Robert Grosseteste c. 1160-1253
English theologian, philosopher, scientific writer, and translator.
A prolific writer, gifted administrator, and respected teacher, Grosseteste was a leader of the English church in the thirteenth century. Considered one of the most learned men of the Middle Ages, he was a chancellor at Oxford University and also served as Bishop of Lincoln for eighteen years. During both terms he instituted significant reforms at these institutions while continuing wit his own studies. Grosseteste composed over three hundred works, including essays on theological subjects as well as original works addressing scientific and philosophical questions. Notable among his publications are the scientific treatise De Luce (1939; On Light); a commentary on Genesis, the Hexaëmeron (1982; Hexaëmeron); the philosophical essay De Veritate (On Truth, 1214-35); translations of The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs and Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics (both published between 1235 and 1253); and a commentary on Aristotle's Posterior Analytics (1214-35). The ideas expressed in Grosseteste's writing had a significant impact on the philosophy and theology of the Middle Ages and he is credited with bringing the thought of ancient Greece, particularly Aristotle, to Christian Europe. His influence can also be seen in the works of John Wyclif, Albert the Great, and Thomas Aquinas. In his own day, Grosseteste was regarded as a pioneer of a new literary and scientific movement and as the first mathematician and physicist of his age. Although specialists continue to consider Grosseteste one of the central figures of the thirteenth century, because of the technical nature and subject matter of his works, he is largely unknown to a general audience. Scholars continue to investigate his writings and discuss the importance of his contributions in the areas of early experimental science, philosophy and theology.
Grosseteste was born around 1160 into a humble family from Stowe, Suffolk. Details about the early years of his life are obscure, but it is likely that he completed the first stages of his education at a cathedral school, perhaps in Hereford; he is recorded as being a member of the household of Bishop William de Vere at Hereford in 1190. He studied law, medicine, and the natural sciences at Oxford, and sometime after 1198 he began teaching there. From then until 1225, there is no historical record of his life, although there is evidence that he acted as judge-delegate in Hereford sometime between 1213 and 1216. Some scholars speculate that during 1209 and 1214, when the university ceased to exist because of a murder case, Grosseteste went to Paris to study theology. An early thirteenth-century charter from Paris names a Robert Grosseteste residing at a house in Paris, but since it concerns the property claims of his children, some historians believe that it refers to another Robert Grosseteste. It was during these “missing” years that Grosseteste produced many of his most important scientific writings. Sometime around 1214 Grosseteste returned to teach at Oxford and by 1225 he was chancellor there. The next mention of Grosseteste in any historical document is in the Episcopal register of Hugh of Lincoln, which notes that he was given a benefice with pastoral responsibilities in the diocese of Lincoln, also mentioning his position at Oxford. Grosseteste left the university in 1229 and devoted his time to teaching the young Franciscan friars at Oxford, a practice that led to the humanities becoming a major part in the education of the friars, enabling them to read and interpret sacred Scripture in a critical manner. During these years Grosseteste continued to write prolifically on a variety of subjects, although he began to move away from scientific and philosophical treatises focusing his energies increasingly on works on theology.
In 1235 Grosseteste was elected Bishop of Lincoln, the largest diocese in England. Soon after he was consecrated Bishop, he launched into a vigorous reformation campaign, organizing a team of translators to produce clear and precise translations of Greek and Hebrew works. During his eighteen years as Bishop he also produced his own translations, gaining a reputation as a brilliant but highly demanding church leader. He insisted that all his clergy be literate and receive some training in theology. He also became involved in a number of disputes in various parts of his dioceses, and his treatise on his concept of church leadership, included with his collected letters (not published until 1861), is regarded as one of the most comprehensive discussions of ministry and authority in the medieval church. Grosseteste also clashed with the papacy on several occasions, pointing out major problems of the contemporary church. This led some scholars, particularly those writing after the Reformation, to view him as a proto-protestant, but most modern historians now reject this characterization. Grosseteste died in October 1253 while serving as Bishop of Lincoln.
