The Catholic Encyclopedia

F rench poet and critic, b. at Montbrison in 1812; d. at Lyons in 1883. He first studied medicine, then law, and was admitted to the bar, but soon left it to become professor of French literature at the "Faculté des lettres" of Lyons. He lost this position in 1863 for having published "Les Muses d'Etat", a satire aimed at the men of the Second Empire, and from that time on he devoted all his time to poetry. In 1858 he had taken the seat of Musset in the French Academy. Laprade is probably the most idealistic French poet of the nineteenth century. His talon somewhat resembles that of Lamartine, whom he gladly acknowledge as his master. His inspiration is always lofty, his verses are harmonious and at times graceful. God, nature, the fatherland, mankind, friendship, the family are his favourite topics. To form a correct opinion of his work, one should discriminate between the two phases of his literary career. During the first, which extends down to his admission into the French Academy, he takes pains to connect the ancient with the modern world, mythology with Christianity. This is what might be termed the impersonal phase of his thought. "Psyché" (1842), "Les Odes et Poèmes" (1844), "Les Poèmes évangéliques (1852). "Les Symphonies" (1844), belong to this first period. Another collection of poems "Les Idylles héroiques" (1858), marks the transition from the first to the second phase. Laprade's poetical pantheism has now given place to a more Christian and more humane inspiration. The "poet of the summits", as he was sometimes called, had become a man of his times; filial and parental love, the country life of his dear native province (Forez), are now his topics. To this period belong "Pernette" (1878), "Harmodius" (1870), "Les Poèmes civiques" (1873). It was then that, in some measure, he became popular. He was also a remarkable educational and aesthetical writer, as is shown by the following works: "Questions d'art et de morale: (1867), "Le Sentiment de la nature avant le christianisme" (1867), "L'éducation homicide" (1867), "L'éducation libérale" (1873).

2 Pierre Marique.

Lapsi

4 (Lat., labi, lapsus).

5 The regular designation in the third century for Christians who relapsed into heathenism, especially for those who during the persecutions displayed weakness in the face of torture, and denied the Faith by sacrificing to the heathen gods or by any other acts. Many of the lapsi, indeed the majority of the very numerous cases in the great persecutions after the middle of the third century, certainly did not return to paganism out of conviction: they simply had not the courage to confess the Faith steadfastly when threatened with temporal losses and severe punishments (banishments, forced labor [smudged in my version]... death), and their sole desire was to preserve themselves from persecution by an external act of apostasy, and to save their property, freedom, and life. The obligation of confessing the Christian Faith under all circumstances and avoiding every act of denial was firmly established in the Church from Apostolic times. The First Epistle of St. Peter exhorts the believers to remain steadfast under the visitations of affliction (i, 6, 7; iv, 16, 17). In his letter to Trajan, Pliny writes that those who are truly Christians will not offer any heathen sacrifices or utter any revilings against Christ. Nevertheless we learn both from "The Shepherd" of Hermas, and from the accounts of the persecutions and martyrdoms, that individual Christians after the second century showed weakness, and fell away from the Faith. The aim of the civil proceedings against Christians, as laid down in Trajan's rescript to Pliny, was to lead them to apostasy. Those Christians were acquitted who declared that they wished to be so no longer and performed acts of pagan religious worship, but the steadfast were punished. In the "Martyrdom of St. Polycarp" (c. iv; ed. Funk, "Patres Apostolici", 2nd ed., I, 319), we read of a Prhygian, Quintus, who at first voluntarily avowed the Christian Faith, but showed weakness at the sight of wild beasts in the amphitheatre, and allowed the proconsul to persuade him to offer sacrifice. The letter of the Christians of Lyons, concerning the persecution of the Church there in 177, tells us likewise of ten brethren who showed weakness and apostatized. Kept, however, in confinement and stimulated by the example and the kind treatment they received from the Christians who had remained steadfast, several of them repented their apostasy, and in a second trial, in which the renegades were to have been acquitted, they faithfully confessed Christ and gained the martyrs' crown (Eusebius, "Hist. Eccl.", V, ii).

6 In general, it was a well-established principle in the Church of the second and beginning of the third century that an apostate, even if he did penance, was not again taken into the Christian community, or admitted to the Holy Eucharist. Idolatry was one of the three capital sins which entailed exclusion from the Church. After the middle of the third century, the question of the lapsi gave rise on several occasions to serious disputes in the Christian communities, and led to a further development of the pentitential discipline in the Church. The first occasion on which the question of the lapsi became a serious one in the Church, and finally led to a schism, was the great persecution of Decius (250-1). An imperial edict, which frankly aimed at the extermination of Christianity, enjoined that every Christian must perform an act of idolatry. Whoever refused was threatened with the severest punishments. The officials were instructed to seek out the Christians and compel them to sacrifice, and to proceed against the recalcitrant ones with the greatest severity (see DECIUS). The consequences of this first general edict of persecution were dreadful for the Church. In the long peace which the Christians had enjoyed, many had become infected with a worldly spirit. A great number of the laity, and even some members of the clergy, weakened, and, on the promulgation of the edict, flocked at once to the altars of the heathen idols to offer sacrifice. We are particularly well-informed about the events in Africa and in Rome by the correspondence of St. Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, and by his treatises, "De catholicae ecclesiae unitate" and "De lapsis" ("Caecilii Cypriani opera omnia", ed. Hartel I, II, Vienna, 1868-71). There were various classes of lapsi, according to the act by which they fell:

7 sacrificati, those who had actually offered a sacrifice to the idols,

8 thuruficati, those who had burnt incense on the altar before the statues of the gods;

9 libellatici, those who had drawn up attestation (libellus), or had, by bribing the authorities, caused such certificates to be drawn up for them, representing them as having offered sacrifice, without, however, having actually done so.

10 So far five of these libelli are known to us (one at Oxford, one at Berlin, two at Vienna, one at Alexandria; see Krebs in "Sitzungsberichte der kais. Akademie de Wissenschaften in Wein", 1894, pp. 3-9; Idem in "Patrologia Orientalis", IV, Paris, 1907, pp. 33 sq.; Franchi de' Cavalieri in "Nuovo Bulletino di archeologia cristiana", 1895, pp. 68-73). Some Christians were allowed to present a written declaration to the authorities to the effect that they had offered the prescribed sacrifices to the gods, and asked for a certificate of this act (libellum tradere): this certificate was delivered by the authorities, and the petitioners received back the attestation (libellum accipere). Those who had actually sacrificed (the sacrificati and the thurificati) also received a certificate of having done so. The libellatici, in the narrow sense of the the word, were those who obtained certificates without having actually sacrificed. Some of the libellatici, who forwarded to the authorities documents drawn up concerning their real or alleged sacrifices and bearing their signatures, were also called acta facientes. The names of the Christians, who had shown their apostasy by one of the above-mentioned methods, were entered on the court records. After these weak brethren had received their attestations and knew that their names were thus recorded, they felt themselves safe from futher inquisition and persecution. The majority of the lapsi had indeed only obeyed the edict of Decius out of weakness: at heart they wished to remain Christians. Feeling secure against further persecution, they now wished to attend Christian worship again and to be readmitted into the communion of the Church, but this desire was contrary to the then existing penitential discipline. The lapsi of Carthage succeeded in winning over to their side certain Christians who had remained faithful, and had suffered torture and imprisonment. These confessors sent letters of recommendation in the name of the dead martyrs (libella pacis) to the bishop in favor of the renegades. On the strength of these "letters of peace", the lapsi desired immediate admittance into communion with the Church, and were actually admitted by some of the clergy inimically disposed to Cyprian. Similar difficulties arose at Rome, and St. Cyprian's Carthaginian opponents sought for support in the capital in their attack against their bishop. Cyprian, who had remained in constant communication with the Roman clergy during the vacancy of the Roman See after the martyrdom of Pope Fabian, decided that nothing should be done in the matter of reconciliation of the lapsi until the persecution should be over and he could return to Carthage. Only those apostates who showed that they were penitent, and had received a personal note (libellus pacis) from a confessor or a martyr, might obtain absolution and admission to communion with the Church and to the Holy Eucharist, if they were dangerously ill and at the point of death. At Rome, likewise, the principle was established that the apostates should not be given up, but that they should be exhorted to do penance, so that, in case of their being again cited before the pagan authorities, they might atone for their apostasy by steadfastly confessing the Faith. Furthermore, communion was not to be refused to those who were seriously ill, and wished to atone for their apostasy by penance.

11 The party opposed to Cyprian at Carthage did not accept the bishop's decision, and stirred up a schism. When, after the election of St. Cornelius to the Chair of Peter, the Roman priest Novatian set himself up at Rome as the antipope, he claimed to be the upholder of strict discipline, inasmuch as he refused unconditionally to readmit to communion with the Church any who had fallen away. He was the founder of Novatianism. Shortly after Cyprian's return to his episcopal city in the Spring of 251, synods were held in Rome and Africa, at which the affair of the lapsi was adjusted by common agreement. It was adopted as a principle that they should be encouraged to repent, and, under certain conditions and after adequate public penance (exomologesis), should be readmitted to communion. In fixing the duration of the penance, the bishops were to take under consideration the circumstances of the apostasy, e.g., whether the penitent had offered sacrifice at once or only after torture, whether he had led his family into apostasy or on the other hand had saved them therefrom, after obtaining for himself a certificate of having sacrificed. Those, who of their own accord had actually sacrificed (the sacrificati or thurificati), might be reconciled with the Church only at the point of death. The libellatici might, after a reasonable penance, be immediately readmitted. In view of the severe persecution then imminent, it was decided at a subsequent Carthaginian synod that all lapsi who had undergone public penance should be readmitted to full communion with the Church. Bishop Dionysius of Alexandria adopted the same attitude towards the lapsi as Pope Cornelius and the Italian bishops, and Cyprian and the African bishops. But in the East Novatian's rigid views at first found a more sympathetic reception. The united efforts of the supporters of Pope Cornelius succeeded in bringing the great majority of the Eastern bishops to recognize him as the rightful Roman pontiff, with which recognition the acceptance of the principles relative to the case of the lapsi was naturally united. A few groups of Christians in different parts of the empire shared the views of Novatian, and this enabled the latter to form a small schismatic community (see NOVATIANISM).

12 At the time of the great persecution of Diocletian, matters took the same course as under Decius. During this severe affliction which assailed the Church, many showed weakness and fell away, and, as before, performed acts of heathen worship, or tried by artifice to evade persecution. Some, with the collusion of the officials, sent their slaves to the pagan sacrifices instead of going themselves; others bribed pagans to assume their names and to performed the required sacrifices (Petrus Alexandrinus, "Liber de poenitentia" in Routh, "Reliquiae Sacr.", IV, 2nd ed., 22 sqq). In the Diocletian persecution appeared a new category of lapsi called the traditores: these were the Christians (mostly clerics) who, in obedience to an edict, gave up the sacred books to the authorities. The term traditores was given both to those who actually gave up the sacred books, and to those who merely delivered secular works in their stead. As on the previous occasion the lapsi in Rome, under the leadership of a certain Hericlius, tried forcibly to obtain readmission to communion with the Church without performing penance, but Popes Marcellus and Eusebius adhered stricly to the traditional penitential discipline. The confusion and disputes caused by this difference among the Roman Christians caused Maxentius to banish Marcellus and later Eusebius and Heraclius (cf. Inscriptions of Pope Damasus on Popes Marcellus and Eusebius in Ihm, "Damasi epigrammata", Leipzig, 1895, p. 51, n. 48; p. 25, n. 18). In Africa the unhappy Donatist schism arose from disputes about the lapsi, especially the traditores (see DONATISTS). Several synods of the fourth century drew up canons on the treatment of the lapsi, e.g., the Synod of Elvira in 306 (can. i-iv, xlvi), or Arles in 314 (can. xiii), of Ancyra in 314 (can. i-ix), and the General Council of Nice (can. xiii). Many of the decisions of these synods concerned only members of the clergy who had committed acts of apostasy in time of persecution.

13 HEFELE, Konziliengesch., I (2nd ed., Freiburg, 1873), 111 sqq., 155 sqq., 211, 222 sqq., 412 sqq.; DUCHESNE, Hist. ancienne de l'Eglise, I (Paris, 1906), 397 sqq.; FUNK, Zur altchristl. Bussdisziplin in Kirchengesch. Abhandlungen u. Untersuchungen, I, 158 sqq., MÜLLER, Die Bussinstitution in Karthago unter Cyprian in Zeitschr. für kathol. Theol. (1907), 577 sqq.; CHABALIER, Les Lapsi dans l'Eglise d'Afrique au temps de S. Cyprien: Thèse (Lyons, 1904); SCHÖNAICH, Die Christenverfolgung des Kaisers Decius (Jauer, 1907); DE ROSSI, Roma sotteranea cristiana, II, 201 sqq.; ALLARD, Historie de persécutions, V, 122 sqq. See also bibliography under CYRIAN, SAINT.

14 J.P. Kirsch

Ven. Luis de Lapuente

7 (Also, D'Aponte, de Ponte, Dupont).

8 Born at Valladolid, 11 November, 1554; died there, 16 February 1624. Having entered the Society of Jesus, he studied under the celebrated Suarez, and professed philosophy at Salamanca. Endowed with exceptional talents for government and the formation of young religious, he was forced by impaired health to retire from offices which he had filled with distinction and general satisfaction. The years that followed were devoted to literary composition. Though not reckoned among Spanish classics, his works are so replete with practical spirituality that they claim for him a place among the most eminent masters of asceticism. Ordaind priest in 1580, he became the spiritual director of the celebrated Marina de Escobar, in which office he continued till his death. In 1599 he devoted himself with great charity to the care of the plague-stricken in Villagarcia. Of remarkable innocence of life, he not only avoided all grievous sin, but bound himself by vow, some years before his death, to avoid as far as human weakness permitted even venial faults. Besides a mystical commentary in Latin on the Canticle of Canticles, he wrote in Spanish: " Life of Father Baltasar Alvarez"; "Life of Marina de Escobar"; "Spiritual Directory for Confession, Communion and the Sacrifice of the Mass"; "The Christian Life" (4 vols.), and "Meditations on the Mysteries of Our Holy Faith", by which he is best known to English readers. This last work has been translated into ten languages, including Arabic. A few years after his death, the Sacred Congregation of Rites admitted the cause of his beatification and canonization.

