JOHN OF SALISBURY’S ENTHETICUS
AND THE CLASSICAL TRADITION
OF SATIRE
Ronald E. Pepin
John of Salisbury's m o d e r n reputation depends chiefly on his prose
writings.
The Metalo g i c o n and P olicr a t i c us h a v e establ i s h e d the author's
p osition as an eminent Christian h u m anist of the twelfth century.
In fact,
his name is usually discovered amidst c l u s tered superlatives and confident
affirmations of his enormous influence, especially in contexts w h i c h i n ­
volve the classics.
F o r example, F r e d erick Artz refers to J o h n as "the
m ost gifted Latin stylist of his age, and the most learned classical s c h o l ­
ar,"1 while to Charles Homer Haskins he was simply "the b e s t classical
scholar of the age."
2
These statements are typical and w h o l l y familiar
to students of John's life and work.
However, one literary c o ntribution
strongly imbued w it h the humani s t i c spirit remains largely u n n o t i c e d among
John of Salisbury's writings.
The E n t h e t i c u s de Dogmate P h i l o s o p h o r u m , a
p o e m of 926 elegiac distichs, is John's m a j o r work in v e r s e . 3
Literary historians of the M iddle Ages, with few exceptions, have
haltingly dismissed or m e r e l y a c k nowledged the Entheticus. T o W r i g h t and
4
Sinclair it was simply "a curious p o e m . "
Hans Liebeschutz refer r e d to
the w o r k as an "introductory poem," and P r o f essor C h r i s t o p h e r B rooke f o l ­
lowed this v i e w in calling it a fragment, a "first draft" of the P o l i c r a ­
ticus. "*
Yet, the piece offers an important eclectic s urvey o f p h i l o s o p h i ­
cal doctrines in its more narro w l y didactic portions, and i m p o rtant in­
sights into social aubses in its satirical passages.
This p a p e r concentrates
o n the latter:
satire of vices in the schools, court, and cloister and,
especially, the influence of classical satire on John of Salisbury.
The Enth eti c u s w a s composed in 1155 or 1156 a n d w a s d e d i cated to
Chancellor Thoma s à Becket.
ly for this dating:
One section of the p o e m itself argues s t rong­
lines 1435-1522, in w hi c h J o h n d e s c ribes the efforts
of Becket to recall the royal court from scandalous ways b y conforming for
a time to its d e p r a v e d customs.
This insin u a t i o (John's term) indicates
an early stage in the polit i c a l activities of Becket, for such a ruse could
h a r d l y have b e e n u n d e r t a k e n after a long p e r i o d of residence at court and
p a r t i cipation in its affairs.
The Entheticus, then, appeared at a time of abounding satire.
Be­
fore the mi d - t w e l f t h century, a tide of invective against institutions had
begun to flow, and it d i d not abate for more than a century.
course, the age of the vagantes and the m on astic diatribe.
This was, of
The vices of
church, court and clois t er were favorite targets of vitriolic wit.
Monks,
magistrates, innkeepers, and, of course, "femina foetida" were fond o b ­
jects of vehement satire.
Student writers, trained in cathedral schools,
b o r r o w e d liberally f r o m Horace, Persius, and Juvenal to attack c o n t e m p o ­
rary abuses.
John of Salisbury's b a c k g r o u n d and p e r s o n a l i t y a c c orded perfe c t l y
w i t h this t ur bulent age of satire.
He was a student for twelve y ears on
the continent, an intimate observer of court life t h rough his clerical p o ­
sition, and a w id e l y - t r a v e l l e d e c c l esiastical emissary.
Furthermore, John
was a m a n of robust h u mo u r and distin c t i v e literary gifts.
He d r e w upon
h is talents, experiences, and, perhaps, a m e a s u r e of h a s t y i ndignation to
p ro d u c e his own satire in the classical tradition.
As noted above, the p o e m is n o t e n tirely satirical.
M u c h o f the
text surveys ancient p h i l o s o p h i c a l doctrines, i n terspersed w i t h J ohn's cri­
tical observat i ons a n d culmin a t i n g in the assertion that all p a g a n tenets
y i e l d to Chris ti an teaching.
The d i s t i n c t l y satirical p o r tions of the
poem, however, r es u l t in a farrago, a m i x e d dish.
