Linea Christi

A vertical line of descent from Adam to Christ, the Linea Christi, forms the backbone of the Compendium historiae’s graphic concept. Most manuscripts have a short text just after Judah (the son of Jacob) that clarifies, “Christ descended from Judah through this line below.” Peter of Poitiers constructed this line from various sources. The generations recounted in Luke (3:23–38) provide the basis for the period from Adam to David. The subsequent sequence follows the Liber generationis in Matthew (1:1–14). Peter of Poitiers, however, used other sources to contruct the line where the information in Matthew is incomplete or vague. Matthew, for instance, does not include the names of the sons of Josiah, or the name of the ruler during the Babylonian Exile (Zedekiah).

Worm, Geschichte und Weltordnung, 43–51.

Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 29 (C2), fol. VIv

In this linear construction, however, Christ descends from the Old Testament figures through his father Joseph rather than his mother Mary. The Compendium includes four medallions for Christ: birth (Christus natus), childhood (Christus puer), death (Christus passus), and resurrection (Christus resurgens). Peter of Poitiers placed the medallions for Christ’s birth, childhood, and death—the earthly, or human, aspects—on the central Linea Christi. He then created a separate line descending from Anna, mother of Mary. In most copies Anna’s line is placed to the right of the Linea Christi, parallel to the christological section of the Linea Christi that concludes the Compendium. Christus resurgens and the Apostles descend from this new, Marian, line (see below, The Genealogy of Anne and the Apostles).

More detailed information on the sources and construction of each section of the Linea Christi are given in the Visual Edition.

Six Ages

The Compendium divides biblical history into six ages. The first age begins with Adam, the second with Noah, the third with Terah, the fourth with Saul, and the fifth with the Babylonian Captivity, which coincides with the medallion for Zedekiah. The sixth age starts with the birth of Christ. Short, rubricated texts mark these divisions. The first of such texts, placed next to Noah, reads: “Here ends the first age, which according to the Hebrews had 1656 years; and according to the Septuagint 2244 years.”

“Hic terminatur prima etas habens secundum hebreos .m.dc.l.vi. secundum Lxx .mm.cc.xl.iiij.”

Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 29 (C2), fol. VIr

Since Paul, the division of history into distinct ages was standard in Christian theology.

See R. Schmidt, “Aetates mundi. Die Weltalter als Gliederungsprinzip der Geschichte,” Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte 67 (1956–1955): 288–317 and A. Higgins, “Medieval Notions of the Structure of Time,” Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies 19 (1989): 227–250.

While Paul posited four ages, Augustine’s periodization was to become more influential.

The Pauline division is: the era of natural law, the era of mosaic law, the time under grace, and eternal life. See Higgins, “Medieval Notions,” 241–244.

In several works written between 388 and 426, Augustine interprets the seven days of creation as an allegory for the ages of the world, which he in turn compares to the ages of man.

While Augustine first developed this allegory in De genesi contra Manicheos (388–389), he returns to it in De genesi ad litteram (404–420) and De civitate Dei (413–426). The six ages of man are infancy, childhood, adolescence, young manhood, settled life and old age (infantia, pueritia, adulescentia, inventus, gravitas, senectus). See and E. Sears, The Ages of Man: Medieval Interpretations of the Life Cycle (Princeton, 1986), 54–58.

In his model, the first age extends from Adam to Noah, the second from Noah to Abraham, the third from Abraham to David, the fourth from David the Babylonian Captivity, and the fifth from the Babylonian Captivity to the coming of Christ. The sixth age begins with the preaching of Christ and the seventh when Christ comes in glory at the end of time. Because Augustine writes that the seventh age of rest has no evening, but will be brought to a close by an eighth and eternal day of eternal repose (Civitate dei 22:30), his model was also interpreted to have eight ages.

See Augustine, City of God. Vol. VII (Cambridge, MA, 1972), 385. Schmidt, “Aetates mundi,” 292.

While keeping the same chronological divisions, other notable historiographers, such as Isidore and Bede, were interested in calculating the exact number of years in each age.

Schmidt, “Aetates mundi,” 293.

Also attentive to precise chronological information, Peter Comestor notes in the Historia scholastica when each age ends and, for some, gives the duration of the age according to the Septaguint, Methodius, the Vulgate, and sometimes other sources.

On the first age, for intance, Comestor writes, “Porro Noe fuit decimus ab Adam, in quo prima etas terminata est, ita quod et ipse in ea fuerit. Huius etatis annos LXX ponunt duo milia ducentos quadraginta quatuor, Ieronimus non plene duo milia, Methodius duo milia. Ipse tamen per ciliades secula disponit, nec apponit annos si supersint, et ideo nichil certum de numero annorum tradidit.” Peter Comestor, Historia scholastica, ed. A. Sylwan (Turnhout, 2005), 59.

The Compendium’s standard early design (Graph Version 1) does not emphasize the ages except for the rubricated labels marking the end of each age. These labels appear next to Noah, Terah, Saul, Zedekiah, and the Birth of Christus. Diverging from Augustine, this slightly offbeat division comes from Comestor’s account of the ages given in the Historia scholastica.

“In Thare terminatur secunda etas habens secundum LXX annos mille septuaginta duos, secundum Methodium ciliadem, secundum hebraicam ueritatem annos mille ducentos nonaginta duos. Tot annos dicit Iosephus usque ad natiuitatem Thare, sed usque ad natiuitatem Abre extenditur hec etas.” Peter Comestor, Historia scholastica, ed. Sylwan, 79–80 and “Hic inchoatur quarta aetas, non pro nuntio regni Judaeorum, ut quidam volunt, quia tunc inchoasset a Saule, sed pro innovatione promissionis, quae patribus olim data erat de regno Christiano, quod praefiguratum est in David, jurante Domino David veritatem, de fructu ventris ejus sessuro super sedem suam…" Peter Comestor, Historia scholastica, Patrologia Latina, ed. J.P. Migne (Paris, 1855), col. 1325.

