Reflections on the British Academy Dialogus Project
John Kilcullen
Feb. 2024

The Ockham Dialogus project has now been completed, after thirty years of work. This also completes the Opera politica project, after more than eighty years. (See Miethke, Die kritische Edition von William Ockhams Opera politica ist jetzt abgeschlossen.) I believe it can be said, without exaggeration, that the making of a critical edition of Ockham's political writings has been one of the most important undertakings in the study of medieval European thought--in view of Ockham's high intelligence and the boldness and originality of his thought, and in view of the centrality to political and religious thinking of the controversies in which he was involved.

Sometime shortly before World War II a number of scholars (J.G. Sikes, B.L. Manning, R.F. Bennett, H.S. Offler and R.H. Shape) set out to make a modern critical edition of the Latin text of Ockham's Opera Politica. (Opera politica was the name they chose for the writings Ockham produced in support of the dissident Franciscans' campaign to depose Popes John XXII, Benedict XII and Clement VI; these writings involve discussion of many topics of political philosophy.) The first volume, edited by J.G. Sikes, was published in 1940 by Manchester University Press. After the war Offler and Bennett returned to the project (Bennett not for long--he turned to WWII history, having played a key part in British intelligence). Manchester UP brought out two more volumes (1956, 1963) and a second edition of the first volume (1974), all three edited by H.S. Offler. The front matter of Volume 3 gives an outline of the project. Eight volumes were planned, of which volumes 5-8 would contain the Dialogus. In 1997 Oxford University Press for the British Academy published Volume 4, edited by H.S. Offler, as number 14 in the series Auctores Britannici Medii Aevi. Professor Offler had died in 1991, and the final preparation of Volume 4 was overseen by Professor David Luscombe, chairman of the Medieval Texts Editorial Committee of the British Academy.

Volume 4 completed all of the Opera Politica except for the Dialogus. In the foreword to Volume 4 Professor Luscombe announced that the Dialogus would be edited by John Kilcullen in the Auctores series, that it would be published electronically, and that it would include both Latin text and English translation. He did not characterise the Dialogus project as the continuation of the Opera politica project, but in effect it was. The first editors of the Dialogus project appointed by the Medieval Texts Editorial Committee were John Kilcullen and John Scott. We were awarded a Australian Research Council large 3-year grant 1994-, but it became clear that the project was too big for two people. With the approval of the Medieval Texts Committee, parts of the project were assigned to other scholars: 1 Dial. 6 and 7 to George Knysh, 2 Dial. to Volker Leppin and Jan Ballweg, and 3.2 Dial. to Karl Ubl and Semih Heinen. (The German participants were supported by large grants from Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft and employed a number of research assistants.) The editors did not form a committee; the project was overseen by the Medieval Texts Committee. The editorial policy was worked out by the editors and approved by the Medieval Texts Committee.

The Coherence of the Edition

Given that none of the editors had any authority over the others, there might be a question whether we have produced a coherent edition. Some degree of heterogeneity is appropriate, since Ockham wrote the Dialogus in stages over some 20 years, and in different manuscripts and different sections of a manuscript there are differences in the exemplars and in degree of “contamination”. Given these circumstances, I believe that the outcome of our work is well unified. (For my examination of this issue see Coherence.html.)

Development of the website

With the cooperation of the British Academy we set up and maintained a Dialogus website from 1995 (which was just a few years after the establishment of the World Wide Web – we were pioneers in using the Web for a humanities research project). The first ARC research grant paid for Dr Christine Asmar to type into a computer the approx. 500,000 words of the text in the 17th century Goldast edition: quite an undertaking, which she did well. We posted her files on the website and gradually amended them as we read the manuscripts. These files, as amended, were the basis of all the volumes. The website went through many updates (see chronology).

There were a number of reasons for putting the project on the World Wide Web. (1) The British Academy at first seemed to consider the possibility of publishing the Dialogus only electronically and not in print. (Maybe they were waiting to see how it went.) (2) We thought we might get feedback and suggestions from other students of Ockham. (I don’t think we ever got any.) (3) We wanted to make our work available to others without waiting for print publication. (In fact it was used, e.g. an Italian translation was based on the web text.) (4) We realised that we might not live to complete the project, and wanted to make it easy for someone else to go on from where we were at. (5) Web publication was a way of keeping the British Academy, the Australian Research Council and Macquarie University informed about the progress of a long project.

