Baldus de Ubaldis
|Biography||Works of Civil law|
|Works of Canon law||Consilia|
|Manuscripts of Consilia||Printed Editions of Consilia|
Baldus de Ubaldis died in Pavia while writing a consilium on April 28, 1400. At his death he had outlined only the sketchiest facts of the case, and the unfinished text is preserved in a Vatican manuscript. We learn that the men of the commune of Brugnano (perhaps the modern Brugherio) had been condemned to pay 160 florins when they negligently seized 'wrongdoers and exiles' (malefactores et banniti) of Baldus' lord, Giangaleazzo Visconti.(1) The commune imposed a tax to pay the fine. Some of the inhabitants (familiares, inquilini, coloni et fictabiles) claimed to be immune from the tax because their possessions had been held in fee, and, consequently, they had never been considered men of the commune.(2) One may guess that the inhabitants or their lord asked Baldus for an opinion about the legality of the tax.
The case reflected the circumstances of Baldus' last ten years. After he moved to Pavia in 1390 and became the 'court jurist' of Giangaleazzo, Baldus occupied himself with many questions of feudal law. He finished a commentary on the Libri feudorum in 1393 and devoted much time and effort to Visconti's legal problems and those of his vassals.(3) He was seventy-two when he began his last consilium, and he died scribbling or, more accurately, dictating, thus ending an extraordinarily productive life with his boots on.
Baldus of Perugia, who has been described as 'the most cultivated of the jurists, as the one most nurtured on philosophy',(4) was born in Perugia on October 2, 1327, the son of Franciscus de Ubaldis, a medical doctor and master at the University of Perugia.(5) Although modern historians refer to him as 'de Ubaldis', medieval jurists, and he himself, almost invariably called him 'Baldus de Perusio'.(6) In his will dated 26 October, 1399, he described himself as born a citizen of Perugia, from the quartiere of the Gate of St. Peter and the parish of St. Lucia.(7) Since stories of his early brilliance were widely reported, he must have been a very precocious student. With brotherly pride, Angelus de Ubaldis reported that his brother held a repetitio on the law, Centum Capuae [Dig. 13.4.8(9)], when he was fifteen years old.(8)
Biographers from the sixteenth to the twentieth centuries have reported many contradictory facts about his early years, but we can now outline the beginnings of his career with more certainty. A very old tradition dated his birth to 1319 and his doctorate to 1344.(9) The first date was not supported by good evidence, and another, reliable birth date of 1327 is found in Baldus' own papers and is now commonly accepted. The date of 1344 for his doctorate is unlikely, since he would have been only 17. Baldus was precocious but his having finished a doctorate at 17 seems improbable. Domenico Maffei has now shown that a clever forger inserted a few pseudo-autobiographical lines into the Practica iudiciaria, falsely attributing them to Baldus when he printed the book. Consequently, historians have believed and repeated the litany of the forger: Baldus received his doctorate in 1344, taught for a short time in Bologna, and bested Bartolus in a disputatio.(10) These 'facts' about his early life cannot be given any credence.(11)
Maffei's sifting of the facts permits us to construct a more probable history of Baldus' early years. In the Proemium to his commentary on the Libri Feudorum, he mentioned that he had been teaching for 46 years.(12) Since he finished this work in 1393, his examination for the doctorate must have been held in ca. 1347, perhaps even later. Stories of his early precociousness could be true, as he would have been still a very young teacher of twenty. Since Baldus studied with Bartolus in Perugia for a 'long time' and since Bartolus arrived there in 1343, the date of 1347 fits well into what we know of his early education.(13) He also mentioned that he sat at the feet of a number of other jurists in Perugia: Federicus Petrucci de Siena in canon law, Johannes Palliarensis (Pagliarensis), and Franciscus de Tigrinis in civil law.(14) Federicus Petrucci left Perugia to become a Benedictine monk in 1343. As Franciscus de Tigrinis moved from Pisa to Perugia in 1345 and remained there until 1355, Baldus must have studied with him in the late 1340's.(15) We have no information about when or where Johannes Palliarensis taught, but since Baldus referred to him as his 'first doctor', he probably heard his lectures in Perugia before 1345.(16)
After receiving his doctorate, Baldus began teaching at Perugia with his old teacher Bartolus and was soon joined by his brother Angelus in 1351.(17) Late in life, Baldus wrote that he and Bartolus ( 1357) both participated in a legal case in which he opposed Bartolus' opinion on an issue. It is not clear from his comment whether the two jurists were on opposing sides or whether they simply disagreed about a particular legal point.(18) Whatever the case, Baldus did not immerse himself solely in teaching but practiced law early in his career.
Teaching was in his blood, and he taught until the time of his death. He began at Perugia and remained until 1357, moved to Pisa from 1357-1358, to Florence in 1359-1364, returned to Perugia in 1365-1376, received a call to Padua in 1376-1379, but again returned to Perugia in 1379-1390. The powerful ruler of Milan, Giangaleazzo Visconti offered him at a salary of 90 Florins per month to teach at his university. It was a princely offer that Baldus could not refuse. He sold his house to the distinguished teacher of medicine in Perugia, Antonius de Scarperia, for 390 Florins of gold(19) and moved to Pavia in February, 1390. He was still teaching civil law there when he died.(20) Among his many students he counted Petrus Ancharanus, Franciscus Zabarella, Paulus de Castro, and Johannes de Imola.
He also educated a pope. Petrus Belforte heard his lectures in Perugia and later became Pope Gregory XI (1370-1378). Gregory negotiated the delicate politics of moving the papacy back to Rome from Avignon, but after his premature death the College of Cardinals split into Italian and French factions. Baldus must have felt an obligation to defend what he believed was the intention of his former student: the papacy should reside in Rome. In 1378 he wrote a consilium that was included in his Commentary on the sixth book of the Codex, De schismate, in which he justified the claims of the Roman claimant, Pope Urban VI.(21) In 1380, Baldus and Johannes de Legnano were summoned to Rome to defend Urban's legal position.(22) Both jurists wrote consilia for the pope while in Rome. For Baldus' efforts, Urban granted him a castle near Gubbio, of which, it seems, he was never able to take possession.(23)
Perugia honored him with many important public offices. After returning to his native city in 1364 he was sent on several legations to Rome. In 1370, he was elected one of the Tre della guerra when the city was on the brink of war with Pope Urban V and later served as a legate on a mission to negotiate with the pope. In 1379, Baldus was the city's representative to Charles III of Durazzo.(24) He was appointed ambassador for Perugia in 1381, 1382, 1384, 1385, and 1389.
He married and had at least two sons, possibly three, who became jurists: Johannes Zenobius and Franciscus.(25) We do know that during his stay in Florence, his wife, Landa di Vanni de' Conti di Collemedio, gave birth to male twins, but he did not reveal their names in his commentary.(26) The twins very likely grew up to become the two jurists, since Franciscus and Johannes Zanobius are the only two sons mentioned in his will.(27) Baldus does mention another 'most beloved' son named Giliolus (Ziliolus) in a rubric at the end of a consilium written in the mid-1390's, in which he endorsed his son's opinion.(28) This Giliolus must have written a consilium, not extant, on the same case. Since this text is the only known reference to this son in the sources, one might suspect that Baldus meant Zenobius and that Giliolus was a nickname for him. From the evidence of the texts at the end of the Barberini lat. 1409, Johannes Zenobius inherited the manuscripts. Johannes died shortly after Baldus in 1401, and his son, who wrote the obituary notices of his brother Amadeus and his mother, Lambertina, inherited them after Johannes' death.(29) Vallone conjectures that his name was either Carlo or Galeazzo.(30)
Baldus had special connections to Florence and was made a citizen during his stay from 1359-1364,(31) writing a number of consilia that dealt with Florentine litigants or problems.(32) At the height of his career, the Florentines tried to persuade him to return. In 1385 Coluccio Salutati wrote in the name of the Republic of Florence to the Republic of Perugia and asked that Baldus be given permission to teach in Florence.(33) Perugia refused and declared that if Baldus left, his departure would destroy the Studium. The priors and the camerarii of the guilds forbade his departure without their permission.(34) He did not leave but must have had continuing interests in Florence. In his will, he bequeathed property in Tuscany. According to its provisions he also had holdings in Pavia, Milan, Genoa, and Perugia.(35) He did not die a poor man.
Over the course of his long life he wrote many different types of legal works, and it is difficult to generalize about their character. An important feature of his work, however, is his attention to practical problems. This tendency is illustrated by his preoccupation with the statutes of the Codex and Libri feudorum as the primary focus of his exegetical work and by the reams of consilia that he wrote over his lifetime. Although the consilia were substantial sources of income, his devotion to this work, even on the eve of his death, betrays a passion for the genre that transcends simple explanations.