Around 1200, a new design appears in the Compendium tradition (Graph Version 2) that shifts the divisions to reflect a more classic chronology. The inscription for the end of the second age, for instance, next to Terah in the earlier concept, appears instead by Abraham’s medallion. And the inscription for the end of the third age, originally next to the medallion for Saul, is placed beside David. These manuscripts also include a text adjacent to Noah that explains that there are eight ages in total (thus similar to Augustine, Civitate dei 22:30), two of which are not depicted in the Compendium because they occur after the life of Christ.

“Prima etas fuit ab adam usque ad noe. Secunda Noe ad Abraham. Tercia ab Abraham usque ad Dauid. Quarta a Dauid usque ad transmigrationem bablionis. Quinta usque ad Christum. Sexta a christo usque ad finem seculi. Hee sex sunt uiuentium. Septima est quiescentium que incipit a passione domini. Octaua erit resurgentium qui incipiet a die iudicii et durabit usque in sempiternum.” Firenze, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Plut. 15.11 (F1), fols. 5v–6r. Differing slightly from Augustine’s schema, this text places the seventh age between the Passion and the Last Judgment, and the eighth after the Last Judgment.

This design also introduces larger illustrated medallions for Adam and Eve, Noah, Abraham, David, Zedekiah, and Christ to mark the ages. As established by Parisian workshops around 1200, the pictorial program, as shown here, consists of the following images: Adam and Eve on either side of the Tree of Knowledge, accepting the fruit from the serpent; Noah harvesting in the vineyard; Abraham in the act of sacrificing Isaac; David seated on a throne with a harp; Zedekiah, also seated, with his head in his hand; and a scene of the Nativity. This selection of images provided the basis for the Compendium’s pictorial tradition in the following centuries.

Firenze, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Plut. 15.11 (F1), fols. 5v–6r

Firenze, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Plut. 15.11 (F1), fols. 7v, 9r, 10v

Judges and High Priests

In addition to the Linea Christi, Peter of Poiters included several other lines representing dynastic or legal descent. Two of such lines descend respectively from Aaron and Moses: the lines of High Priests and Judges. Illustrated copies of the Compendium often depict Moses and Aaron as representatives of these respective offices. Aaron appears with a bishop’s mitre and staff; Moses usually holds the tablets of the law.

See, for instance, GB4, AT3.

Paris, École nationale supérieure des Beaux-Arts, Ms. Mas 71 (P12), roll

The line of Judges consists of the thirteen leaders of Israel during the Period of Judges (Judges 1–21), that is, after the Israelites had arrived in the Promised Land but before they first appointed a king. While shown descending from Moses in the Compendium, the office did not pass from parent to offspring during this period. Rather, God seems to have chosen the judges at will, each from a different tribe of Israel. Samuel marks the end of the Line of Judges. When his sons proved unfit to rule, the elders of Israel demanded that Samuel appoint a king. Samuel declared Saul king and thus the rule of the Judges ended (1 Samuel 10).

Given that the office of judge was not hereditary, the Compendium’s early design does not connect the judges with a line like that of the Linea Christi.

See groups FR1, FR2, and BE1.

Rather, the medallions are placed between two framing lines.

Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 29 (C2), fol. VIIr

The High Priests, on the other hand, are connected by a central vertical line. The office of priesthood, unlike that of the judges, was a dynastic office held by the descendants of Aaron through his son Eleazar. The Compendium shows, however, that the priesthood was transferred to the line of Ithamar (another son of Aaron) with the priest Eli. This is a detail that Peter of Poitiers took from the Historia scholastica.

“Nam de Ithamar non erant summi sacerdotes, sed minores, nisi pauci circa tempora David. Nam in Heli sacerdotium translatum est ad filios Ithamar. Abiathar quoque erat de Ithamar, quem deposuit Salomon, et ejus loco statuit Sadoch, qui erat de Eleazar.” Peter Comestor, Historia scholastica, Patrologia Latina, col. 1081.

The Bible remains vague about this dynastic shift, saying simply that Eli was a priest at the time of Samuel (1 Samuel 1). It is more explicit about the priesthood’s shift back to the line of Eleazar, when Salomon removed Abiathar from the priesthood and named Zadok high priest (1 Kings 2:27, 35) (fulfilling the prophecy against the House of Eli, 1 Samuel 2: 27–36).

Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 29 (C2), fols. VIIv–VIIIr

The Compendium often uses color-coding to highlight the shift of the office of priesthood between the descent of Eleazar and Ithamar. In the Cambridge manuscript, the line descending from Ithamar is colored brown. With Eli, Ithamar’s line shifts over into vertical column of the High Priests, while Eleazar’s descendants are displaced to the left. After Ithamar’s line ends with Abiathar, Eleazar’s line shifts back into the column of the High Priests.

In some manuscripts, color-coding or other types of labeling are used to differentiate the lines of Judges and High Priests from each other and from the Linea Christi.

München, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 19414 (M6), fol. 172r

Kings of Judah and Kings of Israel

One of the most chronologically complex sections of the Old Testament is the time after the death of Solomon, when the Kingdom of Israel was divided. When the assembly of Israel rejected Solomon’s son Rehoboam as a leader, the kingdom split in two: the Kingdom of Judah ruled by Rehoboam and the Kingdom of Israel ruled by Jeroboam (1 Kings 12). The Compendium illustrates this period with two interlinked parallel lines. While the Kings of Judah continue on the Linea Christi, the Kings of Israel appear on a line to the right. Each medallion contains not only the name of the king, but also a roman numeral indicating the duration of the king’s reign. The connecting lines between the line of Judah and line of Israel are also labeled with roman numerals. These refer to the number of years the two connected kings reigned at the same time.

Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 29 (C2), fol. VIIIv

For example, Jeroboam, who was king of Israel for twenty-two years, reigned concurrently with the following three kings of Judah: Rehoboam for seventeen years, Albijah for three years, and finally Asa for two more years.

“Estha Square”

In the section of the Compendium around the medallion of Estha, Peter of Poitiers attempts to reconcile an aspect of Matthew and Luke’s conflicting accounts of Christ’s genealogy.Historia ecclesiastica.