9 Henry J. Swift

Laranda

10 A titular see of Isauria, afterwards of Lycaonia. Strabo (XII, 569), informs us that Laranda had belonged to the tyrant Antipater of Derbe, whence we may infer that it was governed by native princes. The city was taken by storm and destroyed by Perdiccas (Diodorus Siculus, XVIII, 22), afterwards rebuilt. Owing to its fertile teritory Laranda became one of the most important cities of the district, also one of the principal centres for the pirates of Isauria. It was the birthplace of the poets Nestor and his son Pisander (Suidas, s.v.). In later time it was a part of the sultanate of Konia, and after the possessions of the Seljuks were divided, it became the capital of Caramania, conquered in 1486 by the Osmanli Sultan Bajazet II. The name Laranda is seldom heard in modern days; the city is generally known as Caraman. It has about 15,000 inhabitants, the majority being Mussulmans, and is one of the chief towns of the vilayet of Konia. Cotton and silk fabrics are made there, and it is a railway-station, between Konia and Eregli on the way to Bagdad. There are no ancient ruins. Laranda is mentioned as a suffragan of Iconium by the "Notitiae Episcopatuum" until about the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Only four of its bishops are known: Neo, mentioned by Eusebius (Hist. Exxl., VI, xix); Paul, present at the Council of Nicaea, 325; Ascholius, at Chalcedon, 451; Sabbas, at Constantinople, 879.

11 LE QUIEN, Oriens Christ., I, 1081; SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geog., s.v.; RAMSAY, Asia Minor, passim.

12 S. Pétridès.

Lares

13 Formerly a titular archiepiscopal see in pro-consular Africa. In ancient times it was a fortified town, mentioned by Sallust (Jugurtha, xc), later it received the name of Colonia Xlia Aug. Lares. At least five of its bishops are known: Hortensian, who took part in 242 and 255 at the Councils of Carthage; Victorinus who with his Donatist colleague Honoratus figured at the conference of Carthage; Quintian who lived at the time of the persecution of Huneric (about 480); Vitulus, who was living in 525 in the time of King Hilderic. St. Augustine (Ep. ccxxix), Victor Vitensis (Hist. Pers. Vand., 6 and 9), Procopius (Bell. Vand., II, 22 and 28), also Arabian and other historians mention the town. It is the Lorbeus of today, between Tunis and Tebessa; the ruins cover a large area, which would indicate that once it had been a town of considerable importance. A mosque has taken the place of a church, and the ruins of a basilica are still visible.

14 [Missing sources.]

15 S. Vailhé

Armand de La Richardie

16 Born at Perigueux, 7 June, 1686; died at Quebec, 17 March, 1758. He entered the Society of Jesus at Bordeaux, 4 Oct., 1703, and in 1725 was sent to the Canada mission. He spent the two following years helping Father Pierre Daniel Richer at Lorette, and studying the Huron language. In 1728 he went to Detroit to re-establish the long-interrupted mission to the dispersed Petun-Hurons in the West. Not a solitary professing Christian did he find, but among the aged not a few had been baptized. The new Indian church, though "seventy cubits long" (105ft?) was scarcely spacious enough to contain the fervent congregation of practising Hurons. During the night, 24-25 March, 1746, the father was stricken with paralysis, and on 29 July he was placed in an open canoe and thus conveyed to Quebec.

17 In 1747 the Hurons insisted on his returning to restore tranquillity to their nation. The father had almost completely recovered from his palsy, and willingly consented. He set out from Montreal on 10 Sept., and reached Detroit on 20 Oct. From this date until 1751, leaving the loyal Hurons in the keeping of Father Potier at the Detroit village, he directed all his energies to reclaiming Nicolas Orontondi's band of insurgent Hurons. These had already in 1740, owing to a bloody feud with the Detriot Ottawas and to the reluctance , if not refusal, of Governor Beauharnais to let the Hurons remove to Montreal, sullenly left Detroit and settled at "Little Lake" (now Rondeau Harbour) near Sandusky. There they had been won over to the English cause, had openly revolted in 1747, and had murdered a party of Frenchmen. Early in the spring of 1748 Orontondi (not Orontony) set fire to the fort and cabins at Sandusky, and withdrew to the Riviere Blanche, not far from the junction of the Ohio and Wabash Rivers. Until his death, which occurred some time after Sepember, 1749, Orontondi continued to intrigue with the English emissaries, the Iroquois, and the disaffected Miamis. When there was no longer doubt of the renegade leader's demise, de La Richardie resolved on a final attempt at conciliation. He had already at intervals spent months at a time among the fugitives, and now on Sept., 1750, at the peril of his life he started, with only three canoe men for the country of the 'Nicolites" as they were then termed. The greater number remained obdurate. It is the descendants of the latter who in July, 1843, removed from their lands at Upper Sandusky, Ohio, to beyond the Mississippi, and now occupy the Wyandot reserve in the extreme north-eastern part of Oklahoma. The father's failing strength obliged his superiors to recall him to Quebec in 1751, and on 30 June he bade a final farewell to the Detroit mission. From the autumn of 1751 until his death he filled various offices in Quebec College. His Huron name was Ondechaouasti.

18 Arthur Edward Jones.

Diocese of Larino

19 (Larinum).

20 Diocese in the province of Capmobasso, Southern Italy. Larinum was a city of the Frentani (a Samnite tribe) and a Roman municipium. The present city is a mile from the site of the ancient Larinum, destroyed by war and epidemic, and is first mentioned as an episcopal see in 668. Noteworthy among the bishops were Giovanni Leone (1440), a distinguished canonist and theologian; Fra Giacomo de' Petruzzi, a saintly a renowned philosopher; Belisario Baldovino (1555), present at the Council of Trent, founder of the seminary and episcopal palace; the Oratian Gian Tommaso Eustachi (1612), famous for his sanctity; Carlo M. Pianetti (1706), who restored the cathedral, with its beautiful marble façade; Gian Andrea Tri (1726), historian of Larino. The diocese is a suffragan of Benevento, and has 21 parishes with 79,000 souls, 3 religious houses of men and 1 of women, and 1 school for girls.

21 U. Benigni

Larissa

22 The seat of a titular archbishopric of Thessaly. The city, one of the oldest and richest in Greece, is said to have been founded by Acrisius, who was killed accidentally by his son, Perseus (Stephanus Byzantius, s.v.). There lived Peleus, the hero beloved by the gods, and his son Achilles; however, the city is not mentioned by Homer, unless it be identified with Argissa of the Iliad (II, 738). The constitution of the town was democratic, which explains why it sided with Athens in the Peloponnesian War. In the neighbourhood of Larissa was celebrated a festival which recalled the Roman Saturnalia, and at which the slaves were waited on by their masters. It was taken by the Thebans and afterwards by the Macedonian kings, and Demetrius Poliorcestes gained possession of it for a time, 302 B.C. It was there that Philip V, King of Macedonia, signed in 197 B.C. a shameful treaty with the Romans after his defeat at Cynoscephalae, and it was there also that Antiochus III, the Great, won a great victory, 192 B.C. Larissa is frequently mentioned in connection with the Roman civil wars which preceded the establishment of the empire and Pompey sought refuge there after the defeat of Pharsalus. First Roman, then Greek until the thirteenth century, and afterwards Frankish until 1400, the city fell into the hands of the Turks, who kept it until 1882, when it was ceded to Greece; it suffered greatly from the conflicts between the Greeks and the Turks between 1820 and 1830, and quite recently from the Turkish occupation in 1897. On 6 March, 1770, Aya Pasha massacred there 3000 Christians from Trikala, who had been treacherously brought there.

23 Very prosperous under the Turkish sovereignty Larissa, which counted 40,000 inhabitants thirty years ago, has now only 14,000, Greeks, Turks, and Jews; the province of which it is the chief town has a population of 140,000. Christianity penetrated early to Larissa, though its first bishop is recorded only in 325 at the Council of Nicaea. We must mention especially, St. Achilius, in the fourth centruy, whose feast is on 15 May, and who is celebrated for his miracles. Lequien, "Oriens Christ," II, 103-112, cites twenty-nine bishops from the fourth to the eighteenth centuries; the most famous Jermias II, occupied the Patriarch of the West until 733, when the Emperor Leo III the Isaurian annexed it to the Patriarchate of Constantinople. In the first years of the tenth century it had ten suffragen sees (Gelzer, "Ungedruckte. . .Texte der Notitiae episcopatuum", Munich, 1900, 557); subsequently the number increased and about the year 1175 under the Emperor Manuel Commenus, it reached twenty-eight (Parthey, "Hieroclis Synecdemus", Berlin, 1866, 120). At the close of the fifteenth century, under the turkish, domination, there were only ten suffragan sees (Gelzer, op. cit., 635), which gradually grew less and finally disappeared. Since 1882, when Thessaly was ceded to Greece, the Orthodox Diocese of Larissa has been dependent on the Holy Synod of Athens, not Constantinople. Owing to the law of 1900 which suppressed all the metropolitan sees excepting Athens, Larissa was reduced to the rank of a simple bishopric; its title is united with that of Pharsalus and Platamon, two adjoining bishoprics now suppressed.

24 S. VAILHÉ

Joseph de La Roche Daillon

25 Recollect, one of the most zealous missionaries of the Huron tribe, d. in France, 1656. He landed at Quebec, 19 June, 1625, with the first Jesuits who came to New France, and at once set out with the Jesuit Father Brebeuf for Three Rivers, to meet the Hurons into whose country they hoped to enter. Owing to a report that the Hurons had drowned the Recollect Nicolas Viel, their missionary, the journey was put off. In 1626 La Roche Daillon was among the Hurons, leaving whom he passed to the Neutral Nation after travelling six days on foot. He remained with them for three months, and at one time barely escaped being put to death. This caused his return to the Hurons. In 1628 he went to Three Rivers with twenty Huron canoes, on their way to trade pelts with the French. From Three Rivers he journeyed to Quebec, and on the taking of the city, in 1629, the English sent him back to France. La Roche Daillon published an account of his voyage to and sojourn amongst the Neutrals, describing their country and their customs, and mentioning a kind of oil which seems to be coal oil. Sagard and Leclercq reproduced it in their writings, in a more or less abridged form.

26 Odoric-M. Jouve

The Duke of La Rochefoucauld-Liancourt

28 (François-Alexandre-Frédéric).

29 Born at La Roche-Guyon, on 11 January, 1747; died at Paris, 27 March, 1827.

30 Opposed during the last years of the reign of Louis XV to the government of Maupeou, and the friend of all the reformers who surrounded Louis XVI, he owed to the influence of these economists the favour of the king. Having little liking for the military profession he devoted himself to scientific agriculture. During the rage for rural life which characterized the last years of the old regime, La Rochefoucauld made his estate at Liancourt an experimental station, whishing to improve both the soil and the peasantry. He introduced new methods of farming, founded the first model technical school in France (intended for the children of poor soldiers), and started two factories. Politically, he was a partisan of a democratic regime of which the king was to be the head, and throughout his life was faithful to this dream. Deputy for the nobility of Clermont in Beauvaisis at the States-General, he voted unhesitatingly for the "reunion of the three orders". it was he who in the night which followed the taking of the Bastille (14 July, 1789) roused Louis XVI, saying: "Sire, it is not a revolt, it is a revolution." He presided at the Constituent Assembly from 20 July to 3 August, 1789. On the night of 4 August he was one of the most enthusiastic in voting the abolition of titles of nobility and privileges. As grand master of the wardrobe he accompanied Louis XVI from Versailles to Paris on 5 and 6 October, 1789. As president of the committee of mendicancy, he made a supreme effort at the Constituent Assembly to organize public relief; he determined the extent and the limits of the rights of every citizen to assistance, determined the obligations of the State, and established a budget of State assistance which amounted annually to five millions and a half of francs, and which implied the national confiscation of hospital property, of ecclesiastical charitable property, and of the income from private foundations.

31 Liancourt is one of the most undiscerning representatives of the tendency which led the revolutionary state to destroy all collective forms of charity. Absolutely devoted to the person of Louis XVI as well as to the doctrines of the Revolution, he secured for himself in 1792 the lieutenancy of Normandy and Picardy, so as to prepare for the flight of the king as far as Rouen; but Louis XVI refused to place himself in the hands of constitutional deputies. La Rochefoucauld-Liancourt emigrated shortly after 10 August, and resided in England until 1794, afterwards in the United States (1794-7). He took advantage of his residence in that country to write eight volumes on the United States to induce Washington to interfere in favour of Lafayette, and to gather ideas upon education and agriculture which he attempted later to apply in France. After 18 Brumaire, Napoleon authorized him to return to his Liancourt estate, which was restored to him. This former duke and peer gloried in being appointed, during the first Empire (1806), general inspector of the "Ecole des arts et métiers" at Châlons, of which his Liancourt school had been a forerunner. The book "Prisons de Philadelphie" which he composed in American and published in 1796, was meant to initiate a penitentiary reform in France at the Restoration in 1814 he begged but one favour-to be appointed prison inspector. In 1819 he became inspector of one of the twenty-eight arrondissements into which France was divided for penitentiary purposes. Louis XVIII gave him back neither the blue ribbon nor the mastership of the wardrobe, and in the House of Peers he sat with the opposition.