A close examination of an important collection of Baldus' consilia in the Barberini fond of the Vatican Library, most of which were in his personal library, can do much to illuminate his working methodology.(36) Of these manuscripts Barberini lat. 1408, containing consilia of his last years, is a particularly important witness to Baldus' 'working style'. Many marginal additions, notations, and corrections that probably come, in part, from the hand of Baldus or his amanuensis,(37) provide information about the purpose of individual consilia and sometimes indicate that Baldus did his share of pro bono work for the Franciscans,(38) his parish priest,(39) and others.(40) Some notations indicate the amount that Baldus for paid for an opinion.(41) Baldus called his two short consilia for the Franciscans 'allegationes,' which may indicate that he distinguished between his opinions that he wrote as 'advisory' and those that he presented to a court. Undoubtedly, more shades of purpose and meaning could be culled from the genre of the consilia, but we are just beginning to appreciate the many purposes for which the jurists wrote them.(42)
Baldus wrote his commentaries on Roman law over a long period of time. There is some evidence in the printed editions that he wrote 'additiones' to works that he had already written.(43) Any future examination of Baldus' thought will require a careful exploration of the manuscripts upon which the printed editions were based.
2.Works of Civil law
Baldus taught Roman law at Perugia, Florence, and Pavia and wrote commentaries on all parts of the Corpus iuris civilis. He also wrote many repetitiones to various leges that were included in his commentaries or which circulated separately. Savigny noted that many of his commentaries are incomplete with large lacunae between parts. He concluded from this evidence that Baldus did not lecture comprehensively on Roman law but only on certain parts of it. Savigny considered this practice common to the teaching of law in the later Middle Ages, and the manuscript evidence supports his assumption.(44) The printed edition of Baldus' Opera omnia includes commentaries on all parts of the Corpus iuris civilis,(45) but Gero Dolezalek's survey of Baldus' manuscripts of Roman law clearly demonstrates that his commentaries on the Authentica and some books of the Digest were not widely circulated, and in the case of the Digestum novum, there do not seem to be any manuscript witnesses. He seems not to have written a commentary on the Institutes.(46) This evidence casts doubt on the 'orderly' presentation of Baldus' works in early printed editions. Consequently, the manuscripts should be explored in order to understand the genesis and authenticity of these works that early modern editors have attributed to him. As Manlio Bellomo has observed, the editors of early modern legal texts have 'constructed' commentaries to fit their publishing needs, and Baldus' lecturae produced over a number of years were probably put together without undue respect for their original shape and form.(47)
In contrast, Baldus' Commentarium on the various books of the Codex circulated widely, with many manuscripts still extant. The scope of his work was broad as well. The manuscripts demonstrate that he commented on each book of the Codex individually and extensively. The early printed editions adhered to the divisions of the manuscripts.(48) Although we cannot generalize much about his work since his commentaries on the Codex remain largely unexplored, it is striking that he immersed himself in the explication of ancient Roman statutory law at a time when the Italian city states were promulgating massive numbers of statutes, the interpretation of which Baldus undertook quite often in his consilia.(49) The challenge of understanding statutory law must have seemed very relevant and helpful at a time when he was frequently called upon to explain how a statute of a city state fit into the Ius commune.(50)
Baldus also wrote an extraordinarily large number of tracts on various aspects of civil law, which have never been systematically listed or explored. These small works most often were extensive repetitiones on individual leges and were often printed at the appropriate place as part of his commentaries on the Corpus iuris civilis. In the manuscripts, however, they quite often circulated separately. The most important seem to have been a Tractatus de sindicatu officialium [Dig. 188.8.131.52],(51) Tractatus de constituto,(52) Tractatus de statutis,(53) but there are many others.(54) A number of these tracts have been printed in the Tractatus universi iuris.(55) As mentioned earlier, Domenico Maffei has demonstrated that a work on procedure, the Practica iudiciaria, with its autobiographical interpolations, long attributed to Baldus, is not his.(56)
3. Works of canon law
We do not know where or when Baldus taught canon law, but he wrote several purely canonistic works. His consilia also contain many cases of canonistic interest.(57) Like most legal scholars of his time, Baldus very likely did not think of himself as learned in one law or the other; rather, he considered himself a jurist of the Ius commune.
During the last ten years of his life, he completed a partial Commentary to the Decretals of Gregory IX that ends at X 3.2.8, but skips some early sections.(58) In book two his text presents particular problems. In the manuscripts and in the printed editions, there is a lacuna from X 2.1.12 to 2.4.1, in medio. His commentary to 2.4.1 begins in mid-stream, with a citation, 'Iudex, lege Consentaneum, ibi "Incontinenti",' <Cod. 7.43.8> as if a portion of his text had been lost. The printer of a fifteenth century edition wrote:(59)
Hic deficit Lectura Baldi . . . unde autem hoc provenerit ignoratur. Sed vitio et culpae primi scriptoris tribuendum censemus, cum in lecturis antiquis illa dictio "Iudex" ita praecedentibus sit connexa, ut nil novi inducere videatur, quod non nisi scribentis errore factum fuisse iudicandum est.
There is another jump from X 2.13.11 to 2.14.4.(60) Baldus' Lectura was an important text in the late Middle Ages and was first printed in Milan in 1476-1478. The first edition was followed by a number of later printings.(61)
Thomas Izbicki discovered that Baldus also wrote commentaries on the Sext, Clementines, and De regulis iuris.(62) Since these works have not been edited, I give the incipits from Munich, Staatsbibl. Clm 24164, a carefully written Italian text:
1. De regulis iuris, fol. 1r-27r: 'Vicarius Iesu Christi qui totius ecclesie monarcha omnium Christianorum supremus et unicus patriarcha in monarchia vero imperii dudum est, quod non multum laboravit ad sui iuris dubia decidenda'.
2.Liber Sextus, fol. 48v-85r: Rubric: 'Incipit lectura domini Baldi super Sexto'. 'Gratia per papam facta et nondum scripta in solita litterarum forma vel scripta sed non bullata non expirat morte pape'.
3. Clementinae, fol. 35r-48r: Rubric: 'Baldus super Clementinis. De constitutionibus'. 'Constitutiones que occultantur non ligant etiam si conditor velit ligare'. In Vat. lat. 1398, the incipit reads: 'Nota quod constitutiones que occultantur non ligant etiam si conditor velit ligare'.
The commentaries on the Sext and Clementines are sketchy and not of great juristic interest. In addition, Baldus wrote additiones or apostillae to the Speculum iuris of Guilelmus Durantis,(63) to the Novella in Sextum and Mercuriales of Johannes Andreae,(64) and to the consilia of Oldradus de Ponte.(65) He also compiled an index to the apparatus of Pope Innocent IV, the Margarita or, as he may have named it, Repertorium super Innocentium compilatum et additionatum.(66) It is printed before or after Innocent's Commentary in most editions. He also compiled a Repertorium iuris that may be primarily canonistic if one may judge the contents from its incipit: 'Abbatis electio qualiter fiat? De iure civili fit per monachos'.(67)
Baldus wrote other brief canonistic tracts, and more will probably come to light as detailed manuscript catalogues are produced. The recent catalogue of the College of Spain's manuscripts has uncovered several canonistic texts of which the most important seems to be an excerpt of dicta from the Apparatus of Innocent IV:(68)
4. Dicta Innocentii papae IV super decretalibus cum additionibus Baldi de Ubaldis. Bologna, College of Spain, 83, fol. 397v-407v: 'Hec sunt dicta domini Innocentii pape super decretalibus per patrem et dominum meum dominum Baldum de Perusio. Nota quod licet administratoribus et ordinariis iudicibus ratione casuum emergentium leges egredi'.
4. Commentary on the Libri feudorum
If one may judge by its manuscript tradition and its printing history, Baldus' Commentary on the Libri feudorum was his most important single work.(69) He published it in 1393 while teaching at Pavia under the patronage of Giangaleazzo Visconti.(70) The rubrics of the manuscripts almost always name it a Lectura super usibus feudorum, which conforms to the name the Libri feudorum were most often given, Liber usus feudorum.(71) In the last twenty years of his life, Baldus devoted much time and energy to feudal matters, especially in his consilia. Feudal law had become of great practical importance in the Duchy of Milan, but the aristocracy from other regions of Italy lived under regimes in which feudal law was flourishing as well.(72) There is some evidence that Baldus had been called upon to resolve problems of feudal law long before his stay in Pavia. Mattaeus de Afflittis reported on a consilium that Baldus wrote about a problem of feudal law during the reign of Queen Joanna I of Naples (1343-1382).(73)
Giangaleazzo may have commissioned him to write his commentary, although there is no evidence that Baldus taught feudal law at the university.(74) In any event, the feudal regime in Milan and its prince, Giangaleazzo, provided Baldus with many occasions to 'consiliare'. Baldus wrote a number of consilia in the period after 1390 in which he discussed and analyzed the feudal rights and privileges of Giangaleazzo. As the manuscript copies of these texts show, he struggled with these matters and only gradually came to understand all the complicated issues involved.(75)
Baldus' work was an enormous success. Cristina Danusso has listed 34 manuscripts in libraries stretching from Spain to Poland and from England to Italy.(76) Antonio and Raffaele da Volterra produced the first printed edition in Rome ca. 1474, and their edition was quickly followed by seven more before 1500 and fifteen between 1502 and 1585.(77) As Danusso has demonstrated, there are only minor differences between the manuscript and printed editions.(78)
5. De pace constantiae
Sometime after 1393, Baldus finished his Commentum on the Treaty of Constance (25 June, 1183). In it he referred to his Commentarius on the Libri feudorum as having been completed.(79) The Treaty of Constance or Acta pacis Constantiae had been occasionally added to the Libri feudorum since the late twelfth century, but usually circulated separately.(80) Odofredus Denari had provided an important commentary on it in the thirteenth century.(81) By the advent of printing, the Acta pacis Constantiae was commonly added to the end of the Libri feudorum, as it had been in some manuscripts much earlier.(82) By not including the Acta pacis Constantiae in his Commentary to the Libri feudorum and by writing a separate commentary on it, Baldus was respecting a long tradition.
