[119] On William of Conches see, besides HL XXI, 455 _et seq._ and DNB, Antoine Charma, _Guillaume de Conches_, Paris, 1857; B. Hauréau, in his _Singularités historiques et littéraires_, Paris, 1861; H. F. Reuter, _Geschichte der religiösen Aufklärung im Mittelalter_, II (1877) pp. 6-10; R. L. Poole, _Illustrations of the History of Medieval Thought_, 1884, pp. 124-31, 338-63, (or, 1920, pp. 106-12, 293-310) and “The Masters of the Schools at Paris and Chartres in John of Salisbury’s Time,” EHR, 35 (1920) pp. 321-42. For editions and MSS of the original version and revision of William’s chief philosophical treatise see Appendix I at the close of this chapter. For his other works see my subsequent foot-notes. [120] _Metalogicus_ II, 10. [121] _Metalogicus_, I, 24. [122] Haskins, _Norman Institutions_, 1918, p. 130. Haskins, _Ibid._, p. 205, has found no authority for Geoffrey’s absence on crusade in 1147, so that it need not be taken into account in dating the _Dragmaticon_. [123] R. L. Poole, in EHR (1920) p. 334. [124] R. L. Poole (1884), p. 348, (1920) p. 299, concluded from this, “The dialogue was written therefore some time, probably some years, before Henry was of an age to be knighted, in 1149; and we shall certainly not be far wrong if we place it about the year 1145.” As, however, Henry was knighted when only about sixteen, and as the remark “quos ... studio literarum tenera aetate imbuisti” may be retrospective, and as one can scarcely argue with any chronological exactness from these medieval phrases denoting time of life--Henry, for example, is addressed as “vir optime atque liberalis” in the preface of the collection of ethical maxims which William made for him before he was seventeen,----it seems to me that there is no sufficient reason for fixing on 1145 as the date of the _Dragmaticon_. [125] Printed in Migne, PL 171, 1007-56, among the works of Hildebert of Le Mans. William’s authorship was determined by Hauréau, _Notices et Extraits_, XXXIII, i, 257-63. [126] Bouquet, _Recueil_, XIII, 703D. [127] R. L. Poole, in EHR (1920) p. 334, decides in favor of Chartres. [128] Cited from the _Dragmaticon_ by Poole (1884) pp. 348-9, (1920) 300. [129] _In iuventute nostra_, another example of a vague chronological phrase. [130] Charles Jourdain, _Des Commentaires inédits de Guillaume de Conches et de Nicolas Triveth sur la Consolation de la Philosophie_, Paris, 1861. [131] Printed in part as by Honorius of Autun in Cousin, _Ouvrages inédits d’Abélard_, Appendix, p. 648, _et seq._ [132] My references will be to the _editio princeps_ of Basel, 1531, which is, however, not particularly accurate. [133] Edition of 1531, p. 1. [134] _Ibid._, p. 14. [135] _Ibid._, pp. 27-8. [136] _Ibid._, p. 51. [137] The parallel passages are: _De consolatione philosophiae_, I, i, 21-3 and I, iii, 19-28. It will be recalled that William wrote a commentary on Boethius’ work. [138] Ed. of 1531, p. 65. [139] _Ibid._, pp. 9-10.