Due to the uncertainty surrounding the details of his early life, and because of his busy and varied career in later years, it is difficult to date many of Grosseteste's writings. The sheer volume of his output also makes it difficult for scholars to organize his works. He likely began his writing career after he began teaching at Oxford, at first producing texts on the liberal arts, particularly astronomy and cosmology. Many of his scientific and philosophical treatises are believed to have been written between 1214 and 1235, although at least one scholar claims that he did not write down any of his ideas until after 1225. Grosseteste's most famous scientific work is his On Light, in which he argues that light is the basis of all matter, combining Christian creation doctrine with Aristotle's system of the universe. Grosseteste also wrote important essays on meteorology, color, and optics as well as on mathematics; he was one of the first western thinkers to argue that natural phenomena can be described mathematically. Among Grosseteste's original philosophical contributions are an attempt to classify the various forms of knowledge in On Truth. Grosseteste also wrote a number of short theological treatises between 1214 and 1235, covering subjects such as free will, causes emanating from God, and the knowledge of God. These writings also engaged his scientific and philosophical interests; critics note that Grosseteste's writings, whether on scientific, philosophical, or theological subjects, emphasized a synthesis of ideas across disciplines.
Although science was important to Grosseteste, he devoted most of his intellectual energies in later life to questions of theological import. Of particular interest to biblical scholars are his translations and works of pastoral care written between 1235 and 1253. He also produced a new translation of the works of the Byzantine theologian John Damascene as well as the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, a text that he considered further proof that Jesus was the promised Messiah. His Hexaëmeron, or commentary on the Book of Genesis, which emphasized the eternity of the world, was particularly influential on other thirteenth-century authors.
Grosseteste also played a pivotal role in the introduction of Aristotle to scholastic thought, producing commentaries on a number of the ancient philosopher's works. His translation of the Nicomachean Ethics made this important work available to the West in its entirety for the first time. Grosseteste's translation was used, for example, by Albert the Great and Thomas Aquinas, opening up a whole new area of moral discussion in the Middle Ages.
Scholars concede that it is difficult to define Grosseteste's position in the history of thirteenth-century thought. Today he is virtually unknown outside a small scholarly circle of medievalists, yet his impact on the development of learning in the Middle Ages is immeasurable. He was one of the pioneers of scholasticism, although his interests lay in moral questions rather than in logic or metaphysics. He laid great emphasis on clear thinking and intellectual pursuits, yet he also stressed the importance of the study of scripture. During his own time Grosseteste was known for his scientific learning; the writer Roger Bacon, who was also a critic of Grosseteste, declared that “No one really knew the sciences, except the Lord Robert, Bishop of Lincoln, by reason of his length of life and experience, as well as of his studiousness and zeal.” Bacon also admired Grosseteste's broad knowledge of mathematics, philosophy, language, and the Bible, noting, “he knew mathematics and perspective, and there was nothing which he was unable to know, and at the same time he was sufficiently acquainted with languages to be able to understand the saints and the philosophers and the wise men of antiquity.” His translations of Aristotle from the Greek and theological works from the Hebrew were invaluable to medieval thinkers after him, including Aquinas, Albert the Great, and Wyclif. Critics have asserted that perhaps Grosseteste's greatest achievement was in producing a synthesis of thought in science, philosophy, and theology that was to become central in the intellectual development of the Middle Ages, paving the way for the synthesis of reason and faith that was Aquinas's great contribution.
Because of its technical nature, much of Grosseteste's work remains unedited. Most modern scholars have concentrated on his scientific writings, although there has been some discussion about his contributions to the development of the intellectual history of the thirteenth century. Critics have also been impressed by Grosseteste's care and accuracy in translating Aristotle's works, with his wide range of intellectual interests and his concern with more practical matters, and by his sensitive discussion of detailed theological issues. They have also remarked on the evolution in Grosseteste's thought from his time in Oxford to his days as Bishop. All in all, Grosseteste is an admired figure among specialists in medieval philosophy and theology for his vast learning and contributions to the intellectual development of his age.
