# Satan's lawsuits and dialogues on salvation in the Late Middle Ages *

Carmen Cardelle de Hartmann

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

## To cite this version:

Carmen Cardelle de Hartmann. Satan's lawsuits and dialogues on salvation in the Late Middle Ages
*. Doctoral. Kings College, London, United Kingdom. 2014. hal-05052860v2

HAL Id: hal-05052860

https://hal.science/hal-05052860v2

Submitted on 13 May 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
# Satan's lawsuits and dialogues on salvation in the Late Middle Ages*

Carmen Cardelle de Hartmann

## Abstract

This paper introduces the reader to a group of Latin works, the dialogues on salvation, in which biblical figures discuss human redemption. A peculiarity of these dialogues is that they usually have a narrative setting, situating them in place and time, and some dramatic action, although they were not written to be performed. One of them, the *Processus Sathanae*, presents the devil filing a lawsuit at the heavenly court to regain possession of humankind. This work is conserved in several versions, including some in vernacular languages, and presents central theological problems in an entertaining, often humorous manner, paying also attention to judicial procedure. Whereas there are no dialogues on salvation from the Early and High Middle Ages, the genre was widespread in the late medieval period, before their popularity faded during Reformation and Counter-Reformation. The Latin texts seem to have circulated above all in the environment of universities. This paper argues that their success resides in their combining discussion of doctrinal problems with an appeal to emotion and imagination that is characteristic of late medieval piety. Since scholastic theology was highly technical 1, such a combination had become rare but was still attractive for readers, especially those with an academic background.

In the Middle Ages, many authors, particularly those writing in Latin, chose to present their subject matter through a conversational exchange among characters.<fnref n="1" /> The numerous Latin dialogues have different degrees of complexity in the characterization of the figures and of their interaction. According to these aspects and to their contents, four main types can be defined—didactic, polemic, philosophical and introspective dialogues—which are not well-defined genres, but rather points of orientation in a continuum. Thus, a particular work can be related to two different types or to other, non-dialogic genres.

The simplest form of dialogue is the exposition of a subject matter in questions and answers, formulated by two figures representing types, such as ‘teacher’ and ‘pupil’ in didactic dialogues. Many polemical dialogues simply contrapose types (for instance, ‘Christian and ‘Jew’) declaring their position; in other cases, though, the characters engage in an exchange of arguments, lending

<footnote>* This paper was scheduled to be published in print in 2021. This could not be done, therefore it is published now (May 2025) in HAL. The text has not been changed, the bibliography goes therefore only until 2020.</footnote>

<footnote n="1">¹ In this introduction, I summarize the results of my research on medieval dialogues (Cardelle de Hartmann 2007). The repertory includes only dialogues written in the period 1200–1400, but the first part also considers early and high medieval works, as well as some later ones. For a summary of the characteristics of medieval prose dialogues, cf. 261–67, for the different denominations of dialogues, cf. 29–57, the four types are discussed 58–247.</footnote>
the work some similarity to the philosophical dialogues. Some authors slightly individualize their
characters, for instance giving them a forename or making some reference to their status, even
identifying them with a historical person. In the introspective dialogues, the interlocutors are
allegorical figures, such as Ratio, Anima or Homo, of which one admonishes the other, offering
guidance in religious and moral matters.

It is unusual to find a dialogue in which more than two figures interact. This might be due, at
least in part, to the erroneous but widespread belief that the etymology of *dialogus* is not διὰ but
δύο, which is also reflected in the creation of new words such as *trialogus*, *tetralogus* and the
like. The setting of medieval Latin dialogues is usually very simple. Most of them appear to take
place out of time and space; sometimes, there is a short narrative passage at the beginning or
even a small frame narrative giving a context for the discussion. Only in very exceptional cases
do the characters move from one place to another, or interrupt their conversation because time
has elapsed, the night is approaching, or they have other occupations.

From 1400 on, the imitation of classical authors such as Cicero and the translation of Greek
works, especially of Lucian of Samosata's dialogues, bring about remarkable changes in Latin
dialogue literature, which acquires new forms, increases the argumentative complexity and
develops dramatic qualities. Even before this time, in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries,
there are works aside from the four main types that present a more elaborate setting and even
theatrical traits: the allegorical dialogues, similar to the moralities of medieval drama, and some
texts for which we have suggested the name 'dialogues on salvation and devil's lawsuits' and
which are the subject of this paper.<fnref n="2" /> This group of texts will be presented in the next section, and
then one of them, the *Processus Sathane*, will be discussed in some detail. On this basis, we shall
analyse their common generic characteristics, to discuss finally in which way they relate to late
medieval spirituality.

Dialogues on salvation and other late medieval dialogues with biblical figures

In the dialogues on salvation, biblical figures—mostly central characters such as Christ, Mary,
the Devil or God the Father himself—debate on the condition of humanity and take decisions

<footnote n="2">² Cardelle de Hartmann, *Lateinische Dialoge*, 233–47.</footnote>
about its redemption. Sometimes, there are only two figures, but there can also be a whole group, and the interaction can imply their successive coming and going, as well as their emotional actions. We discuss here the Latin texts that formed the genre, but it is important to remark that there are also vernacular works, of which some are translations or adaptations of Latin dialogues.<fnref n="3" /> In one case, the *Questiones inter Christum et diabolum*, the Latin work might even be a translation of a vernacular original.<fnref n="4" />

The group of Latin dialogues with biblical figures appears to be small, but it is likely that we are only viewing the tip of the iceberg, since it is difficult to make targeted searches for this kind of works in catalogues or databases, given the lack of a generic denomination in the titling.

Moreover, there are still many undescribed late medieval manuscripts in which texts of this kind probably slumber. The number of texts would also increase if we considered dialogic scenes included in other text types, for instance in sermons.

Most of the medieval Latin dialogues on salvation are anonymous, and it is difficult even to specify their date and origin. The *terminus post quem* is usually given by some textual reference, the *terminus ante quem* by the oldest manuscript known. Most probably, the texts considered here were written in the thirteenth or fourteenth century. They were written in England, France, Italy and the German Empire, and, judging by the provenance of the manuscripts, they were read all over Latin Europe.<fnref n="5" /> From the sixteenth century on, the interest on them seems to wither.

The texts are listed below with some basic information on their origin and their content.

Numbers 6 and 7 combine different types of dialogue with lengthy narrative passages and include allegorical figures, having some common characteristics with the allegorical dialogues<fnref n="6" />:

1) *Conflictus inter Deum et diabolum* (second half of the twelfth century or beginning of the thirteenth, probably written in England): The Devil accuses Christ of robbing him of his

<footnote n="3">³ For an overview of the vernacular texts cf. Cardelle de Hartman, ‘Satan vor Gericht’ and *Lateinische Dialoge*, 300–03, 323–29, 646–48, 692.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Further, Crawford, ‘The Catalan Mascaró’n’ supposes that the Latin *Mascaron* is a translation of the passage in Jacob van Maerlant’s *Merlin*, as the latter antedates the manuscripts of the former. However, the differences between the texts are too great to determine the exact relationship between both.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ The manuscripts are listed in the repertory entries of Cardelle de Hartmann, *Lateinische Dialoge* quoted in the following footnotes.</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶ In Cardelle de Hartmann *Lateinische Dialoge*, 242–47, I considered those two works allegorical dialogues; actually, they combine characteristics of both types.</footnote>
rightful possession, mankind. The angels act corporately as judges and dismiss the action.
The text has been transmitted in three manuscripts.<fnref n="7" />

2) *Questio Christi ad Cain* (falsely attributed in some manuscripts to Jakob of Paradies, written between the middle of the twelfth and the end of the fourteenth century, probably in Germany): Christ comes to the underworld to rescue the just from limbo. The spokesman for the inhabitants of hell, Cain, tries to convince Christ to free them too.<fnref n="8" />

3) *Processus Sathanae* (transmitted in three redactions, written between the end of the thirteenth and the end of the fourteenth century): This text is discussed in detail in Section 2 of this paper.

