John of Salisbury, who was present through the whole
proceedings, leaves it an open question whether the offence
lay in a substantial disagreement with the rules or in
the mere appearance of such a disagreement, arising from
the unusual form of the words Gilbert employed:[1] for,
he remarks, it is certain that a good many things are now
handled by scholars in public which when he put them for
ward were reckoned as profane novelties. John s criticism
of the character of the prosecution betrays well enough the
general estimate of it among cultivated men outside the
immediate circle of partisans. He doubts whether Gilbert s
accusers were moved by the zeal of faith, or by emulation of
a more illustrious and deserving name, or by a desire to get
favour with the abbat, whose authority was then supreme.
As to abbat Bernard himself, he adds, there are several
opinions, some thinking one way and some another, in
reference to his having acted with such vigour against men of
so great renown in letters as Peter Abailard and the aforesaid
Gilbert, as to procure the condemnation of the one, to wit,
Peter, and to use all his power to condemn the other. How
could a man of so singular a holiness have broken out into
such intemperance as his conduct would seem to imply ?
We cannot think of jealousy as the moving principle
here; Bernard must have been actuated by a righteous
zeal. But as to the object of his assault, John could as
little be persuaded that Gilbert had really committed him
self to views from which Bernard was bound to dissent :
for the reason is curious and characteristic Gilbert was
a man of the clearest intellect, and of the widest reading ;
he had spent some sixty years in study and the exercise of
literature, and was so ripe in liberal culture as to be surpassed by no one, rather it was believed that in all things he
excelled all men.
There was thus a presumption in Gilbert’s favour possibly not less powerful than the evidence against him.
- ↑ Cf. Otto i. 46 p. 376 : Con- suetus ex ingenii subtilis magnitu- dine ac rationum acumine multa praeter coramuncra hominum mo- rem clicere. Compare too ch. 52, p. 379.