De artibus liberalibus (philosophical-scientific-theological treatise) 1214-35
De Calore Solis [On the Heat of the Sun] (scientific treatise) c. 1214-35
De Colore [On Colors] (scientific treatise) c. 1214-35
De Cessatione Legalium [On Setting aside the Law] (theological treatise) c. 1214-35
Le Chasteau d'Amour [The Castle of Love] (romance) c. 1214-35
Commentarium in VIII Libros Physicorum [Commentary on the Eight Books of [Aristotle's] Physics] (commentary) c. 1214-35
Commentarius in Posterium Analyticorum Libros [Commentary on [Aristotle's] Posterior Analytics] (commentary) c. 1214-35
De Cometis [On Comets] (scientific treatise) c. 1214-35
De Computo [On Computation] (scientific-mathematical treatise) c. 1214-35
Confessioun [Confession] (theological treatise) c. 1214-35
De Decem Mandatis [On the Ten Commandments] (theological commentary) c. 1214-35
De Differentiis Localibus [On the Differences of Places] (scientific treatise) c. 1214-35
De Finitate Motus et Temporis [On the Finitude of Motion and Time] (scientific treatise) c. 1214-35
(The entire section is 666 words.)
SOURCE: Stevenson, Francis Seymour. “Chapter X: 1239-1244.” In Robert Grosseteste, Bishop of Lincoln: A Contribution to the Religious, Political, and Intellectual History of the Thirteenth Century, pp. 223-40. New York: Macmillan and Co. Limited, 1899.
[In the following essay, Stevenson discusses Grosseteste's literary and academic activities between 1239 and 1244, including his efforts in promoting the revival of learning, his translations of The Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, and other writings.]
It might have been thought that Grosseteste's time, during the period which elapsed between 1239 and 1244, would have been so fully occupied with the reorganisation of religious work within his diocese, with the numerous disputes in which he was engaged, and with the active part he took in public affairs, that he would have found no opportunity either for literary occupations or for sustained interest in the fortunes of the University with which his career had been so closely interwoven. Such, however, was not the case. To the period in question must be assigned (1) his renewed effort to promote the revival of Greek studies; (2) his translation from Greek into Latin of the work known as the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, as well as of a treatise ascribed to Dionysius the Areopagite, and other writings;1 (3) his contributions to the literature of rural and domestic...
(The entire section is 6462 words.)
SOURCE: Dunbabin, Jean. “Robert Grosseteste as Translator, Transmitter, and Commentator: The Nichomachean Ethics.” Traditio: Studies in Ancient and Medieval History, Thought, and Religion 28 (1972): 460-72.
[In the following essay, Dunbabin examines Grosseteste's translation of the Nichomachean Ethics, commenting on its accuracy, range of scholarship, clarity, logical precision, and philosophical skill, and lauding it as an example of the foundation Grosseteste laid for future commentators on Aristotle's work.]
Because Robert Grosseteste's translation of Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics is now seen as having provided the framework for a dynamic study of Aristotle's moral philosophy, more significance must be attached to what itself became the standard translation in the Middle Ages. That Grosseteste was responsible both for the full translation of Aristotle's text and for the translation of the Greek commentaries which accompany the Ethics in twenty-one known manuscripts1 modern scholars are now in agreement.2 Grosseteste's work on the Nicomachean Ethics has been dated confidently to the 1240s, arguably to 1246-47,3 and scholars have tended to stress the rapidity with which the Aristotelian ethics were assimilated in the thirteenth century,4 in contrast, for example, with the slow progress recorded by John of Salisbury on...
(The entire section is 6109 words.)
SOURCE: Purday, Kevin M. “The Diffinicio Eucariste of Robert Grosseteste.” Journal of Theological Studies 27, no. 2 (October 1976): 381-90.