4) *Questiones inter Christum et diabolum* (transmitted in at least two redactions, written between the middle of the twelfth century and the late thirteenth century in Northern Italy): The devil sits on the cross and talks to the crucified Jesus, trying to prevent him from redeeming mankind.<fnref n="9" />

5) *Dialogus lucis et tenebrarum*, written by an author from the territories of modern Austria in the second half of the thirteenth century: Satan comes to the heavenly court to file a suit on Jesus for having stolen mankind from hell. Gabriel represents Christ as his attorney. The lawsuit is described in great detail.<fnref n="10" />

6) *Liber dialogorum* of John of Jenstein (Jan z Jeňstejna, Bohemia, 1347/48 – 1400): The text describes the drama of redemption centred in a man (*homo*), who after losing all is seduced by a devil. An angel rescues him after disputing with the devil and shows him the way of salvation in a long conversation.<fnref n="11" />

7) *Legatio prophetarum ad Deum* (written in the fourteenth century, probably in Germany, attributed in a manuscript to an otherwise unknown Frater Nicolaus de Spina): The work is mostly written in dialogue form, but also includes narrative parts and is organized in many episodes. The main storyline is as follows: After Adam's sin, the devil acquires dominion over mankind. The righteous men who have to dwell in limbo after their death send four ambassadors to God trying to persuade Him to redeem mankind. As God refuses, they seek a virgin free of sin and send her to God. The Trinity discusses which person should incarnate and decides on the Son. The devils suspect that something is going wrong when they hear

<footnote n="7">⁷ Edition on the basis of the three known manuscripts Marx, ‘An Edition and Study’. On this work cf. Marx, *The Devil’s Rights*, 60–64; Cardelle de Hartmann, *Lateinische Dialoge*, 300–01; Marx, ‘The Conflictus’.</footnote>

<footnote n="8">⁸ Edition of the oldest manuscript (other three are known): Schmidt, ‘Altercatio Cayn’. The title in the manuscript is *Questio Christi ad Cain*, whereas *Altercatio Cayn cum Christo* has apparently been supplied by the editor. Cf. Cardelle de Hartmann *Lateinische Dialoge*, 301–03.</footnote>

<footnote n="9">⁹ Unedited. Cf. Cardelle de Hartmann, *Lateinische Dialoge*, 323–29 for a detailed summary of the contents and a discussion of the date, the redactions and the relationship to an Italian text, *Piaito ch’ebbe Dio con l’inimico*.</footnote>

<footnote n="10">¹⁰ Unedited. An edition is being currently prepared by Thomas Ziegler as part of a PhD thesis under my supervision. The date and origin mentioned in the paper are the result of his research. The thesis will be finished soon. In the meantime, cf. Cardelle de Hartmann *Lateinische Dialoge*, 362–66.</footnote>

<footnote n="11">¹¹ This work has been only partially edited by Weltsch, *Archbishop John of Jenstein*, 180–85. For a detailed summary of the contents cf. Cardelle de Hartmann *Lateinische Dialoge*, 646–48.</footnote>
about Jesus, his doctrine and his miracles, but they cannot avert his death and the redemption of mankind. The work ends with a description of the Last Judgment.<fnref n="12" />

It is also possible to find some instances of poetic debates featuring biblical figures, which even include legal argumentation: The *Discussio litis super hereditate Lazari et Marie Magdalene* (written probably in the thirteenth century, perhaps by Drogo of Altovillari) presents Lazarus reclaiming his property, which during the three days in which he was dead had been inherited by his sisters, and discussing his claim with his sister Maria in the presence of a judge<fnref n="13" />; the *Altercatio de utroque Iohanne*, written by Franco of Meschede (Cologne, 1319–1332), presents fully developed judicial proceedings, in which John the Baptist and John the Evangelist litigate about which of them is to be considered superior in dignity and holiness.<fnref n="14" /> Contrary to the prose dialogues, they do not touch on questions related to salvation and therefore will not be examined here.

The figures in the prose dialogues discuss problems related to sin and redemption: Why did the Son of God redeem humankind, whereas the rebel angels were damned for all eternity? Did the devil win any rights over humanity after Adam and Eve had sinned against God? Why was it necessary for God to become a man? Which men and women born before Christ’s coming were saved by his death? Where had they been until Christ led them into heaven? And what chances of salvation does each Christian individual have?

## Processus Sathanae

<footnote n="12">¹² Unedited. An edition is being prepared by Peter Tóth. For a detailed summary and discussion on date, author and origin cf. Cardelle de Hartmann *Lateinische Dialoge*, 692–95. On the relationship of this work to the Low German play *Sündenfall* by Arnold Immesen and to a sermon by the Hungarian friar Pelbartus of Temeshwar cf. Tóth, ‘The Prophets’ Cry’, 82–92.</footnote>

<footnote n="13">¹³ Editions: Walther, *Das Streitgedicht*, 234–48; Bachmann, *Drogo de Altovillari*. The attribution to Drogo of Altovillari made by Bachmann is not sure. On this text, see Rippl, ‘Literatur – Recht – Erzählen’ and Gebert, ‘Das Erbe des Lazarus’.</footnote>

<footnote n="14">¹⁴ The text is transmitted in two redactions, of which the shorter, with dedication to Pope John XXII, has been edited in Blume and Dreves, *Pia dictamina*. There is a second, enlarged redaction with dedication to Archbishop Walram of Cologne. The prose preface to this later redaction has been edited by Walther, *Das Streitgedischt*, 130–32. On this work, cf. Gärtner ‘Franko von Meschede’, and Eichenberger, *Geistliches Erzählen*, 411–16.</footnote>
These problems, which are central to Christian thought and which, by that time, had been
discussed in depth in theological treatises, are negotiated in the dialogues on salvation in a
peculiar way, as will be shown using the *Processus Sathanae* as an example.

The research on this work began in the nineteenth century with Roderich Stintzing, who discerned three redactions (Stintzing 1867, 262–71). Afterwards, several scholars found more manuscripts and early prints.<fnref n="15" /> Basing on their work and adding some hitherto unnoticed manuscripts, it was possible for me in 2007 to list, in all, 44 manuscripts and 22 early prints.<fnref n="16" /> The examination of five manuscripts and nearly all the prints corroborated the existence of Stintzing’s three redactions,<fnref n="17" /> but an inspection of all manuscripts could reveal greater textual variability.<fnref n="18" /> The older manuscripts were written in the fourteenth century,<fnref n="19" /> and the original text (whose exact textual form cannot be determined) was possibly written not long before. The three

<footnote n="15">¹⁵ In chronological order: Burdach, *Der Dichter des Ackermann*, 460–90; Van de Kamp, *Bartolus de Saxoferrato*, 72; Jacquin, ‘Le Procès de Satan, 271–72; Calasso, ‘Bartolo da Sassoferrato’, 23; Casamassima, *Codices operum Bartoli*; Dolezalek, *Verzeichnis der Handschriften*; García y García, *Codices operum Bartoli*.</footnote>

<footnote n="16">¹⁶ Cf. Cardelle de Hartmann, *Lateinische Dialoge*, 305–20, where the problems related to these texts are discussed in depth. A list of the manuscripts with no further additions can also be found in Pasciuta, *Il diavolo in Paradiso*, 222–31.</footnote>

<footnote n="17">¹⁷ In the case of nine manuscripts, I even failed to get basic information about the contents, such as incipit or title. Two of them have been now examined by Pasciuta, *Il diavolo in Paradiso*, and they transmit Bartolo: Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 10770, fourteenth century, ff. 189v–195v and Vaticano, Biblioteca Apostolica, Vat. lat. 2625, fourteenth/fifteenth century, ff. 174v–177v.</footnote>

<footnote n="18">¹⁸ The more recent investigation by historians of law does not discuss philological matters and seems even to lag behind Stintzing’s results. Shoemaker, ‘The Devil at Law’ mentions only two redactions, without discussing the matter. Pasciuta, *Il diavolo in Paradiso*, 50–52, distinguishes also two redactions, an *adespota* (equivalent to our *Advocacia*) and a *bartoliana*, reuniting our *Advocacia* and *Bartolo*, as she argues that there are no relevant differences between both. Pasciuta asserts however at the same time that the variability in the transmission is so great that each manuscript should be considered separately and that it is neither possible nor advisable to talk about one original at the beginning of the transmission (ibid. 48–49). She fails though to give some material support to her assertions. Her edition of the *bartoliana* is based on the ms. Leipzig, Haenel 15, with some variants from the print Hain 2645/GW 3652 (both representatives of our *Bartolo* redaction) and two manuscripts which I had not been able to examine and therefore to attribute to one or other of the known redactions (see n. 17). The simple comparison of the editions of *Advocacia* by Hauréau and Friedlaender and her edition of *Bartoliana* reveals considerable differences in the text (some instances are mentioned in n. 36, 37, and 50). The question of the number of redactions and indeed of the textual variability in general remains therefore unsolved.</footnote>

