Decretum Gratiani

In the first half of the 12th century Gratian, clusinus episcopus, probably a jurist of the ecclesiastical forum and a teacher, at the monastery of Saints Nabor and Felix (according to the Bolognese Odofredus Denariis [13th century]) and starting from the 18th century believed to have been a Camaldolese monk, The so-called or vulgate version (an advanced editorial stage) of the is divided into three parts (, , ). • The first part is divided into 101 distinctions (), the first 20 of which form an introduction to the general principles of canon law (); the remainder constitutes a , relative to ecclesiastical persons and function. • The second part contains 36 causes (), divided into questions (), and treat of ecclesiastical administration, procedural issues and marriage. 3 of 33 on penance () is treated separately and subdivided into 7 distinctions. • The third part deals with sacramental and liturgical law and contains 5 distinctions. Each distinction or question contains , or maxims of Gratian, and . Gratian himself raises questions and brings forward difficulties, which he answers by quoting , i. e. canons of councils, decretals of the popes, texts of the Scripture or of the Fathers. These are the ; the entire remaining portion, even the summaries of the canons and the chronological indications, are called the maxims or . Many have been inserted in the by authors of a later date. These are the , so called from Paucapalea, the name of the principal commentator on the . The Roman revisers of the 16th century (1566–1582) corrected the text of the "Decree" and added many critical notes designated by the words . Citing the The is cited by referring to the larger units of the distinction or the cause and question, and then the specific canon or dictum. For clarity, the distinctions of 33, 3 of the second part are referred to as (or ), while the distinctions of the third part are referred to as (or ). The Part is usually not included, as the citation form is different for each. Citation styles for the have changed over time and can generally be categorised under the modern, obsolescent, and obsolete forms. Modern form This form, common since the twentieth century, cites all units in Arabic numerals, from largest unit to smallest unit. Distinctions are referenced by an uppercase "D.", Causes by an uppercase "C.", questions by a lowercase "q.", and canons by a lowercase "c.". Gratian's are referred to with a lowercase "d. a. c." (, for commentary preceding the canon) or "d. p. c." (, for commentary following the canon). Examples: • [Part I] D. 23 c.7 • [Part II] C. 15 q. 2 c. 4 • [Part II] C. 23 q. 8 d. p. c. 25 • [Part II, ] D. 3 de pen. c. 24 • [Part III] D. 2 de cons. c. 82 Obsolescent form Commonly used between the seventeenth and early twentieth centuries, this form generally begins with a reference to the smallest unit in Arabic numerals, followed by the Distinction or Cause in Roman numerals and (if required) the question in Arabic numerals, e.g. "c. 5, C.3 q.1". Obsolete form This is the form used by medieval and early modern writers, falling out of use after the eighteenth century. Major divisions () were cited with (usually Roman) numerals. Since the numbering of the 's capitula only became standard in the sixteenth century, canons were cited by their opening word(s). Two or more canons beginning with the same word/phrase might be distinguished with numbers, e.g. . Examples (using the same references as above): • • • • • Early commentators might also refer to the first few canons by number (e.g. for the third canon of a distinction), or to the last few canons as (, that is, third to last), (or or , second to last), and () or (last). ==Author==

Gratian () was a canon lawyer from Etruria, probably working in the former feudal state of Matilda of Tuscany (mainly in Tuscany and Emilia region) as well as in Reims (1131), Rome, Bologna, Venice (1143) and Chiusi. He flourished in the second quarter of the twelfth century. He died on 10 August around the middle of the 12th century as bishop of Chiusi in Tuscany. Little else is known about him. He is sometimes incorrectly referred to as Franciscus Gratianus, Johannes Gratian, or Giovanni Graziano. For a long time he was believed to have been born around 1100, at Ficulle in Umbria, based on a chronicle of illustrious men of the 14th century attributed to an exponent of the powerful Colonna family, who had possessions in Ficulle. He was said to have become a monk at Camaldoli and then taught at the monastery of St. Felix in Bologna and devoted his life to studying theology and canon law, but contemporary scholars do not attach credibility to these traditions. Since the 11th century, some cities of central-northern Italy such as Arezzo, Pisa, Bologna had been the centre of the study of Roman law, after the was rediscovered in western Europe. In the second half of the 11th century and at the beginning of the 12th century Roman law was generally studied and applied only in the cities (seat of the diocese) in which there was an imperial Prefecture, where imperial and ecclesiastical jurists (and courts) coexisted (such as Pisa and Bologna), with mutual interference. However, from the first editorial stages of the it is clear that Gratian had little knowledge of Roman law and that he had a great sense of depth in the disputes dealt with in the ecclesiastical seats, especially in the appeal judgments dealt with in the Roman curia. Therefore, some scholars today exclude that he was trained in Justinian Roman law and that (at the beginning of his career) he worked mainly in certain cities (such as Arezzo, Pisa or Bologna) where Roman law was known and applied for years, it being plausible that he came from an episcopal city in which all jurisdiction, both civil and ecclesiastical, was dealt with by the only court present: the ecclesiastical one. Perhaps also for this reason he feels the need to create a legal work to be applied only in ecclesial courts and only for cases relating to canon law, putting an end to the mixture between civil and ecclesiastical jurisdictions. It is no coincidence that Dante Alighieri writes that he helped "one and the other forum", that is, he separated the canonical jurisdiction from the civil one. Gratian's work was an attempt, using early scholastic method, to reconcile seemingly contradictory canons from previous centuries. Gratian quoted a great number of authorities, including the Bible, papal and conciliar legislation, church fathers such as Augustine of Hippo, and secular law in his efforts to reconcile the canons. Gratian found a place in Dante's Paradise among the doctors of the Church: He has long been acclaimed as (Latin: "Father of Canon Law"), a title he shares with his successor St. Raymond of Penyafort. Gratian was the father and the first teacher of the which he himself coined: the new canon law or . Many of his disciples have become highly renowned canonists. ==Textual history==

