WRITING AUTHORITY IN LATE MEDIEVAL ... - Cornell University

needs direct access to knowledge—that is, so he would know how to ask for information, how to
think, how to be curious. For example, Ranulf Higden in his Ars Componendi makes curiosity
the key to any type of Latin exposition of the text, writing:
It is expedient for the preacher, as long as this is inoffensive to God, that from the start he render
his audience willing and attentive listeners and concerned about following the argument…This
method is also effective when the cause of some obscure saying is pointed out. So if why the eye
is not a fixed color is discussed, the answer is because, if it were, it would perceive only one
hue—the color of the eye itself—and there ought to be as many perceptions as colors. This saying
can be applied to sinners, especially the avaricious and deceitful who, in that they are fixed in
opposition, do not perceive the operation of God’s word. 391
True, not knowing Latin may prevent a layman from not knowing what he “scholde axe,” but the
Latinate clerical tradition had already incorporated and encouraged curiosity in its preaching. By
starting from a difficult observation—like the discussion of eye color—Higden advises preachers
to encourage their audience to question through the orthodox exposition of biblical truth. Thus,
in wishing to give to a lay audience the tools to think, the Dominus incorporates an important
precept of Latinate biblical exposition, namely curiosity.
In both of these examples, Latinate translation and exposition think of clarity as a trope
eventhough they explain their concepts—of pedagogy and curiosity—through less than clear
terms by alluding to biblical passages or scientific discussions. As a result, we cannot say that
“clarity” and pedagogical exposition is simply Trevisa’s way of bringing knowledge closer to his
audience’s hands away from Latinate means of exposition. We can say that there is some irony
in how Dominus deploys these very Latinate arguments against the Latin tradition, which
engendered them, by arguing that knowledge is only achieved for English readers once the need
for a Latin teacher is removed. This sets up a contradiction. In Dominus’s formulation, English
can teach ideas because its speakers have legitimate linguistic tools to articulate Latinate
concepts, such as “costa,” in their own terms. However, English translations are needed because
391 Ranulfus Higden, Ars Componendi Sermones, trans. Margaret Jennings (Peeters: Paris, 2003) 49.
234