32 La Rochefoucauld-Liancourt was the Franklin of the Revolution. An aristocrat by birth, a liberal in his views, in touch with all the representatives of the new commerce, he availed himself of this concurrence of circumstances to become the leader of every campaign for the people's protection and betterment; improvement of sanitary conditions in hospitals and foundling asylums, reorganization of schools according to the theories of Lancaster, whose book he had translated (Système anglais d'Instruction). He brought into use the methods of mutual instruction, and the pupils between 1816 and 1820 increased from 165,000 to 1,123,000. In 1818 he established the first savings bank and provident institution in Paris. On 19 Nov., 1821, he founded the Society of Christian Morals, over which he presided until 1825. It was at times looked upon with suspicion by the police of the Restoration. At its meetings were such men as Charles de Rémusat, Charles Coquerel, Guizot the Pedagogue, Oberlin, and Llorente, historian of the Inquisition. Broglie, Guizot, and Benjamin Constant were chairmen in turn, and Dufaure, Tocqueville, and Lamartine made there their maiden speeches. In these meetings provident institutions, rather than charitable ones, were discussed; slavery, lottery, gambling were combatted, and the matter of prison inspection was taken up. When La Rochefoucauld-Liancourt died, the Restoration would not permit the students of Châlons to carry his coffin, and the two chambers were much concerned over such extreme measures. La Rochefoucauld-Liancourt was a typical philanthropist, with all that this word implies of generous intentions and practical innovations; but also with a certain naïve pride, inherited from the philosophy of the eighteenth century, which led him to mistrust the charitable initiative of the Church, and to forget that the Church, the most perfect representative of the spirit of brotherhood, is still called in our modern society to win the victory for this spirit by putting it to practical uses, as she alone can.

33 FERDINAND-DREYFUS, Un philanthrope d'autrefois: La Rochefoucauld-Liancourt, 1747-1827 (Paris, 1903).

34 George Goyau

Henri-Auguste-Georges du Vergier, Comte de la Rochejacquelein

31 French politician, b. at the château of Citran (Fironde), on 28 September, 1805; d. on 7 January, 1867. He belonged to an old illustrious French family, whose name is mentioned in connection with Saint Louis's Crusade in 1248. His father, Louis de La Rochejacquelein, and his uncle Henri had won fame as royalist generals in the wars of the Vendéans against the National Convention. His mother left interesting memoirs which have been edited many times. Young La Rochejacquelein entered the military academy at Saint-Cyr at the age of sixteen and in 1823 he received a commission as second lieutenant in the cavalry. He took part in the Spanish War (1823) and in the Russo-Turkish War of 1828. In 1825 he had been made a peer, but he resigned shortly after the Revolution of 1830, which brought the younger branch of the House of Bourbon to the throne of France. The Department of Morbihan sent him to the legislature in 1842. He took his seat among the members of the Extreme Right, or Legitimist party, with whom he usually cast his vote, although he occasionally support liberal measures. In 1848 the "Gazette de France" supported his candidacy for the presidency of the newly established French Republic, but he obtained only an insignificant number of votes. In 1852 he was made a senator by Napoleon III, which caused some astonishment and comment among his friends the Legitimists. In the senate La Rochejacquelein always showed himself an ardent defender of Catholicism, but he may be reproached with having given his support to the whole foreign policy of the imperial Government. He published a number of works on political and economical subjects, among them being: "Considérations sur l'impôt du sel" (Paris, 1844); "Opinion sur le projet de loi relatif à la réforme des pensions" (1844); "Situation de la France" (1849); "A mon pays" (1850); "La France en 1853" (1853); "Question du jour" (1856); "La suspension d'armes" (1859); "La politique internationale et le droit des gens" (1860); "Un schisme et l'honneur" (1861).

32 Pierre Marique.

Diocese of La Rochelle

34 The Diocese of La Rochelle (Rupellensis), suffragan of Bordeaux, comprises the entire Department of Charente-Inférieure. The See of Maillezais (see ) was transferred on 7 May, 1648, to La Rochelle, which diocese just, previous to the Revolution, aside from the territory of the former Bishop of Maillezais, included the present arrondissements of Marennes, Rochefort, La Rochelle, and a part of Saint-Jean d'Angély. At the Concordat the entire territory of the former See of Saintes (less the part comprised in the Department of Charente, and belonging to the See of Angoulême) and of the See of Luçon was added to it. In 1821 a see was established at Luçon, and had under its jurisdiction, aside from the former Diocese of Luçon, almost the entire former Diocese of Maillezais; so that Maillezais, once transferred to La Rochelle, no longer belongs to the diocese now known as La Rochelle et Saintes.

35 I. See of la Rochelle

36 Mgr Landriot, a well-known religious writer, occupied this see from 1856 to 1867. St. Louis of France is the titular saint of the cathedral of La Rochelle and the patron of the city. St. Eutropius, first Bishop of Saintes, is the principal patron of the present Diocese of La Rochelle. In this diocese are especially honoured: St. Gemme, martyr (century unknown); St. Seronius, martyr (third century); St. Martin, Abbot of the Saintes monastery (fifth century); St. Vaise, martyr about 500; St. Maclovius (Malo), first Bishop of Aleth, Brittany, who died in Saintonge about 570; St. Amand, Bishop of Maastricht (seventh century). From 1534 La Rochelle and the Province of Aunis were a centre of Calvinism. In 1573 the city successfully resisted the Duke of Anjou, brother of Charles IX, and remained the chief fortress of the Huguenots in France. But in 1627 the alliance of La Rochelle with the English proved to Louis XIII and to Richelieu that the political independence of the Protestants would be a menace to France; the famous siege of La Rochelle (5 August, 1627-28 October, 1628), in the course of which the population was reduced from 18,000 inhabitants to 5000, terminated with a capitulation which put an end to the political claims of the Calvinistic minority.

37 II. Ancient See of Saintes

38 Saintes had a certain importance under the Romans, as is proved by many existing monuments. The oldest bishop of known date is Peter, who took part in the Council of Orléans (511). The first bishop, however, is St. Eutropius. Venantius Fortunatus, in a poem written in the second half of the sixth century, makes explicit mention of him in connexion with Saintes. Eutropius was said to be a Persian of royal descent, ordained and sent to Gaul by St. Clement; at Saintes he converted to Christianity the governor's daughter, St. Eustelle, and like her suffered martyrdom. This tradition is noted by Gregory of Tours, with a cautious ut fertur; Saintes is thus the only church of Gaul which Gregory traces back to the first century. This evidence is much weakened, says Mgr Duchesne, by Gregory's remark to the effect that no one knew the history of St. Eutropius before the removal of his relics by Bishop Palladius, which took place about 590. At this tardy date seems to have arisen the account of Eutropius as a martyr. Among the bishops of Saintes are mentioned: St. Vivianus (119-52?), once Count of Saintes, later a monk; St. Trojanus, died about 532; St. Concordius (middle of the sixth century); S. Pallais (Palladius), about 580, to whom St. Gregory the Great recommended St. Augustine on way to England; St. Leontius, bishop in 625; Cardinal Raimond Perauld (1503-05), an ecclesiastical writer, several times nuncio, legate for a crusade against the infidels and the re-establishment of peace between Maximilian and Louis XII; Cardinal François Soderini (1507-16), who died in Rome as dean of the Sacred College, and his nephew Jules Soderini (1516-44); Charles of Bourbon (1544-50), cardinal in 1548, afterward Archbishop of Rouen, whom Mayenne wished later to make King of France; Pierre Louis de La Rochefoucauld (1782-92), massacred at Paris with his brother, the Bishop of Beauvais, 2 September, 1792, thus closing the list of the bishops of the diocese as it opened, with a martyr.

39 Several councils were held at Saintes: in 562 or 563, when Bishop Emerius, illegally elected, was deposed and Heraclius appointed in his stead; other councils were held in 579, 1074 or 1075, 1080, 1081, at which last, metropolitan authority over the sees of Lower Brittany was granted to Tours as against the claims of Dol, and William VII gave the church of St. Eutropius to the monks of Cluny; also in 1083, 1088, 1089, 1097. The crypt of St. Eutropius, one of the largest in France, dates from the beginning of the twelfth century. Urban II consecrated it on 20 April, 1096. Kings of France and England, and dukes of Guyenne, enriched the church with numerous foundations. Charles VII made a pilgrimage to it in 1441. Louis XI himself wrote a prayer against dropsy, in honour of St. Eutropius. Through the Middle Ages many pilgrimages were made to the tomb. In 1568 the Calvinists ravaged the crypt, but the tomb of St. Eutropius was so well hidden by the monks that it was thought to be lost; it was not until 19 May, 1843, that it was again discovered. In a Bull of Nicholas V, 1451, it is said that the cathedral of Saintes was the second church ever dedicated to St. Peter. Geoffrey Martel, Count of Anjou, and his wife, Agnes of Burgundy, founded in 1047 the Abbey of Notre-Dame de Saintes for Benedictine nuns, which foundation was sanctioned by a Bull of Leo IX. During seven centuries this monastery had thirty abbesses, most of them daughters of the first families of France. The abbey church, now a military barrack, is Poitou Romanesque of the twelfth century. The Church of Saintes claims the honour of being the first to begin the practice of the Angelus; when John XXII heard of this pious custom he solemnly authorized it by two Bulls (1318, 1327). The monastery of "Angeriacum", founded in 768 by Pepin the Short, was the beginning of the town of Saint-Jean-d'Angély. In 1010 Abbot Alduin, while having the walls of the church restored, declared that he found in a cylindrical stone a silver reliquary containing the head of St. John the Baptist; William V, Duke of Aquitaine, had the relic exposed, and King Robert and Queen Constance inspected it. The future fifteenth-century Cardinal Jean de La Balue was Abbot of Saint-Jean-d'Angély. Bernard Palissy, the famous artist in ceramics (1510-90), was one of the founders of the Protestant Reform Church of Saintes, and his atelier was about 1562 a secret assembly-place of the Huguenots; for this he was summoned before the Parliament. Aside from the Basilica of St. Eutropius, the principal pilgrimages of the diocese are: Our Lady of Corme-Ecluse, near Saujon; Our Lady of Pity, at Croix-Gente (twelfth century); Our Lady of Seven Sorrows, at Jaugou.

40 There were in the Diocese of La Rochelle, when the Associations Law was enforced, Lazarists, Little Brothers of Mary, Marianists, Children of Mary Immaculate, and a local congregation called the Brothers of St. Francis of Assisi, known as "farming brothers"; this congregation, founded in 1841 by Père Deshayes, then superior general of the Missionaries of the Holy Ghost, the Daughters of Wisdom, and the St. Gabriel Brothers, looked after the agricultural instruction of foundlings. Three congregations of women trace their origin to this diocese: the Providence Sisters of St. Joseph, a teaching order founded at La Rochelle in 1658 by Isabelle Mauriet; Providence Sisters of St. Mary, a teaching order founded in 1818, with the motherhouse at Saintes; Ursulines of the Sacred heart, a nursing and teaching order, founded in 1807 by Père Charles Barreaud, with motherhouse at Pons. In 1900, before the Associations Law, the religious congregations had in the diocese one crèche, 34 day nurseries, one convalescent home for children, an institute for the blind, an agricultural settlement for boys, 8 orphanages for girls, an industrial room, a society for the preservation of young girls from danger, 14 hospitals, homes, and asylums for the aged, 18 convents of visiting nurses, 2 houses of retreat, and an insane asylum. In 1905 (last year of the Concordat) the Diocese of La Rochelle had 452,149 inhabitants, 46 parishes, 326 succursal churches, 52 curacies.

41 Gallia Christiana, Nova, II (1720), 1053, 1093 and instrum., 457-86; Duchesne, Fastes épiscopaux de l'ancienne Gaule, II, 72 75 and 138-39; Briand, Histoire de l'église santone et aunisienne depuis son origine (3 vols., La Rochelle, 1845-46); Bunell Lewis, The antiquities of Saintes (London, 1887); Audiat, Documents pour l'histoire des diocèses de Saintes et de La Rochelle (Paris, 1882); Idem, Abbaye de Notre-Dame de Saintes, histoire et documents (Paris, 1884); Bruhat, De administratione terrarum Sanctonensis atabatio, 1047-1220 (La Rochelle, 1901); Audiat, Le diocèse de Saintes au XVIIIe siècle (Paris, 1894); Palaysi, Bernard Palissy et les débuts de to Réforme en Saintonge (Cahors, 1899); Courpron, Essaie sur t'histoire du protestantisme en Aunis et Saintunge, 1685-1787 (Cahors, 1902); Barbot, Histoire de La Rochelle, ed. Denys D'aussy (3 vols., Paris, 1880-90); de La Gravière, Les origines de la marine française et la tactique naturelie: le siège de La Rochelle (Paris, 1891); Rodo canachi, Les derniers temps du siège de La Rochelle, relation du nonce apostolique Guidi (Paris, 1899); Laronze, Quas ob causas rupellensis respublica perierit (La Rochelle, 1890); Chevalier, Topo-Bibl., s. v. Rochelle.

42 Georges Goyau

Dominique-Jean Larrey

37 Baron, French military surgeon, b. at Baudéan, Hautes-Pyrénées, July, 1766; d. at Lyons, 25 July, 1842. His parents were so poor that he obtained his preliminary education only through the kindness of the village priest. After the death of his father, when the boy was thirteen years of age, he was sent to his uncle Dr. Oscar Larrey, a successful surgeon of Toulouse. The surgical ability of the family had already been established by his elder brother, Charles-François-Hilaire Larrey, recognised as an able surgeon and writer on surgery. At the age of twenty-one the younger Larrey went to Paris, and after a brilliant competitive examination entered the navy. Later he became a pupil of Dessault. He joined the army in 1792, and the next year established the ambulance volante (flying ambulance), a corps of surgeons and nurses who went into battle with the men and tended to their wounds on the battle-field as far as was possible. For this he was made surgeon-in-chief and accompanied Napoleon on his expedition into Egypt. He became a great favourite with Napoleon for his devotion to duty. He was noted not only for his care of the wounded soldiers during and after the battles but also for his care of the health of the troops at all times. Friends or enemies all received the same devoted attention. For distinguished courage he was made a baron by Napoleon on the field of Wagram in 1809. He was wounded at Austerlitz and at Waterloo. He made many ingenious and important inventions in operations, and significant advances in clinical surgery. His observations in medicine and on the health of troops during campaigns were scarcely less valuable. Some of his suggestions on medicine and surgery are still used. "If ever", said Napoleon, "the soldiers erect a statue it should be to Baron Larrey, the most virtuous man I have ever known." He has two monuments, one erected in 1850 in the court of the Val-de-Grâce military hospital, Paris, and the other in the hall of the Academy of Medicine. The American surgeon Agnew said of him: "As an operator he was judicious but bold and rapid; calm and self-possessed m every emergency; but full of feeling and tenderness. He stands among the military surgeons where Napoleon stands among the generals, the first and the greatest." His attachment to his profession was only exceeded by his patriotism. After the exile of Napoleon, deprived of his honours and emoluments, though solicited by the Emperor of Russia and by Pedro I of Brazil to take charge of their armies with high rank, he refused to leave his native land. One of his special pleasures at the end of his life was a meeting with the Abbé de Grace, the preceptor of his early years, whom he held in high veneration. His works ave been a favourite study of the surgeons of all nations during the nineteenth century. Most of them have been translated into all modern languages. His principal works are: "Relation histor. et chirurg.de l'expédition de l'armée d'Orient en Egypte et en Syrie" (Paris, 1803), translated into English and German; "Clinique chirurgicale dans les camps et hopitaux militaires"; "Surgical Memoirs of Campaigns: Russia, Germany, France' (Philadelphia, 1832); "Choléra Morbus, Md-moire" (Paris, 1831).