In this case Comestor was not the source, as Estha is not mentioned in the Historia scholastica. A summary of Eusebius’ reconciliation of Christ’s genealogy was given in the Glossa ordinaria on Matthew 1:16, see Glossa ordinaria cum Biblia latina (Mt. Capitulum 1), ed. Martin Morard et al. in Sacra Pagina, IRHT-CNRS, 2026.

According to Matthew, Joseph’s father is Jacob. According to Luke, Joseph’s father is Heli. In the fourth century, Eusebius of Caesarea had already attempted to harmonize these conflicting accounts in the Historia ecclesiastica.

Eusebius, The History of the Church: A New Translation, trans. J. M. Schott (Oakland, 2019), 61–61.

According to Eusebius, Jacob’s father, Matthan (who descended from Solomon), was the first husband of a woman named Estha. After Matthan died, Estha married another man named Melchi (who descended from Nathan), and she had a second son named Heli. Heli married, but died without having a child. According to the law, it was Jacob’s duty as Heli’s half brother to take Heli’s widow as a wife and raise Heli’s child (Deuteronomy 25:5–6). Jacob thus took Heli’s widow, and together they had Joseph. While Joseph was therefore Jacob’s son by blood, he was Heli’s son by law. Thus both genealogies, Matthew and Luke, are true.

See also M.D. Johnson, The Purpose of the Biblical Genealogies with Special Reference to the Setting of the Genealogies of Jesus (Cambridge, 1969), 140–145 and A. Worm, “Arbor Autem Humanum Genus Significat: Trees of Genealogy and Sacred History in the Twelfth Century,” in The Tree: Symbol, Allegory, and Mnemonic Device in Medieval Art and Thought, ed. P. Salonius and A. Worm (Turnhout, 2014), 35–67, at 40–43.

The Compendium represents this situation with a figure that resembles a square of opposition, the classic logic diagram showing the relationships between categorical propositions.

See the comparison made in J. Hamburger, “Drawing Conclusions: Logic Diagrams as a Matrix for the Making and Meaning of Christian Images in the Middle Ages,” in The Diagram as Paradigm: Cross-cultural Approaches, ed. J. Hamburger, D. Roxburgh, L. Safran (Washington, DC, 2022), 419–455, at 440–441.

The labels on the connecting lines indicate the relationships: first spouse (prior coniuges, between Estha and Mathan, who is on the Linea Christi), second spouse (coniuges posterior, between Estha and Melchi), carnal son (carnalis filius, between Melchi and Heli, Mathan and Jacob, and Jacob and Joseph), son (filius, between Estha and Heli and Estha and Jacob) uterine brothers (uterini fratres, between Heli and Jacob), and adopted or by law (adoptivus vel legem, between Heli and Joseph). In the early copies of the Compendium there is no line between Melchi and Mathan. Later scribes drew in this line, as shown here in the Corpus Christi College manuscript, despite the lack of immediate relation between Melchi and Mathan, making the figure look more like a square of opposition.

Klosterneuburg, Augustiner-Chorherrenstift, Cod. 696 (K), fol. 6v; Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 83 (C3), fol. 7r; Paris, Bibliothèque Mazarine, Ms. 305 (P3), fol. 5v

Eusebius had explained how Melchi and Mathan both descended from David—Mathan through the line that Peter of Poitiers made into the Linea Christi (through David’s son Solomon, according to Matthew), and Melchi through David’s son Nathan (according to Luke). There are a few copies of the Compendium that include this information in the Estha figure, as shown here in the Mazarine manuscript.

Such as Wf, P3, Do, and some Italian rolls, group IT2.

The Genealogy of Anne and the Apostles

Unlike the medallions for Christ’s birth, childhood, and death, which are located on the Linea Christi, Christ Resurrected and the Apostles descend from a separate line to the left of the Linea Christi that originates from Anne, mother of Mary. Peter of Poitiers uses this section to show the kinship relationships between Christ, John the Baptist, and the Twelve Apostles. The source that popularized what became known as the Trinubium Annae, the tradition of Anne’s marriage to three different men, seems to have been a later recension of the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew.

While Peter Comestor gives the names of Anne’s three husbands in the Historia scholastica, he does not mention Esmeria. See Peter Comestor, Historia scholastica, Patrologia Latina, cols. 1563–1564. While the Trinubium Annae, that is, the notion that Anna was married three times, derives from Haimo of Auxerre’s Epitome historiae sacrae, Esmeria only appears in the tradition at the end of the eleventh century or beginning of the twelfth. The Trinubium text that circulated Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew as of the twelfth century, for instance, includes Esmeria. For a summary of this history, see B. Hawk, The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew and the Nativity of Mary (Eugene, 2019), 30–32 and A. Dörfler-Dierken, Die Verehrung der heiligen Anna in Spätmittelalter und früher Neuzeit (Göttingen, 1992), 135. For an edition of the Trinubium text in manuscripts of the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew, see J. Gijsel and R. Beyers, eds., Libri de nativitate mariae (Turnhout, 1997), 93. On the authorship of the early medieval Trinubium tradition , see B. de Gaiffier, “Le Trinubium Annae. Haymon d’Halberstadt ou Haymon d’Auxerre?,” Analecta Bollandiana 90 (1972): 289–298.

Accordingly, the Compendium places Anne next to her sister, Esmeria, mother of Elizabeth and thus grandmother of John the Baptist. Anne’s three husbands, Joachim, Clopas, and Salome, are depicted descending from Anne’s medallion in a sort of triangle formation. Anne’s daughter from each husband, all named Mary, are shown, in turn, descending from their fathers’ medallions. With each husband she had a daughter named Mary. Five of the apostles are the sons of Anne’s daughters: James the Lesser, Simon, and Thaddaeus (sons of Mary Clopas) and John the Evangelist and James the Greater (sons of Mary Salome). The remaining seven are nevertheless lumped together in Anna’s genealogy. Peter, Andrew, Philip, and Bartholomew typically appear with the sons of Mary Salome on the right, while Matthew, Thomas, and Matthias are grouped with the sons of Mary Clopas on the left. Peter of Poitiers chose to include Matthias rather than Judas, who, according to the Acts of the Apostles, was called to replace Judas after Christ had already ascended to heaven.

Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 29 (C2), fol. XIr

Below these two groups of “official” apostles, Peter of Poitiers included three additional apostolic figures: Paul, Joseph Barsabbas, and Barnabas. Joseph Barsabbas, according to the Acts of the Apostles, was the other candidate considered to replace Judas. Paul and Barnabas, while not in the original twelve, are nevertheless sometimes called “apostles” in the Acts of the Apostles. Together Paul and Barnabas were the first to spread the teachings of Christ after his death.

There are several copies of the Compendium in which the apostles are arranged in a circle around Christus resurgens. Some of these circles include Paul and Barnabas, while others do not. In some cases an image appears in the center: Christ rising from the tomb, Christ in majesty, or Christ preaching to the Apostles. This circular configuration alludes to the New Jerusalem, that with its twelve gates (described in the Book of Revelation) represents a fulfillment of the earthly Jerusalem pictured by the Plan of Jerusalem diagram earlier in the Compendium, described below.

A. Worm, “‘Ista Est Jerusalem’. Intertextuality and Visual Exegesis in Peter of Poitiers’ Compendium historiae in genealogia Christi and Werner Rolevinck’s Fasciculus temporum,” in Imagining Jerusalem in the Medieval West, ed. H. Vorholt and L. Donkin (Oxford, 2012), 123–162.

Cleveland Museum of Art, 1973.5 (Cl), roll

Ultimately, the Compendium’s linear graphic concept had not only didactic, but also symbolic implications for the understanding of history in the Middle Ages, and beyond. In creating an academic apparatus that laid out the precise synchronic and diachronic order of biblical (and parabiblical) figures in time, Peter of Poitiers also offered a visualization of history that was linear, continuous, and teleological.

Cross-sections of the Ark

Many copies of the Compendium include one, two or, more rarely, three cross-sections of Noah’s Ark, usually placed next to Noah or by the passage that mentions the flood. Unlike the other diagrams embedded within the Compendium’s main graph (Tribes, Encampments, and Jerusalem diagrams), the cross-sections of the ark do not appear consistently across the tradition. Thus it remains unclear whether Peter of Poitiers conceived the ark diagrams for the Compendium.

Similar ark diagrams often appear next to the relevant passage in the margins of the the Historia scholastica. Compendium manuscripts in which the ark diagrams appear with the Historia scholastica include: Br, Br2, C2, Do, Kö, Lz1, Ly, M5, P4, W1.

These cross-section diagrams show different renditions of the shape and internal structure of Noah’s Ark.

Worm, Geschichte und Weltordnung, 58–67.

According to the account in Genesis, God commanded the only righteous man, Noah, to build an ark to save himself, his family, and the animals and birds from the flood. In his instructions God gave precise dimensions for the ark: three hundred cubits long, fifty cubits wide and thirty cubits high, and with a roof raised by exactly one cubit. God also specified that there should be an entrance in the side and that there should be three decks: lower, middle, and upper (Genesis 6:14–16). The passage in Genesis, however, led theologians to different interpretations of the internal structure of the ark. The cross-sections of the ark found in the Compendium depict two interpretations described in the Historia scholastica.

“Dicit alia translatio: Bicamerata et tricamerata. Habuit enim quinque cameras quas Augustinus etiam preter sentinam dicit ibi fuisse, dicens super tabulatum fuisse sentine eam bicameratam. Vna camerarum erat stercoraria, altera apotecaria et super hanc mansionem erat alia tricamerata. Laterales camere erant: una immitium, altera mitium animalium, media hominum et auium. Et habuit ostium ubi bicamerata et tricamerata iungebantur. Alii uero has quinque cameras in altitudine sola disponunt: inferiorem que et sentina stercorariam dicentes, secundam supra illam apotecariam, terciam immitium animalium et serpentium, et ubi hee iunguntur ostium ponunt; quartam mitium, supremam hominum et auium. Iosephus tamen dicit archam quatuor cameras habentem, forte stercorariam uel sentinam non includens.” Peter Comestor, Historia scholastica, ed. Sylwan, 62–64.

Peter Comestor compares the structure of Noah’s Ark according to Genesis and Flavius Josephus’ Antiquitates Judaicae before summarizing the exegesis of Augustine, Isidore of Seville, and Hrabanus Maurus. The arks in the Compendium usually have labels attributing the first to either Genesis (the label reads “according to Moses”) or Augustine and the second to Flavius Josephus. In some manuscripts the second is labeled “according to Hrabanus Maurus”,

Co, Ny2.

but there are also other attributions, for instance, to Isidore,

Ed, L12.

Cassiodorus,

L12.

Bede,

Aa1, M7, P13, Pn1, Ph1, St1, V3, V6.

Strabo,

Aa1, M7, P13, Pn1, Ph1, St1, V3, V6.

and "the translation of others" or just "others".

GB3, GB5, IT2.

The first cross-section (A) has a total of three levels, with the upper level divided into three sections. The middle section houses humans and birds (hominum et auium), the left one the tame (mitium animalium) and the right one the wild animals (immitium animalium). On the middle deck, which is divided into two parts, is the storage space for the provisions (apothecaria) on the left and the waste (stercoraria) on the right. The lowest level is the ship’s bilge (sentina), where the bilge-water collects. The entrance to the ark is on the upper level, where the people and animals are housed. The second cross-section (B) shows a different division. There are six levels (from the top down): people and birds, tame animals, wild animals, provisions, waste, and bilge-water (stercoraria uel sentina).

Cambridge, University Library, MS Dd. 8.12 (C15), fol. 461r

Some manuscripts, almost all in the English manuscript tradition, have three cross-sections of the ark.

See groups GB3, GB5, GB7, as well as D, Sg, and C15).

The third cross-section, while similar to the first with three levels, (C) has the shape of a truncated pyramid. Its most recognizable feature is the central placement of the door, which in the other cross-sections is either shown as a small appendage to the side or not included at all.