[In the following essay, Purday discusses the theological issues described in the Diffinicio Eucaristie,, arguing that the work, whose authorship has been under dispute, should be attributed to Grosseteste.]
The philosophical and scientific works of Robert Grosseteste, first chancellor of Oxford University and Bishop of Lincoln from 1235 until his death in 1253, have in recent decades received considerable attention.1 His theological works, however, have been somewhat neglected. Edward Brown published some of the sermons and Dicta in 1690,2 a few of the sermons have been individually published,3 and there has been a recent publication of sixteen Dicta in translation.4 These, together with a few other individual pieces, represent the sum total of the printed theological works of Grosseteste. Of all his theological writings, his treatise on the Eucharist is particularly interesting since it provides an insight into the state of Eucharistic theology well after the Berengarian controversy but before the full impact of Aristotelianism was felt.
As far as is known, Robert Grosseteste's treatise on the Eucharist is to be found in only one place in the manuscript collections....
(The entire section is 4072 words.)
SOURCE: Evans, G. R. “The ‘Conclusiones’ of Robert Grosseteste's Commentary on the Posterior Analytics.” Studi Medievali 24, no. 2 (December 1983): 729-34.
[In the following essay, Evans remarks on the clarity of the demonstrative style used by Grosseteste in his commentary on Aristotle's Posterior Analytics, noting that Grosseteste points out the conclusiones, or principles of demonstrative science, as they emerge from the philosopher's work.]
In the middle of the twelfth century Thierry of Chartres made a collection of all the textbooks of the seven liberal arts of which he was able to obtain copies. He was able to include all the works of Aristotle's Organon except the Posterior Analytics1. A decade later John of Salisbury wrote an abrasive account of the work of the schools as he had known them twenty years earlier when he was a student at Paris, with, no doubt, additional matter which he had heard about since. He knew of the Posterior Analytics but he has little to say in its favour. It is a subtilis scientia which is incomprehensible to all but a few (paucis ingeniis pervia)2. He knows that it deals with the ars demonstrandi, which he considers to be the most difficult of all the techniques of formal reasoning (prae ceteris rationibus disserendi ardua)3. Hardly anyone studies it because it...
(The entire section is 3001 words.)
SOURCE: Marrone, Steven P. “Truth in Simple Knowledge according to Grosseteste's Early Works.” In William of Auvergne and Robert Grosseteste, pp. 144-56. Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press, 1983.
[In the following essay, Marrone examines Grosseteste's early theological treatises, arguing that they offer insights into Grosseteste's later views, particularly regarding his ideas about truth as a simple quality, and the scientific ideal of knowledge as it evolved in his work.]
The theological treaties of Grosseteste's early years represented a less elaborate and complete investigation of the problem of truth than was to be found in his commentaries on Aristotle, but more important than this, they struck a philosophical tone quite different from that of his later works. It should hardly be surprising that this was the case, since as much as fifteen years may have intervened between the composition of the two sets of works, and they were years of great intellectual ferment both at Oxford and at the University of Paris. Nevertheless, the shift in Grosseteste's views has been virtually overlooked in modern expositions of his thought.1 Its importance for a study of this sort cannot be stressed too much.
The key to the difference between the two sets of works is that only in the latter did Grosseteste come to espouse the scientific ideal of knowledge and to take an...
(The entire section is 4858 words.)
SOURCE: De Jonge, M. “Robert Grosseteste and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.” Journal of Theological Studies 42, Part I (April 1991): 115-25.
[In the following essay, de Jonge explores the reasons for Grosseteste's interest in the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, also speculating on why the text was considered so significant by his contemporaries.]
This article is devoted to the introduction of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs in the West by Robert Grosseteste, who had it brought from Greece to England and translated it into Latin in 1242.