<footnote n="19">¹⁹ In Cardelle de Hartmann, *Lateinische Dialoge*, 307, the manuscript Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Lat. 1093, fol. 22–25, is dated in the end of the thirteenth or the beginning of the fourteenth century, but the reference online of the BnF attributes those pages to the fourteenth/fifteenth century (cf. http://archivesetmanuscrits.bnf.fr/ead.html?id=FRBNFEAD000059014&c=FRBNFEAD000059014_e0000018&qid=eas1434554703307, accessed June 30, 2020).</footnote>
known redactions were labelled 1, 2 and 3 by Stintzing, but the numbering suggests a chronology
of which we cannot yet be sure. Therefore, it is preferable to give them a name:

- *Advocacia* (Stintzing 1): In most manuscripts, the title mentions that Mary acts as an advocate. Some manuscripts attribute the work to Guido de Collemedio, bishop of Cambrai between 1296 and 1309. It is credible that he had some part in the elaboration of the text, but unclear whether he was the author or just reworked it in some way.<fnref n="20" /> Barthélemy Hauréau edited a great part of this text from the manuscript Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 18216, fourteenth century, ff. 94–99; he seems to have tacitly supplemented it with text from the prints (Hauréau 1893). Ina Friedlaender edited the *Advocacia* from the manuscript Linköping, Stifts- och Landesbiblioteket, cod. BR I, second half of the fourteenth century ff. 42v–46r, with variants of four other manuscripts in the apparatus (Friedlaender 1956). The text was translated into French by a canon from Bayeux (perhaps Jean de Justice) in the first half of the fourteenth century.<fnref n="21" />

- *Mascaron* (Stintzing 2): This is a very similar text to the *Advocacia*, but including towards the end the disputation of God’s Four Daughters (Justitia, Veritas, Misericordia and Pax). The procurator of Hell is called Mascaron, as in a very similar passage in the Middle Low German *Boek van Merline* by Jacob van Maerlant, written in 1262.<fnref n="22" /> The Middle Low German poem *Dit es van Maskeroen* is also probably related to the *Mascaron*,<fnref n="23" /> but the relationship between the Latin and the vernacular texts is not clear. It has even been proposed that the *Mascaron* is a reworking of the episode in the *Boek van Merline*.<fnref n="24" /> This redaction was also translated into Catalan.<fnref n="25" /> The Latin text from the manuscript Bologna, Collegio di Spagna, cod. 126, ff. 189r–195r, has been edited by Beatrice Pasciuta with some variants from a further manuscript in the apparatus.<fnref n="26" />

- *Bartolo* (Stintzing 3): Expanded text of the *Advocacia*, including more legal detail, some additional text in the dialogue and two writs (the procuration of the devil and the sentence). It is transmitted in at least three manuscripts and four incunabula,<fnref n="27" /> but, as it was attributed in one of

<footnote n="20">²⁰ Taylor, *Mary between God and the Devil*, 37–40 points to a terminus post quem after 1320 as the author considers that the treatise follows the summary procedures described in the constitution *Saepe contingit*. However, the exact date of this constitution is not sure and there could be at least one manuscript which antedates this proposed terminus *post quem* (cf. n. 19). On the date of *Saepe contingit* (after 1312 or 1314) cf. Descamps, ‘Aux origines de la procedure, 45–6.</footnote>

<footnote n="21">²¹ Editions: Raynaud, *L'advocacie Nostre Dame*; Akehurst, *Our Lady's lawsuits*.</footnote>

<footnote n="22">²² Cap. X-XII, v. 1694–2981. Edited by Sodmann, *Jacob van Maerlant*.</footnote>

<footnote n="23">²³ Snellaert, *Nederlandsche Gedichten*, lxii-lxxviii and 493–538. On the language of this text cf. Kinable, ‘Semagrams’.</footnote>

<footnote n="24">²⁴ Shoemaker, ‘The Devil at Law’, 578. He argues that the *Boek van Merline* predates the *Processus*, considering that the latter was written at the time of the oldest manuscript.</footnote>

<footnote n="25">²⁵ Edition: Bofarull y Mascaró, *Documentos literarios*, 107–17. On both this text and Jacob van Maerlant cf. Crawford, ‘The Catalan Mascarón’.</footnote>

<footnote n="26">²⁶ Pasciuta, *Il diavolo in Paradiso*, 206–21, the edition includes some variants from the manuscript Vaticano, Biblioteca Apostolica, Ross. Lat. 1124.</footnote>

<footnote n="27">²⁷ On the manuscripts cf. n. 17 and n. 18.</footnote>
them to Bartolo da Sassoferrato (1313–1357), one of the most influential jurists of the Late Middle Ages, it attracted the attention of modern scholars, who debated primarily whether Bartolo was really its author.<fnref n="28" /> Melchior Goldast included this text in his *Processus iuris ioco-serius* (Goldast 1611). The text was translated into German by Georg Alt in the fifteenth century and by Ulrich Tenngler in the sixteenth century, who reworked it and combined it with Jacobus of Theramo’s *Belial*.<fnref n="29" /> An edition based on the manuscript Leipzig, Universitätsbibliothek, Haenel 15, ff. 129v–135v, was recently published by Beatrice Pasciuta.<fnref n="30" /> A critical edition by Neil Cartlidge is in progress.

The redaction attributed to Bartolo da Sassoferrato is clearly a reworking of the *Advocacia*. The relationship between *Advocacia* and *Mascaron* is more difficult to specify: The former has a stylistically and dramatically better text, which suggests that it is a reworking of *Mascaron*, but it would be necessary to examine and collate the whole of the textual tradition to ascertain this point.<fnref n="31" /> It is even possible that there is a hitherto unidentified redaction, which was the model for both.

As the text is not easy to consult, it is necessary to provide a brief summary of the *Advocacia* as the redaction with the broadest circulation.<fnref n="32" /> *Mascaron* differs only in one additional scene before the judgment, namely the dispute of the Four Daughters. The dialogue has a frame narrative: The assembly of the devils, outraged because they have lost power over humankind after Christ’s death on the cross, decides to send a procurator to the heavenly court in order to claim possession. The dialogue begins with his appearance in heaven to file for legal action. The judge makes an appointment on Good Friday, and lets the Archangel Gabriel summon humanity. As it fails to send a representative on the appointed day, the procurator of Hell tries to get a writ confirming its contumacy, but the judge grants the accused one day of additional time. On Saturday again, nobody appears to represent humankind, and the angels lament. At this point,

<footnote n="28">²⁸ As far as I can see, only Stintzing, *Geschichte der populären Kultur* and Calasso, ‘Bartolo da Sassoferrato’ considered the *Processus Satanae* a genuine work of Bartolo’s. The discussion on Bartolo’s authorship has been summarized by Jacquin, ‘Le Procès de Satan’, 273–80.</footnote>

<footnote n="29">²⁹ On Georg Alt cf. Kugler, ‘Georg Alt’, 78–9. Edition of Tenngler’s work: Schmitz, *Der Teufelsprozess*. On this text cf.: Deutsch, *Ulrich Tenglers Laienspiegel*; Schumann, ‘Seltzsame Gerichtshändel’; ‘Wissensvermittlung’; Bleumer, ‘Teuflische Rhetorik’.</footnote>

<footnote n="30">³⁰ Pasciuta, *Il diavolo in Paradiso*, 187–205, with variants from the incunable GW 3652 and the two manuscripts mentioned n. 17.</footnote>

<footnote n="31">³¹ Cf. Cardelle de Hartmann, *Lateinische Dialoge*, 205–06. Taylor, *Mary between God and the Devil*, 9–11 states that *Advocacia* is the original text which has been abbreviated in *Mascaron* (not noticing thus the addition of a whole episode) and reworked in *Bartolo*. However, he fails to present arguments for his position.</footnote>

<footnote n="32">³² A detailed summary of *Bartolo* with an Italian translation of the key passages and a valuable commentary on the legal questions can be read in Pasciuta, *Il diavolo in Paradiso*, 17–39.</footnote>
Mary offers herself as an advocate. The proceedings begin with Christ as judge and revolve around the following matters. First, the procurator of Hell refuses to accept Mary as an advocate, pleading that she is related to the judge and cannot, as a woman, be a legal representative. After hearing Mary, however, the judge accepts her advocacy. The next step is that the devil tries to regain custody of humanity while the case is being discussed, it being proved that Hell had it in its possession before. Mary argues that the community of devils was only a temporary possessor (*detentor*), and not the rightful proprietor (*possessor*).<fnref n="33" /> Again, the judge accepts Mary's arguments. The devil takes his Bible and reads the passage in Genesis about the disobedience of Adam and Eve in order to show that humankind is guilty and therefore merits punishment, specifically, to be in the possession of the devils. This point is discussed in some length, until Mary, dreading to lose the battle, abandons the legal arguments to try and influence the judge by other means. She reminds him of his crucifixion, which was the work of the devil, and of the nine months in which she carried him. She even weeps and bares her breast, so that he can see how she fed him as an infant. As the procurator of Hell realizes that he might lose his case, he proposes a settlement to the judge: Christ should take the righteous people while the sinners will go with him to hell. Mary protests and the discussion proceeds. There is even an intervention by the Father and the Holy Ghost, demanding infinite punishment for man's infinite sin. The Son replies that he could give satisfaction to God, being himself God and man. At the end of the dispute, the Father and the Holy Ghost exclaim: *Si Deus filius et mater pro homine, quis contra hominem?*<fnref n="34" /> The proceedings come to an end and the choir of the angels sings *Salve regina*.

