Humanists and scholastics in early sixteenth-century Paris: new sources from the Faculty of Theology

ABSTRACT Historians often compare the relationship between humanists and scholastics in the early sixteenth century to a battle. In such accounts, the Parisian Faculty of Theology plays the role of a major combatant keeping humanists away from religious studies. This article paints a different and more harmonious picture of humanists and scholastics in the decade before the Reformation. It draws on hitherto little explored evidence from manuscripts authored by official orators at the University of Paris: their speeches to graduating students at the Faculty of Theology in 1510 and 1512. It will be argued that the speakers celebrated both humanist and scholastic competences and the speeches themselves demonstrate that eloquence had a role to play within the institution. In this way, the article adds nuance to our understanding of how the Faculty of Theology viewed humanists and introduces important new sources to the history of universities.

In February 1510, twenty-five theology students gathered for one of the final rituals before the doctoral disputations.Over four days, they met in theological colleges to receive the official "call to the licence."In charge of the ceremony was Olivier de Lyon, an orator appointed by the university chancellor.He addressed each student in turn, praising his learning, diligence and character in front of a large audience.De Lyon ended by formally inviting the candidate to attend another ceremony at the chancellor's residence, where he would receive the licentiate.It was a celebration of the accomplishments and qualities that made the candidates worthy future members of the Faculty of Theology.
The surviving graduation orations from 1510, 1512 and 1514 are previously untapped resources for considering the intellectual culture of the Faculty of Theology. 1 The speeches illuminate the faculty's perspective on theological competencewhat capacities bestowed special honour on individual candidates for the doctorateand ideas about the history and social role of theology were celebrated.Composed during the pivotal years when the Reuchlin affair was deepening the controversy between graduate theologians and secular scholars, these orations provide a rare insight into the changing The ceremony was divided over multiple days at different locations within Paris.The records from 1510 and 1512 suggest that the celebration migrated between four colleges: the two dominant theological colleges, Navarre and Sorbonne, and two monastic colleges, the Dominican Couvent de Jacobins and the Franciscan Couvent des Cordeliers.That this was a standard arrangement is supported by later evidence.On 18 January 1570, twenty-seven students from the Faculty of Theology came to Parlement to invite members to attend the paranymph's orations and outlined the schedule: Thursday at the Jacobins, Friday at the Cordeliers, at the Sorbonne on Saturday, and Navarre on Sunday. 10he invitation from 1570 raises the question of who was present at the ceremonies in the early 1510s.Although Goulet's account from 1517 does not answer this question, he claimed that other graduation ceremonies were well attended by the general public.When the university chancellor ranked and licensed the theological candidates, according to Goulet this event attracted "nearly the whole population of Paris, not to mention the University, and a great multitude from elsewhere." 11Similarly, the ceremony where the "Doctorate and the round magisterial biretta" were awarded attracted not only the members of the faculty but also a variety of dignitaries, including bishops, sometimes the king, cardinals, royal counsellors, and magnates and nobles invited by the doctoral candidates. 12These comments suggest that the graduation ceremonies was not a purely internal affair.
Throughout the sixteenth century, controversies regularly arose from inappropriate orations or unfitting replies from students.As James Farge discovered, one of the students graduating in 1512 was criticised by the faculty for failing to thank his teachers properly in his reply to Lasseré's oration. 13In 1514 the doctoral candidate Jerome de Hangest was accused of having satirised the faculty member Nicolas Le Clerc. 14The same year Nicolas Cappelly was accused of insulting his regent master Jean Girard in his response to the paranymph. 15The scandals caused by inappropriate behaviour by the paranymph or students highlight the social significance of the ritual.The praise they received, as well as their behaviour, needed to reflect that they were deserving of becoming full members of an important scholarly community.