The vulgate version of Gratian's collection was completed at some point after the Second Council of the Lateran of 1139, which it quotes. Research by Anders Winroth established that some manuscripts of an early version of Gratian's text, which differs considerably from the mainstream textual tradition, have survived. With later commentaries and supplements, the work was incorporated into the . The quickly became the standard textbook for students of canon law throughout Europe, but it never received any formal, official recognition by the papacy. Only the of 1917 put it out of use. As late as 1997, scholars commonly set the date of completion at 1140, but this accuracy in dating is not possible after Anders Winroth's groundbreaking scholarship. Winroth's research shows that the existed in two published recensions. The first dates to sometime after 1139, while the second dates to 1150 at the latest. There are several major differences between the two recensions: • The first recension is a more coherent and analytical work. • The second recension places a much greater emphasis on papal primacy and power. • The second recension includes Roman law extracts taken directly from the , whereas the first recension does not demonstrate substantial familiarity with Roman jurisprudence. These differences led Winroth to conclude that Roman law was not as far developed by 1140 as scholars had previously thought. He has also argued that the second recension was due not to the original author of the first recension (whom he calls Gratian 1), but rather another jurist versed in Roman law. However, Winroth's thesis of two Gratians remains controversial. This field of inquiry is hampered by ignorance of the compiler's identity and the existence of manuscripts with abbreviated versions of the text or variant versions not represented by Winroth's two recensions. One of these is the manuscript St. Gall, , 673 (=Sg), which some have argued contains the earliest known draft (Larrainzar's ) of the , but which other scholars have argued contains an abbreviation of the first recension expanded with texts taken from the second recension. == Criticism ==

During the Reformation, individuals such as Martin Luther strongly criticized the claims of papal primacy within the . One of Luther's chief concerns surrounded 40 (Chapter "") which reads: Additional concerns about papal primacy in the context of 2 Thessalonians 2:4 were raised regarding Distinctio 96 chapter 7 which reads: == Sources ==

in Ghent, Belgium. Gratian himself named his work – "Concord of Discordant Canons". The name is fitting: Gratian tried to harmonize apparently contradictory canons with each other, by discussing different interpretations and deciding on a solution, as a judge in a case. This dialectical approach allowed for other law professors to work with the and to develop their own solutions and commentaries. These legists are known as the decretists. These commentaries were called glosses. Editions printed in the 15th, 16th or 17th century frequently included the glosses along with the text. Collections of glosses were called "gloss apparatus" or (see also glossator). Systematic commentaries were called . Some of these were soon in circulation as well and obtained the same level of fame as the itself. Early commentators included Paucapalea and Magister Rolandus. The most important commentators were probably Rufin of Bologna (died before 1192) and Huguccio (died 1210). Less well-known was the commentary of Simon of Bisignano, which consisted of the Glosses on the and the . Peter Lombard borrowed and adapted from the when discussing penance in his Sentences (c. 1150). Importance in Western law Because of its influence as a source of canon law, the served as an influence for 12th-century jurists in the development of Western legal systems and their rules of evidence, which in canon law (including in the Decretum) did not include trial by ordeal and by battle. The author Thomas Woods called the "the first comprehensive and systematic legal treatise in the history of the West, and perhaps in the history of mankind – if by 'comprehensive' is meant the attempt to embrace virtually the entire law of a given polity, and if by 'systematic' is meant the express effort to codify that law as a single body, in which all parts are viewed as interacting to form a whole." The made a direct contribution to the development of Western law in areas that it dealt with such as marriage, property and inheritance. Specific concepts preferred included consent for marriage, and wrongful intent in determining whether a certain act constituted a crime. The Corpus Juris Civilis and Digesta were 'comprehensive' and preceded it, and so did the 'systematic' Institutes but covered only 'private law'. == References ==