38 The principal sources of material for his life are his works. Agnew, Baron Larroy (Philadelphia, 1861); Werner, Larrey, Ein Lebensbild (Berlin, 1585).

39 James J. Walsh

Charles de Larue

40 Born 29 July, 1685 (some say 12 July, 1684), at Corbie, in France; died 5 Oct., 1739, at St. Germain-des-Près. Very early he displayed talent in the study of languages and signs of a religious vocation. He took the habit of St. Benedict in the Abbey of St. Faro at Meaux, and made his religious profession on 21 Nov., 1703. He then studies philosophy and theology, and in 1712 was sent to Paris to assist Dom Bernard de Montifacon in his literary work. The latter soon had a true estimate of his young assistant, and set him to work at editing all the works of Origen, except the "Hexapla". Larue worked with energy; in 1725 printing was begun, and eight years later two volumes appeared with a dedication to Pope Clement XII. In the preface Larue gives the various opinions of earlier writers on Origen and his works, and states his reasons for making a new edition. The first volume contains the letters of Origen (mostly in fragments), the four books "De principiis" on prayer, an exhortation to martyrdom, and the eight books against Celsus. To this is added "De recta in Deum fide contra Marcionem", which had been published in 1674 under the name of Origen. Larue proves that this book and the books "Contra hæreses" are falsely ascribed to Origen. To each book Larue adds copious explanatory notes. In the preface to the second volume is given an outline of the method followed by Origen in explaining the Holy Scriptures; then follow the commentaries on the Pentateuch, Josue, Judges, Ruth, Kings, Jobs, and the Psalter. Larue had gathered material for two other volumes, but a stroke of paralysis put an end to his labours. They were edited by his nephew Vincent de Larue, a member of the same congregation.

41 Francis Mershman

Charles de La Rue

43 One of the great orators of the Society of Jesus in France in the seventeenth century, b. at Paris, 3 August, 1643; d. there, 27 May, 1725. He entered the novitiate on 7 September, 1659, and being afterwards professor of the humanities and rhetoric, he attracted attention while still young by a poem on the victories of Louis XIV. Corneille translated it and offered it to the king, saying that his work did not equal the original of the young Jesuit. He wrote several tragedies, brought out an edition of Virgil, and wrote several Latin poems. After having several times refused to permit him to go to Canada, his superiors assigned him to preaching; as an orator he was much admired by the court and the king. His funeral orations on the Dukes of Burgundy and Luxemburg, and that on Bossuet, his sermons on "Les Calamités publiques" and "The Dying Sinner" have been regarded as masterpieces by the greatest masters. He preached missions among the Protestants of Languedoc for three years. He was a most virtuous religious, and during his last years endured courageously great infirmities.

44 Abel Champon.

La Salette

46 Located in the commune and parish of La Salette-Fallavaux, Canton of Corps, Department of Isere, and Diocese of Grenoble. It is celebrated as the place where, it is said, the Blessed Virgin appeared to two little shepherds; and each year is visited by a large number of pilgrims.

47 On 19 September, 1846, about three o'clock in the afternoon in full sunlight, on a mountain about 5918 feet high and about three miles distant from the village of La Salette-Fallavaux, it is related that two children, a shepherdess of fifteen named Mélanie Calvat, called Mathieu, and a shepherd-boy of eleven named Maximin Giraud, both of them very ignorant, beheld in a resplendent light a "beautiful lady" clad in a strange costume. Speaking alternately in French and in patois, she charged them with a message which they were "to deliver to all her people". After complaining of the impiety of Christians, and threatening them with dreadful chastisements in case they should persevere in evil, she promised them the Divine mercy if they would amend.

48 Finally, it is alleged, before disappearing she communicated to each of the children a special secret. The sensation caused by the recital of Mélanie and Maximin was profound, and gave rise to several investigations and reports. Mgr. Philibert de Bruillard, Bishop of Grenoble, appointed a commission to examine judicially this marvellous event; the commission concluded that the reality of the apparition should be admitted. Soon several miraculous cures took place on the mountain of La Salette, and pilgrimages to the place were begun. The miracle, needless to say, was ridiculed by free-thinkers, but it was also questioned among the faithful, and especially by ecclesiastics. There arose against it in the Dioceses of Grenoble and Lyons a violent oppposition, aggravated by what is known as the incident of Ars. As a result of this hostility and the consequent agitation, Mgr. de Bruillard (16 November 1851) declared the apparition of the Blessed Virgin as certain, and authorized the cult of Our Lady of La Salette. This act subdued, but did not suppress, the opposition, whose leaders, profiting by the succession in 1852 of a new bishop, Mgr. Ginoulhiac, to Mgr. Bruillard, who had resigned, retaliated with violent attacks on the reality of the miracle of La Salette. They even asserted that the "beautiful lady" was a young woman named Lamerliere, which story gave rise to a widely advertised suit for slander. Despite these hostile acts, the first stone of a great church was solemnly laid on the mount of La Salette, 25 May, 1852, amid a large assembly of the faithful. This Church, later elevated to the rank of a basilica, was served by a body of a religious called Missionaries of La Salette. In 1891 diocesan priests replaced these missionaries, driven into exile by persecuting laws.

49 As said above, the Blessed Virgin confided to each of the two children a special secret. These two secrets, which neither Mélanie or Maximin ever made known to each other, were sent by them in 1851 to Pius IX on the advice of Mgr. de Bruillard. It is unknown what impressions these mysterious revelations made on the pope, for on this point there were two versions diametrically opposed to each other. Maximin's secret is not known, for it was never published. Mélanie's was inserted in its entirety in brochure which she herself had printed in 1879 at Lecce, Italy, with the approval of the bishop of that town. A lively controversy followed as to whether the secret published in 1879 was identical with that communicated to Pius IX in 1851, or in its second form it was not merely a work of the imagination. The latter was the opinion of wise and prudent persons, who were persuaded that a distinction must be made between the two Mélanies, between the innocent and simple voyante of 1846 and the visionary of 1879, whose mind had been disturbed by reading apocalyptic books and the lives of illuminati. As Rome uttered no decision the strife was prolonged between the disputants. Most of the defenders of the text of 1879 suffered censure from their bishops. Maximin Giraud, after an unhappy and wandering life, returned to Corps, his native village, and died there a holy death (1 March, 1875). Mélanie Calvat ended a no less wandering life at Altamura, Italy (15 December, 1904).

50 Leon Clugnet

Missionaries of La Salette

49 The Missionaries of La Salette were founded in 1852, at the shrine of Our Lady of La Salette, where some priests banded together to care for the numerous pilgrims frequenting the mountain. In 1858 these priests formed a little community with temporary constitutions, under the immediate charge of the Bishop of Grenoble. In 1876 Right Rev. Mgr Fava gave them more complete rules, and in May, 1890, the Institute was approved by Rome.

50 Finding it hard to recruit their number from the secular clergy, the fathers founded an "Apostolic school" or missionary college in 1876. After a six-year classical course in their novitiate, they were to go to the scholasticate in Rome, to complete their philosophical and theological course in the Gregorian University. In 1892 five of the missionaries arrived in the United States with fifteen students. Bishop McMahon of Hartford, Connecticut, welcomed them into his diocese, and they established themselves in the episcopal city, occupying the former bishop's residence on Collins Street. In 1895 they moved to new quarters at 85 New Park Avenue, Hartford, Connecticut, close to the church of Our Lady of Sorrows. Hitherto a mission church of the cathedral, it was made a parish and given in charge of the fathers, who began to tend it on Ascension Day of the same year. In 1894, having established themselves in the Springfield Diocese, the fathers received the French parish of St. Joseph, Fitchburg, Massachusetts, from Rev. Thomas Beaven. In 1895 Rt. Rev. Michael Tierney, successor to Bishop McMahon, requested the fathers to take charge of the mixed parish of St. James, Danielson, Conn. In 1901, at the suggestion of Bishop Beaven of Springfield, the Very Rev. Superior General sent a few students to Poland to prepare themselves for Polish parishes in the Springfield Diocese, and the parish at Ware and that of Westfield were given over to their care. in 1902 they were received into the Diocese of Sherbrooke, Canada, with a parish at Stanstead, Quebec, Canada, and also into the Archdiocese of New York, with a parish at Phoenicia, in Ulster County. At the request of Archbishop Langevin of St. Boniface, Canada, a few fathers were sent from the mother-house in Hartford to establish themselves in West Canada. They became a separate province with headquarters at Forget, Saskatchewan. They tended four flourishing parishes, Forget, Esteven, Ossa, and Weyburn. In 1909, the missionaries deeming their order sufficiently developed, owing to additional foundations in Belgium, Madagascar, Poland, and Brazil, the Very Rev. Superior General petitioned the Holy See to approve their constitutions. The request was granted 29 January, 1909. The students of the Apostolic schools are trained chiefly to combat the great crimes of the day, especially those denounced in the discourse of the Blessed Virgin at La Salette. The spirit of the community is that which pervades the whole apparition of Mary on the Mountain of La Salette—a spirit of prayer and sacrifice.

51 J. Guinet.

René-Robert-Cavelier, Sieur de La Salle

52 Explorer, born at Rouen, 1643; died in Texas, 1687.

53 In his youth he displayed an unusual precocity in mathematics and a predilection for natural science; his outlook upon life was somewhat puritanical. Whether or not he was educated with a view to entering the Society of Jesus is a matter of doubt, though some religious order he must have subsequently joined, for to this fact is assigned the forfeiture of his estates. The career of a churchman was definitely abandoned, however, when, after receiving the feudal grant of a tract of land at La Chine on the St. Lawrence from the Sulpicians, seigneurs of Montreal—perhaps through the influence of a elder brother who was a member of the order at that place—he came to Canada as an adventurer and trader in 1666. For three years La Salle remained quietly upon his little estate, mastering Indian dialects and meditating on a southwest passage. Upon the latter quest he set out in 1669 with a party of Sulpicians, who, deeming that there was greater missionary work among the north-western tribes, soon abandoned the expedition. La salle's subsequent travels on this occasion are shrouded in an obscurity that will perhaps never be dispelled. Whether he was the first white man to gaze upon Niagara, whether he explored the Allegheny valley or the Ohio river, he seems not to have reached the Mississippi, Joliet's undisputed claim to that distinction during La Salle's residence in Canada being regarded, at present, as finally established. Indeed Joliet's announcement, some few years later, that the Grande Rivière flowed into the Gulf of Mexico perceptibly stimulated La Salle to fashion and carry out those schemes which must have been taking shape even in the novitiate of Rouen—dreams of acquiring a monopoly of the fur trade and of building up the empire of New France. The French doctrine that the discovery of a river gave an inchoate right to the land drained by its tributaries suggested to La Salle and Governor Frontenac a " plan to effect a military occupation of the whole Mississippi valley...by means of military posts which should control the communication and sway the policy of the Indian tribes", as well as present an impassable barrior to the English colonies. The money needed for such a plan drove La Salle to those attempts at a monopoly which engendered such persistent opposition, and which account, partly at least, for the failure of his plans.

54 A trip to France in the autumn of 1674 followed his erection of Fort Frontenac for the protection of the fur trade at the outset of Lake Ontario. The king gave him a grant of his fort and the adjacent territory, promised to garrison it at his own expense, and conferred upon him the rank of esquire. Upon his return, La Salle rebuilt the fort, launched upon the Niagara River the "Griffin", a forty-five ton schooner with five guns, in which, with Hennepin, a Franciscan, and the Neapolitan Henri de Tonty, he set sail in the autumn of 1678, passed over Lakes Erie and Huron, and reached the southern extremity of Lake Michigan. Here the gunboat was sent back, unlawfully laden with furs to appease La Salle's creditors, and was never heard from again. The expedition pushed on to the Illinois, where Fort Crevecoeur was built. After waiting through the winter for the return of the "Griffin", La Salle, leaving the faithful Tonty in charge of the fort, resolved to return one thousand miles on foot to Montreal, accompanied by four Frenchmen and an Indian guide. The sufferings of his famous retreat were borne with incredible fortitude, and he was returning with supplies when it was learned that the garrison at Fort Crevecoeur had mutinied, had driven Tonty into the wilderness, and were then cruising about Lake Ontario in the hope of murdering La Salle. The dauntless Frenchman pushed out at once upon the lake, captured the mutineers, sent them back in irons to the governor, and then went to the rescue of Tonty, whom he met at Mackinaw on his return trip after abandoning the search. For a brief space in 1682 La Salle's fate seems more propitious, when, on 9 April, we catch a glimpse of him planting the fleurs-de-lis on the banks of the Mississippi, and claiming for France the wide territory that it drained. But, five years later, in the wretched failure of an attempt to plant a colony at the mouth of the Mississippi, he was murdered by mutineers from ambush.

55 La Salle's schemes of empire and of trade were far too vast for his own generation to accomplish, though it was along the lines that he projected that France pursued her colonial policy in the New World in the eighteenth century until finally overthrown by the English in the French and Indian Wars.

