INTERNATIONAL PRIZE “JOAO XXI“
PRIX INTERNATIONAL JEAN XXI
Ruling for the
INTERNATIONAL PRIZE OF MEDICAL ETHICS AND DEONTOLOGY JOÃO XXI
A prize has been organized by the Association of Portuguese Catholic Doctors and will be continued for as long as judged useful; it will be awarded by the International Federation of Catholic Doctors (FIAMC) according to the following rules:Article 1: It will be called “The International Prize of Medical Ethics and Deontology João XXI” consisting of a special medal with the effigy of this Pope and Portuguese Doctor, and a diploma.

Article 2: The João XXI Prize is meant to stimulate the study of Medical Ethics and Deontology in different countries and to reward, in that field, the best original work written or published in the interval of two International consecutive Congresses of Catholic Doctors.

Article 3: Only works, which adhere to the following conditions will be admitted to the competition.
1. By the choice of the competitor, the work should be linked with Medical Ethics or Deontology fields and the most debated ethical or deontological questions at the time of the competition.
2. Each time the International Federation of Catholic Doctors considers it useful, the Federation will be able to indicate in advance, from the vast fields of Medical Ethics and Deontology, the theme or themes on which the competition will be based.
3. The works must be original, preferably those which have not yet been published. Studies of work already published or of borrowed extracts will not be accepted.
4. The works must be written in the original language, but when that is not French or English, they must be accompanied by a translation in one of these two languages which will be the author’s responsibility.
5. The works must be typed with two spaces, on one side of the paper, 20 to 30 pages, with seven copies. If the work is printed, the author can replace the typed copies with that of printed copies.

Article 4: The competitors will have to send to the Secretariat of the International Federation of Associations of Catholic Doctors or to the place indicated three months before the International Congress of Catholic Doctors, a demand for entry, declaring that they wish to compete for the João XXI Prize, accompanying their demand with seven copies of the work presented for the competition.
1. The works will not be sent back to the interested party; the text can be published in the magazines of the Associations of Catholic Doctors; it will suffice to ask for it at the Secretariat of the International Federation of the Associations of Catholic Doctors.
2. As for the work which wins the prize, the Association of Catholic Portuguese Doctors reserves the right to publish it fully in its periodical “Acção Médica“. It can also be published in a special edition by the Federation of the Association of Catholic Doctors.

Article 5: The following will not be accepted for the competition:
1. Works which take a view contrary to the doctrine of the Catholic Church.
2. Works belonging to members of the judging panel.

Article 6: The Directors of the International Federation will choose, well in advance, four well-known and respected personalities from international Catholic circles, who, with the President of the International Federation, will work on the judging panel, which will assess the works presented at each competition.
1. The five members of the judging panel will have to be, as far as possible, from different countries, but there must be a Portuguese appointed by the Directors of the Association of Portuguese Catholic Doctors, since the prize has been set up by a Portuguese Institution.
2. One of the members of the judging panel must be a priest with deep knowledge of ethical and deontological problems, and one other member, at least, Professor of Medical Ethics or Deontology in a faculty of medicine.

Article 7: The month after the closing of the competition, each member of the judging panel will receive a copy of the works sent in.

Article 8: There will be no appeal against the decisions of the judging panel, which will be passed on a month before the date of Congress by a majority vote (absolute or relative). Once the decision is known, the President of the Judging Panel will pass on its opinion duly authorized, to the Association of Portuguese Catholic Doctors.

Article 9: The prize is indivisible. The judging panel has the right not to award it if the works presented seem to it inadequate for the objectives of the initiative, or in disagreement with the demand set up and whenever the medical ethical or deontological literature is not impressive.

Article 10: The Prize João XXI will be awarded in an official ceremony at the opening of each International Congress of Catholic Doctors, to the competitor or his representative.

Article 11: In case there are no entries for the competition, the judging panel may award the Prize João XXI to the paper presented at the International Congress of Catholic Doctors, which, in his opinion, does best meet the criteria established in Articles 2 and 3.

Article 12: It is the task of the International Federation of the Associations of Catholic Doctors to apply this ruling and to deal with contested cases, always in agreement with the Directing Body of the Association of Portuguese Catholic Doctors.
 
Règles d’attribution du
PRIX INTERNATIONAL DE ÉTHIQUE ET DÉONTOLOGIE MÉDICALE JOÃO XXI
Un prix a été créé par l’Association des Médecins Catholiques Portugais et sera maintenu aussi longtemps que jugé utile; la Fédération Internationale des Associations de Médecins Catholiques (FIAMC) l’attribuera selon les règles suivantes:Article 1: Ce prix sera appelé “Prix International de Éthique et Déontologie Médicale João XXI” et consistera en une médaille spéciale à l’effigie de ce Pape et médecin portugais et un diplôme.

Article 2: Le Prix João XXI est censé stimuler l’étude de l’Éthique et de la Déontologie Médicale dans différents pays et récompenser dans ce domaine le meilleur travail original écrit ou publié dans l’intervalle de deux Congrès Internationaux consécutifs de la FIAMC.

Article 3: Seuls les travaux, qui adhèrent aux conditions suivantes seront admis à concourir. 1. Du fait du choix du concurrent, le travail doit avoir un lien avec l’Éthique ou la Déontologie Médicale et les questions éthiques ou déontologiques les plus débattues au moment de la compétition. 2. Chaque fois que la FIAMC le jugera utile, elle pourra indiquer d’avance, au sein des vastes domaines de l’Ethique ou de la Déontologie Médicale, le thème ou les thèmes sur lesquels la compétition sera basée. 3. Les travaux doivent être originaux, et de préférence non encore publiés. Les études tirées de travaux déjà publiés, ou d’extraits empruntés, ne seront pas acceptées. 4. Les travaux doivent être écrits en langue originale, mais s’il ne s’agit pas du français ou de l’anglais, ils doivent être accompagnés d’une traduction en une de ces deux langues sous la responsabilité de l’auteur. 5. Les travaux doivent être tapés en double interligne, recto seul, 20 à 30 pages, avec sept copies. Si le travail est déjà imprimé, l’auteur peut remplacer les copies tapées des copies imprimées.

Article 4: Les concurrents devront envoyer au Secrétariat de la FIAMC ou au lieu indiqué trois mois avant le Congrès International des Médecins Catholiques, une demande déclarant qu’ils veulent concourir pour le Prix João XXI, en accompagnant leur demande de sept copies du travail présenté. 1. Les travaux ne seront pas retournés; le texte pourra être publié dans les journaux des Associations de Médecins Catholiques; il suffira de le demander au Secrétariat de la FIAMC. 2. Quant au travail qui gagnera le prix, l’Association des Médecins Catholiques Portugais se réserve le droit de le publier entièrement dans son périodique “Acção Médica“. Il pourra aussi être publié dans une édition spéciale par la FIAMC.

Article 5: Ne seront pas acceptés pour la compétition: 1. Les travaux ayant un optique contraire à la doctrine de l’Église Catholique; 2. Les travaux ayant pour auteurs des membres du jury.

Article 6: Les Directeurs de la FIAMC choisiront d’avance quatre personnalités bien connues et respectées des cercles catholiques internationaux, qui, avec le Président de la FIAMC constitueront le jury qui évaluera les travaux présentés. 1. Les cinq membres du jury devront être de pays différents, aussi éloignés que possible les uns des autres, mais il devra y avoir un portugais désigne par la Direction de l’Association des Médecins Catholiques Portugais, puisque le prix a été fondé par une institution portugaise. 2. Un des membres du jury doit être un prêtre ayant une connaissance profonde des problèmes éthiques et déontologiques, et un autre membre, au moins, Professeur de Éthique ou Déontologie Médicale dans une faculté de médecine.