Forty-two Encampments

The Compendium includes two diagrams illustrating the exodus of the people of Israel from Egypt and their journey to the Promised Land. Usually adjacent, these two figures appear by Moses and Aaron.

Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 29 (C2), fol. VIIr

The first is a table consisting of three arches that lists the names of the forty-two campsites at three different points in time during the journey of the Israelites through the desert ( Hee sunt xlii mansiones israelitici populi per tres annos ). The locations of the twelve sites of the first year are listed under the first arch (mansiones primi anni duodecim), the twenty-one stations of the second year appear under the second arch (mansiones secundi anni .xxi.), and the nine encampments of the fortieth and last year are listed under the third arch (mansiones .xl. anni nouem).

Peter of Poitiers took the information in this table from the summary given by Peter Comestor in the Historia scholastica.

“Liber Numerorum, XXIII, De reditu in Cades in quadragesimo anno: [...] Et sic quadraginta et duae mansiones filiorum Israel, quibus leguntur profecti ab Aegypto, usque ad campestrias Moab, iuxta Iordanem, tribus tantum annis completae fuerunt duodecim ab Aegypto, usque ad montem Sinai anno primo a decima quarta die mensis primi usque ad diem primam mensis tertii. Deinde anno secundo vigesima die mensis primi profecti a Sinai, usque ad Cades viginti mansiones et unam expleverunt, infra annum secundum, tamen quoto spatio anni non est determinatum, sicut in primo, per triginta octo annos. Post errantes, et prostrati quadragesimo anno redierunt ad eandem Cades. Eo anno reliquas novem mansiones transegerunt. Quod si invenires decem hujus anni fuisse mansiones, scito quod inter has iterum numeratur Cades repetita.” Peter Comestor, Historia scholastica, Patrologia Latina, co. 1232. Cited in Worm, Geschichte und Weltordnung, 69.

According to Numbers 33:1–49, Moses wrote down the names of the campsites at the command of the Lord. The chronological information given in Numbers, however, is sparse. It does specify that the journey to Sinai took a year, and that the departure from Sinai then took place at the beginning of the second year (Numbers 10:11). The Compendium thus lists the places up to Sinai Desert under the first arcade. The second arcade begins with the first camp after the departure, the Sepulcra concupiscentie (“Graves of Longing,” Numbers 10:1–35), and ends with Kadesh. This is the period in which the Israelites wandered in the desert for thirty-eight years, due to their unbelief and rebellion against God (Deuteronomy 2:14). Aaron died on Mount Hor in the fortieth year of the exodus from Egypt (Numbers 33:38). This is the first station listed under the last arcade of the diagram. Thereafter the Compendium lists the subsequent stages of the journey in the fortieth year, ending with the Plains of Moab, where Moses finally died in view of the Promised Land (Deuteronomy 32:48–52; 34:1–9).

Worm, Geschichte und Weltordnung, 69–72.

The encampments diagram is fairly stable across the Compendium tradition. There is some variation, however, in how the scribes chose to arrange the names of the sites under the arches. In the standard version (FR1, FR2, FR3, FR4, FR5, BE1, DE1, GB3, GB6, ES1, IT1) the names are organized in a grid with two columns under the first arch, three under the second arch, and two under the third arch (A). Given that there are nine, rather than twelve, sites listed under the third arch, however, this arrangement leaves three empty spaces. Other scribes thus chose to list the names in single columns under each arch (B), as in some Austrian (AT2) and English manuscripts (GB1), or in other configurations: one-two-one columns (C), two-two-two columns (D), and two single columns (E). Type E is found in Gallus Kemli’s design (CH1).

Type A (C2); Type B (Lz1); Type C (Lz)

Type D (C1); Type E (Fm)

Twelve Tribes of Israel

This diagram represents the layout of the tents of the tribes of Israel around the tabernacle (the Tent of Congregation) in each encampment during the Israelites’ journey through the desert.

Worm, Geschichte und Weltordnung, 73–74.

The four central medallions positioned around the tabernacle at the center represent the tents of the Levites (Moses and Aaron in the east, the Caathites in the south, the Gershonites in the west, and the Merarites in the north). The twelve outer medallions are inscribed with the names of the twelve tribes of Israel: Reuben, Simeon, Gad (south), Ephraim, Benjamin, Manasseh (west), Naphtali, Asher, Dan (north), Zebulun, Issachar, and Judah (east). The diagram provides additional information in the form of numbers, written below the names on the four inner medallions. These indicate the number of cities of refuge each Levitical tribe received from the other tribes after the Israelites conquered the promised land. The interconnecting lines show which tribes gave these cities. For example, the Caathites received ten cities from the tribes of Dan, Manasseh and Ephraim. Inscriptions indicating the cardinal directions orient the diagram with south (meridies) positioned at the top, east (oriens) to the left, etc.

Peter of Poitiers created this schema based on information given in Numbers 2 (on the orientation of the tribes) and Joshua 21 (on how many cities of refuge the Levites received). In this case the Historia scholasticadoes not seem to have been Peter’s primary source.

Comestor’s passage summarizes Numbers 2 und does not give the information in Joshua 21: “De excubiis circa tabernaculum: Praecepit etiam Dominus, ut semper poneretur tabernaculum in medio castrorum, et filii Israel per gyrum excubarent per turmas, et cuneos, quod pro eodem hic accipitur. Turma est proprie triginta millium est. Et dicitur cuneus quasi conveniens multitudo. Excubare enim large hic accipitur; excubiae etiam propriae dici, vigiliae noctis. Ternae tribus per quatuor partes tabernaculi excubabant, ita tamen remoti, ut maximas in medio plateas haberent. Eratque ornatus quasi fori rerum venialium, singulis in ordine constitutis. Opifices etiam artium in stationibus suis erant, ita ut urbi competenter aedificatae, castra eorum simillima viderentur. Judas itaque Issachar et Zabulon castra metabantur ad orientem, Ruben, Simeon et Gad ad meridiem, Ephraim, Benjamin, Manasses ad occidentem, Dan Aser et Nephtalim ad aquilonem. Inter tabernaculum et castra excubabant Levitae in tabernaculis suis, propinquiores tabernaculo quam castris. Et excucubabant similiter per quatuor plagas Moyses et Aaron cum suis ad orientem; reliqui ab his, Caathitae, ad meridiem sub custodia Eliazaris filii Aaron excubabant; filii autem Gersonitae ad occidentem; Meraritae ad septentrionem, et erant utrique sub custodia Ithamar.” Peter Comestor, Historia scholastica, Patrologia Latina, col. 1217. Cited in Worm, Geschichte und Weltordnung, 73.