56 Jarvis Keiley.

Ernst von Lasaulx

55 Scholar and philosopher, born at Coblenz, 16 March, 1805; died at Munich, 9 May, 1861. His father, Johann Claudius von Lasaulx, was a distinguised architect; his uncle, Johann Joseph Görres (q.v.), was the fiery champion of Catholic liberties; and the young Ernst became imbued with an enthusiam for the Catholic Faith and for liberty. He first studied at Bonn (1824-30), and later took up classical philology and philosophy at Munich, attaching himself in particular to Schelling, Görres, and Baader, and then spent four years travelling through Austria, Italy, Greece, and Palestine, visiting the places most famous in the history of civilization, both pagan and Christian. His voyage to Athens was made as a member of the suite of Prince Otto of Wittelsbach (Bavaria), who had been elected King of the Hellenes. On his return to his native land he took the doctor's degree at Kiel, in 1835, presenting a dissertation entitled "De mortis dominatu in veteres, commentatio theologica-philosophica", and was appointed dozent in classical philology at the University of Wurzburg, where he exercised a deep and far-reaching influence on the youth of the university. Meanwhile he married Julie Baader, daughter of the Munich philosopher, Franz Baader.

56 Upon the arrest (20 November, 1837) of Clemens August, Archbishop of Cologne, whose forcible detention in the fortress of Minden by the order of Prussian Government caused a great stir in Catholic circles both at home and abroad, Lasaulx wrote to his uncle, Görres, calling upon him to protest against the arbitrary act of the "military Government of Berlin against the Archbishop of Cologne". This was the impulse that was responsible for Görres's celebrated "Athanasius". At the same time Lasaulx himself issued the controversial pamphlet "Kritische Bemerkungen über die Kölner Sache", a bold attack on the Prussian Government and the diplomat Josias von Bunsen. In the autumn of 1844 Lasaulx was appointed professor of philology and aesthetics at the University of Munich, despite the vigorous efforts of the Würzburg senate to secure his continued services there. At Munich he quickly became famous as a magnetic and stimulating teacher. When his influence effected the downfall of the minister Abel, the senate of the University applauded his action, but King Louis, on the other hand, vented his displeasure by dismissing Lasaulx from office ( 28 February, 1847). Demonstrations on the part of the students followed, resulting in the dismissal of eight other members of the University teaching staff. In 1848 Lasaulx, with three of his former colleagues, was elected to the National Assembly at Frankfort, where he identified himself with the Conservative group and again and again eloquently defended the liberties of the Catholic Church among the intellectual elite of Germany.

57 King Maximilian II having at length yielded to the petition of the Munich students to reinstate Lasaulx and the other expelled professors (15 March, 1849), Lasaulx resumed his work as a philosophical writer. In the same year he was elected a member of the Bavarian Chamber of Deputies, where, until his death, his masterly ability in all political controversies found energetic expression. Soon after his death, four of his works were placed on the Index; it was found that in them he had erred on the side of effacing the distinction between the common human religious element in heathenism and the theological expression of Christian revelation. Several years earlier, however, he had declared that, should any errors be found in his works, he would freely submit to the judgment of the Church.

58 Karl Hoeber

Constantine Lascaris

58 Greek scholar from Constantinople; born 1434; died at Messina in 1501. Made a prisoner by the Turks on the fall of Constantinople, he probably stayed the greater part of seven years in Corfu; he made a visit to Rhodes where he acquired some manuscripts; finally came to Italy and settled at Milan as a copyist of manuscripts. His work on the eight parts of speech presented to Princess Hippolyta Sforza procured from her father a request to teach the princess Greek. Lascaris followd the princess to Naples when she married Alfonso II (1465). The following year he left for Greece, but the vessel stopping at Messina, he was urged to stay there, consented, and died there after many years, bequeathing to the city his seventy-six manuscripts. They remained at Messina until 1679, and were then moved first to Palermo and later to Spain, where they are now in the National Library of Madrid. Constantine Lascaris was above all a tutor and a transcriber of manuscripts. One of his pupils was the future Cardinal Bembo. His industry as a copyist was soon superseded by the art of printing. He was himself the author of the first book printed in Greek, a small grammer (Milan, 1476) entitled "Erotemata".

59 Paul Lejay

Janus Lascaris

61 Also called John; surnamed Rhyndacenus (from Rhyndacus, a country town in Asia Minor).

62 He was a noted Greek scholar, born about 1445; died at Rome in 1535. After the fall of Constantinople he was taken to Peloponnesus and to Crete. When still quite young he came to Venice, where Bessarion became his patron, and sent him to learn Latin at Padua. On the death of Bessarion, Lorenzo de' Medici welcomed him to Florence, where Lascaris gave Greek lectures on Thucydides, Demosthenes, Sophocles, and the Greek anthology. Twice Lorenzo sent him to Greece in quest of manuscripts. When he returned the second time (1492) he brought back about two hundred from Mount Athos. Meanwhile Lorenzo had passed away. Lascaris entered the service of France and was ambassador at Venice from 1503 to 1508, at which time he became a member of the Greek Academy of Aldus Manutius; but if the printer had the benefit of his advice, no Aldine work bears his name. He resided at Rome under Leo X, the first pope of the Medici family, from 1513 to 1518, returned under Clement VII in 1523, and Paul III in 1534. Meanwhile he had assisted Louis XII in forming the library of Blois, and when Francis I had it removed to Fontaine-bleau, Lascaris and Budé had charge of its organization. We owe to him a number of editiones principes among them the Greek anthology (1494), four plays of Euripides, Callimachus (about 1495), Apolloninus Rhodius, Lucian (1496), printed in Florence in Greek capitals with accents, and the scholia of Didymas (1517) and of Porphyrius (1518) on Homer, printed in Rome.

63 Paul Lejay

John Laski

64 John a Lasco.

65 Archbishop of Gnesen and Primate of Poland, b. at Lask, 1456; d. at Gnesen, 19 May, 1531. In 1482 he entered the service of the royal arch-chancellor Kurzowcki, who made him provost of Skalmirez and of the cathedral church in Posen, and canon of Krakow. In 1502 he became royal arch-secretary, in 1505 arch-chancellor, in 1509 coadjutor of Archbishop Boryszewski of Gnesesn, and, after the death of the latter in 1510, Archbishop of Gnesen and Primate of Poland, whereupon he resigned as arch-chancellor in 1511. In 1513 he took part in the Fifth General Council of the Lateran, when he delivered an oration in which he urged upon the pope to take measures against the Teutonic Knights, who had been openly and secretly intriguing against Poland ever since 1466, when it had taken West Prussia and Ermland from them and begun to exercise its suzerainty over East Prussia. during the progress of the Lateran Council, Leo X conferred upon Laski and his successors in the archiepiscopal See of Gnesen the title of legatus natus. The Bull conferring the title is dated 25 July, 1515, and is still preserved in the archives of the cathedral chapter of Gnesen (no. 625). It was reprinted in Korytowski's "Arcybiscupi Gnieznienscy", II (Posen, 1888), 662. Laski's elevation to the cardinalate by Pope Leo X is aid to have been prevented by King Sigismund. Archbishop Laski was a zealous upholder of ecclesiastical discipline within his archdiocese, and a strenuous opponent of Protestantism in Poland. To put a stop to various ecclesiastical abusues, he held two provincial synods at Piotrkow (1510, 12) and a diocesan synod of Gnesen (1513). The seven other provincial synods which he held were intended chiefly to stem the spread of Protestantism in Poland. Four of these were convened at Lencicz in the years 1522, 1523, 1525, and 1527, and three at Piotrkow in 1526, 1532, and 1533.

66 Many of the legislative measure passed at these synods are printed in the "Constitutiones synodorum metropolitanae ecclesiae gnesnesis" (Krakow, 1630). Most of the canons and decrees of the earlier synods Laski edited in his "Sanctiones ecclesiasticae tam expontificum decretis quam ex constitutionibus synodorum provinciae excerptae, in primis autem statuta in diversis provincialibus synodis a se sancita" (Krakow, 1525), in his "Statuta provincialia" (1512), and "Statuta provinciae Gnesnensis" (1527). After the marriage of King Sigismund of Poland with Barbara Zapolya, in 1512, Archbishop Laski entered into friendly relations with John Zaploya, a brother of Barbara and an aspirant to the crown of Hungary. He sent his nephew Jerome Laki to Hungary to assist Zapolya, with money and troops in his opposition against the rightful King Ferdinand of Hungary. If we maky believe his enemies (especially Cardinal Gattinara), he continued to support his nephew even after the latter allied himself with the Turkish Sultan Soliman with the purpose of marching upon Viennna. In 1530 he was cited to Rome by Clement VII to give an account of his actions. His departure was, however delayed by King Sigismund, and he died the following year after expressing his desire to resign his see. Besides collecting the synodal legislations mentioned above, he made a compilation of the most important laws of Poland while he was arch-chamcelor. The work is entitled "Commune inclyti Poloniae regni privilegiorum, constitutionum et indultuum", etc., and was jpublished at Cracow in 1506. His "Liber beneficiorum archidioces Gnesnesis" was by Korytowski (Gnesen, 1880-1).

67 ZEISSBERG, Johann Laski, Erzbischof von Gnesen, kund sein Testament (Vienna, 1874); HIRSCHBERG, J. Laki als Verbundeter des turkischen Sultans (Leinberg, 1879); BUKOWSKI, Dzieje reformaclyi w Polace (Krakow, 1883).

68 Michael Ott

Baron Joseph Maria Christoph von Lassberg

67 A distinguished German antiquary, born at Donaueschingen, 10 April, 1770; died 15 March, 1855. He was descended from a pious Catholic family. His father was chief forester in the service of Prince von Fürstenberg. After a brief service in the army, he entered the University of Strasburg and later that of Freiburg im Br. to study law and economics, especially forestry. From 1789 he was in the service of Prince von Fürstenberg, becoming chief warden of the forests in 1804. Princess Elizabeth, who ruled the principality during the minority of her son Karl Egon, showed him marked favour. He became privy councillor in 1806, and accompanied her on her travels through Switzerland, Italy, and England. When the regency ended in 1817, Lassberg resigned his position and retired to privite life, residing first on his estate at Eppishusen in Thurgau, and from 1838 at Castle Meersburg on Lake Constance. He now devoted himself zealously to the study of German literature, and in the pursuit of these studies he collected a superb library of upwards of 12,000 books and 273 valuable manuscripts, among which was the codex of the "Nibelungenlied" (known as the Hohenems manuscript and commonly designated as C). After his death this library was presented to the town of Donasueschingen.

68 Lassberg was very hospitably inclined and many visitors were entertained at Castle Meersburg. Uhland, Lachmann, Gustav Schwab, and other distinguished men of letters were among his friends. He was twice married, his second wife being Maria Anna von Droste-Hülshoff, a sister of the famous poetess Annette (q.v.). His literary work consisted chiefly in editing medieval German poems, many of which were published under the pseudonym of Meister Sepp von Eppishusen. Especially noteworthy is the "Liedersaal", a collection of medieval German poems, chiefly of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, of miscellaneous content. It appeared at St. Gall in four volumes. In the fourth volume the above-mentioned Nibelungen manuscript was printed for the first time.

69 Arthur F.J. Remy

Orlandus de Lassus

70 (Original name, Roland de Lattre), composer, born at Mons, Hainault, Belgium, in 1520 (according to most biographers; but his epitaph gives 1532); died at Munich, 14 June, 1594. At the age of eight and a half years he was admitted as soprano to the choir of the church of St. Nicholas in his native city. He soon attracted general attention, both on account of his unusal musical talent and his beautiful voice; so much so that he was three times abducted. Twice his parents had him returned to the parental roof, but the third time they consented to allow him to take up his abode at St-Didier, the temporary residence of Ferdinand de Gonzaga, general in command of the army of Charles V and Viceroy od Sicily. At the end of the campaign in the Netherlands, Orlandus followed his patron to Milan and from there to Sicily. After the change of his voice Orlandus spent about three years at the court of the Marquess della Terza, at Naples. He next went to Rome, where he enjoyed the favour and hospitality, for about six months, of Cardinal Archbishop of Florence, who was then living there. Through the influence of this prince of the church , Orlandus obtained the position of choirmaster at St. John Lateran, in spite of his extreme youth and the fact that there were many capable musicians available. During his residence in Rome, Lassus completed his first volume of Masses for four voices, and a collection of motets for five voices, all of which he had published in Venice. After a sojourn of probably two years in Rome, Lassus, learning of the serious illness of his parents, hastened back to Belgium only to find that they had died. His native city Mons not offering him a suitable field of activity, he spent several years in travel through France and England and then settled at Antwerp for about two years. It was while here that Orlandus received an invitation from Albert V, Duke of Bavaria, not only to become the director of his court chapel, but also to recruit capable musicians for it in the Netherlands. While in the employment and under the protection of this art-loving prince, Lassus developed that phenomenal productivity as a composer which is unsurpassed in the history of music. For thirty-four years he remained active at Munich as composer and director, first under Albert V, and then under his son and successor, William V. During all this time he enjoyed not only the continued and sympathetic favour of his patrons and employers, but was also honoured by Pope Gregory XIII, who appointed him Knight of the Golden Spur; by Charles IX of France, who bestowed upon him the cross of the Order of Malta; and by Emperor Maximilian, who on 7 December, 1570, raised Lassus and his descendants to the nobility. The imperial document conferring the honour is remarkable, not only as showing the esteem in which the master was held by rulers and nations, but particularly as evidence of the lofty conception on the part of this monarch of the function of art in the social economy. Lassus's great and long-continued activity finally told on his mind and caused a depression and break-down, from which he at first rallied but never fully recovered.

71 Lassus was the heir to the centuries of preparation and development of the Netherland school, and was its greatest and also its last representative.