The Acta was an important document for establishing the rights of his patron, Giangaleazzo Visconti, because it helped to define the relationship of the duke and the emperor. The emperor had granted the duke an imperial privilege confirming his ducal authority and appointing him imperial vicar in 1395.(83) Giangaleazzo claimed a ducal title for himself and argued that all cities and lordships formerly subject to the Visconti vicariate were now subject to him as their feudal lord.(84) Wenceslaus had granted Giangaleazzo all imperial rights and lordships in Lombardy. He declared that he made this grant with certain knowledge and from his fullness of power, notwithstanding any concessions, constitutions, immunities, liberties, and privileges that anyone might possess.(85) Visconti's privilege raised several legal problems that had parallels with the Treaty of Constance. It encroached upon the rights of imperial vassals in Lombardy and broke longstanding diplomatic ties between the emperor and local authorities. Some German princes claimed that the emperor did not have the authority to grant such a privilege because it injured the imperial patrimony. Baldus struggled with Giangaleazzo's legal position until the last days of his life. The issue of feudal rights, obligations, and privileges remained important for the next two centuries. Consequently, Baldus' Commentary became the standard interpreation of the Acta and was commonly printed as the Ordinary Gloss in the sixteenth century.(86)
Alexander Tartagnus reported that Baldus claimed to have earned 15,000 ducats just writing consilia dealing with testamentary substitutions.(87) If he were paid 100 ducats for each consilium, there is no doubt that he earned significant amounts of money from them. To 'consiliare', 'allegare', and 'dubitare' became a compulsive part of Baldus' professional life. There are ca. 2500 consilia in the printed editions, and at least several hundred more in the manuscripts. A simple calculation taken on the basis of the Barberini manuscripts reveals the extent of Baldus' devotion to the genre. Vallone estimates that the Barberini manuscripts, written between ca. 1380 and 1400, contain ca. 1600 consilia. Baldus had to write a consilium every four and one half days to finish just those in these manuscripts.
For more than ten years, Vincenzo Colli has been compiling a repertorium-incipitarium of Baldus' consilia in all known manuscripts. Consequently, any conclusions about the transmission of his consilia must be preliminary until Colli has finished his massive project. Only two manuscripts have been analyzed to date: Thomas Izbicki and Julius Kirschner have printed a complete list of consilia in Chicago, University of Chicago, Regenstein Library, 6. There the consilia follow more closely the arrangement of the Brescian-Venetian edition.(88) Colli has partially analyzed Lucca, Biblioteca Capitolare, 351 that was copied from drafts in the Ubaldi library at Perugia during the fifteenth century.(89) Both manuscripts contain a large number of consilia that have never been printed.
The richest collection of Baldus' consilia is found in the Fondo Barberini of the Vatican Library. Colli has demonstrated that these manuscripts must have been the ultimate source for the editors. Nonetheless, many questions remain about exactly how they arranged their material.
Colli has demonstrated the chronological sequence of the Barberini manuscripts. This information will be invaluable for following the development of his thought:(90)
Barb. lat. 1405 [--] [a]
Barb. lat. 1403 [- August 1384] [c]
Barb. lat. 1399 [- January 1384] [d]
Barb. lat. 1402 [October 1384 -] [e]
Barb. lat. 1401 [1388 - ] [f]
Barb. lat. 1412 [1389 - ] [g]
Barb. lat. 1407 [1390 - ] [h]
Barb. lat. 1410 [1391 - ]
Barb. lat. 1404 [1393 - ]
Barb. lat. 1408 [1396 - ]
Barb. lat. 1406 [ -- ]
Barb. lat. 1409 [ - April 28, 1400]
Later these Barberini manuscripts were arranged by Baldus' son Francesco, and he labeled the volumes containing consilia written in Perugia with the first twelve letters of the alphabet, a-l. Of these manuscripts the seven listed above are still extant. The remaining five Barberini manuscripts contain the consilia that he wrote after he arrived in Pavia.(91) Baldus dictated the consilia in these manuscripts to an amanuensis, revised them with his help sometimes the manuscripts give evidence that he corrected texts himself. They are invaluable examples of a working jurist's personal papers and in some cases permit us to follow the evolution of Baldus' thought.(92) In addition, Baldus' consilia are scattered among a large number of manuscripts in various libraries.(93)
Like Bartolus, Baldus never arranged his consilia for 'publication', and that task was left to the editors and publishers of the first printed editions.(94) At the end of the fifteenth century, three different editions of his consilia, interspersed with those of other jurists, were printed almost simultaneously in Brescia, Venice and Milan. All three printings are quite rare, and, consequently, scholars have not given them the attention they deserve.(95) The extraordinary number of consilia presented fifteenth-century editors of Baldus with significant problems. Since he had never arranged his consilia for 'publication', and since his family probably still had copies made by his amanuensis with corrections and deletions by Baldus himself, the manuscripts in the Barberini fond were very likely the indirect source for the printed editions.
By the end of the fifteenth century, there was a demand for printed editions of Baldus' consilia. Boninus de Boninis Ragusius Dalmatini supervised the first edition printed in four volumes at Brescia between July, 1490 and February 1491.(96) He wrote in a prefatory letter, dated March, 1491:(97)
Verum enimvero haud parvam huiusce muneris atque officii laudem gratiamque videor mihi summo iure posse vindicare, qui nunc, ut que antehac ad communem liberalium studiorum utilitatem contulerim, <c>ommittam quatuor hec preclara ingentiaque Baldi Perusini volumina multis, sed et multo meo cum sumptu atque labore, exemplis quam accuratissime quamque fieri potuit emendatissime impressa proposui.
His efforts may have been herculean, but they were not well received. Angelus Britannicus and his brother Jacobus decided within months that a new edition was needed. Angelus criticized the Brescian edition in his prefatory letter of the Venetian printing:(98)
Arbitror te inscium non esse in hac nostra florentissima urbe Brixia Baldi Perusini iurisconsulti celeberrimi consilia hoc anno impressa fuisse in quibus sive correctoris incuria sive impressorum, quod credibilius est, negligentia qui ut scis non modo litteras et syllabas invertere sed et dictiones immutare . . . Nostre civitatis iurisconsulti . . . hortati sunt me ut opus rursus curarem.
At the end of his letter, Angelus listed four improvements that he made to the Brescian edition: 1. The addition of 178 consilia in a fifth volume;(99) 2. A table of incipits; 3. 'Additiones' or 'Rubrice'; 4. The correction of twenty thousand errors(!).(100) The Venetian edition was printed between February and June of 1491 and follows the arrangement of the Brescian edition.(101) The printers in Brescia were quick to take advantage of Angelus's initiative. In December, 1491 they printed a fifth volume of consilia based on the Venetian printing.(102)
Then in 1489-1493, according to the dates printed at the end of the first and last volumes, Leonardus Pachel issued an expanded edition of Baldus's consilia in Milan.(103) However, this edition could not have been printed in 1489 because the editor included many new consilia not included in the Brescian and Venetian collections, marking those with an asterisk in the list of incipits not heretofore printed. The asterisk is not absolutely accurate, but, by and large, the consilia not found in the Brescian-Venetian editions are so marked, while all others are not. Ludovicus Peregus, who wrote an introductory letter to Pachel's edition, mentioned that he had seen earlier editions,(104) and Pachel himself at the end of his edition called Boninus's edition the first.(105) Since there were no printings before 1490, the 1489 date is a mistake; Pachel's entire edition must date between 1492 and 1493. Pachel wrote in the rubric preceding the list of incipits at the beginning of his edition:
Nos vero ea habuimus Rome ex codicibus reverendissimi d.d. cardinalis Sabelli qui cum longo tempore legationis Perusine officio fungeretur ab ipsius Baldi nepotibus copiam sumpsit.