F o r example, early in
the work, as p a r t of J o h n ' s defence of the v e rbal arts, h e ridicules
schools w h i c h d e ni g r a t e the t r ivium and q uadri v i u m in favour of a quick,
pract i c a l course in "natural eloquence."
In taking u p this theme, to w h i c h
he w o u l d return in the M e t a l o g i c o n , J o h n v i v idly p o r trays his enemies as
boors w h o care nothing for serious studies:
Sic nisi complacito p ueris sermone loquaris,
Conspuet in faciem g a rrula turba tuam.
Si sapis auctores, v e t e r u m si scripta recenses,
Ut statuas, si q u i d forte probare velis,
Undique clamabunt "vetus h i e quo tendit asellus?
Cur ve t e r u m nobis dicta vel acta refert?
A nobis sapimus, d ocuit se nostra juventus,
N on recipit v e t e r u m dogmata n ostra cohors,
Non onus accipimus, ut e o r u m verba sequamur,
Quos h a b e t auctores Graecia, Roma colit."
(39-48)
The poet's use of ironic w i t and dialogue in this p o r t i o n of the
Entheticus is clearly in the Roman satirical tradition.
His repetitions
of auctores and veteres contrast n i cely with the negative connotations of
pueris, nostra j u v e n t u s , and n ostra cohors by w h i c h he characterizes the
immature defamers of Greece and Rome.
John u nderscores the ignorance of
his boasting opponents by condemning them through their own w o r d s , m u c h as
6
Horace did w i t h his bore.
Before the lengthy speech ends, the br as h
spokesman for a speedy, p r a c t i c a l course has shown h i m s e l f to be a v a i n ­
glorious, naive trifler.
John can finally dispose of this c r o w d by a s ­
serting its madness:
Insanire pûtes p otius q u a m p h i l o s o p h a r i ,
Seria sunt e tenim cuncta m o l esta nimis.
Dulces cun t n u g a e , v u l t u m sapientis abhorrent;
Tormenti genus est saepe videre librum.
(119-22)
The main satirical thrust of the Entheticus comes in the long s e c ­
tion which concludes the work.
Here (1283-1852) the author d i rects his
scathing wit against the folly of the royal court, tyranny, m o n a s t i c h o s ­
tels, and a host of rampant vices.
This final p o r t i o n of the p o e m best
illustrates John of Salisbury's debt to the classics.
John's grammar studies h a d imparted to h i m a clear impres s i o n of the
nature of satire and the chief ancient p r a ctitioners of the genre.
Al­
though the Roman satirists d iffer in tone and attitude, they e m p l o y a
c ommon core of themes and techniques w h i ch shape the g e n r e . ^
J o h n of
Salisbury m i g h t not have d i st inguished literary types with the p r e c ision
of our s p e c i al ize d age, b u t he was confidently aware of classifications
b a s e d on form and content.
T hough he freely adapted classics to his own
purposes, as rec e n t resear c h e s have clearly demons t r a t e d he reverenced
the auctores and cited t h e m often.
Thus, pe rhaps m i n d f u l of Quintilian,
he speaks of T erence as "comicus" and C icero as "orator."
fers to a satirist, he employs the term "ethicus."
When John re­
This is his title for
Horace and Juvenal, w h o m he also designates b y the adjective "satiricus."
0
The word s are fittingly applied to the E nthet i c u s also, for moral
purpose is central to J ohn's satirical endeavour in this poem.
This is
the social function of his literary art, one shared by m o s t satirists.
He returns again and again in the concluding passa g e s of the w o r k to the
contrast bet w e e n virtue and vice.
His attacks on the m a n i f o l d faces of
the latter are always, in the classical tradition, a summons to virtue,
which, he declares ( 1800), is its own reward:
Vi r t u s se contenta sui p r a e m i a semper habet.
Of course, John's C h ri s t i a n faith c o m p elled h i m to w r i t e w i th a m o r a l a u ­
t hority alien to his Roman s o u r c e s , though in a m u c h less h e a v y - h a n d e d
g
fashion than B ern a r d of M o r val's D e Contemptu Mundi.
Ce rt ai n ly his m o r ­
alistic invective is a legacy m o r e of Jerome than of Juvenal.
John of Salis b u r y ' s reliance on the Roman satirical t r a d ition is
re vealed in his use o f t echniques and language o f the ancient poets.