The work has the pace and structure of a play; however, the usual indications of a performance—melodies, stage directions—are not found in the manuscripts, direct speech is always introduced by short sentences of the type *procurator dixit*, and now and again, small narrative passages describe the actions and feelings of the characters.<fnref n="35" /> Regarding the plot, the *Processus* is more

<footnote n="33">³³ This paragraph is very short in the text edited by Friedlaender, *Processus Satanae*, 149, more developed in the manuscript edited by Hauréau, *Notices et extraits*, 6: 98—but it has to be taken into account that he seems to have changed the text of the manuscript without acknowledging it in every case—and very detailed in *Bartolo*, where it nearly occupies one page (Pasciuta, *Il diavolo in Paradiso*, 194–95, § 53).</footnote>

<footnote n="34">³⁴ Hauréau, *Notices et extraits*, 6: 105; Friedlaender, *Processus Satanae*, 157. In *Bartolo*, the last scene is completely different: the discussion on man’s guilt is more extensive, Jesus lets archangel Gabriel summon both lawyers and passes his sentence (Pasciuta, *Il diavolo in Paradiso*, 204–05).</footnote>

<footnote n="35">³⁵ Pasciuta, *Il diavolo in Paradiso*, 67 considers that the *Processus* has been represented on the stage and bases her argumentation on short indications of the content in Paris, BnF, lat. 10770, which she describes as *didascalia*, and on the presence of *praenotatio nominum* in Würzburg, Universitätsbibliothek, M. ch. f. 5.</footnote>
complex than other dialogues of this group, which present discussions involving only two people. Only the later texts by Johannes de Jenzenstein and Nicolaus de Spina have even more complex plots, as they recur more often to narrative passages and include changes of scene.

## The entanglement of theological and legal problems

The strong presence of legal argument and of legal procedure is characteristic for the *Processus* as well as for the *Conflictus inter Deum et diabolum* and the *Dialogus lucis et tenebrarum*. In the case of the *Processus*, we have indications that these legal aspects were of particular interest for some readers, since in some manuscripts the specific references to canon law have been included or written in the margins.<fnref n="36" /> The *Bartolo* redaction provides elaboration on the legal aspects. At the end of the fourteenth century, Jacobus de Theramo wrote a work entitled *Belial*, which also portrays Satan’s lawsuit, and presents the legal proceedings in great detail, also reproducing the text of all necessary writs. The *Belial* seems mainly to have been read as a guide in matters of legal proceedings.<fnref n="37" />

The legal aspects of the *Processus* present, however, some difficulties. The jurists who discussed the work in the nineteenth century remarked that some of the decisions made by the judge were incorrect and doubted the author’s legal competence.<fnref n="38" /> In the past ten years, three historians of law (Schumann 2011, 2012, Shoemaker 2011, Pasciuta 2013, 2015, 85–134) have pronounced a milder judgment. Admittedly, Mary contravenes recommendations about how lawyers should conduct themselves in court.<fnref n="39" /> Court proceedings are definitely abandoned when she weeps and

However, medieval plays are not preceded by *didascalia* and the *praenotatio nominum* is not specific for drama, but usual too, even the rule, in medieval dialogues; its appearance would be relevant only if the narrative passages were also missing.

<footnote n="36">³⁶ For instance, in the manuscripts München, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 27421, ff. 86r–95v written in 1462 in the monastery of Prüfening, and Trier, Stadtbibliothek, ms. 975/923 4°, fourteenth/fifteenth century, ff. 98ra–99vb. Shoemaker 2011, 578 remarks on similar glosses in the manuscript Bologna, Biblioteca del Collegio di Spagna, ms. 126, written towards the end of the fourteenth century, ff. 189r–195r.</footnote>

<footnote n="37">³⁷ The *Belial* is still unedited, even the very large textual transmission has not yet been explored. In a first recount, Darko Senekovic has found 135 manuscripts, which is indeed remarkable for a work written in the last years of the fourteenth century and printed 44 times between 1472 and 1500 (according to the information in *Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke*, www.gesamtkatalogderwiegendrucke.de, accessed January 30, 2015). On *Belial* cf. Ott, *Rechtspraxis*; Mastroberti, *Il ‘Liber Belial’*.</footnote>

<footnote n="38">³⁸ For instance, Von Savigny, *Geschichte des Römischen Rechts*, 6: 160 and Stintzing, *Geschichte der populären Kultur*, 262–64.</footnote>

<footnote n="39">³⁹ This point is discussed in Cardelle de Hartmann, ‘Satan vor Gericht’.</footnote>
bares her breast in appealing to the judge. This is an old gesture when mourning<fnref n="40" /> or asking for
pity, and in medieval art, Mary is often shown in this attitude to represent her intercession on
behalf of sinners.<fnref n="41" /> Although the gesture is highly unsuitable for a barrister, it is appropriate for
Mary—and the text ends with the angels singing one of the most widespread Marian antiphones,
*Salve regina*, in which Mary is explicitly named *advocata nostra*.

The advocate's disregard for legal procedure points in some passages to a disparity between a
legally understood *iustitia* and righteous *aequitas*,<fnref n="42" /> at one point even explicitly: When the
demon protests against granting additional time (*ubi est iustitia*?),<fnref n="43" /> the judge says: *Eiciatis eum
foras. Nonne tibi diximus quod aequitate uti volebamus?*<fnref n="44" /> Nevertheless, the central topic is not
this disparity, but the contrast between God's justice and his mercy. The discussion between
Mary and the devil makes it clear that the devils have no rights whatsoever over humankind,
which they possessed only with God's acquiescence, and that God's power defines and changes
laws.<fnref n="45" />

Through the discussion, it also becomes evident that humanity would never attain salvation by
depending on God's justice alone. This is made particularly clear in the short debate among the
persons of the Trinity, and through Mary's statement: *cum adnullata sit culpa per
misericordiam, adnullata es pena per gratiam, sicut dicitur, ut vitium virtus operiret, gratia
culpam*.<fnref n="46" /> The *Mascaron* redaction elaborates on this point by introducing the discussion among
the Four Daughters of God. This motif develops Ps 84,10 (*Misericordia et veritas obviaverunt
sibi; justitia et pax osculate sunt*) and appears in different contexts from the first half of the

<footnote n="40">⁴⁰ Cf. Corbeill, *Nature Embodied*, 67–106, who interprets the Roman funeral as an inversion of birth and the baring of the breast as a reference to nursing, as is also the case in Mary’s plea. For other occurrences of this gesture in Antiquity and in the Middle Ages, cf. Pasciuta, *Il diavolo in Paradiso*, 78–80.</footnote>

<footnote n="41">⁴¹ Cf. Koeplin, ‘Interzession Mariä’.</footnote>

<footnote n="42">⁴² On this point and on its relevance for the canonistic cf. Pasciuta, *Il diavolo in Paradiso*, 112–14.</footnote>

<footnote n="43">⁴³ Friedlaender, *Processus Satanae*, 145. *Ah, Domine, ubi est iustitia?* (Hauréau, *Notices et extraits*, 6: 95). In the *Bartolo* redaction: *Domine, ubi est iustitia tua? Nam enim bis, per ea que video, in exercenda iustitia deficitis* (Pasciuta, *Il diavolo in Paradiso*, 191, § 28).</footnote>

<footnote n="44">⁴⁴ Hauréau, *Notices et extraits*, 6: 95. Friedlaender, *Processus Satanae*, 145. In the *Bartolo* redaction: *Nonne tibi dicimus quod volumus equitate servare?* (Pasciuta, *Il diavolo in Paradiso*, 191, § 28).</footnote>

<footnote n="45">⁴⁵ On this point and its political implications cf. Shoemaker, ‘The Devil at Law’, 581.</footnote>

<footnote n="46">⁴⁶ Hauréau, *Notices et extraits*, 6: 104. Friedlaender, *Processus Satanae*, 156. In *Bartolo: Scitis enim quod si qua culpa in homine fuit, quod non credo, fuit per gratiam abolita et misericordiam cancellata* (Pasciuta, *Il diavolo in Paradiso*, 203, § 87).</footnote>
twelfth century on, illustrating that all humans are sinners and hence depend on God's mercy.<fnref n="47" />

The *Processus Sathanae* also shows that Mary plays an important role in obtaining God's mercy for humankind.