Pachel had received copies of the consilia from Nicolaus Antiquarius, a medical doctor, who had obtained them from Giovanni Battista Cardinal Savelli. Antiquarius was a native of Perugia. According to his prefatory letter in the Milan edition, the grandsons of Baldus had given their copies of Baldus's consilia to Savelli, who had them copied and arranged in four volumes (perhaps the model for the Brescian-Venetian editions). Because friends of Savelli had given them to printers who produced inferior editions, Antiquarius obtained Savelli's permission to negotiate a proper printing.(106)
Itaque cum non solum meruisset a Perusinis obsequium verum etiam statuas et cetera benegestorum insignia inter alias curas Baldi quoque eterne memorie iurisconsulti libros, si quos ille occultius scripsisset ab Petro Juliotto atque Antonio pronepotibus eius . . . conquisivit. Neque magis letari unquam visus est, quam cum illius viri consilia in triginta sex amanuenses(107) -- ut ita dixerim -- libros congesta consequutus est, que statim in quattuor volumina exscribi curavit . . . Qua re petii pro clientele mee iure et pro patrie merito ab ipso Sabello ut integra volumina mihi per eum liceret impressoribus tradere.
If Savelli's manuscripts could be traced, they might shed much light on the genesis of the printed editions.(108)
Savelli and other members of the his family were important figures in the fifteenth-century Perugia. Pope Paul II sent Giovanni as Protonotarius apostolicus to Siena in 1466. He held this position until 1468.(109) Upon his arrival in Perugia he undertook the task of repairing the aqueduct supplying water to the city and the fountain in the piazza.(110) Paul also entrusted matters touching the governance of the university to him, granting him the right to determine professorial salaries in 1466 and the responsibility of reforming the Studium in 1467.(111) Although there is no evidence for Savelli's having attended law school, his interest in Baldus's consilia and in university affairs would lead one to believe that he did. Pope Sixtus IV elevated him to the cardinal-deaconate of SS. Vito and Modesto in 1480 and transferred him to S. Nicola in Carcere in 1483. At the time he became cardinal he was also given the office of papal legate to the province of Perugia. His relationship with people of Perugia remained particularly good. Upon his elevation to the cardinalate, the city granted Savelli and his family a number of honors.(112) It is not surprising that the descendants of Baldus would have entrusted their manuscripts to him.
The Milanese printing differs considerably from its two predecessors. It is not possible to discern any order, thematic or chronological, in the arrangement of the consilia in the first two printings. Pachel completely rearranged the consilia for his new edition, but he too did not impose any discernable pattern. Most of the rearrangement may simply be reflect a desire to have 500 consilia in each part.(113) The question remains open whether Pachel changed the order of the Brescian and Venetian editions to conform to the order he found in manuscripts that Antiquarius gave him. Pachel added a substantial number of new consilia. The Brescian-Venetian printing contained 2036 consilia (some, however, are not numbered), while the Milanese added ca. 464 (with the same caveat).(114) Only one later sixteenth-century edition added anything to the Milanese collection;(115) a seventeenth-century Liber sextus of his consilia increased the number of printed consilia modestly (see below).
The importance of the Brescian-Venetian editions lies in the evidence that they provide for illuminating the shaping of a massive collection of consilia by fifteenth-century printers. The transmission of Baldus's consilia had been concealed from us, because later printers decided that the Milanese edition was more complete than the Brescian-Venetian and after 1493 published only its order and form.(116) Although the earlier editions were not entirely forgotten, all the sixteenth-century editions follow the Milanese model.(117) It becomes the 'vulgate' edition of the consilia. However, it is clear that Baldus had nothing to do with the arrangement of his consilia. There is some evidence that the first two editions were used fairly widely in the sixteenth century. Thomas Diplovatatius had a copy of either the Brescian or the Venetian edition in his library and cited consilia from it in his lives of Baldus and Hostiensis.(118) Colli has demonstrated that Felinus Sandeus did not possess the Milan edition when he worked on Baldus' consilia in a manuscript now in Lucca, Biblioteca Capitolare 351.(119)
Liber Sextus of Baldus' Consilia
Flavius Tortus published a 'sixth book' of Baldus' consilia in 1602 that was probably meant to supplement the five books of the vulgate edition.(120) The book is rather rare.(121) Maffei had noted that most of the consilia are not Baldus', and Vallone determined that only 26 of 129 can be attributed to him, although not all with certainty.(122) Vallone also compared Vat. Barb. lat. 1396 with the Liber Sextus and discovered that many of the consilia in the 1602 edition are also in this manuscript, although Tortus may not have not used it for his printing. Between 1602 and the twentieth century, none of Baldus' consilia was printed. Modern scholars have edited a small number of them.(123)
The consilia are Baldus' most important works, and scholars have yet to take full advantage of the richness of this source for the history of the Ius commune. Since we can date many of them, at least roughly, they can demonstrate how Baldus' thought evolved, and the problems that he faced interpreting the Ius proprium through the Ius commune. The consilia also provide an invaluable guide to the legal questions that most frequently bedeviled jurists in late fourteenth-century Italy. Our knowledge of Baldus' achievement will remain incomplete until we have thoroughly explored them.
1. On the legal status of 'banniti' see Peter Raymond Pazzaglini, The Criminal Ban of the Sienese Commune, 1225-1310 (Quaderni di Studi senesi, 45; Milano 1979).
2. Vat. Barbarini lat. 1409, fol. 97r: 'Proponitur quod commune et homines uille de Brugnano fuerunt condempnati in clx. Flor. propter negligentiam commissam in capiendo malefactores et bannitos domini nostri in dicta uilla conuersantes, pro cuius quidem pecunie solutione commune et homines dicte uille imposuerunt sibi collectam distribuendam inter singulos habitatores dicte uille uoluntque cogere ad subeundum honus dicte collecte familiares (laboratoresac) inquilinos, colonos et fictabiles <in> possessionibus de Brugnano olim domini Segeamorri habite titulo donationis ab illustri domino nostro duce et etiam ante a magnifico domino domino Bernabone quamquam familiares et coloni predicti numquam fuerint cum hominibus dicte uille extimati uel in extimo descripti, ymo dicta possessio est immunis et exempta. Modo queritur an coloni dicte possessionis ut supradicti teneantur de iure ad contribuendum dicte collecte?' See Patrick Lally, 'New Light on the Birth and Death of Baldus de Ubaldis', The Two Laws: Studies in Medieval Legal History Dedicated to Stephan Kuttner, edd. Laurent Mayali and Stephanie A.J. Tibbetts (Studies in Medieval and Early Modern Canon Law 1; Washington, D.C.: 1990) 209-220 and Giancarlo Vallone, 'La raccolta Barberini dei "Consilia" originali di Baldo', Rivista di storia del diritto italiano 62 (1989) 75-78.
3. Cristina Danusso, Ricerche sulla "Lectura feudorum" di Baldo degli Ubaldi (Università degli Studi di Milano, Pubblicazioni dell'Istituto di Storia del Diritto Italiano 16; Milano: 1991) 9.
4. Paolo Grossi, L'ordine giuridico medievale (Roma-Bari: 1995) 147; also N. Horn, 'Philosophie in der Jurisprudenz der Kommentatoren: Baldus philosophus', Ius commune 1 (1967) 104-149; Danusso, Ricerche sulla "Lectura feudorum", 65-67, lists the non-juristic sources in his Commentary on the Libri feudorum.
5. On Baldus see Georges Chevrier, 'Baldi de Ubaldi', Dictionnaire de droit canonique 2 (1937) 39-52; Friedrich Karl von Savigny, Geschichte des römischen Rechts im Mittelalter: Das 14. und 15. Jahrhundert (5ed. Reprint Aalen: 1986) 6.208-48, who cite older literature. The most recent studies are: N. Horn, Aequitas in den Lehren des Baldus (Forschungen zur neueren Privatrechtsgeschichte 11; Cologne-Graz: 1968); Domenico Maffei, 'Su alcuni nodi della biografia di Baldo degli Ubaldi', Giuristi medievali e falsificazioni editoriali del primo Cinquecento (Ius commune, Sonderhefte 10; Frankfurt a.M. 1979) 71-74; Gero Dolezalek, 'I commentari di Odofredo e Baldo alla Pace di Costanza (1183)', Atti del Convegno internazionale tenuto a Milano e Piacenza, 27-30 aprile 1983 (Bologna 1985) 59-75; S. Fodale, 'Baldo degli Ubaldi difensore di Urbano VI e signore di Biscina', Quaderni medievali 17 (1984) 73-85; the study of his political thought by Joseph Canning, The Political Thought of Baldus de Ubaldis (Cambridge Studies in Medieval Life and Thought, 4th Series, vol. 6; Cambridge 1987); Vito Piergiovanni, 'La "peregrinatio bona" dei mercanti medievali: A proposito di un commento di Baldo degli Ubaldi a X. 1.3.4', Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, Kan. Abt. 74 (1988) 348-356; Idem, 'Un trattatello sui mercanti di Baldo degli Ubaldi', Scritti di storia del diritto offerti dagli allievi a Domenico Maffei, ed. Mario Ascheri (Padova 1991) 235-254; Vincenzo Colli, 'Il Cod. 351 della Biblioteca capitolare "Feliniana" di Lucca: Editori quattrocenteschi e Libri consiliorum di Baldo degli Ubaldi (1327-1400)', pp. 235-282 of the Maffei Festschrift just cited; Vallone, 'La raccolta Barberini'.