The
En th et i c u s has some thirt y - f i v e echoes of Horace, Persius, Petronius, and
Juvenal.
Significantly, almost all (27) o ccur in the concluding p o rtion
of the poem.
Actually, every J uvenalian a l l usion (16 in all) appears in
this p a r t of the Entheticus, fortifying a h a r s h censure of contemporary
ills.
J oh n b o r r o w e d p h r a s e s and lines to u nderscore his own themes, and
he u s e d pseudo n y m s from Petro n iu s and J u venal to revile contemporaries.
For example, a re c u rring theme in the p o e m is detraction.
John cautions
his readers against treach e r o u s spies eager to m a l i g n anyone for a price.
In reviling these base characters, the po et twice
(lines 1515 and 1692)
employs Juvenal's image of the informer dropping his p o isons into a ready
ear.^
Thus, Joh n establ i s h e s a legacy from the vicious network of delatores
under Domitian among his own contemporaries in court and cloister.
Like
the Roman satirist, he mo c k s the slanderers wh o w o u l d advance their own
interests by back bi t i n g and he alerts his literate friends to the o m n i ­
presence of these d angerous enemies.
John's learned a udience w o u l d re ­
cognize such J u v ena l i a n reprobates as Ma t o ("mens p l e n a dolis") an d Pedo:
Na m quotiens facili Pedo vilis in aure susurrât,
Toxic a t interius cordis et oris opus.
(1707-08)
The Roman writers p r o v i d e d John of Salisbury w i t h an i m pressive list
of pseudonyms, wh i c h he used liberally in the Enth e t i c u s to score a variety
of moral ills.
Horace's Balatro appears, along w i t h Persius' a rrogant
Dinomaches and effeminate Polydamas, and Juvenal's cowardly Sergiolus.
When John assails careless, unproductive monks at Canterbury, he turns to
Petronius' Satyricon, a rare text in the twe l f t h century, for Eumolpus,
Encolpius, and G i t o n . 11
These classical borrowings were more than st ylistic affectations,
such as one sometimes observes in the student p r o d u c t s of the ea r l y twelfth
century.
For John of Salisbury they were a safe communicative channel wit h
a select group of friends.
Jan e t Martin, in an article focussing chiefly
on Petronius' Satyricon, says that "one of the i m portant uses of the c l a s ­
sical tradition of Jo h n and his circle ma y ha v e b e e n the r e i n f o r c e m e n t of
their sense of bein g a small group, an elite."
12
This s t atement is ce r ­
tainly correct; John e mployed ancient sources k n o w n to his literate co l ­
leagues, b u t un f amiliar to the courtiers whose folly bec a m e his foremost
object of contempt.
He characterizes the latter at the outset of the sa ­
tirical finale to the Entheticus:
Sed qu ia nemo pot e s t stultis ratione placere,
Sufficiat gravibus te p l acuisse viris.
V i x in doctorum pot e r i t quis ferre cachinnos,
Si non sit forti pectore, mente gravi.
Sannas et rhonchos geminat lasciva juventus,
Audi t ab ignoto si no v a ve r ba libro.
(1283-88)
The last lines imply that the ignorant courtiers w h o m John moc k s hav e r e ­
course to laughter as their defence against the l earning they observe in
"serious men."
These l i n e s , and o t h e r s , clearly contrast his rude enemies wi t h the
schooled and serious friends upon w h o m learned allusions w o u l d not be
lost.
F o r example, Jo h n here e mployed words
(s a n n a , cachinnus, and rhon-
cus) taken from the satirical v o cabulary of Persius and Juvenal.
In fact,
Persius, in his first satire (1.62), uses sanna to describe the hostile
reception that a po e t m i g h t expect for asserting the truth in hi g h so c i ­
ety.
Elsewhere in the satirical portions of his work, Joh n uses rare e x ­
pressions fro m Roman sources, chiefly Persius, to ridicule his opponents.
For instance, one he calls tressis a g a s o , "trifling lackey," and another
ciniflo,
"h a i r - c u r l e r .1,13
One suspects that Jo h n of Salisbury invokes
such terms to remind his close friends of the vast gulf betw e e n themselves
an d the m o c k i n g triflers at court.