Article 7: Le mois après la fermeture de la compétition, chaque membre du jury recevra une copie des travaux envoyés.

Article 8: Les décisions du jury seront sans appel. Celles-ci seront prises un mois avant la date de congrès par un vote à la majorité absolue ou relative. Une fois la décision connue, le Président du jury la transmettra à l’Association des Médecins Catholiques Portugais

Article 9: Le prix est indivisible. Le jury a le droit de ne pas l’accorder si les travaux présentés semblent inadéquats vis-à-vis des objectifs du prix, ou en désaccord avec la demande, et chaque fois que la littérature médicale éthique et déontologique ne fait pas bonne impression.

Article 10: Le Prix João XXI sera attribué lors d’une cérémonie officielle à l’ouverture de chaque Congrès de la FIAMC, au concurrent ou à son représentant.

Article 11: Dans le cas où il n’y aurait pas de concurrent, le jury peut accorder le Prix João XXI à un papier présenté au Congrès de la FIAMC qui, à son avis, répond le mieux aux critères établis des Articles 2 et 3.

Article 12: C’est la tâche de la FIAMC d’appliquer ce règlement, et de résoudre les cas litigieux toujours en accord avec le Bureau de l’Association des Médecins Catholiques Portugais.
JOHN XXI
THE PHYSICIAN WHO BECAME POPE
By Salvino Leone
SUMMARYIn the XII century a Portuguese doctor, Pedro Hispano, became Pope with the name of John XXI. Before his election to Peter’s throne, he was Professor of Medicine at the University of Siena and a quite famous philosopher. His Summulae Logicales was, probably, the most used study book of philosophy in his time. That is the reason why Dante Alighieri quotes him in the Divina Commedia. As a medical doctor he is remembered especially on account of his ophthalmological works and of the Thesaurus Pauperum, a mixture of health education and preventive medicine. He died crushed by the fall of his bedroom’s roof. Even when he was Pope he continued to practice the medical art, so that people said that his tragic death was God’s punishment because of the sorcery he practiced.
1. BIOGRAPHYYouth
Pedro Hispano (Peter of Spain)’s childhood and adolescence are enfolded in mystery, or at least marked by a great biographical uncertainty; conjectures are far more numerous than certainties. Some scholars, whose most authoritative contemporary representative is José Francisco Merinhos, doubt the single identity of this figure1. The life and works of Pedro Hispano, philosopher, physician and subsequently Pope should in fact be attributed to three different persons: a Dominican friar from Northern-Central Spain, a Portuguese philosopher, a Spanish physician who became Pope taking the name of John XXI. However, the documentation that has been provided, which we cannot summarize here, does not seem to be able to definitely and unmistakably demolish the sounder and more abundant documentation attesting to the uniqueness of the figure of Pedro Hispano. We will therefore follow the “traditional” thesis with more certainty.
Pedro (who later on will be nicknamed “hispano”) was born in Portugal, probably in Lisbon, between 1210 and 1220. Lisbon as Pedro’s place of birth is reported in the oldest accounts2, such as the Historia Satyrica written in the first half of the XIV century by the Franciscan friar Paolino, and the 1331 Cronica by M. Polonius.
His first biographer3, on the basis of some considerations concerning his election to the Papacy, fixed his date of birth in the year 1226, while more recent studies tend to anticipate it to the preceding decade4. Considering the more certain chronology of some future stages of his existence, plausible only if they refer to a young but not too young adult, I would also agree on a rather low dating: about 1210.
When he was born, he was given the second name Julião, like his father. In fact, he was the son of physician Julião Rebelo and of lady Teresa Gil, of noble lineage. Due to a mistake by some Italian chroniclers, in the past someone thought he belonged to the Medici Florentine family, only because in some texts the term medicus (actually a title, not a surname) is added to his name. As to the adjective Hispano, it is in all likelihood an onomastic attribute given to him during his student years in Paris. Other figures of the time carry the same nickname which refers to the whole Iberian peninsula, without any geographical distinction between Spain and Portugal. However, in the introduction to some of his works, he is clearly termed Pedro Hispano Portugalense.
The presence of his father, a physician, can certainly justify (as a sufficient, but not necessary, condition) the young man’s future orientation towards the medical art.
As all boys his age, his first “training agency”, as we like to call it now, was the Episcopal School where he attended the trivium and the quadrivium classes.
In order to carry on his studies, the young Pedro had no other alternative but to go and study abroad, since in Portugal the first steps towards a real university or “advanced school” were taken as late as in 1288. Naturally, this was not commonly done by all students: it was only a step which those who could afford it economically and above all those who had promising aptitudes and the will to do it took.
Perhaps on account of its fame or perhaps simply because it was nearby, Pedro went to Paris. Many of the studies tracing his biographical profile maintain that, since at the time St. Albert the Great was teaching in Paris, it is likely that the Portuguese student attended some of his classes. Even if possible, this supposition seems improbable. St. Albert, in fact, went to Paris to hold his commentary course to Peter Lombard’s Aphorisms in 1245. If we consider the certain date of 1247 when Pedro Hispano became professor at the University of Siena, it is impossible to place all the intermediate events that took place in the meanwhile within a pair of years only and, in any case, it is also improbable that this “newly-trained” youth was already a professor.

Medical training
Concerning the medical school he attended, there is also uncertainty. The two most probable hypotheses are Paris and Montpellier. In favour of the first, there is first of all the consideration that the young student would have known the school during his stay in Paris, and that he had to be fairly familiar with the Parisian student circles and, more in general, with Parisian circles. Moreover, in a manuscript from the XIV century now at the Vatican Library5 there is a brief text related to the medical observation of urine that ends as follows: “supplicium febris sublatum signat ab egris expliciunt versus brevilogi urinarum magistri petri yspani doctoris parisius cathedrati”
This seems to confirm that he graduated in Paris. However, the verb cathedrari is problematic, since we should not immediately assign to it a meaning analogous to that we intend today; moreover, such graduation is not necessarily to be referred to medicine6.
The hypothesis he attended medical school in Montpellier perhaps seems more likely. First of all because some documents discovered at the University of Montpellier mention one Pedro Hispano7 and it is improbable they refer to someone else. Moreover, while the University of Paris acquired its highest prestige in the years that followed Pedro Hispano’s hypothetical stay, the medical faculty of Montpellier at the time was already very famous.
There are also those who maintain that he was trained at the Medical School in Salerno8, but there is no proof to back this hypothesis. Even if it is probable that in his later stay in Siena he easily came into contact with people coming from that school. To confirm this, in his treatise De oculo Pedro Hispano asserts he had as magister meus Theodorus, medicus imperatoris. In the 5218 Harleian codex in the British Library there is an Epistola magistri Pedri Yspani ad imperatorem Fridericum super regimen sanitatis. But there is no witness of possible relations between Hispano and Frederick II when the latter was still alive9.