A short explanation ( Hec figura ualet ad intelligendum… ) accompanies the diagram in the Compendium:

This figure is useful for understanding what is said in the book of Numbers about the arrangement of the tribes and Levites in four regions around the tabernacle. Moreover, it is useful for understanding the difficult crossing of the Adamantius in Joshua, where it is also shown which of the Levites received how many towns from the dwelling places of which tribes, organised by lot.

In addition to the placement of the tribes and the cities received by the Levites, this text also refers to the crossing of Jordan during the Israelites’ journey through the desert described in Joshua 3–4. This passage recounts that as soon as the Levitical priests who were carrying the Ark of the Covenant touched the river’s edge, the water stopped flowing and the Israelites crossed on dry ground. God instructed Joshua to choose one man from each tribe to take a stone from the Jordan and set them up in their camp. The text in the Compendium implies that the arrangement of the stones reflects that shown in the diagram.

In the standard version of the Compendium’s tribe diagram, the outer medallions are connected in the form of a quatrefoil (A). Color-coding often differentiates the connecting lines (four colors for each of the four Levitical tribes). The diagram can also take the form of a circle (B), four circles (C), a square (D), or a diamond (E).

Type A (C2); Type B (Ma); Type C (C)

Type D (Lz1); Type E (E1)

While the quatrefoil tribes diagram is standard (see groups FR1, FR2, FR3, FR5, BE1, DE1), circular tribes diagrams are also quite common across the Compendium tradition (IT1, DE3, CH1, CH2, GB4). Slightly less widespread, square tribe diagrams appear in the group of Austrian manuscripts associated with the Windrose diagram (AT2) and French illustrated manuscripts (FR3). The tribe diagram composed of four circles is characteristic of English manuscripts (GB1, GB2, GB3, GB5, GB6). The diamond-shaped tribes diagrams, on the other hand, are rather rare, represented in a group of German-Austrian manuscripts (DE2).

Plan of Jerusalem

The last diagram is a plan of the city of Jerusalem. Positioned in the Compendium to coincide with the Babylonian captivity, that is, when King Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the city of Jerusalem and held the Judeans captive in Babylon, the diagram refers to the layout of the rebuilt city.

Worm, Geschichte und Weltordnung, 75–82.

According to the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, the Judeans began to reconstruct the temple and the walls of Jerusalem after the Persian King Cyrus gave them the permission to return. The diagram in the Compendium consists of three concentric circles: the quarters of the king and priests (habitatio regis et sacerdotum), the noble citizens and prophets (habitatio nobilum ciuium et prophetarum), and the common people (habitatio uulgi). The outer circles are interrupted by six archways representing six gates. They are labelled, “Dung Gate” (porta sterquilinii), “Old Gate or Judicial Gate” (porta uetus uel iudiciaria), “Fish Gate or Gate of David” (porta piscium uel david), “Gate of the Pool of Siloam or Water Gate" (porta fontis Syloe uel aquarum), “Flock Gate or Gate of the Sheep Pond or Ophel Gate or Merchants’ Gate” (porta gregis uel probatice piscine uel Offel uel negotiatorum), and “Gate of the Valley of Josaphat or Gihon” (porta uallis Josaphat uel Geon).

Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 29 (C2), fol. Xr

The passage in the Compendium referring to the medallion of the Persian king Artaxerxes reports on the rebuilding of Jerusalem. Some interpolated copies, such as English rolls (GB4), French rolls (FR4, FR5) and French illustrated manuscripts (FR3), also include a passage about the three Jewish sanctuaries built in the course of history: the temples of Solomon and Manasseh (both in Jerusalem) and the temple of the high priest Onias (in Leontopolis), which were respectively consecrated by Solomon, Yeshua, and Judah. However, none of these passages describe the plan of Jerusalem in the Compendium. The source of the six gates shown in the diagram is the Historia scholastica. Peter Comestor condensed the many (at least ten) gates named in the biblical account of rebuilding Jerusalem (Nehemiah 3:1–32) to six.

“De reaedificatione Jerusalem: Et surrexerunt sacerdotes, et aedificaverunt portam gregis. Alia translatio habet, Aedificaverunt portam et probaticam piscinam. Haec est porta iuxta templum, per quam inducebantur greges ad offerendum. (...). Secundo filii Asnaa aedificaverunt portam piscium, et statuerunt valvas eius, et seras et vectes. Haec respicit Ioppen et Diapolim, per quam inferebatur copia piscium. Haec, secundum Iosephum, postea dicta est porta David. Tertio aedificaverunt portam veterem pigmentarii et aurifices. Vestigia enim istius erant in diebus Iebusaeorum, et Melchisedech. Quarto, portam vallis, quae scilicet in vallem ducebat Iosaphat, aedificaverunt filii Zanoe. Quinto aedificavit portam sterquilinii Melchias princeps vici Bethacharam. Per hanc portam sordes civitatis effluebant inundantibus fluviis in torrentem Cedron. Sexto aedificavit portam fontis princeps pagi Maspha, et muros piscinae Siloe. Muros autem inter portas aedificavit populus per vicos, et civitates; unusquisque secundum possibilitatem suam. Nec te moveat si alia nomina portarum invenias, quae forte in interiori muro factae sunt, cum aliqua de praedictis, alia postea sortitae sint vocabula. Nam porta negotiatorum, forte porta est gregis, in qua negotiatores ergasteria sua posuerant ob templi viciniam. Sed et porta Iudiciaria potuit esse porta vetus, quae in frontecivitatis prior eminebat. Porta vero aquarum potuit esse porta fontis. Porta vero equorum non fuit porta civitatis, sed statuta erat ante atria templi, usque ad quam ascendere in equis licitum erat.” Peter Comestor, Historia scholastica, Patrologia Latina, co. 1486. Cited in Worm, Geschichte und Weltordnung, 78–79.