6. Oscar Scalvanti, 'Notizie e documenti sulla vita di Baldo, Angelo e Pietro degli Ubaldi', L'opera di Baldo per cura dell'Università di Perugia nel V centenario dalla morte del grande giureconsulto (Perugia 1901) 181-359 at 316, prints a compact between Baldus, and his son Franciscus in which he is named 'de Ubaldis'. On p. 328, Baldus' will names him 'de Ubaldis' twice.
7. Scalvanti, 'Notizie e documenti sulla vita di Baldo' 328: 'civis perusinus porte sancti petri et parochie sante lucie genitus'.
8. Since several jurists repeat this fact but give ages ranging from 15 to 17 years, the manuscripts of Angelus' Commentary should be checked. Cf. Savigny, Geschichte 6.209.
9. On the basis of a clearly erroneous date of 1388 in Baldus' Commentary to the Cod. 5.7.1: 'quam dedi domino Baldo qui recepit insignia doctoratus anno domini 1388, mensis Jul. In vigilia sanctorum Petri et Pauli', Savigny, Geschichte 210, concluded that 1388 must have been 1344, since that Arabic 8 and 4 were easily confused in fifteenth-century manuscripts. His conjecture was accepted until the work of Maffei in note 11 below.
10. There is a note in Vat. Barb. lat. 1399, fol. 175v, which states that Baldus held a 'repetitio' at Bologna in which he differed with his master: 'Super ista questione uide omnino Baldum . . . in repetitione quam fecit Bononie de lege, Pater filium, ff. eodem titulo [Dig. 5.2.14] ubi hac subtiliter discutit reprobando Bartolum ibi tenentem contrariam opinionem Jacobi Butrigarii'. Cited by Vallone, 'La raccolta Barberini' 82. Having held a 'repetitio' in Bologna does not mean that Baldus ever taught there.
11. Domenico Maffei, Giuristi medievali e falsificazioni editoriali del primo Cinquecento (Ius commune, Sonderhefte, 10; Frankfurt am Main: 1979) 19-34, 71-74..
12. Danusso, Ricerche 11 n.5.
13. Savigny, Geschichte 6.208-209, quoting his Commentary on the Libri feudorum 2.26.21: 'et illam glossam multum notabat primus doctor meus Joan. Pogliarensis. Alius enim doctor meus, qui rerum singularium habuit memoriam, fuit dominus Franciscus Tigri. de Pisis. Sed ille, qui multum contulit meo ingenio fuit Bar. de Saxoferrato, quos (quem?) longo tempore audivi et discendi (discedi?) studio raro me ab eis (eo?) separavi'.
14. Savigny, Geschichte 6.209-214. Paolo Nardi, 'Contributo alla biographia di Federico Petrucci con notizie inedite su Cino da Pistoia e Tancredi da Corneto', Scritti di storia del diritto offerti dagli allievi a Domenico Maffei, ed. Mario Ascheri (Medioevo e umanesimo` 78; Padova 1991) 153-180.
15. Savigny, Geschichte 6.194-195. Savigny assumed that Baldus finished his legal training in 1344 and was forced to assume that he studied in Pisa for a time.
16. See note 7 above for the text. Several consilia of Johannes Palliarensis are found in the library of the College of Spain in Bologna, see I codici del Collegio di Spagna di Bologna, edd. Domenico Maffei, Ennio Cortese, Antonio García y García, Celestino Piana, and Guido Rossi (with others) (Milano 1992): manuscripts: 83.247b, 267; 126.48a-b, 56; 198.17. Johannes' consilia were printed among those of Federicus Petrucci and are linked in these three manuscripts with other jurists who taught in Perugia. Consequently, Baldus most likely studied with Johannes there.
17. Scalvanti, 'Notizie e documenti sulla vita di Baldo' 280.
18. Savigny, Geschichte 6.218. Partes consiliorum primae-quintae (Milan 1493) M[ilan] 3.160. Partes consiliorum primae-quintae (Venice 1491) V[enice] 1.358. Vat. Barb. lat. 1410, fol. 155r: 'aut <emphiteosis> ecclesie, et dicebat Bartolus quod non poterat donari nec legari, set ad suam proprietatem reuertebatur, et hoc tenebat per legem, Vniuersas, C. de ne rei dominice uel templorum [Cod. 7.38.2]. Ego istam questionem in aduocationibus habui secum, et dicebam quod tale legatum valet'. Baldus wrote this consilium sometime after 1391.
19. Epistolario di Colluccio Salutati, ed. Francesco Novati (Vol. 3, Fonti per la Storia d'Italia 17; Rome 1896) 240 in note.
20. Because of a note in Vat. Barb. lat. 1412, fol. 65r, we know exactly when Baldus left for Pavia: 19 February, 1390; see Vallone, 'La raccolta Barberini' 82. In his will, dated six months before his death, he is described as 'incola civitatis papie in qua legendo iura civilia in felici studio papie', see Scalvanti, 'Notizie e documenti sulla vita di Baldo 328.
21. Cod. 6.33. See Fodale, 'Baldo degli Ubaldi' 78-81. Baldus' second consilium of 1380 never seems to have had an independent textual tradition in legal texts but was printed in Odorico Raynaldi, Annales ecclesiastici (Cologne 1593) 17.14-15. Odorico connects Baldus' consilium with Johannes de Legnano's. The incipit is: 'Quod tumultuans populus Romanos'. Scalvanti, `Notizie e documenti sulla vita di Baldo' 223-233 has doubts about whether the text Odorico printed was written in 1380. Scalvanti discusses the consilium printed at Cod. 6.33 and Johannes' contribution on pp. 233-236. He thinks that the consilium printed in the Codex was written in 1380.
22. Scalvanti, 'Notizie e documenti sulla vita di Baldo' 320.
23. Savigny, Geschichte 6.233. Kenneth Pennington, The Prince and the Law 1200-1600: Sovereignty and Rights in the Western Legal Tradition (Berkeley-Los Angeles 1993) 219-220. Fodale, 'Baldo degli Ubaldi' 81-83, believes that Baldus took possession of the castle in 1386. These events merit further study. Fodale did not seem to know of Paulus de Castro's testimony that Baldus never obtained possession. Since Paulus was Baldus' student and heard his lectures, his evidence is important. For the document, dated September, 1380, that transfers the fief, see Scalvanti, 'Notizie e documenti sulla vita di Baldo' 321-322.
24. Ibid. 197-220. Canning, Baldus de Ubaldis 2-6. Scalvanti, 'Notizie e documenti sulla vita di Baldo' 322-323.
25. consilia of Johannes Zenobius and of Franciscus are included in Baldus': M 3.369 (Franciscus) and M 3.370 (Johannes Zenobius). Significantly, these two consilia are placed in the material that the early modern editors included after the last complete consilium Baldus wrote before his death (M 3.364 [V --]). For the differences between the M[ilan] and V[enice] editions of Baldus' consilia, see below. For other consilia of the two sons and their hands in the Barberini manuscripts, see Vallone, 'La raccolta Barberini' 89-91.
26. Savigny, Geschichte 6.220, called 'Laudutia' in Baldus' printed commentary. Torquato Cuturi, 'Baldo degli Ubaldi in Firenze', L'Opera di Baldo (Perugia 1901) 389 n. 11 asserts that the twins were Franciscus and Zanobius, but without evidence. Scalvanti, `Notizie e documenti sulla vita di Baldo' 192.
27. Scalvanti, 'Notizie e documenti sulla vita di Baldo' 316-317: 'Franciscus utriusque iuris doctor' and 'Joannes Zanobius legum doctor'. Johannes is called a 'miles' in his will (p. 333).
28. (M 1.310 [V 3.262]) Vat. lat. 1408, fol. 162r: 'Concludo igitur secundum disertas allegationes domini Gilioli filii mei amantissimi et acuti ingenii'. [et acuti ingenii om. V]
29. Lally, 'Baldus' 216-217 n. 21. The death notices of Joahnnes Zenobius and Amadeus , as well as Zenobius's wife, Lambertina, are entered into Vat. Barberini 1409, fol. 97r.
30. Vallone, 'La raccolta Barberini' 78.
31. Cuturi, 'Baldo degli Ubaldi in Firenze' 365-393.
32. E.g. M 1.408. Thomas Salvectus of Pistoia wrote in the prologue to his commentary on the second book of the Florentine Statutes that he drew upon Baldus' consilia for his work. Venice, Bibl. Marciana, lat. 206, Class.V.5 n.44 a.429 L.290 (Coll. 2654): 'Salvectus multas praetorum ac magistratum reipublicae florentinae sententias a semetipso in tabulariis civitatis inspectas affert, ut et consilia . . . Baldi de Perusio'. Cited by Egidio Gianazza and Giorgio D'Ilario, Vita e opere di Giovanni da Legnano (Legnano 1983) 73.
