German, and Hebrew. The work was an admirable
combination of Aristotelian ethics and Christian moral
and spiritual teaching.
Giles maintained good relations with Philip, and
in the year following his election to the post of prior-
general of the Augustinians (1292) Philip granted the
order the Grand Convent of the Augustinians in Paris.
In 1295, Pope Boniface VIII, with Philip’s consent,
elevated Giles to the archiepiscopal see of Bourges. But
in the ensuing controversy between Philip and Boniface,
Giles sided with Boniface, composing the treatise De
ecclesiastica potestate (1301)—one of the principal
sources for the papal bull Unam sanctam (1302) and
one of the broadest expressions of papal supremacy in
the entire controversy.
Following the death of Boniface, Giles returned to
his duties in Bourges. He was active in several contro-
versies at the time, among them the disputes with the
Templars and with Peter Olivi. He was active at the
Council of Vienne (1311–12) and died a few years later
in Avignon.
As a teacher, Giles lectured according to the pre-
scribed course of study, commenting fi rst on the Bible
and on the Sententiae of Peter Lombard; but his greatest
love was philosophy. He left commentaries on many of
Aristotle’s works on logic, physics, and metaphysics,
including the Pseudo-Aristotelian Liber de causis. His
works were held in such high esteem that the general
chapter of his order meeting at Florence in 1287 declared
that his “opinions, positions, and conclusions [senten-
tiae] both written and yet to be written” were to receive
the unqualifi ed assent of all Augustinian teachers and
students. The Franciscan philosopher William of Ock-
ham went so far as to speak of Giles as the “Expositor”
of Aristotle’s Physics.
Giles was an independent thinker, and though he
shared many ideas with Aquinas he disagreed mark-
edly with him on the relationship between essence and
existence. For Giles, these are two separate things, the
latter not necessarily implied in the former. In this way,
he stressed the contingency of all things on the will of
God and enunciated a theme that would become one of
the hallmarks of later nominalism.
See also Aquinas, Thomas; Boniface VIII, Pope;
Ockham, William of; Peter Lombard
Further Reading
Giles of Rome. De ecclesiastica potestate, ed. Richard Scholz.
Weimar: Böhlaus, 1929.
———. Errores philosophorum, ed. Josef Koch, trans. John
Riedl. Milwaukee: Marquette University Press, 1944.
———. Sermons. In Repertorium der lateinischen Sermones des
Mittelalters von 1150–1350, ed. Johannes-Baptist Schneyer. 6
vols. Münster: Aschendorff, 1969–74, Vol. 1, p. 57.
Hocediz, E. “La condemnation de Gilles de Rome.” Recherches
de théologie ancienne et médiévale 4 (1932): 34–58.
Luna, C. “La lecture de Gilles de Rome sur le quatrième livre des
sentences: les extraits du Clm 8005.” Recherches de théologie
ancienne et médiévale 57 (1992): 183–255.
Nash, P.W. “Giles of Rome: Auditor and Critic of St Thomas.”
Modern Schoolman 28 (1950): 1–20.
——. “Giles of Rome on Boethius’ Diversum est esse et id quod
est.” Medieval Studies 12 (1950): 57–91.
——. “The Accidentally of Esse According to Giles of Rome.”
Gregorianum 38 (1957): 103–15.
Mark ZierGIOTTO DI BONDONE
(c. 1266–1337)
Giotto (Giotto di Bondone), a Florentine painter from
Colle di Vespignano, near Florence, was the single most
important fi gure in the redirection of the arts away from
medieval stylization to Renaissance naturalism. During
his lifetime, Giotto received a level of acclaim accorded
to no other medieval artist. The revolutionary aspect
of his accomplishment was already understood by his
contemporaries. By 1316, Dante proclaimed Giotto the
most famous painter of the day in a passage (Purgatorio,
11.94–96) decrying the folly of pride:
Credette Cimabue ne la pittura
tener lo campo, e ora ha Giotto il grido,
si che la fama di colui è scura.
(“Once, Cimabue thought to hold the fi eld / in paint-
ing; Giotto’s all the rage today; / The other’s fame lies
in the dust concealed.”) Boccaccio, in the Decameron
(c. 1350), credited Giotto with bringing back to light a
true, intellectual art, which had lain in neglect for cen-
turies. Giotto’s work continued to serve as a model for
Florentine artists from the Quattrocento to the high Re-
naissance, when the young Michelangelo copied motifs
from the Peruzzi Chapel in Santa Croce in Florence.
Administrative, legal, and literary documents attest
to Giotto’s long, prolifi c, and far-ranging career. Despite
this, little is certainly known or agreed on about the
artistic career of this master. Only a select core of work
is today ascribed to Giotto with any consensus. Among
these works, the Arena Chapel in Padua, decorated
with frescoes as a family chapel or oratory for Enrico
Scrovegni between 1302 and 1306, serves as the most
secure anchor for an understanding of Giotto’s style.
The interior of the Arena Chapel is covered from fl oor
to vault with an epic cycle of frescoes illustrating the
redemption of humankind, leading from the lives of
Joachim and Anna, Mary, and Christ to an enormous
Last Judgment covering the west entrance wall.
The other major series of undisputed works are the
fresco cycles for two adjacent chapels—those of the
Bardi and the Peruzzi—in the Franciscan church of
Santa Croce in Florence. The Bardi Chapel, immediately
to the right of the high altar, features seven scenes fromGIOTTO DI BONDONE