Professor of Medicine in Siena
Upon his return to Paris, Pedro received in his homeland the holy Orders and was sent by Alphonse III to the priorate of Mafra. However, this was but a brief interlude. From 1245 to 1250 Pedro Hispano taught Medicine at the University of Siena.
In 1246 the University of Siena had decided to develop its courses, thus increasing its prestige. For this reason, on the one hand young people were called to attend such renovated institution, on the other hand both in Tuscany and outside teachers in the different subjects were “recruited”10. Pedro Hispano’s presence (unless we want to attribute it to chance, such as his passing through Siena or the introduction on the part of some friend) already indicates he was rather famous.
Considered the division of Medicine into Physics and Surgery, Pedro Hispano taught Physical Medicine, devoting himself to Dietetics in particular. Prompted by Fantino, a surgeon friend of his, he wrote a small treatise in such discipline, on the most appropriate diet for the wounded. The Casanatese Library holds a preserved fragment of the text11. It seems the unknown commentator of the treatise did not have a particular liking for its author (once, just like today, people often manifested professional jealousy), since in the preserved fragment he literally states: “Petrus Hispanus parvae scientiae parvique intellectus, videns obtenebrositatem Rogerii Salernitanii, rogatus a Fantino cirurgico Senensi, contemplatus est dietam vulneratorum accidentium”.
For such teaching he received a fee of 10 Lire, rather scarce if he is compelled to sell for 7 Lire to Brother Bandino, prior of the monastery of Selva del Lago which belonged to the Hermit monks of Lecceto, his Bible, “written in large letters, on parchment, meticulously illuminated and bound in wood”12. Such information comes from the bill of sale of the precious object, which ended up, together with the other documents concerning suppressed religious Congregations, in the Siena State Archive. From the same document (dated February 5th, 1248)13 we learn that Pedro Hispano lived in Valle Piatta, then one of the poorest neighbourhoods of the city, a further indication of not quite flourishing economic circumstances.
We possess another document on Pedro Hispano’s passage through Siena. On January 11th, 1245 (or 1244 according to the Siena style14) in the presence of four witnesses, “magister Petrus Medicus, qui dicitur Yspanus is compelled not to offend her nor to have her be offended by someone else on account of the damage suffered and to pay 50 Lire to her if he should not keep such promise”. The document is rather obscure, but it is the oldest witness of Pedro Hispano’s presence in Siena.
If 1245 is the a quo date of his presence in Siena, 1250 is the ad quem date. The last documents we have, in fact, date back to 1250. Among the expenses paid by the municipality during the month of June, a series of payments are listed, given to several physicians: Bonaventura, Iohannino, Orlando and, of course, “Petro Spano”. Moreover, in the so-called “Biccherna Books”15 the fee paid to the “magistro Petro Spano, doctori in fisica” is reported.
Some of the “minor” works such as the Commentaries to Isaac Israeli’s treatises and to the works of Hippocrates and Galen certainly date back to the period of his stay in Siena16.

The ascent to the Pontificate
The decade following his teaching activity in Siena is a “hole” in his biography on which we have no certain documents. When and why does his teaching mandate end? Why does he go back to his native country?
In 1250 he is present at the Court of St. Mary of Guimarães as “magistrum Petrum Hispani decanum_ulixbonensem et archidiaconum bracarensem“17 and in the town of Braga we find him again in 1258 taking part in several royal acts.
As we mentioned, ten years later, during which we suppose he wrote most of his works, the name of Pedro Hispano appeared again in an apostolic letter by Pope Alexander IV, dated January 21st 1260. “Pedro Julião the Dean” was in Anagni and was sent by the Pope to arrange a loan needed to pay the expenses for the episcopal election of the future Bishop of Lisbon18. Besides the specific object of such letter, it is interesting to note how during the “obscure decade” Pedro Hispano not only had worked his way up within the Church, but had also earned the respect and trust of the Pope.
An analogous document, dated April 11th 1260, is also very interesting. It refers to a controversy between the Bishop together with the Coimbra Chapter and the prior of the monastery of Santa Cruz with the arbitration of Lisbon’s Archdeacon John of God and of Evora’s Bishop, D. Martinho. The second of the two contending parts had refused an earlier mediation on the part of King Alphonse III, who had sent as his delegate precisely Pedro Julião19. The document is a witness to the prestige Pedro Hispano enjoyed not only at the papal court but also at the royal court. On the other hand, it had been Alphonse III who had sent him to the Mafra priorate and it is probable that such high regard favored the acquisition of the subsequent ecclesiastical ranks.
Two other documents, dated respectively November 17th and 19th 1261 clearly inform us that at the time Pedro Hispano resided in Lisbon. In fact we read: “in civitate ulixiboñ., in domo venerabilis uiri Magistri Petri, decanj eiusdem ciuitatis”20 and “acta sunt haec apud ulixboñ., in domo Magistri Petri julianj, decani ulixiboñ.“21.
On December 31st 1262 (or 1261 according to another reading) he is in Viterbo, at the papal court and he signs as witness an agreement between the Cardinal of St. Sabine and Cardinal Ottobono Fieschi. The latter, who subsequently became Pope with the name Adrian V, kept him by his side as his personal physician. Such decision marks Pedro Hispano’s definitive access to the Papal court and at the same time the beginning of a fast acceleration of the above mentioned “career”.
In 1268 he became Gregory X’s pontifical archiater and in 1273 the Braga Chapter appointed him Archbishop. However, he covered such position for one year only: in 1274, during the Council of Lyon, the Pope in order not to remain without his personal physician, and to acknowledge his worth, appointed him Archbishop of Tuscolo, at the same time making him Cardinal.
Gregory X was followed by Innocent V and then by Adrian V (of whom Pedro Hispano had been the personal physician). Once the latter died, on September 20th 1276 Pedro Hispano was elected to Peter’s throne, after a rather tumultuous conclave, taking the name of John XXI22.
Among the first acts of his pontificate, ten days only after his election, there was the issuing of the bull Licet felicis with which the constitution of his predecessor and patient Gregory X (Ubi periculum, dated July 7th 1274) was repealed. The conclave had been established on the basis of such constitution. It had been precisely his troubled election (after three years during which the throne was vacant) to suggest to the citizens of Viterbo the stratagem of closing cum-clave the electing Cardinals inside the palace. Gregory X, on the basis of this personal experience, made such practice official. It was then suspended by John XXI but, after the pontificate of Nicholas III, Martin IV, Honorius IV, Nicholas IV and Celestine V it was reintroduced by Boniface VIII, essentially lasting till the present day.
Pedro Hispano had a simple and kind temper, and was influenced by Cardinal John Orsini who succeeded him in the pontificate with the name Nicholas III. Although by disposition he was modest and drawn to scholarly work rather than government matters, he threatened Alphonse X of Castile and Philip III of France with excommunication had they not made peace. Likewise, he devoted himself to the realization of the so-called “Italian peace” between Rudolph of Habsburg and Charles of Anjou.
These are the most salient facts of his political activity, but his activity within the Church is also very significant. Besides promoting the Crusade against the Turks, he attempted to realize the union between the Greek Church and the Roman Church, sealed by the Lyon Council that had been summoned by his predecessor Gregory X. Moreover, he prompted the Tartar kings to fight against the Saracens. His conciliatory nature did not prevent him from resolutely opposing the king of his native country, Portugal, in the face of a possible abuse of some rights of the Church.
On the level of orthodoxy, he was also very active. John XXI saw the errors tied to Averroistic approaches that seemed to be spreading at the University of Paris (defended above all by Sigieri of Brabante) and asked the Bishop, with the bull Flumen aquae vivae of April 28th 1277, to carry out an accurate investigation in order to let the Apostolic See intervene, since the Parisian University had to be like a “river of crystal clear water, vivifying souls with a doctrine of life”23. There are those who think, however, that together with the real concerns about orthodoxy there was a personal Agostinian matrix rather than Thomistic in the philosophical training of Pedro Hispano24.
We do not know which other things he could have accomplished during his pontificate, that lasted quite briefly and had a rather tragic ending. During the night of May 20th 1277, the new wing of the Papal palace in Viterbo gave way and buried under its rubble the Pope who had it made. Some said that it was God’s just punishment for him who, though he was a Pope, had kept practicing the magical arts. This is an obscurantist assertion of those who did not understand that the supreme Pontiff, not only sacerdos in aeternum but also and forever physician, kept reserving some limited space to his former profession. Since then he rests in the St. Lawrence cathedral in Viterbo.
2. THE PHILOSOPHICAL AND THEOLOGICAL WORKSAn overview
8 Philosophical works and 5 theological works are attributed to Pedro Hispano: the Summulae Logicales, in 12 volumes which in the Middle Ages were the most widespread school “textbook”; the Liber de Anima which discusses the question with the attention and competence of a physician with reference to some “physiological” implications; the commentaries to Aristotle: De morte et vita et de causis longitudinis et brevitatis vitae and the De Anima; the Tractatus maiorum fallaciarum; the Syncategoremata; the commentary Super de sensu et sensato.
As to theological publications, they are all comments to the Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagite: De celestio hierarchia, De ecclesiastica hierarchia; De divinis nominibus; Theologya mystica; Epistulae.