33. Ibid. 6.225. Cuturi, 'Baldo degli Ubaldi in Firenze' 376. Scalvanti, 'Notizie e documenti sulla vita di Baldo' 237-240.
34. Scalvanti, 'Notizie e documenti sulla vita di Baldo' 325: 'Cum asseratur quod egregius utriusque iuris doctor dominus Ubaldus m.i. Francisci est ad alios partes iturus ad salarium ad legendum in iure civili quod esset annichilare et destruere studium perusinum, et propterea ut studium augeatur et conservetur in civitate perusii domini priores et camerarii reformaverunt quod prefatus dominus Ubaldus sine espressa deliberatione et consensu dominorum priorum et camerariorm artium civitatis perusii, non possit vel debeat se absentare modo aliquo'.
35. Scalvanti, 'Notizie e documenti sulla vita di Baldo' 333.
36. The first to recognize the importance of these manuscripts seems to have been Andrea Padovani, 'Le "Additiones et apostillae super prima parte Infortiati" di Cino da Pistoia', Studia et Documenta Historiae et Iuris 45 (1979) 178-244 at 235 n. 156.
37. Vat. Barb. lat. 1403 also contains similar notations and additions. The additions were written in two distinct hands. Vallone, 'La raccolta Barberini' passim, has attempted to identify Baldus' hand and the hands of his amanuenses in the Barberini manuscripts. Jolande Rummer, 'A Fourteenth-Century Legal Opinion', The Quarterly Journal of the Library of Congress 25 (1968) 178-193, published photographs of Baldus' hand, probably written ca. 1370.
38. Vat. Barberini lat. 1408, fol. 109r: 'Allegationes pro Fratribus Minoribus gratis'. To Consilium 1.206 (Milan), fol. 110r: 'Allegationes Fratrum Minorum gratis date'. consilium 1.206 (Milan). In the manuscript, these texts are two independent pieces, treating two different problems, but were joined in the printed edition.
39. Vat. Barberini lat. 1408, fol. 116v: 'Pro sacerdote pareochie nostre gratis restitutis': Consilium 1.225 (Milan).
40. E.g. Vat. Barberini lat. 1408, fol. 117r: 'Pro domino Xristoforo de Castiliono restitutis gratis': Consilium M 1.226.
41. Vat. Barberini lat. 1408, fol. 116r: 'Pro Maffiolo de Sexingo tradidit domino Baldo fl. iiii.or Ego autem sub fide sue promissoris nichil postea recepi': To Consilium M 1.224.
42. See Mario Ascheri, '"Consilium sapientis", perizia medica e "res iudicata": Diritto dei `dottori' e istituzioni comunali', Proceedings of the Fifth International Congress of Medieval Canon Law, Salamanca, edd. S. Kuttner and K. Pennington (Monumenta iuris canonici, Series C, 6; Città del Vaticano 1980) 533-579.
43. Canning, Baldus de Ubaldis 7-14, especially p. 9 n.41.
44. Savigny, Geschichte 6.239.
45. (Venice 1615-1616).
46. If Baldus wrote a complete
commentary to the Institutiones, manuscripts have not survived. Domenico
Maffei has shown that the printed editions of a commentary attributed to Baldus were not
his but Bartolomeo da Novara ( 1408) (editio princeps Cologne 1477 [Hain *2271 (N.B.
printer's error in n.46, *22710)]). Although the commentary in Lyon,
Bibliothèque muncipale 385 (n.46) is Bartolomeo's, it is attributed to Baldus (Maffei,
"Bartolomeo da Novara" p. 15 n.31). Uppsala C532 contains Baldus'
commentary on Book four of the Codex (Maffei, "Bartolomeo da Novara" p. 15 n.31
For a complete discussion of these points, See Domenico Maffei, "Bartolomeo de Novara ( 1408) autore della Lectura institvtionvm' attribuita a Baldo delgi Ubaldi," Rivista di storia del diritto italiano 63 (1990) 5-22, reprinted in Studi di storia delle università de delle letteratura giuridica (Bibliotheca Eruditorum, 1; Goldbach: Keip Verlag, 1995) 207-224; Baldus' commentary to the books of the Digestum vetus: Madrid, B.N. 2137; Munich, Staatsbibl. lat. 3062, 6538, 6640; Rome, Bibl. Angel. 543, 552; Vat. lat. 10726, Vat. Ross. lat. 1163 [Venice 1475 (Hain *2301)]; to the Infortiatum: Lille, A.D. 41; Vienna, N.B. 5081, fol. 121r-225v; to the Digestum novum: no manuscripts [Venice 1495 (Hain 2305)]; to the Authentica: Torino, B.N. G.I.4, fol. 7-115.
47. Manlio Bellomo, The Common Legal Past of Europe, 1000-1800, tr. Lydia G. Cochrane (Studies in Medieval and Early Modern Canon Law 4; Washington, D.C. 1995) 217 (original edition, L'Europa del diritto comune [Roma 19947], Spanish translation La Europa del derecho común, introduction by Emma Montanos Ferrín, translated by N. Poloni and S.A. de Prado Díez [I Libri di Erice 14; Roma 1996]). See also Bellomo, 'Sulle tracce d'uso dei "libri legales",' Civiltà comunale: Libro, scrittura, documento: Atti del Convegno, Genova 8-11 novembre 1988 (Atti della Società ligure di Storia Patria n.s. 29.2; Genova 1988) 33-51.
48. E.g. Lectura super primo, secundo, et tertio Codicis (Venice 1474). Lucca, Bibl. Cap. 339 contains the first three books. Of the ca. forty manuscripts of the Baldus' Commentarium to the Codex that Dolezalek lists, none contains more than three books. The nine books of the Codex were printed sine loco et anno (Hain *2279); the individual books were printed frequently (Hain 2280-2300) before 1500.
49. See, for example, M 1.10, 1.78, 1.110, 1.168, 1.234, 1.413, to give just a small sample. He often began a consilium treating a statute of the ius proprium with the words 'Statuto cavetur' or 'Statuto civitatis - cavetur'. See the remarks of Enrico Besta, Baldo e la storia letteraria del diritto (Perugia 1900) 22.
50. For the general problem of interpreting statutes, see Mario Sbriccoli, L'interpretazione dello statuto (Milan 1969) and Wolfgang P. Müller, 'Signorolus de Homodeis and the Medieval Interpretation of Statutory Law', Rivista internazionale di diritto comune 6 (1995) 217-229. See also the comments of Manlio Bellomo, Società e istituzioni dal medioevo agli inizi dell'età moderna (Libri di Erice 2; Roma 1994) 377-386.
51. Bologna, College of Spain, 82, fol 321v-325r, Vat. lat. 2289, fol. 73ra-75va, Vat. lat. 2641, fol. 71va-74va, Vat. lat. 2656, fol. 75va-77ra.
52. Bologna, College of Spain, 231, fol. 352v-355r, Vat. lat. 2289, fol. 99ra-100rb, Vat. lat. 2656, fol. 97vb-100rb.
53. Dolezalek, Verzeichnis, lists ten manuscripts. Giustiniano degli Azzi, 'Il trattato "De statutis" e gli statuti di Perugia', L'opera di Baldo (Perugia 1901) 145-168.
54. For an analysis of tracts attributed to Baldus in rare volumes of the early sixteenth century see Gaetano Colli, 'Attribvvntvr Bartolo et tamen non svnt Bartoli: Prolegomeni ad una bibliografia analitica dei trattati giuridici pubblicati nel XVI secolo', Il Bibliotecario (1996) 145-192.
55. Eleven tracts of Baldus were printed in the great sixteenth-century compilation of legal tractates, the Tractatus universi iuris (Venice 1583-1584), listed by G. Colli, Per una bibliografia dei trattati giuridici pubblicati nel XVI secolo: Indici dei 'Tractatus Universi Iuris' (Ius nostrum 20; Milano 1994) 211: Apparatus substitutionum, 8.1, fol. 201r-211v; Regulae generales statutorum, 2, fol. 155r-157v; De aditione cum inventario, 8.2, fol. 323r-v; De carceribus, 11.1, fol. 200v-201v; De constituto, 6.1, fol. 38r-39r; De iure prothomiseos, 17, fol. 18r-20r; De pactis, 6.1, fol. 2r-8r; De sindicatu officialium, 7, fol. 224v-226v; De statutis, 2, fol. 86ra-154v; De tabellionibus, 3, fol. 364v-366v; De testibus, 4, fol. 71r-73r. For interesting observations on the medieval meaning of the word 'tractatus,' see Constantin Fasolt, 'At the Crossroads of Law and Politics: William Durant the Younger's "Treatise" on Councils', Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law 18 (1988) 43-53.