This design has numerical significance. Six, half of twelve, foreshadows the heavenly Jerusalem, described in Ezekiel as the meeting place of the twelve tribes of Israel after the coming of the Messiah. Ezekiel describes New Jerusalem with twelve gates, one for each tribe (Ezekiel 48: 30–35).

See Worm, “‘Ista Est Jerusalem’” and comments above on the representation of the Apostles in Compendium.

While the inscriptions on the Plan of Jerusalem diagram are fairly stable across the Compendium tradition, there is some variation in the shape of the gates and placement of the inscriptions. The standard design has oblong arches to represent the gates that overlap with the second concentric circle (A).

See groups FR1, FR2, GB1, BE1, CH1, DE1, DE2.

These arches, however, quickly became semicircles (B) (GB1, IT2). The type established in the first French illustrated manuscripts (FR3), and thereafter popular (CH2, DE4), has additional inner circles (usually three but sometimes more, sometimes lacking inscriptions, see FR5, Co, Ny2) (C). Less common are the versions that appear in England and Spain with circular gates (D) (GB2, ES1) and in some English rolls with a flower shape (E) (GB4, see also P5).

Type A (C2); Type B (Pn); Type C (P2)

Type D (C3); Type E (P12)

Sometimes the Jerusalem diagram is illustrated with architectural elements for the gates. A manuscript in Linz (Lz) also includes an image of King Solomon enthroned at the center.

Linz, Oberösterreichische Landesbibliothek, Hs. 390 (Lz)

It was King Solomon who built the first temple in Jerusalem for the Ark of the Covenant. In his paraphrase of the Book of Kings in the Historia scholastica, Peter Comestor describes King Solomon’s intention to furnish the city of Jerusalem “with a triple wall, so that in the first enclosure would be the temple and the houses of the temple servants, as well as the king’s palace with the dwellings of his servants; in the second the mighty men and the prophets were to live [...] in the third the craftsmen.”

“[...] et ambire Jerusalem muro triplici: ut in primo ambitu esset templum, et mansiones hebdomadariorum; domus quoque regia cum mansionibus domesticorum; in secundo habitarent potentes viri et prophetae. Unde infra legitur de prophetissa, quod habitaret in secundo; in tertio opifices.” Peter Comestor, Historia scholastica, Patrologia Latina, co. 1351. Cited in Worm, Geschichte und Weltordnung, 79.

This is also Peter of Poitiers’ source for the three concentric districts of Jerusalem.

As will become clear below, this synthetic method used to create the diagrams, heavily reliant on Peter of Comestor’s Historia scholastica but not without its own creative flair, also characterizes Peter of Poitiers’ approach to the text that he composed for the Compendium.

Historical Approach

Short historical accounts on biblical persons and events are embedded in the Compendium’s graphic structure as small text blocks. They are fundamental to Peter’s aim that he set for himself when he conceived the Compendium, as he proclaims in the prologue: namely to condense the narratives of sacred history, from Adam to Christ, into a small, single work, without altering their truthfulness. The prologue, moreover, reveals a distinctly scholastic intention to provide a universal-historical framework (kingdoms, empires, transfers of power) for biblical history. In most cases, the text blocks describe the lives of figures who form part of the genealogy. Some texts introduce and explain the historical facts represented in the diagrams, while others focus on specific events, especially crises, turning points, or contradictory historical statements found in the biblical books that mark the unfolding of salvation history. Throughout, there is an almost severe attention to chronology.

Compilatory Practice and Use of Sources

Composed of short clauses, the prose is very dense with a heavy use of participial constructions. Each text block, usually consisting of one single main clause, reflects a concentration and recomposition of historical facts. These texts, intrinsically compilatory, function by collating biblical traditions with extra-biblical, patristic, and other exegetical traditions. The author often explicitly refers to his sources, pointing out divergences between these traditions (ut tradunt quidam, secundum hebreos, secundum josephum).

In this respect, the text block on the contrarietates ( On the Contradictions Regarding the Kings of Judah and Israel ) is of particular interest. Here, Peter of Poitiers does not attempt to resolve the chronological inconsistencies between Judah and Israel, but explains them as the result of different prophetic utterances in the Book of Kings. This approach is typical of a compilator who respects the authority of his sources and highlights possible differences rather than to hide them and present one single, authoritative truth. This can be observed, for example, in the short note or rubric marking the end of the first age section or in the texts On the Hebrews , On Keturah , On Job , and On the End of the Kings of Judah (where the author explicitly cites his second source, the Antiquitates of Flavius Josephus: In eodem sedechia terminatum est regnum judeorum, in quo secundum josephum regnatum est annis…). Another attempt at reconciliation is evident in the Estha Square and in the diagrams representing the cross-sections of the ark, described above.

Peter’s primary source beyond the biblical texts themselves, however, is the Historia scholastica written by his predecessor Peter Comestor. Although Peter of Poitiers makes use of the Historia scholastica quite extensively, in many cases even quoting verbatim, he never explicity mentions Peter Comestor in the text.

The analysis of the sources, indicated in the form of apparatus notes beneath the critical text, shows that every text unit contains at least one parallel with the work of Comestor. For the narrative gap between the last book of the Old Testament, namely the Book of Maccabees, and the Gospels of the New Testament, the Historia scholastica becomes the sole source of the Compendium from On Aristobulus I to On Hyrcanus II . Remarkably, if we accept Peter of Poitiers’ authorship of the last chapters of the Historia scholastica, those telling the history of the Acts of the Apostles (see note 12), Peter becomes his own source for the final part of the Compendium.