Modern scholars number the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs among the pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, and generally regard them as a Jewish writing with substantial Christian interpolations. In his dissertation and in subsequent writings, the present author has argued that much more than interpolation is involved.1 In 1953 he treated the Testaments as a Christian writing, but since then he has adopted a more cautious attitude.2 At the least this is a case of thoroughgoing redaction, and it is impossible to reconstruct the original Jewish Testaments (if they existed at all) by means of literary criticism. The text as we have it is a Christian text, probably dating from the end of the second century ce.
(The entire section is 4477 words.)
SOURCE: McEvoy, James. “Robert Grosseteste on the Ten Commandments.” Recherches de Theologie Ancienne et Medievale 58 (January-December 1991): 167-205.
[In the following essay, McEvoy argues that Grosseteste's popular treatise on the decalogue was written for a well-educated clerical public; that its most notable doctrinal theme is Christian love; and that it comments favorably on the structure of feudal society while also pointing out and castigating abuses within that system.]
The treatise of Grosseteste on the decalogue bore in medieval times a number of titles: de decem preceptis; de mandatis; summa de decem mandatis; de dileccione et decem mandatis; libellus de decem preceptis decalogi1. No such doubt, however, or variation of opinion affected its authenticity, and no scribe attributed the treatise to any but Lincolniensis. Such connoisseurs of Grosseteste as Gascoigne and Wyclif were quite certain of its attribution, about which indeed no doubt has ever been entertained: the bibliographers, beginning with Boston of Bury, all knew it as a writing of Grosseteste.
If we are to judge by the surviving witnesses to the text and by their owners, the treatise on the decalogue was read less in the century of its composition than in the subsequent period up to c.1500; almost all of the manuscripts date from the fourteenth and...
(The entire section is 16015 words.)
SOURCE: Southern, Richard William. “The Grosseteste Problem.” In Robert Grosseteste: The Growth of an English Mind in Medieval Europe, pp. 3-25. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986.
[In the following essay, Southern examines contrasting interpretations of Grosseteste's ideas, demonstrating how commentators perceive Grosseteste as both a moderate figure representative of papal reform and an eccentric extremist.]
I. DIVERGENT VIEWS
The thoughts and actions of all notable historical characters offer grounds for wide differences of interpretation. But Robert Grosseteste offers more grounds, and has been the subject of more widely contrasting interpretations, than most. Observers in his own day, and interpreters ever since, have tended to portray him either as an extremist, in varying ways original, eccentric, discordant; or as an essentially moderate and representative figure in the central stream of European scholastic and scientific thought, and of papally directed ecclesiastical reform and pastoral care. The second of these views has won an increasing measure of support in recent scholarship, but his contemporaries and their medieval successors were more evenly divided. Two of the main reporters of the thirteenth century, Matthew Paris and Roger Bacon, emphasize (for blame or praise) his eccentricity and his violent—or at least prolonged and determined—opposition to some of the...
(The entire section is 9157 words.)
Callus, Daniel A. “Robert Grosseteste as Scholar.” In Robert Grosseteste, Scholar and Bishop: Essays in Commemoration of the Seventh Centenary of His Death, edited by D. A. Callus, pp. 1-69. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1955.
Collection of essays by notable medievalists on the 700th anniversary of the death of Grosseteste, covering topics such as his status as a scholar, his position in the history of science, his library, his administration of the diocese of Lincoln, his relations with the papacy and crown, and the attempt to canonize him.
Crombie, A. C. “Grosseteste's Writings on the Theory of Science.” In Robert Grosseteste and the Origins of Experimental Science 1100-1700, pp. 44-60. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1953.
Speculates on the dates of Grosseteste's writings on the theory of science and offers a detailed examination of the foundations of his position.
Dales, Richard C. “The Influence of Grosseteste's Hexameron on the Sentences Commentaries of Richard Fishacre, O. P. and Richard Rufus of Cornwall, O. F. M..” Viator: Medieval and Renaissance Studies (1971): 271-300.
Charts the nature and extent of the influence of Grosseteste's Hexaëmeron on some thirteenth-century authors.
———. “Robert Grosseteste's Place in Medieval...
(The entire section is 646 words.)