II. Humanist epideictic at the Faculty of Theology
De Lyon and Lasseré were both involved in organising the grammatical education at Navarre, which was currently in an expansive phase. 16Lasseré had taught humaniores litterae before becoming provisor of the College in 1508. 17De Lyon taught grammar for many years and assisted the principal of the grammarians, Jean Bolu, even after embarking on his own studies in theology. 18De Lyon was particularly engaged in the project of effecting a humanist turn in the curriculum, as we see in an undated letter from Guillaume Budé addressed to him.Budé wrote that he was filled with joy upon hearing about educational reforms in the grammar school at Navarre and, in particular, De Lyon's effort to teach eloquence.Budé wrote with encouragement, advising De Lyon to primarily teach ancient authors and grammarians. 19he humanist revival at Navarre provides, I shall argue, a crucial context for the interpretation of De Lyon and Lasseré's orations.Farkas Gábor Kiss makes two relevant observations concerning the rhetoric of the paranymph orations from 1514.The first observation concerns the style of the speeches, which, as Kiss points out, is closely aligned with the epideictic ecclesiastical oratory studied by John O'Malley.The second point is about particular influences: Kiss found echoes of Erasmus's Adages and the Praise of Folly in the graduation speeches, where the orator used irony and paradoxical praise. 20rawing on the orations from 1510 and 1512, I shall next expand and contextualise these observations.
Like the paranymph orations from 1514, the earlier ones fit well into the model of humanist epideictic oratory described by O'Malley.Unlike in scholastic "thematic sermons," there was no rigid division of the topic, or argumentative scheme.Instead, they relied on classical rhetorical models for structure and focalised a single point of praise, supported by many loci. 21The similarities to epideictic sermons are most striking in the speeches in praise of theologyprime examples of the genre laus disciplinaewhich the paranymph delivered before turning to individual candidates.Nine such orations survive from 1510-1514: four by De Lyon, three by Lasseré and two by the unknown orator of 1514.The variety of material in these speeches shows that there were no set topics: the paranymph chose which aspects of theology to praise and how.Some orations lack obvious connection to the context of graduation.For example, there are speeches on the positive impact of theology on society (1510), the soul's immortality (1512), and analogies between different kinds of theology and flat, concave and convex mirrors (1514). 22However, most of the speeches were directly concerned with theology as a form of erudition and an academic discipline.
After speaking in praise of theology, the paranymph called each candidate to the licence in a personalised speech. 23The orator praised the students' hard work, learning, virtue and a myriad of other merits.The orations vary in length, but the general range is between 600 and 900 words.These speeches followed, roughly, the loci recommended by classical rhetoric for such speeches.They might well have used guides such as Aphthonius's Progymnasmata. 24This manual suggested that encomia should discuss the person's parental and geographical origins, upbringing, excellences of mind, body and fortune, and provide favourable comparisons.This model, as we shall see later, resulted in individualised speeches that not only provide biographical information on the graduating students but also reveal the diversity of their characters.
One common feature of the general speeches in praise of theology and of the orations to particular graduates is the frequent references to classical antiquity.De Lyon regularly employed one of the main figures of humanist sacred epideictic that O'Malley calls "quanto magis."In short, the orator speaks about ancient culture before turning to consider how much better the Christian equivalent is. 25 For example, De Lyon showed how much glory and honour was associated with learning in antiquity to stress how much more theological study ought to be honoured. 26In the same spirit, De Lyon's oration to the candidate Nicolas Helm stated that he was "far happier than those ancients -Anaxagoras, Byante, Democrituswho surrendered their riches and yet could never follow the true image of truth, which you [Nicolas] found in the garden of theology." 27Most orations to candidates made comparisons between the candidate's qualities and ancient characters in this way.To mention only two among very numerous examples, Lasseré claimed that Pierre Crockaert worked as hard at his studies as Pliny the Younger and in De Lyon's speech to Jacobus Pasqueti, the candidate was compared to Caesar's friend Labienus. 28Lasseré also mentioned Old Testament figures in this contextfor example comparing David Cranston with the David who defeated Goliath. 29De Lyon, however, remained completely within the realm of classical antiquity.