72 While with many of his contemporaries, even the most noted, such as Dufay, Okeghem, Obrecht, and Josquin des Prés, contrapuntal skill is often an end in itself, Lassus, being consummate master of every form of the art and possessing a powerful imagination, always aims at a lofty and truthful interpretation of the text before him. His genius is of a universal nature. His wide culture and the extensive travels of his youth had enabled him to absorb the distinguishing musical traits of every nationality. None of his contemporaries had such a well -defined judgment in the choice of the means of expression which best served his purpose. The lyric, epic, and dramatic elements are alternately in evidence in his work. But he would undoubtedly have been greatest in the dramatic style, had he lived at a later period. Although Lassus lived at the time of the Reformation, when the individual and secular spirit manifested itself more and more in music, and although he interpreted secular poems such as madrigals, chansons, and German lieder, the contents of which were sometimes rather free (as was not infrequently the case in those times), his distinction lies overwhelmingly in his works for the Church.

73 The diatonic Gregorian modes form the basis of his compositions, and most frequently his themes are taken from liturgical melodies. The number of works the master has left to posterity exceeds two thousand, in every possible form, and in combinations of from two to twelve voices. Many of them remain in manuscript, but the great majority have been printed at Venice, Munich, Nuremberg, Louvain, Antwerp, or Paris. Among his more famous works must be mentioned his setting of the seven penitential psalms, which for variety, depth, truth of expression, and elevation of conception are unsurpassed. Duke Albert showed his admiration for this work by having it written on parchment and bound in two folio volumes, which the noted painter Hans Mielich illustrated, at the command of the duke, in a most beautiful manner. These, with two other smaller volumes containing an analysis of Lassus's and Mielich's work by Samuel van Quickelberg, a contemporary, are preserved in the court library at Munich. Lassus left no fewer than fifty Masses of his composition. Some of these are built upon secular melodies, as was customary in his time, but the thematic material for most of them has been taken from the liturgical chant. In 1604, his two sons, Rudolph and Ferdinand, also musicians of note, published a collection of 516 motets, under the title of "Magnum opus musicum", which was followed in 1609 by "Jubilus B. Mariae Virginis", consisting of 100 settings of the Magnificat. The publication of a critical edition of Lassus's complete works in sixty volumes, prepared by Dr. Haberl and A. Sandberger, was begun 1894.

74 Joseph Otten

Marie Lataste

73 Born at Mimbaste near Dax, France, 21 February, 1822; died at Rennes, 10 May, 1847; was the youngest child of simple pious peasants. According to her own narrative, written under obedience, she was poor, lowly, country girl, knowing nothing but what her mother taught her; hence, in the natural order, all her learning consisted in being able to read, write, sew, and spin. Her knowledge in the supernatural order long embraced merely the principal truths of salvation. Little by little the light grew like a vast furnace on which wood is cast, and towards which a mighty wind blows from all sides. The Lord Jesus, the Light of the World, had been the light of her soul. He had brought her up as a mother does her child, with patience and perseverance; if she knew aught she owed it to Him, she had all from Him. A troublesome child, proud, ambitious, and self-contained, she was the constant subject of her mother's anxious prayer, and her first Communion, made in her twelfth year, was the turning point in her life. A strong impression of the Divine presence on the great day, and confirmation received soon after, strengthened her piety and virtue, which thenceforward never faltered. About a year after Marie saw at Mass, during the Elevation, a bright light which seemed to inflame her love for the Eucharistic Lord and to increase as that love increased. Soon, to prepare her for greater favours, she was cast into the crucible of severe interior trials and temptations, whence docility to her director brought her forth victorious. He allowed her to make a yearly vow of virginity, and the Blessed Sacrament became the central thought of her life. According to her own narrative, towards the end of 1839, when she was seventeen, she saw Christ on the altar. On the Epiphany, 1840, this was repeated, and for three whole years every time she assisted at Mass this grace was granted her. Almost daily she received from the lips of Jesus instructions forming a complete spiritual and doctrinal education. He explained in simple language the principal truths of faith; sometimes he showed her symbolical visions, or taught her in parables. He sent His Mother and angels to her; at times He reproached and humbled her. Her progress in virtue was rapid, her defects disappeared, and she exercised a happy influence on those who approached her. She did not suspect at first thar hers was a singular privilege, yet she never mentioned it except to her confessor.

74 In 1840 M. l'Abbé Pierre Darbins succeeded M. Farbos as curé of Mimbaste. By Divine command Marie revealed her soul to him. Much surprised, he tested his penitent by trying her obedience and humility; he found her wholly submissive. Then he asked the help of the director of the seminary of Dax. They agreed to order her to put in writing everything supernatural she had heard and seen in the past, and all she might hear and see in the future. In due time this was accomplished; but the true text has been so much interpolated by the editor that the "Works of Marie Lataste" are not considered authentic. The Divine Master had made known to her His will, that she should embrace religious life, and in the Society of the Sacred heart, recently founded and wholly unknown to her and her director. After many objections and delays, she obtained permission and left for Paris, 21 April, 1844, alone, under the guidance of Divine Providence. She was received at the Hôtel Biron by Madame de Boisbaudry, who had her examined by an experienced spiritual guide. She was admitted as laysister on 15 May. With great joy she entered upon this new life. Humility, charity, odedience, and fidelity to common life were her chief characteritics. Her sisters' testmony was : Sister Lataste does everything like every one else, yet no one does anything like her." Still a novice she was sent to Rennes, in the hope that change of air would improve her health. An active life succeeded the quiet of the noviceship; she was infirmarian, refectorian, portress, but her humble virtues shown the more brilliantly; children, strangers, as well as her superiors and her sisters, felt her hidden sanctity. Marie's vows had been postponed in the hope of an improvement in her health. But on Sunday, 9 May, she became suddenly so very ill that the end seemed near. She was allowed to pronounce her vows, just before receiving the last sacraments. Then the pent-up ardours of her soul burst forth in ecstatic joy until her death on 10 May, 1847, at the age of twenty-five. Her memory lives in benediction. Her remains have been secured from desecration and now repose at Roehampton near London.

75 Alice Power.

Flaminius Annibali de Latera

76 Historian, born at Latera, near Viterbo, 23 November, 1733; died at Viterbo, 27 February, 1813. He received his first education from a priest, Paolo Ferranti, and at the age of sixteen entered the Order of Friars Minor Observants in the Roman Province, taking the habit at the convent of St. Bernardine at Orte, 23 January, 1750; a year later on the same day he made his solemn profession. Being in due time ordained priest, he passed his examinations as lector generalis (professor), and successively taught theology in various convents — Viterbo, Fano, Velletri, and Rome. From 1790 to 1791 he was definitor general of the Roman Province . When the convents in Italy were supressed by Napoleon I in 1810, Annibali retired to Viterbo, and died there in a private residence.

77 De Latera during fifty years developed immense activity as a writer. Unfortunately he lived at a time when Franciscan history had just passed through the great and passionate Spader-Ringhieri and Lucci - Marczic controversies, which circumstances had a notable influence on his writings: instead of using his remarkable talents for constructive work, he wrote mostly with a polemical motive. Still his merits are great enough to secure him an honourable place in Fransciscan literature.

78 His chief works are:

79 "Ad Bullarium Franciscanum a P. Hyacintho Sbaralea Ord. Min.Conv...editum, Supplementum" (Rome, 1780), dedicated to Pope Pius VI, by whose orders it was written to correct the Conventual interpretations of Sbaralea [see 'Archiv f. Litt. u. Kirchengeschichte", I (1885), 516-17.]

80 "Manuale de' Frati Minori... con un appendice, o sia risposta all' autore (P. Sangallo, O. M. Con.) del Saggio compendioso della dottrina di Giustino Febbronio (Rome, 1776). This latter work occasioned great controversies, which partly took a violent and abusive form.

81 "Dissertationes critico-historicae in quarum una Ser. Patriarcha Franciscus Tertii Ordinis institutor, in altera Indulgentiae Portiunculae veritas assertir et vindicatur (Rome, 1784).

82 "Veritas impressiones Sacrorum Stimatum in corpore Seraphici S. Francisci Assisiensis..."(Rome, 1786).

83 "La storia della Indulgenza concessa da Gesu Cristo...nella Chiesa della Portiuncula si dimostra vera..." (Rome, 1796). The last three books were written against rationalistic attacks of the time, concerning which see Pezzana, "Memorie degli Scrittori e Letterati Parmigiani", VI, pt. I, 127 (Parma, 1825) When the Benedictine Pujati had, by order of Scipio Ricci of unhappy memory, written against the traditional form of the Stations of the Cross, Annibali, with the Franciscans Affo and Tommasco da Cireglio, was charged to answer; he then wrote

84 "La Pratica del pio Esercizio della Via Crucis...vendicata dalle obbiezioni di D. Giuseppe Ma Pujati, Monaco Casinese..." (Viterbo, 1783; 2nd ed., Viterbo, 1785).

85 "La Difesa dell' antico metodo della Via Crucis e la Censura del nuovo..." (against the "Annali ecclesiastici" of Florence) (Viterbo, 1783). An important but little-known work is

86 "Compendio della Storia degli Ordini religiosi esistensi (4 vols., Rome, 1790-91); 2nd ed. of the same with the title " Storia degli Ordini regolari...." (Naples, 1796).

87 A life of St. Collette, in Italian (Rome, 1805; 2nd ed., Rome, 1807).

88 Italian life of St. Hyacintha Mariscotti (Rome, 1805; 2nd ed., Rome, 1807).

89 New edition of "F. Francisci Horantii Hispani (O. F. M.)... Locorum Catholicorum ...libri VII" (2 vols., Rome, 1795-96).

90 Annibali worked at the reform of the Franciscan Breviary, 1784-85, and composed many new offices edited separately at Rome, 1785 (see "Archivum Franc. Hist.", I, Quaracchi, 1908, 45-49).

91 An Italian hymn-book (Viterbo, 1772). (14) "Notizie storiche della Casa Farnese della fu Citta di Castro...coll' aggiunta di due Paesi Latera e Farnese" (in 2 parts, Montefiascone, 1817-18), which appeared after his death.

92 We omit some other works, as well as the anonymous and pseudonymous pamphlets of the author.

93 Livarius Oliger

Christian Museum of Lateran

79 Established by Pius IX in 1854, in the Palazzo del Laterano erected by Sixtus V on the part of the site of the ancient Lateran palace destroyed by fire in 1308. In 1843 the "profane" Museum of the Lateran was founded by Gregory XVI, in whose pontificate also was mooted the idea of establishing a museum of Christian antiquities in the same edifice. Nothing of consequence, however, was accomplished until Pius IX, at the date noted, entrusted the task to the two famous archæologists, Father Marchi, S.J., and Giovanni Battista de Rossi. To Marchi was assigned the work of collecting and arranging the sculptured monuments of the early Christian ages, to de Rossi all that concerned ancient Christian inscriptions; a third department of the museum consisted of copies of some of the more important catacomb frescoes. The larger part of the material for the new foundation was drawn from the hall in the Vatican Library set apart by Benedict XIV, in 1750, as the nucleus of a Christian monuments from the Capitoline Museum, while many others were recovered from convents, chapels, sacristies, and private collections. Plaster casts were also supplied of certain especially interesting monuments that could not be removed from their original location. The result has been eminently satisfactory, so much so indeed that the Christian Museum of the Lateran contains today a collection of monuments the study of which is indispensable to a proper appreciation of the earlier ages of Christianity. The section devoted to early Christian epigraphy, classified by de Rossi, begins with a collection of inscriptions relating to the most ancient basilicas, baptisteries, etc.; then follow in order the Damasan inscriptions, inscriptions with consular dates, those containing allusions to dogma, to the hierarchy, civil matters, and accompanied with such symbols as the anchor, dove, and monogram. Still another section is occupied by monuments with inscriptions classified according to their topography. The most interesting, perhaps, of all the inscribed monuments of the museum is that containing the famous epitaph of Abercius, one fragment of which was presented to Leo XIII by the Sultan Abdul Hamid II, the other by Professor (now Sir William) Ramsay. The sculptured monuments include a fine collection of fourth and fifth century sacrophagi, the statue of St. Hippolytus, and an admirable third-century statue of the Good Shepherd. The third section of the museum consists of copies, not always accurate, of some of the most interesting paintings discovered in the Roman catacombs.

80 Maurice M. Hassett

Saint John Lateran

82 The Basilica

83 This is the oldest, and ranks first among the four great "patriarchal" basilicas of Rome. The site was, in ancient times, occupied by the palace of the family of the Laterani. A member of this family, P. Sextius Lateranus, was the first plebian to attain the rank of consul. In the time of Nero, another member of the family, Plautius Lateranus, at the time consul designatus was accused of conspiracy against the emperor, and his goods were confiscated. Juvenal mentions the palace, and speaks of it as being of some magnificence, "regiæ ædes Lateranorum". Some few remains of the original buildings may still be traced in the city walls outside the Gate of St. John, and a large hall decorated with paintings was uncovered in the eighteenth century within the basilica itself, behind the Lancellotti Chapel. A few traces of older buildings also came to light during the excavations made in 1880, when the work of extending the apse was in progress, but nothing was then discovered of real value or importance. The palace came eventually into the hands of Constantine, the first Christian emperor, through his wife Fausta, and it is from her that it derived the name by which it was then sometimes called, "Domus Faustæ". Constantine must have given it to the Church in the time of Miltiades, not later than about 311, for we find a council against the Donatists meeting within its walls as early as 313. From that time onwards it was always the centre of Christian life within the city; the residence of the popes and the cathedral of Rome. The latter distinction it still holds, though it has long lost the former. Hence the proud title which may be read upon its walls, that it is "Omnium urbis et orbis ecclesiarum mater, et caput".

84 It seems probable, in spite of the tradition that Constantine helped in the work of building with his own hands, that there was not a new basilica erected at the Lateran, but that the work carried out at this period was limited to the adaptation, which perhaps involved the enlargement, of the already existing basilica or great hall of the palace. The words of St. Jerome "basilica quondam Laterani" (Ep. lxxiii, P.L., XXII, col. 692) seem to point in this direction, and it is also probable on other grounds. This original church was probably not of very large dimensions, but we have no reliable information on the subject. It was dedicated to the Saviour, "Basilica Salvatoris", the dedication to St. John being of later date, and due to a Benedictine monastery of St. John the Baptist and St. John the Evangelist which adjoined the basilica and where members were charged at one period with the duty of maintaining the services in the church. This later dedication to St. John has now in popular usage altogether superseded the original one. A great many donations from the popes and other benefactors to the basilica are recorded in the "Liber Pontificalis", and its splendour at an early period was such that it became known as the "Basilica Aurea", or Golden Church. This splendour drew upon it the attack of the Vandals, who stripped it of all its treasures. St. Leo the Great restored it about 460, and it was again restored by Hadrian I, but in 896 it was almost totally destroyed by an earthquake ("ab altari usque ad portas cecidit"). The damage was so extensive that it was difficult to trace in every case the lines of the old building, but these were in the main respected and the new building was of the same dimensions as the old. This second church lasted for four hundred years and was then burnt down. It was rebuilt by Clement V and John XXII, only to be burnt down once more in 1360, but again rebuilt by Urban V.