Such allusions in the E n theticus sup­
po r t Prof e s s o r Mar t i n ' s vi e w that the classical tradition r e inforced the
sense of scholar l y super i o r i t y for John and his clique.
Moreover, a r e c u r ­
ring accusation of alarming ignorance in school, court, and cloister p e r ­
vades the Entheticus, and places the p o e m in an enduring t radition of sat14
ire, lament for the decline of letters.
The inne r circle of John of S alisbury included Pet e r of Celle, Odo,
and W i l l i a m Brito.
Th e latter, mon k s of Christchurch, Canterbury, are
affectionately h a i l e d in the Entheticus.
Brito was later the recipient
of several letters w r i t t e n by Jo h n in e x i l e ; ^
notably, these epistles co n ­
tain the few allusions to Juvenal, Horace, and Persius w h i c h appear in the
collection of later letters.
This fact also suggests that Jo h n and his
learned colleagues v i e w e d themselves as an élite clique in p o s s e s s i o n of
a literary trust w h i c h excluded all w h o had not bee n immersed in the c l a s ­
sics.
Jo h n of Salisbury's use of Roman satire di d more than offer a sense
of superiority to his intimate group; it i mparted a meas u r e of relative
safety to a critic of h i g h l y p l a c e d officials and nearby associates.
This
Ju ve n a l i a n legacy w o u l d become a standard device for satirists (e.g. Walter
of Cha t i l l o n and Wa t e r Mapes) who, like Lucilius, "rub the city wi t h mu c h
s a l t . " 16
The Entheti c u s is, indeed, a caustic poem, whose sharpness p robably
caused it to be suppressed.
The b iting satire of the conclu d i n g s e c ­
tion is aimed at high officers of the royal court and d e p raved Canter b u r y
monks.
The former, especially, were dangerous adversaries, since the king
himself was clearly implicated in their vicious activities:
Hoc sub rege lupus m e t u i t suspendia pauper,
Absolvi dignus, si dare p o s s e t ovem.
(1315-16)
and
Nam fur, consortem qui regem ducit habendum,
Non pé r i t et justos saepe p erire facit.
(1325-26)
The court is called nova curia rege sub p ue ro (1463-64).
Henry II must
have seemed a mere "boy," at least in experience, w h e n he a s c ended the
throne at twenty-one in 1154.
At that time John of Salisb ur y p r o b a b l y saw
this temperamental, strong-willed youth as just another N o r m an tyrant in
the guise of a Chris t i a n prince.
Thus, the pseudonyms emplo y e d b y John
were not merely "inside jokes," but a protec t i v e m e a s ur e a g a inst r e t r i b u ­
tion.
A fter all, the k i n g and his m agistrates are compared (1305-1310) to
the lion and the tiger in ferocity, the fox in cunning, the wo lf in greed,
the p i g in defilement, and the goat in wantonness.
The Entheticus satirized the m o r a l climate at Henry II's court and
18
not, as has been the p r e v a i li ng theory, the anarchic r eign of Stephen.
John of Salisbury m i g h t have openly assai le d Henry's b i t t e r enemy w i t h i m ­
punity, as he w o uld do later in the P o licraticus
(6:18).
Rather, the v e r ­
ses of the E n t h e t i c u s , as their rhetorical immediacy suggests, decry a b ­
uses in the court of Henry II, the "Hircanus"
poem.
(i.e. "Henricus") of the
The poet not only rehearses injustices p e r p e t r a t e d b y the royal
courtiers but is also at pains to warn his p atron of h o s t i l i t y at court,
a drunken, insane setting for frivolity and malice:
Insanire p ûtes aeque juvenesque s e n e s q u e ,
Insanit judex officiumque suum.
Curia nugaces solos amat, audit, honorât,
Artes exosas aulicus omnis habet,
Artes virtuti famulantes aulicus odit.
Sed famulas carnis aulicus omnis amat.
(1465-70)
Writing years later, after Becket's death, John of Salisbury r e v i e w ­
ed the Chance llo r ' s t r i bulations at this time w h e n "he endlessly fought
a gainst the beasts of the court."
20
W i t h some hagiog r a p h i c a l exaggeration,
perhaps, John claims that B e cket was so w o r n down by toils, o p p r e s s e d w i t h
afflictions, assail e d b y ambushes, and exposed to snares b y the m a l i c e of
c ourtiers that of t e n he g r e w w e a r y of life.
