Berengaudus
File:The Douce Apocalypse 21r - Oxford - Bodleian Library.jpg, c. 1270, the small writing translates (into French) text from the Berengaudus commentary, to go with the Latin text[https://library.nd.edu/medieval/facsimiles/apocalypse/douce.html library.nd.edu, The Douce Apocalypse.]]]
Berengaudus (840–892) was a Benedictine monk, supposed author of Expositio super septem visiones libri Apocalypsis, a Latin commentary on the Book of Revelation.{{cite book|author1=Kevin J. Vanhoozer|author2=Craig G. Bartholomew|author3=Daniel J. Treier|author4=Nicholas Thomas Wright|title=Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=I8UWJohMGUIC&pg=PA684|date=1 November 2005|publisher=Baker Academic|isbn=978-0-8010-2694-2|page=684}} He has traditionally been assumed to be a monk of Ferrières Abbey, at the time of Lupus Servatus. The attribution has been questioned, but the Expositio was later (by the 12th century) much circulated in manuscript.{{cite book|author=Derk Visser|title=Apocalypse as Utopian Expectation (800-1500): The Apocalypse Commentary of Berengaudus of Ferrières and the Relationship Between Exegesis, Liturgy, and Iconography|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=_PD3WuF4eOEC&pg=PA3|year=1996|publisher=Brill|isbn=978-90-04-10621-5|pages=3–4}} It was printed in Patrologia Latina vol. XVII under Ambrose, following an attribution by Cuthbert Tunstall.Jacques-Paul Migne, Patrologiae cursus completus (1879) vol. 17 col. 843; [https://archive.org/stream/patrologiaecurs131migngoog#page/n426/mode/2up archive.org.]
Date of the ''Expositio''
It has been argued that the Expositio's date cannot now be definitely given, but that it is closer to the 12th century than the 9th century.{{cite book|author=Carolyn Marino Malone|title=Façade as Spectacle: Ritual and Ideology at Wells Cathedral|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=SGn5lbRNRVwC&pg=PA53|date=1 January 2004|publisher=BRILL|isbn=978-90-04-13840-7|page=53 note 29}} It has also been said that "Berengaudus" was a contemporary of Anselm of Laon; and that he was somewhat earlier, c. 1040. But Visser argues from familiarity with the commentary of Haimo of Auxerre, and internal evidence of an acrostic, that the traditional identification is valid.