In the *Processus*, the scene is simultaneously situated in two different historical periods. On the one hand, there is a reference to the council of devils meeting after the harrowing of hell, clearly after the Crucifixion and before the Resurrection. On the other hand, however, the procurator protests that Good Friday is a feast day nearly everywhere,<fnref n="48" /> which implies that the scene is situated in a historical period in which Christendom has become a dominant religion. This blending of historical periods reflects the two sides of salvation, which, while it is a historical process embracing all humanity, has to be repeated in each individual. The interval between the death of Jesus and his resurrection was a liminal period, in which his followers feared that the crucifixion meant the definite end and were not sure of salvation; in the same way, the death of each Christian means a transition either to eternal damnation or to eternal bliss, and nobody can be sure about the future of his or her soul. The process against humanity mirrors the particular judgment after death, in which it is decided whether the atonement through Christ's death, Mary's intercession and God's mercy save the individual or his or her sins weigh more heavily.<fnref n="49" />

However, there is no open reflection on this two-sidedness; it is assumed, but not discussed. In the same way, while the *Processus* touches upon many central matters of Christian faith, it simply states them or provides a very short discussion of them.

The *Processus* has a playful humour, which manifests itself in the details of the action and in some remarks.<fnref n="50" /> For instance, the devil protests ironically that there is no justice in heaven, or the narrator comments on Mary being easily upset, as is usual in the case of women, approaching

<footnote n="47">⁴⁷ Cf. Mäder, *Der Streit der Töchter Gottes*, the hitherto most comprehensive history of this motif. For the motif in German literature cf. Ohly, ‘Die Trinität berät’, 260–77; in French literature, Hunt, ‘The Four Daughters of God’.</footnote>

<footnote n="48">⁴⁸ Hauréau, *Notices et extraits*, 6: 93; Friedlaender, *Processus Satanae*, 144. In *Bartolo*, it is basically the same text, completed with the corresponding legal references (Pasciuta, *Il diavolo in Paradiso*, 189, § 11).</footnote>

<footnote n="49">⁴⁹ The idea of a particular judgment after death is already formulated in the ancient church and becomes particularly important in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, when it is presented also in dramatic scenes in literature and the pictorial arts, cf. Baschet, ‘Jugement de l’âme’.</footnote>

<footnote n="50">⁵⁰ The only other dialogue on salvation that can be compared with it in this respect is the *Dialogus lucis et tenebrarum*.</footnote>
thus the sacred sphere to everyday life.<fnref n="51" /> The contrast between the theological subject matter and the precise compliance with court procedure in formal terms may sound ironical to a modern reader, so much so that, some time ago, I thought a parody was intended here—not as its main purpose, however, but as a secondary effect (Cardelle de Hartmann 2005, 427). I must revise this opinion now. Medieval parody often relies on displacement rather than inversion: The focus of a narration is transferred to a secondary matter or figure, or else actions and persons are relocated from their usual environment to another, unexpected one (for instance, the Mass is celebrated in the tavern). It is important that this displacement is surprising, unexpected, and that it creates a relationship between two areas of life which are usually separated from each other.<fnref n="52" /> However, this element of unexpectedness is missing here. Legal vocabulary and legal references are present in the Bible, and therefore, they were always part of the discussion about redemption and the rights of the devil. The reception of Roman law and the formation of the *ius commune* brought theologians and canonists to a more intense reflection on these legal aspects. In the Late Middle Ages, the specialists in canon law presented more and more religious matters in legal vocabulary. This entanglement between theology and law pervaded legal texts and was present even in the most influential textbook of Theology, the *Sententiae* of Petrus Lombardus.<fnref n="53" />

## The peculiarity of dialogues on salvation

To discern the peculiarity of dialogues on salvation, it is necessary to compare them with other genres. Among the major types of dialogue, polemic dialogues show some similarities to dialogues on salvation, as both types present disputations in which the figures defend contrary

<footnote n="51">51 Tunc cepit vociferare: ‘Ubi est iusticia, quam eciam in celis vix invenio!’ (Friedlaender, *Processus Satanae*, 145); Tunc coepit vociferare daemon: ‘Ubi est iusticia quam in celis non invenio’ (Hauréau, *Notices et extraits*, 6: 94); Et tunc cepit vociferare diabolus, dicens: ‘Ubi est iustitia tua, Domine, quam etiam in celis vix invenio?’ (Pasciuta, *Il diavolo in Paradiso*, 190, § 20). Dixit aduocata, qui more muliebri de levi offenditur (Friedlaender, *Processus Satanae*, 1,47), Dixit advocata nostra, quae more muliebri de levi offenditur (Hauréau, *Notices et extraits*, 6: 98), Dixit advocata quod mos mulierum leviter offenditur (Pasciuta, *Il diavolo in Paradiso*, 193, § 44, there with a divergent punctuation, attributing the sentence with quod to Mary). The manuscript edited by Hauréau also includes a reference about the Parisian judges hastily passing a judgment of excommunication (Hauréau, *Notices et extraits*, 6: 94), which does not appear in the manuscripts consulted by Friedlaender or in the Bartolo redaction as edited by Pasciuta.</footnote>

<footnote n="52">52 On displacement in parody cf. Cardelle de Hartmann, *Parodie*, 26–7, 40–52, and 71–3, and ‘Parody’, 39–40, and 45–8.</footnote>

<footnote n="53">53 On the relationship between theology and law cf. Shoemaker, ‘The Devil at Law’, 568–72, and Marx, ‘The *Conflictus*’, *passim*.</footnote>
positions.<fnref n="54" /> But polemic dialogues, other than those on salvation, specifically proceed in a purely
analytical way, with abstract figures discussing arguments and counter-arguments. In some
cases, as in the disputations between a Christian and a Jew, the figures represent opposite
positions in central matters of dogma; in other cases, both are orthodox Christians who disagree
on matters of opinion (for instance, a monk and a canon discussing the truly evangelical way of
life). If both figures agree on Christian dogma, there is a certain degree of collaboration, and the
arguments on both sides are discussed in great detail. On the other hand, dialogues on salvation
discuss central matters of Christian theology, but they do not deal with them in an analytical
manner alone. Theological subjects are discussed rather superficially, and thus, the texts are a far
cry from the level of sophistication of the theology of their time. Their figures are the
protagonists of salvation themselves; for instance, the *Questio Christi ad Cain* presents the
question about the possibility of salvation for those who lived before Christ as a dispute between
Christ and Cain, the latter representing those not freed by Christ after the harrowing of hell. This
means, of course, that there is a very forceful *parti pris*. If one of the persons of the Trinity
defends a position, his opinion obviously has to represent the truth. It also means that the dispute
is not only intellectual, but that emotions can also play an important role. In this aspect,
dialogues on salvation resemble introspective dialogues.<fnref n="55" /> The latter make a strong appeal to the
emotions of the reader through their style (based on exclamations, parallelisms and a vivid
imagery) and through the figures themselves. One of the figures usually represents the human
being as such, sometimes bearing the name of the author but not being individualized in any
particular way (or changing its characterization as does the disciple in Henry Suso’s *Horologium
sapientie*, who is by turn man and woman, young and old, lover and beloved). Introspective
dialogues present the human being exploring its soul, trying to come to terms with life or
searching for God.

A characteristic of the dialogues on salvation, which they do not share with any other type of
medieval prose dialogue, is their dramatic quality. They are the only dialogues that have a
specific setting in space and time and present the figures actually acting, moving and gesturing,
coming and going. Paradoxically, the presence of narrative passages, in which all these actions

<footnote n="54">⁵⁴ For a detailed discussion of polemical dialogues cf. Cardelle de Hartmann, *Lateinische Dialoge*, 104–62.</footnote>

<footnote n="55">⁵⁵ On introspective dialogues cf. Cardelle de Hartmann, *Lateinische Dialoge*, 163–209.</footnote>
are described, contributes to their dramatic qualities. To sum up: Characteristic for the dialogues on salvation is a blend of analytical discussion, religious feeling and a dramatic quality, which means that they make the reader imagine the scene, visualize it in his or her fantasy.

This blend helps to explain their appearance and diffusion in the Late Middle Ages. Of course, there were Late Antique dialogues with similar characteristics, but even if they were at the disposal of the authors, it is still necessary to explain why no similar texts were written from the end of Antiquity to the twelfth century—or in such small numbers that they have not reached us.