In addition, the website was a forum in which the editors could think through various problems, e.g. to characterise the manuscripts and to work out progressively our view of the relationships among them (see here, here). The website was also a means of publishing worthwhile material that would have added too much bulk to printed volumes, e.g. here, here, and here. Hyperlinks enhanced the usefulness of some studies, e.g. here, and helped readers follow Ockham's many cross-references. From the beginning we intended to make an English translation of the whole work (Offler’s generation of scholars saw no need for translation, but these days translations are necessary if younger scholars are to see the value of learning Latin -- we have also translated Breviloquium, LFM and other Writings, and OND vol.1 and OND vol.2.); much of the translation of the Dialogus will be left on the web (here) and not printed. (English translation of the first sections of the Dialogus has been printed in the Auctores series, vol.43.)

Printed volumes

The Opera Politica volumes published by Manchester UP were numbered in their place in the series even though they were published in a different order (Vol. III before II). In the Auctores Britannici Medii Aevi series the Dialogus volumes are numbered in the order of publication in the series, an order that does not correspond to their place in the Dialogus; readers may find this confusing – hence “The Dialogus at a Glance” (included facing the title page in several of the volumes, e.g. vol. 35), which was inserted at Luscombe’s suggestion. The ordering of publication was not the result of any group decision.  The volumes were numbered as they were published, and they were published in the order in which the editors happened to finish their respective volumes. Scott and I reworked the edition of 2 Dial. prepared by Jan Ballweg (with his agreement). We had by then made considerable progress on 1 Dial.1-5 and on 3.1 and 3.2 Dial. (we had 3.2 Dial. well advanced, starting from Scott’s analysis of its text tradition), but re-working 2 Dial. made a big interruption. When we were satisfied with 2 Dial. we published it together with 3.1 Dial. as vol. 20, and then went back to work on 1 Dial. 1-5. That volume took a lot longer than we expected because of the complexities of the manuscript tradition (see vol. 35, pp.xix-xxx – those pages record a lot of work!). As we worked on 1 Dial. 1-5, we realised we might well be dead before we could revise our draft of 3.2, so we asked Ubl to take over 3.2 Dial. Ubl and Heinen and their team produced vol. 33 quickly, while Scott and I were still working on 1 Dial. 1-5, which was published a year later as vol. 35. Knysh, who had been working on 1 Dial. 6 and 7, published when he was ready (vol. 41, vol. 42), which happened to be at the end of the Latin series. Then Scott and I finished our English translation of the text published in vol. 35 and published that as vol.43.

Technology

Over the 30 years the Dialogus project took we had to deal with various changes of technology.

At first we worked from microfilms, parts of which we printed; later we scanned the microfilms to get .pdf or .tif images; only recently have some manuscripts become available in digitised form, some of them now available on the Web (Ce, Fi, Fr, etc.)

Recording variants from many manuscripts produced a large data base that had to be managed through changes of methods and software. At first we entered variants in brackets into the files typed from the Goldast text, like this (search to "volo hic"). When we decided to use Collate, we used a VBA procedure to extract from these Goldast text files, containing variants from many manuscripts, a “witness file” for each manuscript, showing the text as it appeared in that manuscript. We also used VBA to edit the collations that “Collate” produced so as to move rejected variants to the right (after a semicolon) and to colour them by family, so as to exhibit family relationships (and how some MSS occasionally differ from their usual family), e.g. here. On the suggestion of Peter Robinson, the developer of “Collate”, we tried using PAUP to analyse manuscript relationships; see here and here. PAUP rapidly tried thousands of possible stemmata but ended up with something close to what we had decided on without its help. To get high quality results PAUP requires assignment of degrees of significance to variants: by the time we had done that we would already have known the result, so we did not continue to experiment with PAUP.  (The preceding paragraph relates to work on volumes 20 and 35.)

For preparing volumes for print, at first we used Critical Edition Typesetter. When Classical Text Editor became available we used a VBA procedure to turn CET files into MS Word files with specially formatted footnotes, files that could be imported into CTE. See DialArchive for the various documents and procedures written to assist the various transitions in technology.


Work still to be done.

The account of the manuscripts needs to be updated, and may need further updates to link to digitised manuscripts as libraries make them available online. I doubt we will otherwise change much in the account of the manuscripts.

Some chapters of 1 Dial. 6 and 7 have not yet been translated.

My account of Ockham's academic philosophy and theology (to which readers are referred in vol.43 p.14 n.50) still needs much work, especially a more thorough and more up-to-date study of the secondary literature.

It might be useful to post translation of parts of Contra Benedictum.

It might be useful to make a study of the various tabule found in a number of the manuscripts. See here.

More work might be done on the use later writers made of Ockham's Dialogus; see the references in Monica Brinzei's review of ABMA vol.43.
 
Return to johnkilcullen.net