This dissertation argues against the claim made by twentieth–century medievalist scholars that Hugh of Saint Victor anticipates the hermeneutical doctrine of Thomas Aquinas classifying the figurative uses of language under the literal sense of scripture. Hugh actually considers the spiritual sense of scripture to include figurative uses of language. First, I introduce the central concern of the dissertation by reviewing the conclusions of Beryl Smalley, Ceslas Spicq, and Henri de Lubac. Next, in order to obtain a clear understanding of the mutual implications and entailments of individual interpretive doctrines, I develop a basic typology of medieval hermeneutical systems by analyzing the schema of scriptural senses and the schema of double signification; distinguishing among proper, figurative, and sacramental semantic modes; and correlating the schemata into two paradigmatic configurations. I trace the roots of these schemata in the patristic heritage of the Latin Middle Ages and explicate the hermeneutical systems of Bede and Thomas Aquinas in terms of the resultant typology. I then provide a reading of the hugonian account of scripture's ordo expositionis as found in the third and sixth books of Hugh's Didascalicon, followed by a reading of the hugonian account of scripture's modus tractandi as found in the third through fifth chapters of Hugh's De scripturis et scriptoribus sacris. Contrary to prior scholarly opinion, these passages provide no support for an anticipation of the thomistic reclassification of the senses. Finally, I register the different logical and metaphysical assumptions distinguishing Hugh's and Thomas's standards for determining figurative and sacramental signification.