The many classical anecdotes not only inform us about De Lyon's and Lasseré's humanist reading preferences but also indicate what strategies they might have used in composing the speeches.The orators probably used material from reference books such as Valerius Maximus's Facta et dicta memorabilia.We also have reason to believe that De Lyon and Lasseré kept their own commonplace books. 30One of the most successful commonplace book authors of the early sixteenth century, Johannes Ravisius Textor (c.1493-1522), was a colleague of theirs at Navarre.Textor, who specialised in rhetoric, regarded De Lyon as a role model and had perhaps studied with the older humanist. 31extor published several encyclopaedic tools with excerpts from ancient literature, including Epithetorum opus (1518) and Officina (1520).The latter work contained lists of ancients (real and fictional) sharing a specific virtue, vice, childhood experience, type of name, profession, cause of death etc. 32 This is precisely the type of material De Lyon and Lasseré were using in their speeches.The Navarre grammarians' effort to teach literary elegance and engage with ancient authors, which Budé had praised in his letter to De Lyon, shone through in the speeches that De Lyon and Lasseré presented to the Faculty of Theology.

III. Vitae scholasticae
In their written form, the paranymph speeches constitute collective biographies of the graduating classes of 1510 and 1512.James Farge's prosopography of the members of the Faculty of Theology in 1500-1536 illuminated the graduates' geographic and social origins, religious affiliations, educational background and their activity in faculty deliberations, teaching and publishing. 33The graduation orations present important additional insight into the mentality of students graduating in these same years and allow us to address questions relating to scholastic education and culture.What virtues and skills were highly valued in this community?What intellectual specialisms were represented?
The brief biographies included in the graduation orations vary in the amount of detail but generally cover most of the loci recommended by rhetorical handbooks for speeches praising a person.As an example of the typical coverage, we can take De Lyon's speech dedicated to Nicolas Ensche.First, De Lyon mentioned his place of birth near Trier, which De Lyon located at 27 degrees from the Pillars of Hercules and 99 degrees from the equator. 34According to De Lyon, Ensche was born to destitute parents.He nevertheless managed to reach the Collège de Reims, where he studied philosophy before eventually joining the Collège de Montaigu. 35We know from other sources that Ensche at the time of his graduation was a close collaborator of the theologian Noël Beda at Montaigu, where Jan Standonck in the previous decade had instituted a community for poor scholars. 36This circumstance helps explain the focus on poverty in De Lyon's orationa phenomenon encountered in orations to other students associated with Montaigu, including Gaspard Andree and Michael Guytard. 37At Montaigu, De Lyon tells us, Ensche constantly lectured on philosophy and theology.He commented on both recent and older texts: Martin Le Maître's treatises De fortitudine and De temperantia from the fifteenth century as well as earlier scholastic authors such as Guillaume d'Auxerre and Robert Holcot. 38Lastly, De Lyon reported on the topics selected by Ensche for his recent disputations: the passion and poverty of Christ. 39ssociated with Montaigu and lecturing on scholastic theology, Ensche is in many ways a traditional candidate.In his graduating cohort, we also encounter men like Diogo de Gouveiadiplomat, later principal of the Collège de Sainte-Barbe and an early supporter of Ignatius of Loyola. 40According to De Lyon's speech to Gouveia, he had first been trained as an astrologer and served the Portuguese king in this capacity before being sent to Paris for further studies.After an eventful sea voyage, where Gouveia was nearly taken captive by pirates, he arrived in Paris.Like Ensche, he studied philosophy at Collège de Reims and, after another stint in Portugal, he returned to study theology. 41According to De Lyon, Gouveia performed well in the final stage disputations while all the same remaining devoted to literature and good conduct and continuing to develop his knowledge of astrology.