The “Summulae logicales”
Modern critics attribute this treatise to Pedro Hispano with certainty, even if during the Renaissance some critics maintained that it was not original but rather a simple translation of Michele Psello’s Sinossi sulla logica aristotelica (Synopsis on Aristotelian Logic)25. Actually, it has been later demonstrated that it was the Greek text (wrongly attributed to Psello) which was the translation of Pedro Hispano’s work26.
The work was admired by Salimbene Adami who, on account of it, terms its author “magnus sophysta, logycus et disputator atque theologus“27 and above all by Dante, who mentions him in the Divine Comedy (Par XII, 133):

“Ugo da San Vittore é qui con elli,
e Pietro Mangiadore e Pietro Hispano.
lo qual già luce in dodici libelli”

However, even such authoritative witness was questioned by those who maintain that Dante’s Pedro Hispano was in fact a homonymous preaching friar28. Such thesis was refuted with authority by Giovanni Petella, an Italian author who lived at the turn of the XIX century29, and was definitively demolished by other authors in the first half of the XX century30.
The modesty of their title notwithstanding, the Summulae are a real treatise subdivided into 12 books:

I. De propositionibus
II. De praedicabilibus
III. De praedicamentis
IV. De syllogismis
V. De locis
VI. De suppositionibus
VII. De fallaciis
VIII. De relativis
IX. De ampliationibus
X. De appellationibus
XI. De restritionibus
XII. De distributionibus

Such subdivision perfectly mirrors the one used in Medieval teaching. In fact, the first six books correspond to the treatises of Aristotelian logic31, while the remaining six illustrate the “new logic” of Scholasticism.
A scholar of Pedro Hispano rightly states, “the secret of the Summulae‘s spread, for they were used over a time span of three centuries and became a textbook at Paris University and in most European universities, is their simplicity and the orderly method its Author was able to give them. Bypassing any metaphysical considerations, the several subjects addressed are an excellent preparatory introduction to philosophy, without confusing students with discussions they could not handle”32.
William Shyreswood (who had probably been Pedro Hispano’s professor in Paris) and Lambert of Auxerre had written similar treatises. It was a trend of those times, since universities had become widespread and there was the need for synthetic “textbooks”: thanks to them, the student would not have to read from start to finish the largest works.
The text starts with a sort of praise of dialectics, which is the object of the first book. It is deemed superior to the other sciences for it allows people to discuss the very bases of the other disciplines. Then there is the analysis of formal logic with the classic rules of syllogism. All this, together with several mnemonic formulas that could help the student memorize the complex classifications and subdivisions of the subject.
The second part is certainly the more original, where Pedro Hispano examines carefully the analytical elements of discourse and identifies in words six properties: association, relation, expansion, appellative, contraction and subdivision. As someone rightly noted, rather than of formal logic we should speak of a true “verbal logic”33, not very distant from the premises of modern day language philosophy.

The “De anima”
Even if less famous than the previous treatise, the Scientia libri de anima is a summa of Pedro Hispano’s thought, as he himself states in the introduction34. Moreover, although it was, in the subject addressed and in the title itself, a common topic in the treatises of the time (but also of the previous period to which it referred), the work of Pedro Hispano differs on account of two reasons.
Firstly, he departs from the Arabist tendencies which the philosophy of the time had by then acquired. Secondly, there is a “psychological” and “medical” sensibility present in several parts of the text. Perhaps the most correct title (unthinkable at those times) would have been De homine because in fact it concerns man, who is, shall we say, “admired” and then analyzed in all his complexity: from the physiological to the spiritual dimension.
The first of the ten treatises that make up the work studies the essence of the soul as the source of life. The origin of inner life is in the heart (considered the seat of the soul) while the brain is considered “near” origin: “Prima autem origo virtutum motivarum a corde procedit, sed ipsarum cerebrum est proximum fundamentum”35, a sort of “psychosomatic theory”, if we may call it so, quite distant however from the organicism that will prompt Descartes to individuate in the pineal gland the seat of the synthesis between soma and psyche.
With an intuition we could even term “psychoanalytic” Pedro Hispano speaks of a strange virtus necis present in the soul (related to our modern death instinct?36) and at the same time he clearly identifies the survival instinct as the fundamental prerogative of the human being: “habent omnia appetitum innatum ad suam permanentiam acquirendam, et omnia propter hoc operantur, ut suam salvent existentiam”37. Such “existential” salvation is pursued both on a supernatural level in the religious tendency towards transcendency, and on an immanent level, in biological generation.
As to knowledge, the knowledge of principles (which we would call intellective knowledge) is clearly distinguished from the knowledge of singularities (i.e. sensible knowledge). The latter cannot be mistaken, while the first may fall into error. Sensible knowledge, on the other hand, disappears as soon as the species that determined it disappear, while intellective knowledge remains.
The way of sensible knowledge is then analyzed through the analysis of the five senses. It is here that the author shows his skill at biological introspection besides speculative introspection. In fact we can say that in many ways the physician emerges, rather than the philosopher.
The first of the senses analyzed is the sense of touch, with a wider semantic range than what we mean today, but at the same time much more modern than the purely physiological one. Modern psychosomatic theories consider the skin one of the privileged target organs, because it is the border of the physical self, the bodily barrier between the self and the world. In just this perspective it is said that the sense of touch “omnia quae corpus exterius et interius salvant et corrumpunt, apprehendit et nutrimenti essentia discernit, quae corpori tamquam machine ipsius generalis custos accomodatus est“38.
After few not quite interesting considerations concerning the sense of taste, the sense of smell is discussed. With a clear intuition of “comparative anatomy”, this is deemed essential in order for animals to recognize food from faraway. Moreover, unfortunately the Author pays a tribute to the knowledge of his time and maintains that since smells are carried by air, which was thought to be used for “cooling” the brain, they facilitate and make such action more pleasant.
Sight is analyzed in its physiogenesis. Its function is not an emission which starting from the eye strikes objects, nor is it a “spirit” coming out carried by the rays, but rather it is the specific action of colors struck by light and transmitted by a diaphanous medium. Though it is not deemed essential to the aims of biological life, sight is considered important for spiritual life as it allows one to know the perfection of things.
However, hearing is the fundamental sense in order to receive reality, while sight only allows us “to meet” reality. This shows the cultural background of a society which still relied heavily upon hearing, rather than upon sight, as our society does, where learning and knowledge were based essentially on listening and oral transmission. The identification of the “figures of sound”, which according to some remind one of the “sound forms” of Gestaltpsychologie39, and the understanding of movement as a necessary component for the genesis of sound represent a very modern approach to the subject.
From the “outer senses” the Author goes on to discuss the “inner senses” or, more appropriately, “mental functions”. Once more, the Author’s training, which was medical besides being philosophical, led him to describe such functions relying on the notions of pathology, showing therefore himself to be an “organicist”. Speaking of memory, for instance, its seat is situated at the back of the brain; if this part suffers a damage the function of memory, in relation to the extent of the damage, can be destroyed, reduced or modified40.
Imagination is distinguished from fantasy though they are both situated in the median part of the brain. Judgement is intended as the ability to “comprehend that which cannot be sensed in that which is sensed”, i. e. basically to perform a conceptual abstraction. With regard to affective life, “affective” virtues are distinguished from passions. As to movement, there are two fundamental types of movement: expansion and contraction. All other movements derive from these two, which are the only ones present in lower animals (such as shells), who only possess two senses: taste (for they feed themselves) and touch (for they relate to the outside world).
As to the true metaphysical treatment of the soul, it does not much differ from the Aristotelian tradition of the “three souls” (vegetative, sensitive and intellective) that progressively move into the human being. Naturally Pedro Hispano, just like all the followers of the Aristotelian theory, must come to terms with the unity of the human being. Thus, somewhat awkwardly, he speaks of the unity of substance or of the union among substances, or he compares the fact they appear progressively with their analogous progressive disappearance (“quod primus est in ortu, ultimum venit in occasu41“). For certain, the human soul preserves its substantial unity starting from its first appearance.
Concerning the theories of the intellective knowledge which the soul has of itself, of the world and of God, Pedro Hispano’s treatment is not very distant from the scholastic tradition. Once more, its main contribution does not rest in the fact that the philosophical research is original, but rather in its educational ability, and, above all, in the contributions a larger (medical) training basis has brought to purely speculative knowledge.