21
There is no doubt that in
these lines of his Vita Sancti Thomae J o h n of Salisbury impugns Henry II
and his court, as he d i d e a r lier in the Entheticus.
The p o e m d e tails some of the vicious activities of royal m a g i s t r a t e s
u n d e r pseudonyms.
" M a n d r o g e r u s ," "Antipater," and "Sporus" have been
vario u s l y identified, b u t w i t h o u t convincing evidence.
22
Nevertheless,
the offenders w h o m these names s hroud were u n doubtedly p r o m i n e n t figures
k n o w n to John's literate friends.
Perhaps these characterizations had
23
som ething to do w i t h the famous disgrace of J o h n in 1156.
In addition to the m o r a l e a rnestness and the cautious device of
p s e u d o n y m s , other d i s t i n c t features of classical satura occur in the E n ­
theticus.
The topica l i t y of J ohn's satire against innkeepers and m o n a s ­
tic hostels is in the classical tradition.
As one reads the p oet's a d ­
m o n i t i o n s to b e wa r e of h o s t s w h o lie in w ai t for an unsusp e c t i n g viator,
one suspects that J ohn's own journeys h a d been m a r r e d by such encounters.
The poet's m o c k e r y serves to w a r n d e c e n t m e n of lurking perils:
24
a full
k n a p s a c k is a likely t a rget for a t h i eving host, but w o r s e y e t are Bavius
and Dolo, those false w i t n e s s e s w h o note one's v e r y word.
These delatores
are intent up o n d i s t o r t i n g even a wayfare r' s jests, and they seek to m a ­
lign h i m for a price:
Hospes in insidiis sedet hospit ib u s peregrinis,
Et m a l u s a u d itor singula v e r b a notât.
Lin g uaque si p r o f e r t v e r b u m leve sive jocosum,
Ma n t i c a si p aucis rebus o nusta jacet
Involat aut rebus aut v e r b a recenset iniquus
Hospes et interpres p e r n i c i o s u s erit,
Et testes a d h ibet B a v i u m vanumque Dolonem,
Ut p ereas rebus, aut c uncta tua tibi.
(1535-42)
Of course, Catius' serious b e aring belies the vices to w h i c h his p e n i s and
his palate testify:
Fronte gravi Catius v i t a m m e n t i t u r honestam,
Cauda tamen, quid sit, indicat atque gula.
(1561-62)
One m ust avoid the house where m e n like Carinus dispense goods, for they
fear any expenses.
Only a whore has a fair we lcome there:
Hi m e tuu n t sumptus faciemque viantis amici,
Na m m e r etrix illis plus p e r e gr in a placet.
(1593-94)
Reading these p a s sages on t r eacherous hosts, one senses the b i t t e r
experiences of John h i mself in his travels.
The satire is not as p e r s o n a l
as Horace's famous journey to Brundisium, or Hugh Primas' awful a ffair w i t h
the "hospes rufus."
However, the tradition of t opicality is pl ai n l y a d ­
hered to in John's poem, not only in this p a r t but also in the e a r l i e r p o r ­
tion deriding the feeble defamers of liberal studies and their pupils.
Such artful ridicule embraces the social concern of satire —
m oral i m ­
pro vement .
John Salisbury does not slavishly bind h i m self to every device of
ancient satire.
For example, he p r e f e r r e d the elegiac m e t r e to hexameter,
as did Walter of Chatillon and other t w e l fth-century satirists.
p e rs onality does not intrude in the poem.
His own
Dialogue and p h y s i c a l d e s c r i p ­
tions revealing inner m oral condition are limited in the E n t h e t i c u s .
suspects that this may be due to the w i d e sp r e a d use of pseudonyms.
One
The
qualities associated w i t h Gnato, Zoilus, and Thersites w o u l d be u n m i s ­
takably clear to the classicists at Canterbury for w h o m J o h n was chiefly
writing his work.
As the Entheticus draws to a close, the author warns his b o o k that
it will find at Canter bu ry those w h o love reading and w h o strive t o ward
wisdom, min g l e d w i t h others w h o value all literature at not a penny.
he urges:
Legis amatores adeas et scripta c o l e n t e s ,
Contra nugaces n u m m icolasque cave.
(1649-50)
Thus,
Among the former, J o h n identifies Brito and Odo.