85 Through these various vicissitudes the basilica retained its ancient form, being divided by rows of columns into aisles, and having in front an atrium surrounded by colonnades with a fountain in the middle. The façade had three windows, and was embellished with a mosaic representing Christ as the Saviour of the world. The porticoes of the atrium were decorated with frescoes, probably not dating further back than the twelfth century, which commemorated the Roman fleet under Vespasian, the taking of Jerusalem, the Baptism of the Emperor Constantine and his "Donation" to the Church. Inside the basilica the columns no doubt ran, as in all other basilicas of the same date, the whole length of the church from east to west, but at one of the rebuildings, probably that which was carried out by Clement V, the feature of a transverse nave was introduced, imitated no doubt from the one which had been, long before this, added at S. Paolo fuori le Mura. It was probably at this time also that the church was enlarged. When the popes returned to Rome from their long absence at Avignon they found the city deserted and the churches almost in ruins. Great works were begun at the Lateran by Martin V and his successors. The palace, however, was never again used by them as a residence, the Vatican, which stands in a much drier and healthier position, being chosen in its place. It was not until the latter part of the seventeenth century that the church took its present appearance, in the tasteless restoration carried out by Innocent X, with Borromini for his architect. The ancient columns were now enclosed in huge pilasters, with gigantic statues in front. In consequence of this the church has entirely lost the appearance of an ancient basilica, and is completely altered in character.

86 Some portions of the older buildings still survive. Among these we may notice the pavement of medieval Cosmatesque work, and the statues of St. Peter and St. Paul, now in the cloisters. The graceful baldacchino over the high altar, which looks so utterly out of place in its present surroundings, dates from 1369. The stercoraria, or throne of red marble on which the popes sat, is now in the Vatican Museum. It owes its unsavoury name to the anthem sung at the ceremony of the papal enthronization, "De stercore erigeus pauperem". From the fifth century there were seven oratories surrounding the basilica. These before long were thrown into the actual church. The devotion of visiting these oratories, which held its ground all through the medieval period, gave rise to the similar devotion of the seven altars, still common in many churches of Rome and elsewhere. Between the basilica and the city wall there was in former times the great monastery, in which dwelt the community of monks whose duty it was to provide the services in the basilica. The only part of it which still survives is the cloister, surrounded by graceful columns of inlaid marble. They are of a style intermediate between the Romanesque proper and the Gothic, and are the work of Vassellectus and the Cosmati. The date of these beautiful cloisters is the early part of the thirteenth century.

87 The ancient apse, with mosaics of the fourth century, survived all the many changes and dangers of the Middle Ages, and was still to be seen very much in its original condition as late as 1878, when it was destroyed in order to provide a larger space for the ordinations and other pontifical functions which take place in this cathedral church of Rome. The original mosaics were, however, preserved with the greatest possible care and very great success, and were re­erected at the end of the new and deeper apse which had been provided. In these mosaics, as they now appear, the centre of the upper portion is occupied by the figure of Christ surrounded by nine angels. This figure is extremely ancient, and dates from the fifth, or it may be even the fourth century. It is possible even that it is the identical one which, as is told in ancient tradition, was manifested to the eyes of the worshippers on the occasion of the dedication of the church: "Imago Salvatoris infixa parietibus primum visibilis omni populo Romano apparuit" (Joan. Diac., "Lib. de Ecclesia Lat.", P.L. CXCIV, 1543-1560). If it is so, however, it has certainly been retouched. Below is seen the crux gammata, surmounted by a dove which symbolizes the Holy Spirit, and standing on a hill whence flow the four rivers of the Gospels, from whose waters stags and sheep come to drink. On either side are saints, looking towards the Cross. These last are thought to belong originally to the sixth century, though they were repaired and altered in the thirteenth by Nicholas IV, whose effigy may be seen prostrate at the feet of the Blessed Virgin. The river which runs below is more ancient still, and may be regarded as going back to Constantine and the first days of the basilica. The remaining mosaics of the apse are of the thirteenth century, and the signatures of the artists, Torriti and Camerino, may still be read upon them. Camerino was a Franciscan friar; perhaps Torriti was one also.

88 The pavement of the basilica dates from Martin V and the return of the popes to Rome from Avignon. Martin V was of the Colonna family, and the columns are their badge. The high altar, which formerly occupied the position customary in all ancient basilicas, in the centre of the chord of the apse, has now beyond it, owing to the successive enlargements of the church, the whole of the transverse nave and of the new choir. It has no saint buried beneath it, since it was not, as were almost all the other great churches of Rome, erected over the tomb of a martyr. It stands alone among all the altars of the Catholic world in being of wood and not of stone, and enclosing no relics of any kind. The reason for this peculiarity is that it is itself a relic of a most interesting kind, being the actual wooden altar upon which St. Peter is believed to have celebrated Mass during his residence in Rome. It was carefully preserved through all the years of persecution, and was brought by Constantine and Sylvester from St. Pudentiana's, where it had been kept till then, to become the principal altar of the cathedral church of Rome. It is now, of course, enclosed in a larger altar of stone and cased with marble, but the original wood can still be seen. A small portion was left at St. Pudentiana's in memory of its long connection with that church, and is still preserved there. Above the High Altar is the canopy or baldacchino already mentioned, a Gothic structure resting on four marble columns, and decorated with paintings by Barna of Siena. In the upper part of the baldacchino are preserved the heads of the Apostles Peter and Paul, the great treasure of the basilica, which until this shrine was prepared to receive them had always been kept in the "Sancta Sanctorum", the private chapel of the Lateran Palace adjoining. Behind the apse there formerly extended the "Leonine" portico; it is not known which pontiff gave it this name. At the entrance there was an inscription commemorating the dream of Innocent VIII, when he saw the church of the Lateran upheld by St. Francis of Assisi. On the opposite wall was hung the tabula magna, or catalogue of all the relics of the basilica, and also of the different chapels and the indulgences attached to them respectively. It is now in the archives of the basilica.

89 The Baptistery

90 The baptistery of the church, following the invariable rule of the first centuries of Christianity, was not an integral part of the church itself, but a separate and detached building, joined to the church by a colonnade, or at any rate in close proximity to it. The right to baptize was the peculiar privilege of the cathedral church, and here, as elsewhere, all were brought from all parts of the city to receive the sacrament. There is no reason to doubt the tradition which makes the existing baptistery, which altogether conforms to these conditions, the original baptistery of the church, and ascribes its foundation to Constantine. The whole style and appearance of the edifice bear out the claim made on its behalf. There is, however, much less ground for saying that it was here that the emperor was baptized by St. Sylvester. The building was originally entered from the opposite side from the present doorway, through the portico of St. Venantius. This is a vestibule or atrium, in which two large porphyry columns are still standing and was formerly approached by a colonnade of smaller porphyry columns leading from the church. The baptistery itself is an octagonal edifice with eight immense porphyry columns supporting an architrave on which are eight smaller columns, likewise of porphyry, which in their turn support the octagonal drums of the lantern. In the main the building has preserved its ancient form and characteristics, though it has been added to and adorned by many popes. Sixtus III carried out the first of these restorations and adornments, and his inscription recording the fact may still be seen on the architrave. Pope St. Hilary (461-468) raised the height, and also added the chapels round. Urban VIII and Innocent X repaired it in more recent times.

91 In the centre of the building one descends by several steps to the basin of green basalt which forms the actual baptismal font. There is no foundation for the idea that the Emperor Constantine was himself actually baptized in this font by Pope St. Sylvester. That is a confusion which has arisen from the fact that he was founder of the baptistery. But although he had embraced Christianity and had done so much for the advancement of the Church, the emperor, as a matter of fact, deferred the actual reception of the sacrament of baptism until the very end of his life, and was at last baptized, not by Sylvester, but by Eusebius, in whose diocese of Nicomedia he was then, after the foundation of Constantinople, permanently residing (Von Funk, "Manual of Church History", London, 1910, I, 118-119; Duchesne, "Liber Pontificalis", Paris, 1887, I, cix-cxx). The mosaics in the adjoining oratories are both ancient and interesting. Those in the oratory of St. John the Evangelist are of the fifth century, and are of the conventional style of that period, consisting of flowers and birds on a gold ground, also a Lamb with a cruciform nimbus on the vault. The corresponding mosaics of the chapel of St. John the Baptist disappeared in the seventeenth century, but we have a description of them in Panvinio. The mosaics in the chapel of St. Venantius (the ancient vestibule) are still extant, and are of considerable interest. They date from the seventh century, and a comparison between the workmanship of these mosaics and of those in the chapel of St. John offers an instructive lesson on the extent to which the arts had deteriorated between the fifth and the seventh centuries. The figures represent, for the most part, Dalmatian saints, and the whole decoration was originally designed as a memorial to Dalmatian martyrs, whose relics were brought here at the conclusion of the Istrian schism.

92 The Lateran Palace

93 From the beginning of the fourth century, when it was given to the pope by Constantine, the palace of the Lateran was the principal residence of the popes, and continued so for about a thousand years. In the tenth century Sergius III restored it after a disastrous fire, and later on it was greatly embellished by Innocent III. This was the period of its greatest magnificence, when Dante speaks of it as beyond all human achievements. At this time the centre of the piazza in front, where now the obelisk stands, was occupied by the palace and tower of the Annibaldeschi. Between this palace and the basilica was the equestrian statue of Marcus Aurelius, then believed to represent Constantine, which now is at the Capitol. The whole of the front of the palace was taken up with the "Aula Concilii", a magnificent hall with eleven apses, in which were held the various Councils of the Lateran during the medieval period. The fall of the palace from this position of glory was the result of the departure of the popes from Rome during the Avignon period. Two destructive fires, in 1307 and 1361 respectively, did irreparable harm, and although vast sums were sent from Avignon for the rebuilding, the palace never again attained its former splendour. When the popes returned to Rome they resided first at Santa Maria in Trastevere, then at Santa Maria Maggiore, and lastly fixed their residence at the Vatican. Sixtus V then destroyed what still remained of the ancient palace of the Lateran and erected the present much smaller edifice in its place.

94 An apse lined with mosaics and open to the air still preserves the memory of one of the most famous halls of the ancient palace, the "Triclinium" of Leo III, which was the state banqueting hall. The existing structure is not ancient, but it is possible that some portions of the original mosaics have been preserved. The subject is threefold. In the centre Christ gives their mission to the Apostles, on the left he gives the keys to St. Sylvester and the Labarum to Constantine, while on the right St. Peter gives the stole to Leo III and the standard to Charlemagne. The private rooms of the popes in the old palace were situated between this "Triclinium" and the city walls. The palace is now given up to the Pontifical Museum of Christian Antiquities.

95 For the history of the basilica, the student should consult primarily the two quarto volumes of the Liber Pontificalis, edited by DUCHESNE (Paris, 1887 sqq.). Other monographs are JOANNES DIACONUS, Liber de Ecclesia Lateranensi in P.L.; ALEMANNI, De Lateranensibus parietinis (Rome, 1625); RASPONDI, De basilica et patriarchio Lateranensi (Rome, 1656); CRESCIMBENI AND BALDESCHI, Stato della S. Chiesa papale Lateranense nell' anno 1723 (Rome, 723); SEVERANO, Le sette chiese di Roma; UGONIO, Historia delle Stazioni di Roma; PANVINIO, De Septem urbis ecclesiis; PIAZZA, Stazioni di Roma. The latter four works were published in Rome in the sixteenth or seventeenth century.

96 Among recent books the best are: ARMELLINI, Le chiese di Roma (Rome, 1891); MARUCCHI, Basiliques et Eglises de Rome (Rome, 1902); and in particular, DE FLEURY, Le Latran au moyen âge (Paris, 1877). There is a large nubmer of plans and manuscripts in the archives of the basilica. For special points consult also DE ROSSI, Musaici della chiese di Roma anteriori al secolo XV (Rome, 1872); DE MONTAULT, La grande pancarte de la basilique de Latran in Revue de l'art chrétien (Paris, 1886); GERSPACH, La Mosaïque apsidale des Sancta Sanctorum du Latran in Gazette des beaux arts, 1880; BARTOLINI, Sopra l'antichissimo altare di legno in Roma (1852).

97 Arthur S. Barnes

Lateran Councils

85 A series of five important councils held at Rome from the twelfth to the sixteen century. From the reign of Constantine the Great until the removal of the papal Court to Avignon, the Lateran palace and basilica served the bishops of Rome as residence and cathedral. During this long period the popes had occasion to convoke a number of general councils, and for this purpose they made choice of cities so situated as to reduce as much as possible the inconveniences which the bishops called to such assemblies must necessarily experience by reason of long and costly absence from their sees. Five of these councils were held in the Lateran palace, and are known as the First (1123), Second (1139), Third (1179), Fourth (1215), and Fifth Lateran Councils.

86 Other, non-ecumenical councils were held at the Lateran, among the best known being those in 649 against the Monothelite heresy, in 823, 864, 900, 1102, 1105, 1110, 1111, 1112, and 1116. In 1725, Benedict XIII called to the Lateran the bishops directly dependent on Rome as their metropolitan see, i.e. archbishops without suffragans, bishops immediately subject to the Holy See, and abbots exercising quasi-episcopal jurisdiction. Seven sessions were held between 15 April and 29 May, and various regulations were promulgated concerning the duties of bishops and other pastors, concerning residence, ordinations, and the periods for the holding of synods. The chief objects were the suppression of Jansenism and the solemn confirmation of the Bull "Unigenitus," which was declared a rule of faith demanding the fullest obedience.