The Commentary to the Pseudo-Dionysius
The work of an unknown author of the end of the V century, subsequently translated into Latin also by authors of considerable stature such as Johannes Scotus Eriugena, Ambrose Traversari, Marsilio Ficino and others, is today known with the title of “Pseudo-Dionysius Aeropagite”. The “dionysiac” work, which is made up of four texts (Hyerarchy of Heaven, Hyerarchy of the Church, Divine Names, Mystical Theology, Epistles) was greatly appreciated in the Middle Ages, to the extent that Albert the Great and St. Thomas Aquinas wrote commentaries on it.
The Author, inspired by Neoplatonism, did not relinquish any Christian dogma, even if he has often been considered an Apollinarian, Monophysite and Monothelitist perhaps on account of the often convoluted, pompous language full of neologisms and of verbal periphrases in which he wrote. Pedro Hispano was aware of all this, and in his commentary he “popularized” it, trying to make an often obscure and surely redundant thought become intelligible. As a scholar rightly notes: “We could look upon Pedro Hispano as upon a Cicero of the Pseudo-Dionysius who explains to us, with much patience, the most complex passages of the master, taking them away from his confused and somewhat baroque style“42.
In fact in the Pseudo-Dionysius, besides the specific characteristics of its style, we find the verbal surges and convoluted thinking typical of mystics or of those who are concerned with mystical theology. There is a philosophical, more than theological, component which renders the text even more complex. We can just consider the ways of divine knowledge, which are differentiated in affirmative and negative. The latter, in a manner very similar to that of modern “apophatic” theology, indicate that “one cannot exactly say that God is something existing or comprehensible”. In truth His is a “super-existence” different from the existence of mortals. In a similar way, with regard to the Trinity, it is said to be super-good, super-divine, super-substantial, super-living, super-knowing, et cetera”.
3. THE MEDICAL WORKThe “Thesaurus Pauperum”
It is Pedro Hispano’s most important medical text, largely widespread throughout the Middle Age. It presents two basic characteristics: on the one hand the love for medical science (the work can, in fact, be considered one of the first treatises of preventive and social medicine), on the other hand the love for common people, for the “man in the street” as we would say today, for the “poor”, a category to which every sick person belongs.
In this work the aphorism of the Hippocratic school: “where there is love for the (medical) art there is love for man” is fully represented.
From the XII to the XVIII century the Thesaurus Pauperum, of which we have some seventy manuscripts (many of them in Italy)43, had several editions and translations: nine Portuguese, twenty-four Spanish, seventeen French, five English and thirteen Italian. The latter are especially important, above all on account of their antiquity (the first ones appeared in Florence, by Bartolomeo de Libri, and in Venice, by Gioani Ragazo and Gioani Maria Compagni in 1494).
Some scholars think that the treatise was written in Italian, rather than in Latin. Pedro Hispano would thus have written it when he was teaching at the University of Siena. Such supposition is, however, improbable since although the book intends to spread the subject matter, it is nonetheless a scientific text, and the language of science was exclusively Latin. Rather, a possible “vernacularization” would have been made in French, not in Italian44.
The analysis of the different manuscripts indicates that the original text was greatly manipulated and integrated sometimes by inserting in its body the marginal notes of some commentator, sometimes by filling up the empty spaces between one chapter and the next. Without possessing the original manuscript, it is difficult to ascertain with certainty which one was the draft, even if we can surely draw near to it on the basis of a careful critical examination of the texts and of the reconstruction of the main “manuscript families”.
The Author (whose name does not appear in all the manuscripts) writes a popular didactic work, to be used by medicine students, collating texts and aphorisms by other authors, common knowledge of the pharmacopoeia of the time, ordinary praxes and, certainly, also proposing his personal contributions. It is not always easy to discern the different attributions, and in any case, in the style of that period, this was not extremely important after all.
The Thesaurus Pauperum combines the history of philology with the history of medicine; interestingly, it abundantly presents what had to be XIII century “medical Latin”, that was of course different from classical Latin but, in some respects, also from the Medieval spoken Latin that was being vernacularized at the time.
The text we refer to here is the one reconstructed, in its wording and in the sequence of the chapters, by Maria Helena da Rocha Pereira. It is made up by a prologue, by the systematic treatment of the subject in 68 chapters, by a Treatise on fevers and by an appendix which features different contents: practical remedies, classification of substances, index of drugs, etc.
The Prologue, in the style of the time but also on account of the particular religious sensibility of the author, opens the work in the name of the Trinity and of “Christ Physician”, relating human science to the source of all knowledge from which it derives: “In the name of the Holy, undivided Trinity who created all things giving everything its own virtue, by which the wise were given their wisdom and scientists their science, I undertake a work that is superior to my strength. I confide in the help of the Holy Trinity who through us brings all of our actions to conclusion, like through an instrument. And I ask that this work be called Thesaurus of the Poor, offering it to Him who is called Father of the Poor”.
After a firm exhortation to know the origin of evils and the related remedies, there follows a brief reminder, surely of Hippocratic matrix, but fully in line with Christian sensibility, concerning some basic deontological rules: “Refrain carefully and faithfully from prescribing drugs to induce death or abortion or to take pregnancy away, seduced by money or by the vanity of love“.
After the above, with a humorous rather than religious association of ideas, he states that since Christ is the head of the faithful, we shall start with the diseases of the head, to get to the feet. Then the several chapters follow, which we list in their totality devoting later on particular attention to some more meaningful passages:

1. De casu capillorum 1. Hair loss
2. Contra ortum capillorum 2. Against hair growth
3. De pustules capitis 3. Head pustules
4. De litargia 4. Lethargy
5. De frenesi 5. Frenzy
6. De dolore capitis 6. Headache
7. De epilepsia 7. Epilepsy
8. De dolore oculorum 8. Eye pain
9. De infirmitate aurium 9. Ear diseases
10. De gutta rosacea 10. Gout rosacea
11. De dolore dentium et gingivarum 11. Toothache and sore gums
12. De fluxu sanguinis narium 12. Blood flow from the nostrils
13. De paralisis linguae 13. Paralysis of the tongue
14. De squinantia45 14. Sore throat
15. De aegritudinis pectoris 15. Diseases of the chest
16. De sincopi et inanitizione 16. Syncope and lypothymy
17. De nausea et singultu 17. Nausea and hiccups
18. De lesione pulmonis 18. Lung lesions
19. De pleuresi46 19. Pleurisy
20. Ad laxandum ventris 20. To release the bowels
21. De nimio fluxu ventris 21. The scarce flow of the bowels
22. De colica et iliaca passione 22. Colics and iliac suffering
23. De tenasmone 23. Tenesmus
24. De vermibus et lumbricis 24. Worms and earthworms
25. De emorroidibus 25. Haemorrhoids
26. De exitu ani 26. Prolapse of the anus
27. De opilatione hepatis 27. Liver surgery
28. De ydropisi 28. Dropsy
29. De opilatione splenis 29. Spleen surgery
30. De icteritia 30. Jaundice
31.De opilatione lapidis vesice et reunum 31. Kidney stones and bladder stones surgery
32. De stranguria 32. Strangury
33. De pruritu virgae 33. Penis itch
34. De fluxu urinae 34. Urine flow
35. De inflatione testium 35. Tumefaction of the testes
36. De passione virgae 36. Penis diseases
37. Ad ocitum excitandum 37. To favour coitus
38. De suffucatione libidinis 38. To suffocate lust
39. De duritiae et apostematae matricis47 39. Uterus hardening and abscess
40. De provocatione menstruorum 40. Induction of the menses
41. De nimio fluxu menstruorum 41. Reduced menstrual flow
42. De mamillarum infirmitatibus 42. Breast diseases
43. De suffucatione matricis 43. “Suffocation of the matrix”
44. De impedimento conceptus 44. Obstacle to conception
45. Ut mulier concipiat 45. To induce conception
46. Contra difficlem partum 46. Against difficult delivery
47. De dolore post-partum 47. Post-partum pain
48. De gutta arthetica et podagra 48. Arthritic gout and podagra

The remedies proposed are the ones common to the herbal pharmacopoeia of the time (acacia, ribwort, cinnamon, henbane, mallow, rue, verbena, etc.) or the ones based on the authority of the ancient masters (Galen, Dioscorides, Cyranides, etc.). Both types are more or less useless but at list safe. Others instead, equally effective, compelled the poor wretch to perform a series of distasteful procedures:
“Colics and iliac suffering. The application of excrement found in horses’ stables – in the most advanced stage of decomposition, in the place where they urinate – roasted with oil rubbed together with them alleviates pain” (n. XXII)
“Sore throat. Dip a silk thread in the blood of a rat and swallow it: it is very good for your throat. Like wise, gargling and an external compress made with the excrements of a white dog” (n. XIV)
I will not go into the other prescriptions whose repugnant character had already prompted Monti to denigrate Pedro Hispano’s text, maintaining that it should rather have been called:
“Tesoro d’inaudite sciocchezze in fatto di medicina (…) stoltissima e schifosissima fabbricazione di medicamenti, nei quali è raro che non entri l’urina e lo sterco d’ogni genere d’animali, fino ai menstrui delle donne da inghiottirsi dai poveri infermi come giulebbi”48
“Thesaurus of unheard of nonsense in relation to medicine (…) most foolish and disgusting invention of medications, where more often than not the urine or faeces of all sorts of animals are involved, to the point of presenting women’s menstruations to be swallowed by poor sick persons as syrup”
There is another interesting feature, although not very common, i.e. the mixture of an empirical basis with magic-devotional elements:
Against delivery problems. Many say that some shavings of date stones together with wine can miraculously induce childbirth since in the place where the Virgin Mary gave birth there was a palm-tree.
Eye pain. Three twigs of strapwort picked in the name of the Holy Trinity, reciting once the Our Father. Hung around the neck inside a linen cloth, they surely take away the (visual) spot.
To stimulate coition. If the husband takes along the heart of a cornicis and the woman that of a female, they will always live in harmony. Likewise, if (he) takes along a thistle root (he) will no longer suffer the Devil’s temptations. Likewise, if he hides such root underneath his clothes, the Devil shall confess who he is and where he comes from, and he will take flight. And if during the new moon, at sunrise, a hoopoe is flying and you swallow its heart still beating, you will know all that has been in the minds of men as well as heavenly matters.
Finally, a piece of information that seems interesting not only with regard to the history of Medicine, but also to the history of Theology is found in a prescription concerning the ways to prevent conception, i.e. contraceptives. The remedies are herbal (peony, nettle juice, poplar leaves, etc.) or animal (bone of cow’s heart, milch cow’s ears, scolopendra pedicels) or, if we may call them so, “ritual” (castor-oil plant grains to be placed on the placenta after delivery for as many years as the woman wishes to remain sterile, passing over the menstrual blood of another woman, etc.). In any case the subject is interesting not so much on account of the pharmacopoeia used, but rather of its common acceptance. The physician who later became Pope, his religious ideas notwithstanding (above all the powerful Augustinian tradition), does not enter in the merits of a possible guiltiness (however, at the beginning of his treatise he had condemned abortion and any provoked death) but rather provides, with scientific objectivity, the available remedies. Perhaps he clearly perceived the different ethical value of such act and, since he was a physician who understood people’s problems, he tried to intervene without underlining an excessive disvalue in it.

The “Regimen sanitatis”
This small text, whose most ancient manuscript dates back to the XIII – XIV century, is held by the Munich Bayerishe Staatsbibliothek. It is a small jewel in its genre, and it represents one of the first treatises of preventive medicine. This can be seen by the name given to it by its Author, Summa de conservanda sanitate. In dealing with the subject matter he cannot but refer to the classic theory of the “four humours” with a surprisingly modern approach. The text starts as follows: “I, Pietro Hispano, considering that several diseases are caused in the human body by negligence, found and truly applied some useful things which I have tested in order to preserve the health of human life, which are not found in the medical art.”
The text starts with some health rules to be observed in the morning as soon as one wakes up: carefully washing oneself, eating breakfast, etc. There follow some pieces of advice concerning the diet.
With a style common to similar treatises of the time, advice is then provided in relation to the different seasons of the year. It may make us smile, but it does not differ much from what we read today on the pages of many magazines.
This first section is followed by another section entitled “Things which are beneficial and harmful”. The Author makes a list of the different organs (head, eyes, teeth, heart, stomach, liver, lungs), and presents some beneficial or harmful substances or practices, naturally inviting the readers to practice the first and avoid the latter.
Finally, in the third part of the book, the “safeguard of health” is discussed (qui vult custodire sanitatem). The Author provides dietary advice whose validity we will not stop to consider here, and other prescriptions concerning baths, the use of “cupping glasses” or of repercussives.

De Regimine Sanitatis
At the time, medical schools or individual physicians of some renown were used to write popular texts with the purpose, as we would say today, of providing a “health education”. Very often such works were in verse, or in the style of an epistle dedicated to an illustrious figure.
In this line Pedro Hispano wrote this small dissertation addressed to Frederick the Emperor. Following a usual scheme derived from Hippocrates, it presents dietary advice for the twelve months of the year.

