[2326] A fact which Mandonnet, Revue Néo-Scolastique, XVII (1910), 318, actually attempts to use to show that the Speculum was written after 1270, holding that the passage in question in the Speculum must have been copied from Aquinas, since before 1270 no one but Aquinas knew of the existence of the 13th and 14th books of the Metaphysics at all. Yet they are included in Albert’s Commentary, which Mandonnet himself had dated in 1256!
[2327] Grabmann (1916), pp. 163-9; the evidence presented for this view is not very convincing. The fourteen books of the Metaphysics are found in Latin in MSS dated by the catalogues in the 13th century: S. Marco X, 57, fols. 1-75, de metaphysica libri quatuordecim; Additional 17345, late 13th century, according to the catalogue the antiqua translatio ascribed to Thomas of Cantimpré.
[2328] Mandonnet, Siger de Brabant et l’averroïsme latin au XIIIe siècle, Fribourg, 1899, cap. 9.
[2329] That this opinion was condemned in 1277 did not keep Peter of Abano from stating in his Conciliator of 1303 that by power of fascination a man could be cast into a well and a camel into a hot bath.—Differentia 135. Indeed William of Auvergne, a previous bishop of Paris who had himself condemned “errors” in 1240, tells in his De universo (II, iii, 16, edition of 1591, p. 986) of a man who cast down a camel by merely imagining its fall.
[2330] Which seems to contradict 102, which stated that “the celestial circles are not instruments of intelligence but organs.”
[2331] This opinion is, however, that of Boethius and most of the other discussions of fate which we have noted.
[2332] The Latin text of the 219 opinions will be found in the Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis, I, 543, et seq.
[2333] Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis, II, 56-7.
[2334] Chart. Univ. Paris., II, 229.