The expansion of Canon law in the thirteenth century and the disputes between jurists and theologians have already been adduced as the background of these texts,<fnref n="56" /> but in my opinion, the practices of learning and of devotion at the time also have to be taken into account.

## Dialogues on salvation, Satan's lawsuits and late medieval spirituality

The appeal to emotion through the senses and the fantasy of the reader is characteristic for late medieval devotion and was mainly fostered by Franciscan spirituality (which derived in great measure from Cistercian spirituality).<fnref n="57" /> The Fourth Lateran Council (1213–1215) strongly promoted pastoral care, in which the friars played an important role. Franciscan spirituality relied on the identification with Jesus, supported by images of the crucified which strongly differed from the idealized figures of previous centuries, and also by texts which described scenes of the life of Jesus and of Mary. Biblical figures appeared in different genres, in which they speak to the listener, increasing his or her compassion through this personal appeal. This, for instance, is the case in the hymns known as *planctus Mariae*. They belong to a tradition going back to Late Antiquity and to Eastern Christianity and are not a creation of the Late Middle Ages; however, during this period, they proliferate and are widely diffused.<fnref n="58" /> Another instance is the dramas

<footnote n="56">⁵⁶ Shoemaker, ‘The Devil at Law’, and Marx, ‘The *Conflictus*’. Shoemaker points too to the upsurge of interest on demonological issues during the Papacy of John XXII, cf. Shoemaker, ‘The Devil at Law’, 577. Pasciuta, *Il diavolo in Paradiso*, 52–54, differentiates between a theological and a juridical version of the *Processus*, meaning however not the text itself (as the terminus *versione* implies), but its grouping in the codices with either juridical or theological literature. Obviously, she means two different forms of reception, although she considers that the text was primarily an *ordo iudiciarius* (Pasciuta, *Il diavolo in Paradiso*, 90).</footnote>

<footnote n="57">⁵⁷ On the influence of Franciscan spirituality on visual meditation (particularly in English Literature) cf. Despres *Ghostly Sights*. On visual meditation cf. Melion, ‘Introduction: Meditative Images’).</footnote>

<footnote n="58">⁵⁸ Cf. Koehler, ‘Planctus Mariae’. A dissenting voice is Dronke, ‘Laments of the Maries’, who is of the opinion that the Western tradition developed independently from the Eastern.</footnote>
representing biblical scenes. Passion plays were particularly popular, a great number of actors took part in their performance, which occupied several stages and lasted several hours, or even several days. Short dialogic passages with biblical figures were included in many sermons. Late medieval preachers took great care to present matters to their audience vividly, employing anecdotes, examples from nature and allegories for this purpose. They also knew and utilized the rhetorical device of *sermocinatio*, i.e. fictitious dialogue. As an example, we can mention the Cistercian abbot Ogerius of Locedio (1136–1214), who at the end of the twelfth century included, in a homily on the Passion, a short dialogue with Mary, allowing her to expose her feelings and sufferings.<fnref n="59" /> The life of Jesus (sometimes the life of Mary, too) was depicted for meditation in works which have similar characteristics to the dialogues on salvation, as they too blend narration and dialogue among the biblical characters. The most widely read are the *Meditationes vite Christi*<fnref n="60" /> and the *Vita Christi* by the German Carthusian, Ludolph of Saxony.<fnref n="61" /> Both works combine the Gospels with elements from the apocrypha to give a vivid account of the life of Christ. The *Meditationes* are dedicated to a nun and the author gives her detailed instructions for reading the text, placing notable emphasis on the necessity of trying to actually see and hear what is being told.<fnref n="62" /> He also remarks on his describing scenes which he has imagined as they could have happened in order to make a greater impression in the reader, although the canonical books of the Bible do not back many of them.<fnref n="63" />

The dialogues on salvation have much in common with devotional literature, but at the same time differ from it having a lesser emotional appeal and putting more stress on theological argument. They convey a theological discussion not only through legal argument but also

<footnote n="59">⁵⁹ Cf. Marx, ‘The *Quis dabit*’, and Cardelle de Hartmann, *Lateinische Dialoge*, 2007, 712–13. This passage was also transmitted on its own and sometimes attributed to Bernard of Clairvaux.</footnote>

<footnote n="60">⁶⁰ The work has been edited by Stalling-Taney, *Meditationes*. The attribution of the text to the Italian friar Johannes of Caulibus and the fact that it was dated towards the middle of the fourteenth century have recently been called into question. Tóth and Falvay, ‘New Light’, who present strong arguments for dating it at the beginning of the fourteenth century and for the attribution to the Franciscan spiritual Jacob of San Gimignano.</footnote>

<footnote n="61">⁶¹ Cf. Baier, ‘Ludolf von Sachsen’.</footnote>

<footnote n="62">⁶² *Tu autem si ex his fructum sumere cupis, ita presentem te exhibeas his que per Dominum Iesum dicta et facta narrantur ac si tuis auribus audires et oculis ea uideres, tot mentis affectu diligenter, delectabiliter et morose, omnibus aliis curis et sollicitudinibus tunc omissis* (*Meditaciones*, prologus, l. 103–07: Stalling-Taney, *Meditationes*, 10).</footnote>

<footnote n="63">⁶³ *Non autem credas quod omnia quod ipsum dixisse uel fecisse meditari possumus scripta sint. Ego uero ad maiorem impressionem ea sic ac si ita fuissent tibi narrabo prout contingere uel contigisse credi possunt, secundum quasdam imaginarias representaciones quas animus diuersimode percipit* (*Meditaciones*, prologus, l. 90–5: Stalling-Taney, *Meditationes*, 10).</footnote>
visualizing it in a scene which is fictitious in itself, but which takes the biblical narrative as its
point of departure (combined with the harrowing of hell, which is not part of the canonical
gospels but had long been accepted as orthodox). The scribe of the manuscript Vat. lat. 10499 (or
the exemplar he is copying) comments on this characteristic of the text at the end of the
*Quaestiones inter Christum et diabolum*, f. 39r: *Predicta, licet sint verisimiliter fulcita veritate,
tamen, quia ex nulla certa scriptura probantur pro ficticiis habentur ... ('What has been told,
although it is plausibly founded on truth, is considered fictitious because it is not corroborated by
any canonical writing'). In the *Quaestiones*, the devil sits on the cross and talks with Christ about
redemption. The author of these lines considers the dialogue fictitious on the basis of doctrine,
but characterizes it at the same time as 'founded on truth'. In his eyes, the text occupies a sort of
intermediate position between fictional and true narration, being a fictitious representation of
truth. Myth, as some antique philosophers understood it, could also be defined in this way. This
antique discussion on myth was known in the Middle Ages through the filter of the Church
Fathers. With only a few exceptions, early medieval authors adhered to the opinion that the
allegoric interpretation of myth was just an attempt to justify paganism finding fanciful
interpretations for immoral stories. In the twelfth century, however, Neoplatonic texts from Late
Antiquity about the interpretation of myth were keenly read and discussed. New allegoric
interpretations of pagan authors seem to be linked to Chartres, and some authors in this area
discussed philosophical matters in the form of allegorical poems. In the High Middle Ages, not
only philosophical, but also theological matters were presented in short narratives based on the
Bible and included in exegetical or theological works. Later on, they were usually cast in the
form of a debate. Reinhart Herzog, analysing similar scenes in early Christian literature,
observed their similarity to myth.<fnref n="64" /> Friedrich Ohly, discussing such scenes in high medieval
treatises, even called them 'theological myths'.<fnref n="65" /> They could be defined in a more neutral way as
narrative exegesis. In the twelfth century, there is also a tendency to visualizing theological

<footnote n="64">⁶⁴ Herzog, ‘Metapher – Exegese – Mythos’, 170–72, uses the concept of ‘mythischer Kontrapost’.</footnote>

<footnote n="65">⁶⁵ Ohly, ‘Die Trinität berät’, 242. The examples discussed by Ohly are the Trinity’s deliberation on the creation of man, which develops on the old interpretation of the plural *faciamus* in Gn 1,26 (*Faciamus hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem nostrum*) as referring to the Trinity and appears in the text by Nicolaus of Spina, and the dispute of God’s Four Daughters, which is included, as we have seen, in the *Mascaron redaction* of the *Processus Sathanae*.</footnote>
matters employing symbols.<fnref n="66" /> The most consequent way of representing the history of salvation through images and narratives (deriving from the Bible but departing in detail clearly from it) can be found in Hildegard’s visionary works.<fnref n="67" />

In the Late Middle Ages, narrative and symbolic exegesis disappeared from the high-level theological discussion. This can be explained by the development of what might be called a professional theology at universities. In this environment, clear and well-structured forms of teaching and of scholarly writing appeared, so that most philosophical and theological treatises followed the norms of logical reasoning and adopted the form of scholastic quaestiones. Outside and far from universities, figurative language and allegory were still employed to present philosophical or theological matters, for instance in mystical treatises or in philosophical works written by authors who were not ‘professional theologians’. A good instance is Raymundus Lullus, who wrote a great number of allegorical narrations and dialogues.

