THE masters of theology at the University of Paris in the thirteenth century considered themselves to be at the summit of a hierarchy of learning, a position which gave them responsibility for the moral welfare of Christian society as a whole. They were therefore obliged to consider the practical moral problems which Christians faced. Using their discussions of these problems, it is possible to address a number of questions about their attitudes to the future. First, did they discuss provision and planning for the future? If so, how did they envisage this future? Could predictions be made and, if so, what kind? Second, did their approach to problems in their present involve any element of prediction? If so, what kind? And how were predictions to be made? The analysis of practical moral issues was, however, only part of the task which masters of theology set themselves. They were equally concerned to achieve a theoretical understanding of knowledge and the process of knowing. It is therefore possible to ask how they regarded prediction in theory. It will become clear that they envisaged some forms of prediction which were entirely distinct from what they called prophecy, so it will be necessary also to consider theoretical treatments of prophetic knowledge. The masters were not, however, merely observers of and commentators on the world around them. On the contrary, they exercised an authority which gave them roles to play outside the university. Briefly, therefore, their handling of prophecy as a problem in the present will also be examined.

Finally, this analysis of the work of the masters of theology will permit some broader reflections on some of the major themes addressed by this book. First, the masters acknowledged the power of prophecy, while also envisaging people making mundane predictions, plans and provisions for the future, without reference to any divine inspiration. How then did the masters view the relationship between these different ways of thinking and knowing? Second, while some historians have looked at attitudes to time which were articulated explicitly by medieval people, others have drawn attention to implicit views of time, identifying attitudes and approaches which medieval people did not consciously express and for which they had no name.