Content

What stories of biblical figures and events did Peter choose? This is by no means self-evident. On the one hand, there are texts concerning major figures such as Adam ( On Adam ) and David ( On David ), and episodes such as the Flood and its aftermath ( On Noah , On the Four Kingdoms ). On the other hand, considerable attention is given to figures who, although they certainly contributed to the development of events, are otherwise secondary.

This approach follows the model of the Historia scholastica. For example, despite the prominence of Moses in the book on Deuteronomy, Comestor focuses on the events that took place around him rather than on the figure himself. Likewise, the Compendium mentions Moses here and there in various texts, but there is no entire text devoted to him. One reason for this omission might be the omnipresence of Moses as the assumed author of the first five biblical books. As such he is explicitly mentioned in the context of the ark diagrams: Hec est dispositio arche secundum moysen (see Cm and other MSS). It seems that Peter of Poitiers, and Comestor before him, however, were more interested in exploring characters and moments of sacred history that scholars do not know well. The same holds true for Abraham. While he is mentioned in several places, the Compendium instead devotes texts only to Jacob (one of the longest), Isaac, and Esau. Ahab is also cited in the Compendium, but his sons have a much larger role in the narrative. Nebuchadnezzar appears only within the general narrative framework, with a short passage a note on the Hanging Gardens that he had built for his wife. Zedekiah is the subject of just a brief text. Considerable attention, by contrast, is given to the visions of Daniel; all of them are mentioned and narrated in detail. Last but not least, the figure of Christ, although represented by four medallions in the graph, has no dedicated text that makes him the object of a coherent narrative. Reduced to biographical essentials ( Natus est dominus , etc.), the account of the life of Christ consists of contextual references to the Herodian and Augustan age and a few notes on the apostolic community, specifically on the replacement of Judas and on the martyrdom of Paul and Barnabas.

In summary, several of the most prominent biblical figures are mentioned in the Compendium only in the context of other persons or events. The focus falls, instead, on secondary figures and lesser known biographical details—at times as examples (even in a negative sense, for instance, Herod Ascalonita and his dynasty) or for curiosity (e.g., Eleazar Avaran who dies pierced beneath an elephant; Samson who kills more in death than in life; Crassus who dies with molten gold poured into his mouth)—integrating extra-biblical, etymological, and apocryphal information. As such, the Compendium was perceived by later scribes and scholars as an open invitation to add and modify more accounts, bearing witness to the work’s continuing use throughout the Middle Ages.

Textual Versions

The Compendium’s dynamic transmission and transformation is manifest in the many versions attested by its vast manuscript tradition. These versions can be identified by certain recurring features and characteristics serving as indicators within a basic framework. But the overall situation remains fluid, and the definitions assigned to individual versions do not necessarily apply to every witness or component. The number of individual text blocks does not always coincide with a certain type of the Compendium’s graphic structure, nor with the number of specific diagrams, nor with the presence of certain iconographic features.

L. Alidori, “Il Plut.20.56 della Laurenziana. Appunti sull’iconografia dei manoscritti della ‘Genealogia’ di Petrus Pictaviensis.” Rivista di storia della miniatura 6–7 (2001–2002), 157–170.

As already proposed by Moore, it is possible to broadly distinguish three different text versions in the Compendium tradition.

Moore, The Works of Peter of Poitiers, 100. An introduction to the issue is also found in F. Fischer and A. Macchiarelli, “Rappresentare la Storia Sacra: un’impresa ieri, una sfida oggi. Proposta di edizione scientifica digitale del ‘Compendium’ di Pietro di Poitiers,” in Me.Te. Digitali. Mediterraneo in rete tra testi e contesti (Catania, 2024), 221–225. According to Anna Pegoretti, manuscript Firenze, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale, Conv. soppr. F 4.733 would transmit an abbreviated version that remains to be verified; see A. Pegoretti, “Lo ‘studium’ e la biblioteca di Santa Maria Novella nel Duecento e nei primi anni del Trecento (con una postilla sul Boezio di Trevet),” in The Dominicans and the Making of Florentine Cultural Identity, edited by J. Bartuschat, E. Brilli, D. Carron, Reti Medievali Rivista 36 (2020), 105–139, at 127.

The short text version consists of 160 text blocks and approximately 445 nodes and is transmitted with a graphic structure that remains relatively stable. This version serves as the base version and has been chosen for establishing the critical text because it represents the starting point for the whole tradition.

The Compendium has never been scholarly edited. Other editions include Peter of Poitiers, Genealogia et chronologia sanctorum patrum, ed. Zwingli (Basel, 1592), and the transcription (albeit an inaccurate one) of manuscript Milan, Biblioteca Trivulziano, Triv. 489 (Mi) produced by M.F. Baroni, Un prezioso Un prezioso rotolo storico religioso del sec. XIII (Milano, 1969). On this witness, see also M. Rainini, “I rotoli del ‘Compendium historie in genealogia Christi’ di Pietro di Poitiers: origini e primo sviluppo dal testimone di Milano, Biblioteca Trivulziana, ms. 489,” in Imago librorum: mille anni di forme del libro in Europa, a cura di E. Barbieri (Florence, 2021), 41–77.

The earliest manuscript, Wien, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Cod. 363, dated to 1180–1183 (W), displays the configuration of the short version but also transmits a small set of additional texts attested in only a few other witnesses.

From this version subsequently developed a longer one, called “interpolated” because it adds about fifteen texts (different from those found in W) without modifying the general mise en page or content of the text blocks of the short version. Both versions circulated from an early date. An example of the interpolated version, often transmitted in scroll format, is found in the exemplar Cm, dated to around 1200.

Shortly thereafter, even longer—what we call “long” and “extended”—versions began to circulate. There are several types, each with its own specific characteristics: the rolls Co and V3 both add content to the individual text blocks as well as include entirely new texts; the roll P13 extends the genealogy with popes, kings, and emperors; the manuscript Vi1 incorporates new information on the kings and events of ancient Rome.

The textual components of the Compendium are therefore, as its graphical realization, not a static work. Even if it was conceived with the aim of reducing the historical accounts of the biblical books to an essential minimum, numerous texts and other contents have been extended, added and modified from the first years following its composition as a result of the work’s extraordinary success and popularity.