Some time ago, I had great trouble when looking for a function of Satan’s lawsuits. Historians of law have remarked that some texts might well have been employed for learning legal procedure. But there is also theological reflection and even a devotional aspect in them. Therefore, I talked about their ‘Multifunktionalität’.<fnref n="68" /> Maybe it would be more according to reality to say that most of the authors did not have a precise aim in writing those texts. They combined matters on which they usually reflected—on theological ones as well as on juridical ones—with devotional practices, which were also probably their own. This mixture was not unusual in their time, as they can also be found in different degrees in hymns, in sermons and in other forms of devotional literature. But, whereas other genres are defined by a precise context for their purpose and reception, dialogues on salvation are not connected with a particular application. The reader was addressed in an intellectual, emotional and sensorial way and could react to these texts also in different ways. Although I have not studied the manuscripts in depth, I have remarked that many of them came from a university background. In fact, authors and readers must have been persons with an intellectual, probably university formation. The language of the dialogues on salvation—mostly a functional, not literary Latin, employing many technicalities—also points to readers

<footnote n="66">⁶⁶ This is especially true in the work of theologians influenced by the ps. Dionysius Areopagita. The concept of *symbolum* was taken from this late antique author, cf. Poirel, ‘Symbole’.</footnote>

<footnote n="67">⁶⁷ On the influence of the ps. Dionysian theology on Hildegard cf. Meier, ‘Eriugena im Nonnenkloster?’.</footnote>

<footnote n="68">⁶⁸ Cardelle, ‘Die *Processus Sathanae*’, 429.</footnote>
with this background. Such texts might have been a sort of complement to the rigorous
intellectualism of scholastic thinking, which had expelled myth from philosophy and theology.

Bibliography

Akehurst, F. R. P. *Our Lady's lawsuits in "L'Advocacie Nostre Dame" (“Our Lady's advocacy”)
and "La chapelerie Nostre Dame de Baiex" (“The benefice of Our Lady's chapel in
Bayeux”)*. Tempe, AZ: ACMRS, 2011.

Bachmann, Michael Peter. *Drogo de Altovillari, "Discussio litis super hereditate Lazari et
Marie Magdalene": ein Streitgedicht des 13. Jahrhunderts*. Bern: Peter Lang, 2002.

Baier, Walter, and Kurt Ruh. ‘Ludolf von Sachsen.’ In *Verfasserlexikon* 5. 2nd ed., 967–77.
Berlin: De Gruyter, 1985.

Baschet, Jérôme. ‘Jugement de l'âme, jugement dernier: contradiction, complementarité,
chevauchement?’ *Revue Mabillon* n.s. 6 (1995): 159–203.

Bleumer, Hartmut. ‘Teuflische Rhetorik vor dem Gericht des Herrn: Verhandlungen zwischen
Recht und Literatur am Beispiel von Ulrich Tenglers Laienspiegel.’ In *Wissen,
maßgeschneidert: Experten und Expertenkulturen im Europa der Vormoderne*, edited by
Björn Reich, Frank Rexroth, and Mathias Roick, 155–81. Munich: Oldenbourg, 2012.

Blume, Clemens, and Guido-Maria Dreves. *Analecta Hymnica Medii Aevi*. Vol. 29, *Pia
dictamina: Reimgebete und Leselieder*. Leipzig: Reisland, 1898.

Bofarull y Mascaró, Prospero. *Documentos literarios en antigua lengua catalana (siglos XIV y
XV)*. Barcelona: Impr. del Archivo, 1857.

Burdach, Karl. *Der Dichter des Ackermann aus Böhmen und seine Zeit*. Berlin: Weidmann,
1926–1932.

Calasso, Francesco. ‘Bartolo da Sassoferrato.’ In *Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani*, vol. 6, 5–
34. Rome: Istituto della enciclopedia italiana, 1965.

Cardelle de Hartmann, Carmen. ‘Die *Processus Sathanae* und die Tradition der Satansprozesse.
*Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch* 40 (2005): 417–30.

Cardelle de Hartmann, Carmen. ‘Satan vor Gericht: Die *Processus Sathanae* als Inszenierung
juristischer Rhetorik.’ In *Pontes III. Die antike Rhetorik in der europäischen
Geistesgeschichte*, edited by Wolfgang Kofler, and Karlheinz Töchterle, 191–202. Innsbruck:
StudienVerlag, 2005.
Cardelle de Hartmann, Carmen. *Lateinische Dialoge 120–1400. Literaturhistorische Studie und Repertorium*. Leiden: Brill, 2007.

Cardelle de Hartmann, Carmen. *Parodie in den Carmina Burana*. Zürich: Chronos, 2014.

Cardelle de Hartmann, Carmen. ‘Parody in the Codex Buranus.’ In *Revisiting the Codex Buranus*
— *Contexts, Contents, Composition*, edited by Henry Hope, and Tristan E. Franklinos, 39–66.
Woodbridge: Boydell&Brewer, 2020.

Casamassima, Emanuele. *Codices operum Bartoli a Saxoferrato recensiti*. Vol. 2, *Iter Germanicum*. Florence: Olschki, 1971.

Corbeill, Anthony. *Nature Embodied: Gesture in Ancient Rome*. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004.

Crawford, J. P. Wickersham. ‘The Catalan Mascaró'n and an Episode in Jacob van Maerlants’s Merlin.’ *Publications of the Modern Language Association of America* 26 = n.s. 19 (1911): 31–50.

Descamps, Olivier. ‘Aux origines de la procedure sommaire: Remarques sur la Constitution Saepe contingit (Clem., V, 11, 2).’ In *Der Einfluss der Kanonistik auf die europäische Rechtskultur*. Vol. 4, *Prozessrecht*, edited by Y. Mausen, Orazio Condorelli, Franck Roumy, and Mathias Schmoeckel, 45–64. Cologne: Böhlau, 2014.

Despres, Denise Louise. *Ghostly Sights: Visual Meditation in Late-Medieval Literature*. Norman, OK: Pilgrim, 1989.

Deutsch, Andreas. *Ulrich Tenglers Laienspiegel: ein Rechtsbuch zwischen Humanismus und Hexenwahn*. Heidelberg: Winter, 2011.

Dolezalek, Gero. *Verzeichnis der Handschriften zum Römischen Recht bis 1600*. Frankfurt am Main: Max-Planck-Institut für Europäische Rechtsgeschichte, 1972.

Dronke, Peter. ‘Laments of the Maries: From the Beginnings to the Mistery Plays.’ In *Intellectuals and Poets in Medieval Europe*, edited by Peter Dronke, 457–89. Rome: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 1992.

Eichenberger, Nicole. *Geistliches Erzählen: Zur deutschsprachigen religiösen Kleinepik des Mittelalters*. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2015.

Friedlaender, Ina. *Processus Satanae contra genus humanum*. En förbisedd litterär text i en förmulärbok från Vadstena Kloster. In *Archivistica et Mediaevistica Ernesto Nygren oblata*, 123–57. Stockholm: Norstedt, 1956.
García y García, Antonio. *Codices operum Bartoli a Saxoferrato recensiti*. Vol. 2, *Iter Hispanicum*. Florence: Olschki, 1973.

Gärtner, Kurt. 'Franko von Meschede.' In *Verfasserlexikon* 5. 2nd ed., Berlin: De Gruyter, 1980.

Gebert, Bent. 'Das Erbe des Lazarus. Recht und Religion bei Drogo de Altovillari und Hartmann von Aue.' *Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (PBB)*, 142.1 (2020): 23–52.

Goldast, Melchior. *Processus iuris ioco-serius*. Hannover: typis Villerianis, 1611.

Hauréau, Barthélemy. *Notices et extraits de quelques manuscrits latins de la Bibliothèque Nationale*. 6 vols. Paris: Klincksieck, 1890–1893.

Herzog, Reinhart. 'Metapher – Exegese – Mythos. Interpretationen zur Entstehung eines biblischen Mythos in der Literatur der Spätantike.' In *Terror und Spiel: Probleme der Mythenrezeption*, edited by Manfred Fuhrmann, 157–85. Munich: Wilhelm Fink, 1971.