Through these biographical narratives, the orators introduced and commended candidates to the university chancellor.The speeches generally highlighted the candidates' piety, virtue and industry.If we are to believe De Lyon and Lasseré, theology students worked day and night, filling any free time with extra reading, prayer and writing.One candidate who particularly fits this bill was Noel Godefroy, whom Lasseré characterised as "more solitary than a Carthusian."Lasseré further described the toll that hard work had taken on Godefroy's bodystating that his eyelids were now drooping, his eyes retreating, his flesh contracted and pale like boxwood, and the dignity of his brow was, apparently, destroyed. 42This description of Godefroy's appearance is an unusually ruthless example of the orators' habit of remarking on the physical appearance of the candidate standing before themin one case even commenting on the candidate's expected embarrassment. 43he life stories of candidates and the paranymphs' reports from their disputations illustrate one further aspect of their oratory stylenamely, they based their praise of the candidates on argument and testimony.De Lyon and Lasseré clearly attended most disputations.Both also reported on various candidates they had heard preach. 44n some cases, they referenced personal conversations with the candidate. 45Additionally, they reported the opinions of others or described how an audience had reacted to the candidate's preaching or teaching. 46In a few cases, the testimony came from the candidate's students. 47Publications, such as philosophical textbooks, were also invoked as evidence of the candidate's skill. 48If a candidate had received a scholarship or honour from an ecclesiastical or royal benefactor, this was reported.Other stories must have ultimately originated with the candidates themselves, such as the not infrequent accounts of childhood poverty, the loss of parents and illness.The detailed knowledge concerning each candidate conveyed in these speeches is witness to the strong social and intellectual connections among advanced students of theology.A decade of studying the same texts, debating one another, and gathering for religious and academic ceremonies created a strong community.
The orations demonstrate the diversity of academic specialties in the faculty.We learn that one candidate was an avid reader of Thomas Aquinas, 49 that another lectured on the difficult writings of the "subtle doctor" Duns Scotus, 50 while yet another was an expert on the work of Bonaventure. 51Martial Mazurier, whose preaching repeatedly gave rise to controversy and accusations of heresy in the coming decades, was introduced as an avid student of Augustine, Jerome and Gregory. 52hilst information concerning intellectual preferences is included in only a minority of cases, all orations comment on an essential aspect of theological education: the candidate's performance in the late-stage disputations before the licence. 53Disputation was central to scholastic universities for both pedagogical and intellectual reasons.Student examinations at all levelsfrom the bachelor's degree in arts up to the doctorate in theologywere conducted in this way.Moreover, this highly structured and essentially collective mode of argumentation was also considered the superior method for finding the correct answer to a question. 54s Olga Weijers points out, there are still many gaps in our understanding of how or to what extent disputation techniques changed in early sixteenth-century universities.Humanists raised various concerns about the disputation as a mode of truth-seeking, although perhaps not as unanimously as they criticised scholastic logic. 55For example, both Juan Luis Vives and Guillaume Budé thought that disputation was an important exercise albeit in need of modificationin particular as concerned what evidence was allowed. 56Other points of criticism regarded the specialised and technical vocabulary used in scholastic disputation as well as the inherent orientation towards conflict.This perspective is summed up well by Erasmus, when he expressed his hope that "sober and sane discussion" would replace "sophistical and subtle disputations" in the theological faculties. 57t remains unclear to what extent such criticism changed the practice of disputation.The problem is, in part, the paucity of sources.For the Faculty of Theology in Paris, only a few published disputations survive.These include Jacques Almain's resumptiva, argued in connection with the vesperia of his colleague Ludwig Ber in 1512. 58A third student from the same cohort, Marc de Grandval, published a version of his own vesperia the following year. 59Almain's and Grandval's disputations were published because they dealt with a highly controversial and topical issue: the pro-papal arguments of Thomas Cajetan.The published disputations detail the arguments over ecclesiastical authority put forward by Almain and Grandval.However, they say little about the nature of the discussionwhether it was "sane" or "sophistical," to use Erasmus's terms.The paranymph orations, by contrast, are a rich source on the subject.