56. Maffei, Giuristi medievali e falsificazioni editoriali 19-34.
57. See, for example, the dissertation of Jacques A. Pluss, Baldus de Ubladis of Perugia on Dowry Law (University of Chicago, 1983).
58. On the dating of this work, see Canning, Baldus de Ubaldis 9, n.39.
59. (Milan 1478) unfoliated.
60. At this point the transition from one section of the Decretals of Gregory IX is clear in the printed edition, but in Munich, Staatsbibl. Clm 3629, a manuscript of Baldus's Commentary to Books 2 and 3 of the Decretals, on fol. 58r-v, with unnumbered blank folia inserted between, and on fol. 59r-63r, there are two fragments of Baldus. Fol. 58r-v: 'ut erat in casu illius, quando extraneus erat institutus et gravatus . . . non habet locum dicta lex, Omnimodo'. Fol. 59r-63r: 'c. Petimus <C.11 q.1. c.19?> l. Si pretor, de inst. <Cod. 6.25.4 (Si pater)> . . . pro parte testatum et pro parte intestatum'. Vincenzo Colli informs me that this fragment is his commentary on Roman law. Leipzig, Universitätsbibl. 1059 (to Book I) and 1047 (Book II) may contain a different version of his commentary.
61. Hain 2311-2315.
62. See Thomas M. Izbicki, 'Notes on Late Medieval Jurists: II. Baldus on the Sext', Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law, New Series 4 (1974) 53-54. Izbicki found these works in Vat. lat. 5925. The Apostillae to the Clementines are in Vat. lat. 1398 and are described in A Catalogue of Canon and Roman Law Manuscripts in the Vatican Library, compiled by Stephan Kuttner, with the aid of Reinhard Elze (Studi e Testi 322; Città del Vaticano 1986) 190. See the dissertation of Patrick J. Lally, Baldus de Ubaldis on the Liber Sextus and De regulis iuris: Text and Commentary (University of Chicago, 1992).
63. Johann F. von Schulte, Die Geschichte der Quellen und Literatur des canonischen Rechts, II: Von Papst Gregor IX. Bis zum Concil von Trient (Stuttgart: 1877) 276. Vat. lat. 317ra-381ra
64. Vat. lat. 2233, fol. 1vb-166vb (Novella) and fol. 167ra-256ra (Mercuriales).
65. Baldus' additiones to Oldradus' consilia have been found in Munich, Staatsbibl. Lat. 5463. Brendan McManus will discuss them in an article that will appear in the Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law.
66. The rubric of the text in Vat. lat. 2637, fol. 53ra-109rb. Also Vat. lat. 65ra-107vb, Vat. lat. 2678, fol. 131ra-<189>ra.
67. Vat. lat. 2637, fol. 13ra-50vb, Vat. lat. 2683, fol. 121ra-159vb.
68. I codici del Collegio di Spagna di Bologna, edd. Domenico Maffei, Ennio Cortese, Antonio Gracia y Garcia, Celestino Piana, and Guido Rossi (Orbis Academicus, Milan: 1992).
69. On the Libri feudorum, see Peter Weimar, 'Die Handschriften des Liber feudorum und seiner Glossen', Rivista internazionale di diritto comune 1 (1990) 31-98, with a complete list of manuscripts and apparatus. See also Idem, 'Die legistische Literatur der Glossatorenzeit', Handbuch der Quellen und Literatur der neueren europäischen Privatrechtsgeschichte, 1: Mittelalter, ed. Helmut Coing (Munich 1973) 166-168 and G. Giordanengo, Le droit féodal dans les pays de droit écrit: L'exemple de la Provence et du Dauphiné, XIIe-début XIVe siècles (Bibliothèque des Écoles Françaises d'Athènes et de Rome 266; Rome 1988) and Féodalités et droits savants dans le Midi médiéval (Collected Studies 373; Aldershot 1992).
70. The information discussed in the following paragraphs relies heavily on the recent monograph of Danusso, Ricerche sulla 'Lectura feudorum', cited in note 2 above.
71. Weimar, 'Liber feudorum' 53-54.
72. For Milan see, Jane W. Black, 'Natura feudi haec est: Lawyers and Feudatories in the Duchy of Milan', English Historical Review 109 (1994) 1150-1173 at 1150-1157; who cites most of the earlier literature, except for G. Chittolini, 'Infeudazioni e politica feudale nel Ducato visconteo-sforzesco', Quaderni storici 19 (1972) 57-130. For the Kingdom of Naples, see Giancarlo Vallone, Iurisdictio domini: Introduzione a Matteo d'Afflitto ed alla cultura giuridica meridionale tra Quattro e Cinquecento (Collana di studi storici e giuridici ; 1; Lecce : Milella, 1985).
73. Vallone, 'La raccolta Barberini' 81.
74. Danusso, Ricerche sulla 'Lectura feudorum', 11-12.
75. Ibid. 14-17.
76. Ibid. 18-24.
77. Ibid. 24-28.
78. Ibid. 29-35.
79. The colophon of Vat. lat. 2295, which contains Baldus' Lectura super usibus feudorum (fol. 1ra-129rb) and his Commentary on the Libri feudorum (fol. 129rb-140rb), describes the work as a 'commentum'. On this terminology for Baldus' work, see Frank Soetermeer, 'Une catégorie de commentaires peu connue: Les `commenta' ou `lecturae' inédits des précurseurs d'Odofrède', Rivista internazionale di diritto comune 2 (1991) 47-67.
80. Weimar, 'Liber feudorum' 38-41.
81. Dolezalek, 'I commentari di Odofredo e Baldo alla Pace di Costanza' (above n.4).
82. E.g. Vat. lat. 1435, fol. 227ra-228ra; both texts are appended to the text of the Authenticum.
83. For the background see, Bueno De Mesquita, Giangaleazzo Visconti Duke of Milan (1351-1402): A Study in the Political Career of an Italian Despot (Cambridge 1941) 183. Hans Baron, The Crisis of the Early Italian Renaissance (Princeton 1955). Also Paolo Morigia, Historia dell'antichità di Milano (Historiae urbium et regionum Italiae rariores, 48; Venice 1592; repr. Bologna 1967) 134-42.
84. On the Visconti's vicariate see Theodor von Sickel, Vicariat der Visconti (Sitzungsberichte der Phil.-Hist. Classe der K. Akademie der Wissenschaften Wien, 30; Vienna 1895).
85. The text is conveniently printed in L. Muratori, Rerum Italicarum scriptores (Milan 1730) 788-94, as a part of the Annales Mediolanenses, col. 790: 'Et item de omnibus juribus, infeudationibus, et subjectionibus quibuscumque et qualitercumque et quocumque iure et quacumque causa uel occasione pertinentibus vel spectantibus praedictis civitatibus, castris, villis, terris et locis, et omnibus et singulis praedictis et cuilibet vel alicui ipsarum et ipsorum . . . ex de nostra regiae Romanae potestatis plenitudine omnimodo, quo melius et absolute possumus . . . non obstantibus aliquibus in contrarium, et maxime quid in ipsis concessionibus, constitutionibus, immunitatibus, libertatibus, infeudationibus, privilegiis, beneficiis et literis'. Black, 'Natura feudi haec est' 1156 n.2, cites the text from J.C. Luenig, Codex Italiae diplomaticus (Frankfurt am Main 1725) 1.421-431.
86. E.g. Corpus iuris civilis (Lyon 1575) Volume 5, col. 853-878.
87. Savigny, Geschichte 6.229.
88. T.M. Izbicki and J. Kirshner, 'Consilia of Baldus of Perugia in the Regenstein Library of the University of Chicago', Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law, New Series 15 (1985) 95-115. In general, see Kenneth Pennington, 'The Consilia of Baldus de Ubaldis', Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis 56 (1988) 85-92, reprinted with corrections in Popes, Canonists and Texts, 1150-1550 (Collected Studies 412; Aldershot 1993).
89. Colli, 'Il Cod. 351' 262-275.
90. First noted by Vallone, 'La raccolta Barberini' 83-86 and further studied by Colli, 'Il Cod. 351' 260. Following the numbering of the consilia in the vulgate edition [M], Vallone, pp. 93-94, indicates which consilia are in which Barberini manuscript and describes each Barberini manuscript on pp. 106-130.
91. Colli, 'Il Cod. 351' 259-261.
92. Kenneth Pennington, 'The Authority of the Prince' 483-515 (Aldershot 1993), and my essay 'Allegationes, Solutiones, and Dubitationes: Baldus de Ubaldis' Revisions of his Consilia', L'Arte della disputa e la scienza del diritto nei secoli XIII-XIV, ed. Manlio Bellomo (München, to appear)
93. See Gero Dolezalek, Verzeichnis der Handschriften zum römischen Recht bis 1600 (Frankfurt am Main 1972) volume 3.
94. Mario Ascheri, 'The Formation of the Consilia Collection of Bartolus of Saxoferrato and Some of His Autographs', The Two Laws (n.2 above) 188-201 at 192-197. Bartolus wrote far fewer consilia than Baldus.