Hunt, Tony. 'The Four Daughters of God: A Textual Contribution.' *Archives d'histoire doctrinale et littéraire du Moyen Âge* 48 (1981): 287–316.

Jacquin, Robert. 'Le Procès de Satan.' In *Bartolo da Sassoferrato: Studi e documenti per il VI Centenario*, 271–80. Milan: Giuffrè, 1962.

Kinable, Dirk. 'Semagrams' in Historical Lexicography and their Applicability for Text Research. The Case of *Maskeroen*. *International Journal of Lexicography* 26 (2013): 424–28.

Koehler, Theodor. 'Planctus Mariae.' In *Dictionnaire de spiritualité, ascétique et mystique*, vol. 12, 2, 1795–1800. Paris: Beauchesne, 1986.

Koeplin, Dieter. 'Interzession Mariä und Christi vor Gottvater.' In *Lexikon der christlichen Ikonographie*, vol. 2, 346–52. Rome: Herder, 1970.

Kugler, Hartmut. 'Georg Alt.' In *Verfasserlexikon*, vol. 11. 2nd ed., 75–80. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2004.

Mäder, Eduard Johann. *Der Streit der Töchter Gottes. Zur Geschichte eines allegorischen Motivs*. Bern: Peter Lang, 1971.

Marx, William C. 'An Edition and Study of the *Conflictus inter Deum et diabolum*. *Medium Aevum* 59 (1990): 16–40.

Marx, William C. 'The *Quis dabit* of Oglerius de Tridino, Monk and Abbot of Locedio.' *Journal of Medieval Latin* 4 (1994): 118–29.
Marx, William C. *The Devil's Rights and the Redemption in the Literature of Medieval England*. Cambridge: Brewer, 1995.

Marx, William C. 'The *Conflictus inter Deum et diabolum* and the Emergence of the Literature of Law in Thirteenth-Century England.' *Thirteenth-Century England* 13 (2011): 57–66.

Mastroberti, Francesco, Stefano Vinci, and Michele Pepe. *Il “Liber Belial” e il processo romano-canonico in Europa tra XV e XVI secolo*. Bari: Cacucci, 2012.

Meier, Christel. 'Eriugena im Nonnenkloster? Überlegungen zum Verhältnis von Prophetentum und Werkgestalt in den figmenta prophetica Hildegards von Bingen.' *Frühmittelalterliche Studien* 19 (1985): 466–97.

Melion, Walter. 'Introduction: Meditative Images and the Psychology of Soul.' In *Image and Imagination of the Religious Self in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe*, edited by Reindert Falkenburg, Walter Melion, and Todd M. Richardson, 1–36. Turnhout: Brepols, 2007.

Ohly, Friedrich. 'Die Trinität berät über die Erschaffung des Menschen und über seine Erlösung.' *Beiträge zur Geschichte der Deutschen Sprache und Literatur* 116 (1994): 242–84.

Ott, Norbert. *Rechtspraxis und Heilsgeschichte: Zu Überlieferung, Ikonographie und Gebrauchssituation des deutschen “Belial”*. Munich: Artemis, 1983.

Pasciuta, Beatrice. 'Il diavolo e il diritto: il Processus Satane (XIV sec.).' In *Il diavolo nel medioevo: atti del XLIX Convegno storico internazionale, Todi, 14-17 ottobre 2012, 421-28*. Spoleto: Fondazione Centro Italiano di studi sull'alto medioevo, 2013.

Pasciuta, Beatrice. *Il diavolo in Paradiso. Diritto, teologia e letteratura nel Processus Satane (sec. XIV)*. Rome: Viella, 2015.

Poirel, Dominique. 'Symbole.' In *Mots médiévaux offerts à Ruedi Imbach*, edited by Iñigo Atucha, Dragos Calma, Catherine König-Pralong, and Irene Zavattero, 703–15. Porto: Fédération Internationale des Instituts d'Ètudes Médiévales, 2011.

Raynaud, Gaston. 'L'advocacie Nostre Dame et La chapelerie Nostre-Dame de Baiex: poème normand du XIVe siècle imprimé en entier pour la première fois, d'après le ms unique de la Bibliothèque d'Évreux.' Paris: Académie des bibliophiles, 1869.

Rippl, Coralie. 'Literatur – Recht – Erzählen. Kontroversfälle aus Antike und Mittelalter (Seneca, Drogo de Altovillari, Gesta Romanorum, Kaufringer).' In *Rechtsnovelle. Rhetorik, narrative Strukturen und kulturelle Semantiken des Rechts in Kurzerzählungen des späten*
*Mittelalters und der Frühen Neuzeit*, edited by Pia Claudia Doering, and Caroline Emmelius, 51–83. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag, 2017.

Schmidt, Paul Gerhard. ‘*Altercatio Cayn cum Christo*. Ein Streitgespräch über die Ewigkeit der Höllenstrafen im Kontext des *Descensus ad inferos*.’ In *Sprache und Recht. Beiträge zur Kulturgeschichte des Mittelalters*. Festschrift für Ruth Schmidt-Wiegand zum 60. Geburtstag. Vols. 1–2, edited by Dagmar Hüpper, Gabriele von Olberg, Karl Hauck, Karl Kroeschell, Stefan Sonderegger, 722–41. Berlin: De Gruyter, 1986.

Schmitz, Wolfgang. *Der Teufelsprozess vor dem Weltgericht nach Ulrich Tennglers “Neuer Layenspiegel” von 1511 (Ausgabe 1512)*. Cologne: Wienand, 1980.

Schumann, Eva. ‘Seltzsame Gerichtshändel: Fiktive Prozesse als Bestandteil der juristischen Praktikerliteratur.’ *Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik* 41 (2011): 114–48.

Schumann, Eva. ‘Wissensvermittlung leicht gemacht: Die Vermittlung gelehrten Rechts an ungelehrte Rechtspraktiker am Beispiel der volkssprachlichen Teufelsprozessen.’ In *Wissen, maßgeschneidert: Experten und Expertenkulturen im Europa der Vormoderne*, edited by Björn Reich, Frank Rexroth, and Mathias Roick, 182–213. Munich: Oldenbourg, 2012.

Shoemaker, Karl. ‘The Devil at Law in the Middle Ages.’ *Revue de l’histoire des religions* 4 (2011): 567–86.

Snellaert, F. A. *Nederlandsche Gedichten uit de veertiende eeuw van Jan Boendale, Hein van Aken en anderen naar het Oxfordsch Handschrift*. Brussels: F. Hayez, Drukker der K. Akad, 1869.

Sodmann, Timothy. *Jacob van Maerlant. Historie van den Grale und Boek van Merline*. Cologne: Böhlau. 1980.

Stallings-Taney, Mary C. *Iohannes de Caulibus Meditaciones vite Christi olim S. Bonauenturo* [sic] *attributae*. Turnhout: Brepols, 1997.

Stintzing, Roderich. *Geschichte der populären Kultur des römisch-kanonischen Rechts in Deutschland am Ende des 15. und Anfang des 16. Jahrhunderts*. Leipzig: Hirzel, 1867.

Taylor, Scott Lynn. *Mary between God and the Devil: Jurisprudence, Theology and Satire in Bartolo of Sassoferrato’s “Processus Sathane”*. PhD diss., University of Arizona, 2005. http://hdl.handle.net/10150/282895 (accessed January 29, 2015).

Tóth, Peter. ‘The Prophets Cry in Limbo: Origin and History of a Special Scene in Medieval Plays.’ *European Medieval Drama* 12 (2008): 67–92.
Tóth, Peter, and David. Falvay. New Light on the Date and Authorship of the *Meditationes Vitae Christi*. In *Devotional Culture in Late Medieval England and Europe: Diverse Imaginations of Christ's Life*, edited by S. Kelly, and R. Perry, 17–105. Turnhout: Brepols, 2014.

Van de Kamp, Josephus Lodewijk Johannes van de. *Bartolus de Saxoferrato 1313–1357: Leven – Werken – Invloed – Beteekenis*. Amsterdam: H. J. Paris, 1936.

Von Savigny, Friedrich Karl von. *Geschichte des Römischen Rechts in Mittelalter*. Vols. 1–6, Heidelberg: Mohr, 1815–1831.

Walther, Hans. *Das Streitgedicht in der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters*. Mit einem Vorwort, Nachträgen und Registern von Paul Gerhard Schmidt. Hildesheim: Olms, 1984.

Weltsch, Ruben Ernest. *Archbishop John of Jenstein (1348–1400): Papalism, Humanism and Reform in Pre-Hussite Prague*. The Hague: Mouton, 1968.