Note 392 — Chapter IV · THE SOURCES FOR THE PERIOD 1100–1250 A. D.
Reading edition
The principal arguments against the identification of the two Bernards have been set forth by Hauréau (Mémoire, 1883, pp. 99–104), Clerval (Écoles de Chartres, 1895, pp. 158–163), and Sandys (Hist. of Class. Schol., vol. i, 1921, p. 534, note 2). Hauréau and Clerval were followed by De Wulf, Duhem, and others. C. V. Langlois (Maître Bernard, 1893) championed the identification of the two. The most recent discussion of the problem, by R. L. Poole (The Masters, 1920), is convincing in so far as it demonstrates that the evidence now available tends to show that the two Bernards were not the same.