schools, it was not a
book intended for use in the schools but rather as a reflection on pastoral
canon law of the eleventh-century reform.
Christof Rolker

179 C.

Lefebvre, 'Equite', Dictionnaire de droit canonique, vol. 5 (Paris 1953), col.

394-410, col. 397.
180 K.G. Cushing, Papacy and law in the Gregorian revolution: The Canonistic
Work of Anselm of Lucca (Oxford, 1998), 25.
181 See Cowdrey, Pope Gregory VII, 560-3 for the importance of 'mercy within
justice' for Gregory. Ivo's letter 67 (ed. Leclercq, 290) shows that he associates
clemency with the papal office by using Ps. ci 1 as the arenga.

144 '

IVO OF CHARTRES' PASTORAL CANON LAW

Appendix: The Formal Sources of Ivo's Prologus

Pro log
us

CB

Tripartita 182

MS 713

13

Deere tum

Panormia

IU03.010.02la
IT03.0I0.023

ID06.386a

om.

18a

fo. 147r

om.

om .

om .

om.

19

fo . 147r

om.

om.

om.

om.

20

fo. 147r-v

om.

om.

om.

om.

2 1183

IUOl .043.046
ITOl .045.046

om .

om .

22

IU03.010.021b
IT03 .0I0.021 b

ID06.386b

om .

23

IU03 .010.020
IT03 .010.020

1006.385

om .

24

IU03.002.013.07
IT03.002.013.07

ID02.097.07 om .

25

IU03.002.013 .08
IT03.002.013 .08

ID02.097.08 om.

26

IU02.050.025.01
IT02.056.013 .0l

om .

om .

27

IU02.050.025.02
IT02.056.0l3.02

om .

om .

28

IU02.050.025 .03
IT02.056.013.03

om.

om.

29

om.

IDI0.002

om.

30

IUOl .038.013
ITO! .040 .013

ID06.060

IP03.058

30a

IUOl.038.014
ITOI .040.014

ID06.061

om.

31

IUOI .038.027a
IT01.040.027a

ID06.350a

om .

3la

IUO l .038.027b
ITOl .040.027b

ID06.350b

om.

182

In his edition, W erckmeister notes parallels to the Tripartita for Prologus 24, 33 and
35. Unfortunately, he gives no clue which manuscript he used, and given the variety of
the Tripartita manuscript copies, I was not able to check his suggestions.
183
The text of Prologus 21 equals the Tripartita canon plus its rubric.

145

Bl ILLETIN OF MEDIEVAL CANON I.AW

33

IU02.014.003.0l
IT02.0I 7 .001.01

orn .

om.

34

IU02.014.003.02
IT02.0l 7.00I .02

orn.

orn.

35184

IU02.014.004
IT02.0l 7.002

Orn .

om.

40

IU03.010.045
IT03.0I0.045

ID06.415

om .

Orn .

orn .

IP03.052

IU01.043.37a
ITOI .045.37a

ID05.106

orn .

orn.

ID04.l 73

IP02.147

41

fo. 132v

50
51

fo. 56v

fo. 142v

P.S The above article was finshed in summer 2002. Since then,
scholarship on Ivo has made considerable progress, and at least one
major publication has to be mentioned: Bn1ce C. Brasington, Ways of
mercy: the Prologue ofJvo of Chartres: edition and analysis (Vita regularis.
Editionen 2, Munster, 2004) contains the first critical edition of the
Prologus. The text is based on that in Brasington's Ph.D. thesis (University
of California, Los Angeles, 1990) which the author kindly made available
to me before publication - In addition, in the last years I had the
opportunity to work with a large number of manuscripts of Burchard of
Worms. As no complete manuscript I have seen lacks the two canons on
episcopal translation found in the Prologus, I came to the conclusion that
the latter are in fact taken from Burchard. The Prologue, in my opinion,
was written by Ivo during or presumably after the compilation of the
Decretum.
C.R.

March 2005

184 Prologus and Tripartita also share rubric and inscriptions for this canon.