95. In his supplement to Hain, J.A. Copinger no. 819 lists an edition of Consilia quaedam (Cologne 1477) of 20 folios; he noted a copy in the University Library at Halle.
96. Hermann Lange, Die Consilien des Baldus de Ubaldis ( 1400) (Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur, Mainz, Geistes- und sozialwissen-schaftlichen Klasse 12; Wiesbaden 1973) 18, thinks that Baldus was responsible for the division of his consilia into five volumes.
97. Partes consiliorum primae-quartae (4 volumes; Brescia 1490-1491) (Hain *2330); Lange, Consilien 18, notes that 926 consilia were printed in the Brescia edition, taking this number from Ernst Stampe, Das Zahlkraftrecht der Postglossatorenzeit (Abhandlungen der preussischen Akademie, Phil. Hist. Klasse 165; Berlin 1928) 24, n. 1, who saw only the first two parts of the Brescian edition of 1490 at the University Library at Greifswald, hence 926 consilia (if he had added correctly, 924). The Brescian volumes number (which means, since some are not numbered and other numbers are skipped, that the numbered consilia can only roughly give us the number of consilia in the volumes) in part 1: 453, part 2: 470, part 3: 453, part 4: 503. Numbers revised according to those of Colli, 'Il Cod. 351', 256 n. 4.
I have seen copies of volumes 1 and 2 in Munich, Staatsbibliothek and a complete copy (including the later part 5: 172 consilia) in Vienna, Nationalbibliothek. The catalogue of incunabula in Italian libraries Indice generale degli incunaboli delle biblioteche d'Italia 5 (Rome 1972) lists copies in nine Italian libraries. There is also a copy in Grenoble, Bibl. mun., and, presumably, a copy of parts one and two may still be in Greifswald. Canning, Baldus de Ubaldis 12, cites a complete copy of this edition from the Library of Gonville and Gaius College in Cambridge. On the Brescian edition see P. Veneziani, La tipografia a Brescia nel XV secolo (Florence 1986) 77-78.
98. Partes consiliorum primae-quintae (5 vols; Venice 1491) Hain *2329. Hain lists only parts 1, 2, and 5. I have located the entire edition in Eichstätt, Universitätsbibliothek (Signature: D I 958-960; in 3 volumes). Further copies can be found in Lucca, Bibl. cap., Trevisio, Bibl. com., and Rome, Bibl. naz. Parts 1 and 2 are in Munich, Cambridge, Harvard Law Library, and the Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.; parts 3-5 are in Augsburg, Staatsbibl. and Modena, Bibl. Estense.
99. Volume five actually contains 171 numbered consilia; the index to volume 5 lists 179.
100. Stampe, Zahlkraftrecht 24-33, printed five consilia from the Frankfurt 1585 edition and collated them with the Brescian edition. As his notes demonstrate, there are, in fact, many mistakes in the Brescian edition. Cf. Canning, Baldus de Ubaldis 13.
101. Except for slight differences in the numbering of consilia; parts 1 and 2 are the same; part 3: 450, part 4: 502.
102. (Hain *2230); See Veneziani, La tipografia 100. According to the colophon, Boninus did not participate in the printing of the last volume: 'Consiliorum quinta pars nuperrime elucubrata ac diligenti castigatione emendata cum ipso originali collatione habita per D. presbyterum Baptistam de Farfengo. Brixie impressa die xvii. men. Dec. Mccclxxxxi'. I have located the fifth volume in three libraries: Vienna, Nationalbibliothek (Signature: Ink. 11.B.5), Mantua, Bibl. com. and Padua, Bibl. univ.
103. Partes consiliorum primae-quintae (5 vols. Milan 1493) Hain *2328. This edition seems to be even more rare than the first two. There are complete copies in Munich (2 copies of part 1; a single copy of 2-5) and Vienna, Nationalbibliothek, signature Ink. 10.B.18, and incomplete copies in Namur, Sémin., Madrid, Bibl. nac.; parts 1 and 2 in Washington, D.C., The Library of Congress; parts 3-5 in Aberdeen, University Library; part one in Rome, Bibl. naz. and Cambrai, Bibl. mun.
104. Vincenzio Bini, Memorie istoriche della Perugina Università degli studi e dei suoi professori (Perugia 1816) 129, records a printing in Padua 1486. There is no evidence of its existence.
105. He wrote: 'Consilia infrascripta numero xxii. non sunt stampata in prima impressione consiliorum Baldi facta Brixie per Boninum de Boninis, sed solummodo ista fuerunt addita in secunda impressione facta per Angelum et Jacobum de Britannicis'.
106. (Hain *2328), vol. 1, unfoliated (see note 85 for details on copies).
107. 'Amanuenses libros' must mean manuscript, not printed, books. Robert Feenstra has suggested to me in a letter that 'triginta sex' could have the same meaning as the French 'trente-six', that is a 'great many'. Savelli may have had access to a collection of Baldus's consilia written for specific cases and confirmed with his seal. These might not have been bound together. Contemporary examples of such consilia are found today in many Italian libraries: e.g. Florence, Bibl. naz. Magliabecchi 173.
108. Colli, 'Il Cod. 351', 276-278, discusses the letter and the manuscripts of Savelli. He is doubtful that four manuscripts containing all the consilia ever existed. Colli believes that Pierto Antonio Castiglione probably was the moving force for the new edition. Vallone, 'La raccolta Barberini' 80 n.21, misread what I wrote and thinks that I believe the Vatican manuscripts were the copies made for Savelli.
109. Giuseppe Ermini, Storia della universita di Perugia I-II (Firenze 1971) 201.
110. Reported by Pompeo Pellini, Dell'historia di Perugia (Venice 1664; reprinted in Historiae urbium et regionum italiae rariores 15; Bologna 1968) 2.686.
111. Printed by Bini, Memorie istoriche 608-609.
112. Pellini, Historia 2.785-86. See also Ferdinand Gregorovius, Geschichte der Stadt Rom im Mittelalter vom V. bis zum XVI. Jahrhundert (München 1978) 3.127, 129, 150.
113. Colli, 'Il Cod. 315', 262-275, discusses the relationship of the Lucca manuscript and the Milanese edition.
114. Colli, 'Il Cod. 351', 256, has counted the consilia as a part of his project to list the incipits; I take the numbers from him.
115. An edition printed in Lyon 1559, under the editorship of Matthaeus Antonianus published a consilium at the end of book 4. He noted: 'Hoc responsum numquam antea editum a me vero ex sterquilinio nostri Marchi desepultum'. The consilium begins: 'Ad evidentiam premittendum est cum queritur an ille qui intulit alicui aliquod vulnus'. For information about the Liber Sextus of Baldus' consilia see Popes, Canonists, and Texts XX p.10.
116. Until Il Cigno undertook the reprinting of Baldus' works, the most commonly available edition of Baldus's consilia was Venice, 1575-1576, reprinted by Bottega d'Erasmo (Torino 1970).
117. A. Campitelli and F. Liotta, 'Notizia del Ms. Vat. lat. 8069', Annali di storia del diritto 5-6 (1961-62) 387-406 at p. 391 n. 24 examined the editions of Venice 1526, Milan 1543, Lyon 1548, Venice 1575, Venice 1580, Frankfurt 1589, Venice 1608. I have also seen Trino 1516, Lyon 1540, Lyon 1559. I have not been able to find any trace of an edition printed in Pavia 1499 recorded by Bini and Mazzuchelli and mentioned by Campitelli and Liotta. This may be a volume of Angelus de Ubaldis' consilia published in Pavia 1499 (Hain *15866).
118. In his life of Baldus, De claris iuris consultis, ed. F Schulz, H. Kantorowicz, G. Rabotti (Studia Gratiana, 10; Bologna 1968) 302: 'Et vide de Baldo in consiliis Baldi in consilio 287 incipit "Comes Bellimontis" in 3. volumine in fine <= Brescia-Venice 3.289, Milan 1.337>'. Also in his life of Hostiensis, p. 143: Brescia-Venice 2.166 = Milan 4.500. Cf. Canning, Baldus de Ubaldis 13 and Colli, 'Il Cod. 351', 282 n. 47.
119. Colli, 'Il Cod. 351' 277-278.
120. Volumen sextum consiliorum sive responsorum (Venice 1602).
121. I have listed, with the help of Domenico Maffei and Filippo Liotta, four copies of the book in Pennington, 'Baldus de Ubaldis' Appendix II, p. 10 (Aldershot 1993).
122. Pennington, loc. cit. Vallone, 'La raccolta Barberini' 102.
123. Pennington, 'Baldus de Ubaldis' Appendix I, p. 9. Vallone, 'La raccolta Barberini' pp. 130-135, lists 84 unedited consilia from the Barberini manuscripts; when Colli has completed his Incipitario we will know exactly how many of his consilia have never been printed.