Liber de morbis oculorum
This text was authoritatively quoted by the members of the Accademia della Crusca, a Florentine literary academy, as many as five times, by virtue of some terminological peculiarities it presented. However, they made the mistake, later on repeated by other scholars, of considering it a simple transcription of chapter VII of the Thesaurus Pauperum49.
There exists a manuscript codex of this text from the XV century, which once belonged to Francesco Redi, and on which the edition we are citing is based50. We do not know in which language the original text, which many cite as Liber de morbis oculorum or De oculo, was written (Latin or “vernacular”?).
It is interesting to note that precisely during the pontificate of John XXI in Viterbo there are two other great Middle Ages optics scholars, i.e. Witelo from Silesia, author of a famous Perspectiva, and Jean Peckam, author of the Perspectiva communis51, probable indication of a “cultural coterie” (if we may call it so) which had grown around issues related to sight.
The treatise, entitled Libro degli occhi (Book of Eyes), is divided into 55 chapters and it is probably the most authoritative “ophthalmology treatise” of antiquity. The first 41 chapters are dedicated to eye pathology while the remaining are a sort of small treatise which stands by itself, Di certe acque utili agli occhi (Some waters useful to the eyes).
After a brief anatomical description (which distinguishes in the organ 7 tunicas and 3 humours), 27 eye diseases are listed and analyzed briefly. We are quoting them in their original terminology. Some terms are clearly and easily understood (even if the description does not always correspond to the modern understanding of the disease), others are understood with more difficulty. As to the latter, we will not go into any semiological interpretation, which in any case would be hardly reliable: obtalmia, viscositade, emfiaturta, accubito, triemito (tremor), durezza (hardness), soperchi peli, pizzicore (itch), orzaiuolo (sty), peccia cioè tarfa, pidocchi (lice), unghia (nail), peli travolti, situtto o vero sabel, favo, cancro (cancer), formica, enfiagione (swelling), gangola, uva, cadere de’ peli de’ cigli (fall of eyelashes), acqua che discende (water falling), amato, fezzamento, gragnuola, petrosezza, carattilla, fistola (fistula), carattera, rogna (scabies), siaberet .
Other diseases are not rigorously defined with a specific terminology, but their effects are described: de la pochezza del vedere (seeing little), de l’acqua che viene nell’occhio (the water that comes in the eye), del perdere del vedere (losing one’s sight), del panno che viene nell’occhio (the pannus that comes in the eye).
Therapeutic remedies include a herbal pharmacopoeia which is still in use today (i.e. chamomile compresses) together with other more questionable remedies and some extravagant and picturesque aids such as eyebaths with the urine of a virgin male child, lizard decoctions, and even…usare con femmina (sleeping with a woman).
Naturally the chapters on the waters that are useful to the eyes deserve special attention. The readers should not expect a precursory discussion on medical hydrology. It is rather a further collection of prescriptions integrating the remedies introduced earlier.
At the end, some particular medicines are grouped together, such as eye drops and ointments.
The modernity of some concepts is remarkable, such as the notion that eye medicines should be administered often, or the generic advice to refrain from smoke and dust in the case of inflammatory diseases. Finally, the Author notes how cerebral diseases may influence eye movements and the visus52.
BIBLIOGRAPHYANTUNES J., O percurso e o pensamento politico de Pedro Hispano, Actas do Congresso Internacional “IX Centenário da dedicação da sè de Braga”, Braga 1990, pp. 126-184
BERGER A.M., Die Ophtalmologie des Petrus Hispanus mit deutscher Übers, und Kommentar, München 1899
BRAZÃO E., João XXI, o único papa português in “Anais da Academia Portuguesa de Historia 12 (1980) pp. 385-403
CRAVEIRO DA SILVA R., Pedro Hispano (177-1977) ála luz dos últimos estudos in “Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia” 33 (1977) pp.113-123
DA CRUZ PONTES J.M., A obra filosofica de Pedro Hispano portugalense: novos problemas textuales, Universidade de Coimbra, Coimbra 1972
— — Pedro Hispano Portugalense e as controversias doutrinasis do sec. XIII, Instituto de Estudos Filosoficos 1964 (tesi dottorale)
— — Para situar Pedro Hispano portugalense na historia da filosofia in “Revista Portuguesa
de Filosofia” 24 (1968) pp.21-45
DA GAMA CAEIRO F., Novos elementos sobre Pedro Hispano in “Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia”, 22 (1966) pp.157-174
DA ROCHA PEREIRA M.H., A obra médica de Pedro Hispano in “Memórias da Academia de Ciências de Lisboa” 18 (1977) pp.193-208
— — , Obras médicas de Pedro Hispano, Acta Universitatis Conimbrigensis, Combra 1973
DE CAIRES A., O perfil psicologico do Papa João XXI, Accão Medica (1946) pp.148-165
DE RIJK L.M., On the life of Peter of Spain in “Vivarium” 8 (1970) 123-154
DI FERDINANDO R. , L’oculistica di Papa Giovanni XXI in “Realtà Nuova”, 35 (1960) 651-661
GHIBELLINI M., Il “Libro degli occhi” di Pietro Hispano, Atti del XXI Congresso Internazionale di Storia della Medicina, Siena 1968, II Roma s.i.d., 1139-1149
KÖHLER J.T. Vollständige Nachricht von Pabst Johann XXI, welcher unter dem Nahmen Petrus Hispanus als ein gelerh Artz und Weltweiser berühmt ist, Göttingen, bey Victorinus Bossiegel, 1760
LAURENT M.H., Il soggiorno di Pietro Hispano a Siena, , Nuova Serie, IX (1938) pp.42-47
MEIRINHOS, J. F., Pedro Hispano Portugalensis? Elementos para uma diferenciação de autores, Revista Española de Filosofia medieval, 3 (1966) pp.51-76
MOREIRA DA SE’ A., Pedro Hispano e a crise de 1277 da Universidade de Paris, in “Boletin da Biblioteca da Universidade de Comibra” XXII (1955) pp.221-241
MOREAU J., Un Pape portugais: Jean XXI dénomé Pierre d’Espagne in “Teoresi” 34 (1979) pp.391-407
PARAVICINI BAGLIANI A., La cour des papes au XIIIe siècle, Hachette, Paris 1995
— — Medicina e scienze della natura alla corte dei papi nel Duecento, Centro Italiano di Studi sull’Alto Medioevo, Spoleto 1991
SCHIPPERGERS H., Artz im Purpur, in “Materia Medica Nordmark” XIII/15 (1961) 591-600
SEVERAL AUTHORS, Numero monografico su Pedro Hispano, Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia, 8 (1952)
STAPPER R., Papst Iohannes XXI in “Kirchengeschichtichen Studien”” IV, fasc. 4 Münster 1898
— — Pietro Hispano e il suo soggiorno in Siena, “Bollettino senese di Storia Patria”, XXVIII (1921) p.426