In the first place, the paranymph orations inform us about some of the topics treated in disputations.I have already mentioned Ensche's disputations on the passion and poverty of Christ.We also learn that the Cistercian monk Jean de Burrey during his tentativa discussed human perfection in relation to intellect, will, synderesis, charity and merit. 60Guillaume Amery's ordinaria dealt with Revelation and the coming of the Antichrist. 61These examples highlight how topics relating to New Testament texts and moral theology were selected alongside the themes of ecclesiastical authority treated by Almain and Grandval.
Almost all the orations praise the candidates' sharp arguments and subtle responsescommonplaces that tell us little about what actually took place during the disputations.Some, however, describe revealing details.The speech to David Cranston depicts the aggressive vibe disliked by many humanists.Lasseré described Cranston's strong physical reaction to respondents during disputations: If you heard a feeble response, you showed your teeth, fumed, bit your lips, tore your beard.If not, you smoothed your brow and with your lips fixated, your brow unmoving, your gaze fastened, and soles unmoving, you praised the response.
According to Lasseré, Cranston crushed any weak responder like David vanquished Goliath. 62his was, however, not the only way that disputations were portrayed in the paranymph orations.Commenting on Burrey's disputation, De Lyon said that "those who heard you seemed to hear a new Dionysius the Cistercian and besides these very rich teachings, you also had a certain sophistication (urbanitas) with many jokes and great charm." 63De Lyon's report about Amery's performance was similarly colourful: No one missed how you untangled the senses and hidden interpretations of Revelations like a divine interpreter of marvellous meanings.Those present even saw John himself revived, or William of Paris, returning from the interior of the earth to the heavens. 64 these two cases, De Lyon did not represent the disputation as a combative exchange, instead praising the candidates' solid knowledge and eloquence.These appear, in principle, like discussions of which Erasmus would approve.

IV. Scholastics and humanists in the student body
The paranymph orations from 1510 to 1512 demonstrate the coexistence of scholastic approaches to theology with other traditions that were more amenable to humanists.To further explore the relationship between these different groups, this final section focuses on the orations dedicated to students of clear scholastic or humanistic leanings.The former group is best exemplified by students from the circle of John Mair (c.1467-1550).Mair was one of the most active teachers of nominalist philosophy and theology at the University of Paris in this period.He had studied theology with Jan Standonck and remained associated with Montaigu after receiving his licence in theology in 1506. 65Six years later, three of Mair's students received the licence: David Cranston, Jacques Almain and Pierre Crockaert.Their success at the Faculty of Theology is indicated by the ranking that teachers at the faculty made of the candidates in the licentiate class.The official ranking of candidates in 1512 placed all three highly: Almain was ranked second in the class (after Ludwig Ber), Cranston fifth and Crockaert sixth.Association with one of the leading scholastic theologians was clearly correlated with success in the Faculty of Theology.
The three candidates had all published works in the scholastic tradition of philosophy.Cranston had published on logic and physics; Almain on logic, physics and ethics; and Crockaert had written works on logic and Thomist philosophy.In this activity too they followed Mair, who published many books throughout his career.His early publications focused mainly on logic, but he later wrote commentaries on the Sentences (from 1509 onwards), a Gospel commentary (1518) and a work on British history (1521).It seems likely that the three candidates presented to the university chancellor in 1512 would have followed in Mair's footsteps as prolific writers in the scholastic tradition, had not all three died in the years immediately following their graduation. 66e have already seen that Lasseré's speech to Cranston thematised his combative performance in disputations.This portrait of Cranston resonates with how Mair himself depicted his student as a staunch defender of traditional scholastic method.In 1510, Mair made Cranston one of the interlocutors of a short dialogue published as a preface to his own commentary on the first book of the Sentences.In the dialogue, Cranston undertook discussion with a humanist critic of Mair's method.Cranston defended the use of Aristotle and philosophical concepts in theology.Furthermore, he argued that for solving complex questions it is necessary to pay sustained attention to arguments pro and contra according to the scholastic method. 67The willingness to dialogue with humanists is telling of Mair's openminded attitude.It has been pointed out that Mair attended some classes in Greek and that he in part sympathised with the views of humanist educational reformers.In 1528 Mair himself suggested that theologians had perhaps spent too much time on philosophy and that it was time to engage more closely with Scripture. 68The early dialogue ends openly, without a clear sign that Cranston successfully convinced his opponent.Yet the methodology employed in Mair's Sentences commentary made his own preference abundantly clear.