The latter include a
h o s t of cowle d rascals t hinly v e i l e d b y names drawn from classical satire,
con cea l i n g real persons w h o m John and his friends could p u b licly scorn,
as w e l l as the v i cious types w h i c h satire univer s a l l y upholds to ridicule.
Again, the true identities w hich these names m a s k are b e y o n d our recovery,
b u t Joh n' s circle undoub t e d l y r e c o g n i z e d them.
J o h n of Salisbury even b o w e d to the requirements of the genre b y i n ­
cluding a mea s ure of indecent h u m o u r in the Entheticus.
Genial H orace had
spiced his Ser mones w i th indecency, while J u v e nal's rancorous verses e x ­
h i b i t a cruder obscenity.
The indecent pe rvades M a r t ial's epigrams and
ev en occurs in the b rief corpus of Stoic Persius.
John was not prudish, but he rarely emplo y e d indecent language or
im agery in his writings, even in p e r s o n a l letters and the p a s sages of s e ­
vere social c r iti c i s m in the P o l i c r a t i c u s .
It seems clear that J o h n v i ewed
h is Enthet i c u s as p r i m a r i l y a v e hicle of satire, and thus he followed c l a s ­
sical mo d e l s even in the earthy tone u s ed to inveigh against crass vices.
F o r example, Joh n censures m o n a s t i c lusts w i t h references to p r o s t i t u t i o n
and genitals; he characterizes detra c ti o n as a tongue b o r n to lick up
filth, and the depravity of the court as a threat to y oung boys w i t h o u t
sprouting hair.
The latter image
(f r u t i c a n t e p i l o ) is indebted to J u v e n ­
al's ninth satire, on sodomy.
T he pre ce d i n g survey of classical influences on John the satirist
illustrates, albeit briefly, his reliance on the Latin literary tradition.
But more, the En t h e t i c u s d e monstrates the m a t u r e synthesis o f s e cular and
divine learning w h i c h best characterizes the C h r i s t i a n humanist.
F o r even
w h e n he discloses the m o s t base aspects of h u m a n folly, John does so from
a p o s t u r e of en l ightenment and virtue.
He is ever a churchman, and, t h e r e ­
fore, a high mo r a l p u r p o s e inspires his sharp reproaches of vice.
In his
C h r i s t i a n zeal and his love of classical l e t t e r s , John of Salisbury p r o v e s
himself a wo r t h y k i n to Augustine, Jerome, and Dante.
G re a t e r H a r t f o r d C o m m unity College
NOTES
This paper origin a t e d at the Sewanee Mediaeval Colloquium, 1980.
1 Frederick B. Artz, Re n a i s s a n c e H u m a n i s m 1300-1550 (Kent State
1966) 7.
2
Charles H. Haskins, The Renais s an c e o f the 12th C e n t u r y
Cleveland 1966) 225.
3
Ronald E. Pepin,
(repr.
The 'Entheticus' of J o h n of Salisbury:
A
Critical Text," Traditio 31 (1975) 127-93.
4
F. Wright and T. Sinclair, History o f Later Latin L i t e r a t u r e
York 1931) 232.
(New
See also M a ur i c e Hélin, A History o f Medieval Latin
Literature, tr J.C. Snow (New York 1949) 108.
5 Hans Liebeschiitz, M e d ieval H u m a n i s m in the Life and W r i tings o f
John of Salisbury (London 1950) 19; C.N.L. Brooke, The T w elfth C e ntury
Renai ssance
(New York 1970) 59.
O t h e r scholars w h o f ollow this v i e w are
Phyllis Barzillay, "The E ntheticus de Dogmate P h i l o s o p h o r u m of J o h n of
Salisbury," Medieva l i a et Humanistica 16 (1964) 19-20 and Beryl Smalley,
The Becket Conflict and the Schools
6
(Totowa, N.J. 1973) 89.
Sermones I .9 .
^ A useful book on the nature of Roman satire is C h arles Witke,
Latin Satire: The Struc t u r e o f P ersuasion
(Leiden 1 9 7 0 ) .
There is no c o m ­
prehensive history of m e d i a e v a l Latin satire p u b l i s h e d to date.