ZAMBRINI F., Volgarizzamento del trattato della cura degli occhi di Pietro Spani, Bologna 1873The last encyclical by John Paul II, Fides et ratio, presents a complex and extensive treatment of the theme of the relationship between philosophical knowledge and religious faith. In such wider frame there is also the alleged conflict between science and faith. The “Galileo case” is often mentioned as an emblematic example of such alleged conflict. Actually there are other significant, though not very well known, examples whereby a positive union between science and faith has been realized. John XXI is a brilliant witness to this, a Pope who ascended Peter’s throne after having been a first-class physician, in fact who kept practicing medicine even when he was Pope. Professor at the University of Siena, he wrote what is probably the first treatise of “social medicine”, bringing into medical works a powerful humanitarian impetus and a particular attention to the poor. In this sense he can surely be considered a true precursor of modern bioethics. The study by Salvino Leone we are presenting is one of the very few contributions originally written in the Italian language to the knowledge of this figure who would deserve a more careful historical and ecclesiastical memory.
FOOTNOTESI wish to acknowledge the following persons for their prompt and useful collaboration: Miguel Sanchez, Professor of History of Medicine at the Complutense University in Madrid; P. Jorge Texeira de Cuñha, Professor of Moral Theology at the Porto Faculty of Theology; Walter Osswald, Professor of Pharmacology at Lisbon University, former President of the World Federation of Catholic Medical Associations.1. J.F. Meirinhos, Petrus hispanus Portugalensis: elementos para uma difereciação de autores, in “Revista Española de Filosofia medieval” 3 (1996) pages 51-76
2. Cf. T. Carreras Y Artau E J. Carreras Y Artau, Historia de la Filosofia Española, Madrid, 1939, I, pages 101-103
3. J.T. Koehler, Vollständige Nachricht von Pabst Johann XXI welcher unter dem Nahmen Petrus Hispanus als ein gelehter Arzt und Weltweiser berühmt ist, Göttingen, bei Victorinus Bossiegel, 1760.
4. Cf. J.M. Da Cruz Pontes, Para situar Pedro Hispano Portugalense na história da filosofia, in “Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia” 24 (1968) p. 23.
5. Cod. Vat. Lat. 2661, fol. 62 v. (in Da Cruz Pontes, op. cit. , p. 32)
6. Cf. Da Cruz Pontes, op. cit., p.33
7. S. Tavares, Pedro Julião, vida e obra, Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 8 (1952) p. 237
8. P. Stella and A.M. Moschetti, Enciclopedia Filosofica, Sansoni, Florence 1957, III, col. 1377; D. Odon Lottin, Exposicão sobre os livros do Beato Dionísio Areopagita in “Bullettin de Théologie ancienne et médiévale”, VIII (1961) p. 975; J. Carreras Y Artau e J. Tusquets Terrats, Apports Hispaniques à la Philosophie Chrétienne de L’Occident, Louvain-Pairs, 1962, p.16.
9. A. Paravicini Bagliani, Medicina e scienze della natura alla corte dei papi nel Duecento, Centro Italiano di Studi sull’Alto Medioevo, Spoleto 1991, 77-78.
10. A. Zdekauer, Sulle origini dello Studio Senese, Siena 1898, p. 16 ff.
11. Cod. lat. 1382 f. 28 (quoted by R. Stapper, Pietro Hispano ed il suo soggiorno in Siena, in “Bollettino senese di Storia Patria”, XXVIII (1921) p.426
12. Diplomatico, Prov. S. Salv. in Lecceto 1247, 5 February, Siena State Archive, Suppressed Congregations Fund
13. As Laurent rightly observes, the document is wrongly dated 1547 because in Siena (just like in Florence) the year started on March 25, date of the Annunciation (Il soggiorno di Pietro Hispano a Siena in “Bollettino Senese di Storia Patria”, Nuova Serie, IX (1938) 42-47)
14. Cf. preceding note.
15. Biccherna was the name used for the town Treasury in Siena from the 13th to the 18th century. Its registers, the so-called “Biccherna books”, are of great historical and also artistic value, since the front part of the binding is painted. Such boards are also called biccherne.
16. Ib., 36
17. PMH, Leges et consuetudines, I, 185, 687, 689, 693. Cited by F. Da Gama Caeiro, Novos elementos sobre Pedro Hispano, Rev. Port. de Filosofia, 22 (1966) pages 157-174.
18. AV. Reg. Vat. 25, fl 257 (for all these documents: F. Da Gama Caeiro, op. cit).
19. ANTT, Sé de Coimra, Cabido da Sé, maço 16, n. 27
20. ANTT, Sé de Coimbra, Pontifícios, maço 4
21. ANTT, Sé de Comibra, maço 3, n. 45
22. Actually, the last Pope named John had been John XIX (1024-1032), but due to an error in numbering Pedro Hispano, instead of the succession sequence number XX, was assigned the XXI.
23. J.M. Da Cruz, op. cit., 24
24. A. Callebaut, Jean Pecham, O.F.M. et l’augustinisme. Aperçus historiques (1236-1285) in “Archivium Franciscanum Historicum” XVIII (1925), pages 460-461 (quoted by Da Cruz, ib.)
25. E. Ehinger, Synopsis organi Aristotelici Michaele Psello auctore, Wittemberg 1579
26. C. Thurot, Revue Critique d’Histoire et de Literature, n. 13 (1867) pages 194-203. Actually the thesis had already been refuted in volume 160 of Migne’s Greek Patrology, attributing to the Byzantine patriarch Gennadios (1400-1464) the translation into Greek of Pedro Hispano’s work (J.M. Da Cruz Pontes, op. cit., pages 18-19). For a more comprehensive critical study of the whole issue cf. R. Stapper, Die Summulae logicales des Petrus Hispanus und ihr Verhältnis zu Michael Psellus” in “Festschrift zum elfhundertjähren Jubiläeum des deutschen Campo Santo in Rom”, Freiburg 1897, pp.130-138.
27. Chronica fratris Salimbene de Adam Ordinis Minoris, in “Monumenta Germaniae Historica”, Holder-Egger, Nannoverae et Lipsiae 1913, XXXII, p.304.
28. Benvenuto Rambaldi from Imola was the first to put forth such doubt towards the end of the XIV century, followed by other critics in the XVIII century and by HD. Simonin at the beginning of the XX century.
29. G. Petella, Sull’identità di Pietro Ispano, medico in Siena e poi papa col filosofo dantesco in “Bollettino senese di Storia Patria”, 1899, VI, pages 277-329
30. M.H. Laurent, M. Grabmann e B. Geyer, all quoted by Da Cruz Pontes, op. cit., p.23.
31. More specifically: De propositionibus to the “Perihermeneias” – On interpretation; De predicabilibus to the Commentary to the Isagoge by Porphyry; De praedicamntis to the Categories; De Syllogismis to the Prior Analytics; De Locis to the Topics; De Fallaciis to the Sophistical Refutations (C. Abranches, Pedro Hispano e as “Summulae Logicales”, Rev. Portuguesa de Filosofia. 8 (1952) p. 252
32. C. Abranches, op, cit., 255
33. Id., 259
34. Pedro Hispano, Scientia libri de anima, publicados e anotados por Manuel Alonso, S.I., Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas, Madrid, 1941
35. De anima, 107
36. D. Martins, O “De Anima” de Pedro Hispano, in “Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia”, 8 (1952) 263
37. De anima, 157
38. De anima, 237
39. D. Martins, op.cit., 274
40. See De anima 326-327
41. De anima, 378
42. M. Martins, Os Comentarios de Pedro Hispano ao Pseudo-Dionisio Areopagita, Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia, 8 (1952) p. 314
43. Eight are held by the Central National Library and one is held by the Medicea-Laurenziana Library in Florence; one is held by the Archiginnasio Public Library in Bologna; one by the Padua University Library; four by the Siena Public Library; one by the Rome Casanatese Library; nine by the Vatican Apostolic Library (M.H. Da Rocha Pereira, Obras Médicas de Pedro Hispano, Coimbra University 1972, to whom I owe much with regard to this section)
44. Id., 4
45. Sore throat, angina
46. Ancient term for pleuritis
47. Abscess
48. Quoted (without further bibliographic indications) in F. Zambrini, Volgarizzamento del trattato della cura degli occhi di Pietro Spano, Gaetano Romagnoli, Bologna 1873, XIV
49. Ib. VIII
50. Op. cit.
51. A. Paravicini Bagliani, op. cit., 131-133
52. Op. cit. chapter 14.