The awareness of Mair's circle as a bastion of scholastic traditionalism is evident in Lasseré's orations to Almain and Crockaert.Lasseré's speech to Almain focused almost exclusively on his intellectual achievements.The orator praised Almain's capacious memory, his successful teaching at the Collège de Coqueret and the dialectical works written on sleepless nights. 69In describing Almain's work, Lasseré emphasised his ability to resolve complex problems and explain the most obscure and difficult matters lucidly: "nothing could be said more clearly or easily than in your Sorbonic disputations." 70In his speech to Crockaert, Lasseré thematised Crockaert's turn to Thomist philosophy following his entry into the Dominican order, praising his ability to explain both viasthe nominalist and the realistand comparing him to Thomas as well as Durand de Saint-Pourçain. 71Lasseré furthermore remarked that Crockaert did not write in frivolous genres like poetry, history or satire but "in subtle windings like Aristotle, and salutary warnings like Paul." 72 Lasseré's speeches to theologians of the scholastic camp incorporated praise sympathetic to their point of view.
The same is true of Lasseré's speeches to candidates with clear humanistic allegiances.Among the candidates celebrated in 1512 was Valerand de La Varanne, an accomplished poet.Lasseré especially praised La Varanne's patriotic Carmen de expugnatione genuensi from 1507. 73His speech, however, opened with a more general defence of the liberal arts, arguing that "the theologian should know many things besides theology." 74In the speech, Lasseré presented various traditional arguments for why grammatical and rhetorical knowledge was relevant for the theologian.First, the seculares scientiae add ornamentation to divine letters.Second, liberal disciplines had been essential to authors like Lactantius and Augustine.Their erudition had allowed Lactantius to "tear down" the superstitions of pagans, and Augustine to artfully erect the "city of God."Therefore, we should not listen to people who "having finished their study of theology strive to dissuade people from the knowledge of liberal arts." 75Lasseré ended his speech to La Varanne with an exhortation for the multiscius to rise and rejoiceechoing the ideal of encyclopaedic knowledge embraced by many French Renaissance authors. 76everal students and orators had connections to the philosopher and humanist educational reformer Jacques Lefèvre d'Étaples (c.1460-1536). 77La Varanne probably knew Lefèvre through common friends at the Collège de Boncourt or from the Picard nation. 78In 1508, he published a poem in Lefèvre's honour.The poem highlighted the religious implications of Lefèvre's approach to philosophy, which La Varanne characterised as a kind of natural theology.By investigating the creationin particular "its hidden corners" (abdita) -Lefèvre was learning about God. 79La Varanne ended by encouraging Lefèvre's contributions to learning in Paris. 80e Lyon similarly praised Lefèvre's approach to philosophy in an oration, highlighting again that theology students with humanistic interests were not averse to these ideas.This segment is found in De Lyon's speech to Philippe Prevost.Prevost had originally studied with a different teacher but after gaining the master's degree, he taught philosophy alongside Lefèvre at the Collège de Cardinal Lemoine, where he was also a bursar in theology. 81n 1503 Prevost had received a friendly dedication from Lefèvre's close collaborator Josse Clichtove, designating him a "companion in the study of philosophy" (in philosophiae studio commilitonus). 82Reflecting on Prevost's path, De Lyon told this story as a passage from sophism to true philosophy: … at the beginning you had been taught and shaped in those schools where you encountered sophistical fallacies and fallacious sophisms, where you tasted Aristotle, as they say, "with the edge of your lips."Having true philosophy fixed to your heart with great spikes, with regret you were led towards the most learned Lefèvre whoif I may use the words of Plautinusset a ruler to Aristotle's books, and brought back home the peripatetic Aristotle, which had been obfuscated by certain labyrinths and puzzles … .You applied yourself with so much effort that you emerged most skilled among those who stepped out of Lefèvre's shadow. 