One r e ­
cent contribution to the genre h i s t o r y is Rodney M. Thomson, "The Origins
of Latin Satire in T w elfth C e n t u r y Europe," M i t t e l l a t e i n i s c h e s J a h rbuch
13 (1977) 73-83.
Q
See, for example, John's letter (No. 243) to W i l l i a m B r i t o in
W.J. Millor and C.N.L. Brooke, The L e tters of John o f S a l i s b u r y
1979) II, 480.
(Oxford
In G i l b e r t Highet, Juvenal the Satirist (repr. O x f o r d
1961) there is a chapter on J u venal in Medieval culture.
9
H.C. Hoskier, e d . , D e Contemptu Mundi by B e rnard o f M orval
1929).
(London
George J. Engelh a r d t p u b l i s h e d his three p a r t study of this p o e m
in Mediaeval Studies 22 (1960), 26 (1964), and 29 (1967).
10
Saturae 3.123.
See comments by Janet Martin, "Uses of Tradition:
Petronius and John of Salisbury," Viator 10 (1979) 73-74.
Gellius,
13
P e r s i us 5 .76 ; Horace Sermones 1 .2 .9 8 .
14 Wit k e
^
303, 323.
16
17
(at n. 7) 240.
M i l l o r and Brooke (at n. 8); see Nos. 242-43, 245, 247, 293-94,
Horace, S ermones 1.10.3:
"sale mul t o / urb e m defricuit."
W.J. Millor, H.E. Butler, rev. C.N.L. Brooke, The Letters o f
John o f Sal i s b u r y (London 1955) I, xlix.
18
C. Petersen, J ohannis S a r e s beriensis Enth e t i c u s de Dogmate Phil o s o p h o r u m (Hamburg 1843) iii, states that King Stephen is the "Hircanus"
of the poem.
Thi s unproven assertion wa s f ollowed b y C. S c h a a r s c h m i d t ,
Johannis Sare sbe r i e n s i s na c h Leben und Studien, Sch r i f t e n und Philosophie
(Leipzig 1 8 6 2 ) , an d the vi e w has found no c h a llengers to date.
See Bar-
zillay (at n. 5) 20-21.
19
The e x pr e s s i o n "insanire pûtes" is b o r r o w e d from Horace Sermones
II. 3. 302.
20
J o h n of Salisbury's Vita Sancti Thomae wa s p u b l i s h e d in J.C.
Robertson and J.B. Sheppard, M a t e r i a l s for the H i s t o r y o f Thomas Becket,
(London 1875-85) II.
In chapter seven John details Becket's trials at
court and writes "indesinenter o portebat eu m pug n a r e ad bestias curiae."
21
Ibid.
"In primis autem cancellariae suae auspiciis tot et tantas
va r i a r u m nec e s s i t a t u m difficultates sustinuit, tot laboribus attritus est,
tot afflictio n ibu s fere oppressus, tot insidiis appetitus, tot laqueis
in aula expos i tus a m a l i t i à i n h a bitantium in ea, ut eum, sicut archiepiscopo suo et amicis sub lacrymarum testimonio referre solitus erat, saepe
in dies singulos taed e r e t vivere."
22
Pe t e r s e n (at n. 18) a ttempted to identify the real persons b e ­
h in d J o h n ' s pse u d o n y m s in the Entheticus.
His evidence is too shallow
to be convincing, b u t he is followed by Egbert Turk, N u g a e Curialium:
Le règne d'Henri II Plantegenêt et l 'éthique p o l i t i q u e (Geneva 1977)
82-84.
23
J o h n of S alisbury attributes his disf a v o u r w i t h the king to his
support of free d o m and the defence of truth.
His cautious remarks on the
subject appear in tw o early letters (Nos. 96 and 115) to Peter of Celle
in volume one of The Letters of John o f S a l i s b u r y .
It is entirely possible
that the severe criticisms of Henry's court in the Entheticus, w r i t t e n at
the very time of John's disgrace, had reached the king's ear.
The c h r o ­
nology of John's strained relations with Henry is traced b y Giles C o n s ­
table, "The Alle g ed Disgrace of John of Salisbury in 1159," E n g l i s h H i s ­
torical R e v i e w 69 (1954) 67-76.
24
John's career required considerable travel, bo t h in Eng l a n d and
on the Continent.
ten times
In 1159 he could write that he had crossed the Alps
(Metalogicon III p r o l o g u e ) .