83 Lyon's speech to Provost thus presented sympathetically the Fabrist narrative concerning humanist philosophy.He discussed the philological project of cleansing the text, and the approach that was more generally concerned with avoiding the tricky sophistical problems associated with certain branches of scholasticism.Moreover, he said, this approach to Aristotle uncovered the "most concealed places of philosophy"a line of praise borrowed from Francesco Pucci's letter regarding Angelo Poliziano's encyclopaedic Miscellanies. 84wo further passages from De Lyon's orations contain close parallels to Lefèvre's ideas concerning the relationship between philosophy and theology.One is found in his oration to the otherwise little-known theologian Nicolas Lamy.Lamy had taught philosophy for many years at the Collège de Calvy and particularly studied natural philosophy and mathematics, including Archimedes's spheres, Democritus's atoms and Pythagoras's numbers. 85Like Charles de Bovelles and other members of Lefèvre's circle, Lamy paired his philosophical study with contemplative practices. 86Playing on the Platonist notion of the soul's celestial origin, De Lyon said: Just as the endless God the Father gave you a soul from the eternal fires, which we call stars and constellations, so it seems that you, always attending to the heavens and the celestial fatherland, are frequently raptured into heavens through contemplation. 87cording to De Lyon, Lamy's capacity for rapture and ecstasy made him a welcome visitor in reformed monasteries, where he would preach about God and the "council" of the heavens.The same combination of devotion and erudition explained, according to De Lyon, why Lamy had been made prior of the Sorbonne. 88e Lyon's description of Lamy's contemplation echoes Fabrist views on the relationship between philosophical knowledge and religious insight: studying and looking towards the "blessed region" might invite divine illumination.We unfortunately have no surviving writings by Lamy to corroborate that he shared their outlook.De Lyon himself, however, was clearly sympathetic to Lefèvre's views.In one of his orations on theology, De Lyon addressed the question of how theology related to philosophy: … the theology that investigates the cause of causes is the highest form of philosophy; the theology that defines the obligations of virtues in their circumstances is the highest form of ethics; the theology that teaches indestructible truth is the highest form of logic … . 89 sum, De Lyon's orations show that Lefèvre's vision of theologising philosophy gained support beyond his closest students and members of his college, even reaching students at the Faculty of Theology.
I shall conclude with two points relating to the scholastic and humanist students at the Faculty of Theology.The first relates to the ranking of students.I have already mentioned the high rankings achieved by the students from John Mair's circle.Cranston, Almain and Crockaert were among the top students at the faculty.By contrast, Lamy ranked 19/29 and Prevost 26/29. 90While all these students were praised for their philosophical skill by the paranymphs, it is clear that the masters of the faculty preferred Mair's students.
Second, the graduation speeches from the Faculty of Theology in 1510-1512 open up a new perspective on the relationship between humanists and theologians other than the confrontational narrative embraced by most recent studies.For example, Ann Moss argues that humanists and scholastics in Paris and elsewhere belonged to separate linguistic spheres, between which little, if any, communication or compromise was possible. 91James Farge argues that the members of the Faculty of Theology shared a conservative mentality that put them completely at odds with humanist innovators and reformers. 92These narratives fit well with the testimony of some, for whom a humanistic education appeared incompatible with the culture of the faculty.However, many students saw no obvious contradiction between the academic study of theology and humanist learning.In the decade before the Reformation, studia humanitatis still played an important and constructive role within the Faculty of Theology.

Notes on contributor
Christa Lundberg is Junior Research Fellow at St Catharine's College in Cambridge.She has published an article about the philosophical letters of Charles de Bovelles and is working on a monograph about printing and the study of theology in early sixteenth-century Paris.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.