87 H. Leclercq

Ecclesiastical Latin

88 In the present instance these words are taken to mean the Latin we find in the official textbooks of the Church (the Bible and the Liturgy), as well as in the works of those Christian writers of the West who have undertaken to expound or defend Christian beliefs.

89 Characteristics

90 Ecclesiastical differs from classical Latin especially by the introduction of new idioms and new words. (In syntax and literary method, Christian writers are not different from other contemporary writers.) These characteristic differences are due to the origin and purpose of ecclesiastical Latin. Originally the Roman people spoke the old tongue of Latium known as prisca latinitas. In the third century B. C. Ennius and a few other writers trained in the school of the Greeks undertook to enrich the language with Greek embellishments. This attempt was encouraged by the cultured classes in Rome, and it was to these classes that henceforth the poets, orators, historians, and literary coteries of Rome addressed themselves. Under the combined influence of this political and intellectual aristocracy was developed that classical Latin which has been preserved for us in greatest purity in the works of Caesar and of Cicero. The mass of the Roman populace in their native ruggedness remained aloof from this hellenizing influence and continued to speak the old tongue. Thus it came to pass that after the third century B. C. there existed side by side in Rome two languages, or rather two idioms: that of the literary circles or hellenists (sermo urbanus) and that of the illiterate (sermo vulgaris) and the more highly the former developed the greater grew the chasm between them. But in spite of all the efforts of the purists, the exigencies of daily life brought the writers of the cultured mode into continual touch with the uneducated populace, and constrained them to understand its speech and make it understand them in turn; so that they were obliged in conversation to employ words and expressions forming part of the vulgar tongue. Hence arose a third idiom, the sermo cotidianus, a medley of the two others, varying in the mixture of its ingredients with the various periods of time and the intelligence of those who used it.

91 Origins

92 Classical Latin did not long remain at the high level to which Cicero had raised it. The aristocracy, who alone spoke it, were decimated by proscription and civil war, and the families who rose in turn to social position were mainly of plebeian or foreign extraction, and in any case unaccustomed to the delicacy of the literary language. Thus the decadence of classical Latin began with the age of Augustus, and went on more rapidly as that age receded. As it forgot the classical distinction between the language of prose and that of poetry, literary Latin, spoken or written, began to borrow more and more freely from the popular speech. Now it was at this very time that the Church found herself called on to construct a Latin of her own and this in itself was one reason why her Latin should differ from the classical. There were two other reasons however: first of all the Gospel had to be spread by preaching, that is, by the spoken word moreover the heralds of the good tidings had to construct an idiom that would appeal, not alone to the literary classes, but to the whole people. Seeing that they sought to win the masses to the Faith, they had to come down to their level and employ a speech that was familiar to their listeners. St. Augustine says this very frankly to his hearers: "I often employ", he says, "words that are not Latin and I do so that you may understand me. Better that I should incur the blame of the grammarians than not be understood by the people" (In Psal. cxxxviii, 90). Strange though it may seem, it was not at Rome that the building up of ecclesiastical Latin began. Until the middle of the third century the Christian community at Rome was in the main a Greek speaking one. The Liturgy was celebrated in Greek, and the apologists and theologians wrote in Greek until the time of St. Hippolytus, who died in 235. It was much the same in Gaul at Lyons and at Vienne, at all events until after the days of St. Irenaeus. In Africa, Greek was the chosen language of the clerics, to begin with, but Latin was the more familiar speech for the majority of the faithful, and it must have soon taken the lead in the Church, since Tertullian, who wrote some of his earlier works in Greek, ended by employing Latin only. And in this use he had been preceded by Pope Victor, who was also an African, and who, as St. Jerome assures, was the earliest Christian writer in the Latin language.

93 But even before these writers various local Churches must have seen the necessity of rendering into Latin the texts of the Old and New Testaments, the reading of which formed a main portion of the Liturgy. This necessity arose as soon as the Latin speaking faithful became numerous, and in all likelihood it was felt first in Africa. For a time improvised oral translations sufficed, but soon written translations were required. Such translations multiplied. "It is possible to enumerate", says St. Augustine, "those who have translated the Scriptures from Hebrew into Greek, but not those who have translated them into Latin. In sooth in the early days of faith whoso possessed a Greek manuscript and thought he had some knowledge of both tongues was daring enough to undertake a translation" (De doct. christ., II, xi). From our present point of view the multiplicity of these translations, which were destined to have so great an influence on the formation of ecclesiastical Latin, helps to explain the many colloquialisms which it assimilated, and which are found even in the most famous of these texts, that of which St. Augustine said: "Among all translations the Itala is to be preferred, for its language is most accurate, and its expression the clearest" (De doct. christ., II, xv). While it is true that many renderings of this passage have been given, the generally accepted one, and the one we content ourselves with mentioning here, is that the Itala is the most important of the Biblical recensions from Italian sources, dating from the fourth century, used by St. Ambrose and the Italian authors of that day, which have been partially preserved to us in many manuscripts and are to be met with even in St. Augustine himself. With some slight modifications its version of the deuterocanonical works of the Old Testament was incorporated into St. Jerome's "Vulgate".

94 Elements from African Sources

95 But even in this respect Africa had been beforehand with Italy. As early as A. D. 180 mention is made in the Acts of the Scilltitan martyrs of a translation of the Gospels and of the Epistles of St. Paul. "In Tertullian's time", says Harnack, "there existed translations, if not of all the books of the Bible at least of the greater number of them." It is a fact. however, that none of them possessed any predominating authority, though a few were beginning to claim a certain respect. And thus we find Tertullian and St. Cyprian using those by preference, as appears from the concordance of their quotations. The interesting point in these translations made by many hands is that they form one of the principal elements of Church Latin: they make up, so to say, the popular contribution. This is to be seen in their disregard for complicated inflections, in their analytical tendencies, and in the alterations due to analogy. Pagan littérateurs, as Arnobius tells (Adv. nat., I, xlv-lix), complained that these texts were edited in a trivial and mean speech, in a vitiated and uncouth language.

96 But to the popular contribution the more cultivated Christians added their share in forming the Latin of the Church. If the ordinary Christian could translate the "Acts of St. Perpetua", the "Pastor" of Hermas the "Didache", and the "First Epistle" of Clement it took a scholar to put into Latin the "Acta Pauli" and St. Irenaeus's treatise "Adversus haereticos", as well as other works which seem to have been translated in the second and third century. It is not known to what country these translators belonged, but, in the case of original works, Africa leads the way with Tertullian, who has been rightly styled the creator of the language of the Church. Born at Carthage, he studied and perhaps taught rhetoric there: he studied law and acquired a vast erudition; he was converted to Christianity, raised to the priesthood, and brought to the service of the Faith an ardent zeal and a forceful eloquence to which the number and character of his works bear witness. He touched on every subject apologetics, polemics, dogma, discipline, exegesis. He had to express a host of ideas which the simple faith of the communities of the west had not yet grasped. With his fiery temperament, his doctrinal rigidness, and his disdain for literary canons, he never hesitated to use the pointed word, the everyday phrase. Hence the marvellous exactness of his style, its restless vigour and high relief, the loud tones as of words thrown impetuously together: hence, above all, a wealth of expressions and words, many of which came then for the first time into ecclesiastical Latin and have remained there ever since. Some of these are Greek words in Latin dress - baptisma, charisma, extasis, idolatria, prophetia, martyr, etc. — some are given a Latin termination — daemonium, allegorizare, Paracletus, etc. — some are law terms or old Latin words used in a new sense — ablutio, gratia, sacramentum, saeculum, persecutor, peccator. The greater part are entirely new, but are derived from Latin sources and regularly inflected according to the ordinary rules affecting analogous words — annunciatio, concupiscentia, christianismus, coeaeternus, compatibilis, trinitas, vivificare, etc. Many of these new words (more than 850 of them) have died out, but a very large portion are still to be found in ecclesiastical use; they are mainly those that met the need of expressing strictly Christian ideas. Nor is it certain that all of these owe their origin to Tertullian, but before his time they are not to be met with in the texts that have come down to us, and very often it is he who has naturalized them in Christian terminology.

97 The part St. Cyprian played in this building of the language was less important. The famous Bishop of Carthage never lost that respect for classical tradition which he inherited from his education and his previous profession of rhetor; he preserved that concern for style which led him to the practice of the literary methods so dear to the rhetors of his day. His language shows this even when he is dealing with Christian topics. Apart from his rather cautious imitation of Tertullian's vocabulary, we find in his writings not more than sixty new words, a few Hellenisms — apostata, gazophylacium — a few popular words or phrases - magnalia, mammona — or a few words formed by added inflections — apostatare, clarificatio. In St. Augustine's case it was his sermons preached to the people that mainly contributed to ecclesiastical Latin, and present it to us at its best; for, in spite of his assertion that he cares nothing for the sneers of the grammarians, his youthful studies retained too strong a hold on him to permit of his departing from classical speech more than was strictly necessary. He was the first to find fault with the use of certain words common at the time, such as dolus for dolor, effloriet for florebit, ossum for os. The language he uses includes, besides a large part of classical Latin and the ecclesiastical Latin of Tertullian and St. Cyprian, borrowings from the popular speech of his day — incantare, falsidicus, tantillus, cordatus — and some new words or words in new meaning — spiritualis, adorator, beatificus, aedificare, meaning to edify, inflatio, meaning pride, reatus, meaning guilt, etc. It is, we think, useless to pursue this inquiry into the realm of Christian inscriptions and the works of Victor of Vito, the last of these Latin writers, as we should only find a Latin peculiar to certain individuals rather than that adopted by any Christian communities. Nor shall we delay over Africanisms, i. e. characteristics peculiar to African writers. The very existence of these characteristics, formerly so strongly held by many philologists, is nowadays generally questioned. In the works of several of these African writers we find a pronounced love for emphasis, alliteration, and rhythm, but these are matters affecting style rather than vocabulary. The most that can be said is that the African writers take more account of Latin as it was spoken (sermo cotidianus) but this speech was no peculiarity of Africa.

98 St. Jerome's Contribution

99 After the African writers no author had such influence on the upbuilding of ecclesiastical Latin as St. Jerome had. His contribution came mainly along the lines of literary Latin. From his master, Donatus, he had received a grammatical instruction that made him the most literary and learned of the Fathers, and he always retained a love for correct diction, and an attraction towards Cicero. He prized good writing so highly that he grew angry whenever he was accused of a solecism; one-half of the words he uses are taken from Cicero and it has been computed that besides employing, as occasion required, the words introduced by earlier writers, he himself is responsible for three hundred and fifty new words in the vocabulary of ecclesiastical Latin; yet of this number there are hardly nine or ten that may fitly be considered as barbarisms on the score of not conforming to the general laws of Latin derivatives. "The remainder", says Goelzer, "were created by employing ordinary suffixes and were in harmony with the genius of the language." They are both accurately formed and useful words, expressing for the most part abstract qualities necessitated by the Christian religion and which hitherto had not existed in the Latin tongue, e. g., clericatus, impoenitentia, deitas, dualitas, glorificatio, corruptrix. At times, also, to supply new needs, he gives new meanings to old words: conditor, creator, redemptor, saviour of the world, predestinatio, communio, etc. Besides this enriching of the lexicon, St. Jerome rendered no less service to ecclesiastical Latin by his edition of the Vulgate. Whether he made his translation from the original text or adapted previous translations after correcting them he diminished, by that much, the authority of the many popular versions which could not fail to be prejudicial to the correctness of the language of the Church. By this very same act he popularized a number of Hebraisms and modes of speech — vir desideriorum, filii iniquitatis, hortus voluptatis, inferioris a Daniele, inferior to Daniel — which completed the shaping of the peculiar physiognomy of church Latin.

100 After St. Jerome's time ecclesiastical Latin may be said to be fully formed on the whole. If we trace the various steps of the process of producing it we find

101 that the ecclesiastical rites and institutions were first of all known by Greek names, and that the early Christian writers in the Latin language took those words consecrated by usage and embodied them in their works either in toto (e. g., angelus, apostolus, ecclesia, evangelium, clerus, episcopus, martyr) or else translated them (e. g., verbum, persona, testamentum, gentilis). It sometimes even happened that words bodily incorporated were afterwards replaced by translations (e.g., chrisma by donum, hypostasis by substantia or persona, exomologesis by confessio, synodus by concilium).

102 Latin words were created by derivations from existing Latin or Greek words by the addition of suffixes or prefixes, or by the combination of two or more words together (e. g., evangelizare, Incarnatio, consubstantialis, idololatria).

103 At times words having a secular or profane meaning are employed without any modification in a new sense (e. g.. fidelis, depositio, scriptura, sacramentum, resurgere, etc.). With respect to its elements ecclesiastical Latin consists of spoken Latin (sermo cotidianus) shot through with a quantity of Greek words, a few primitive popular phrases, some new and normal accretions to the language, and, lastly various new meanings arising mainly from development or analogy.

104 With the exception of some Hebraic or Hellenist expressions popularized through Bible translations, the grammatical peculiarities to be met with in ecclesiastical Latin are not to be laid to the charge of Christianity; they are the result of an evolution through which the common language passed, and are to be met with among non-Christian writers. In the main the religious upheaval which was colouring all t he beliefs and customs of the Western world did not unsettle the language as much as might have been expected. Christian writers preserved the literary Latin of their day as the basis of their language, and if they added to it certain neologisms it must not be forgotten that the classical writers, Cicero, Lucretius, Seneca, etc., had before this to lament the poverty of Latin to express philosophical ideas, and had set the example of coining words. Why should later writers hesitate to say annunciatio, incarnatio, predestinatio, when Cicero had said monitio, debitio, prohibitio, and Livy, coercitio? Words like deitas, nativitas, trinitas are not more odd than autumnitas, olivitas, coined by Varro, and plebitas, which was used by the elder Cato.

105 Development in the Liturgy

106 Hardly had it been formed when church Latin had to undergo the shock of the invasion of the barbarians and the fall of the Empire of the West; it was a shock that gave the death-blow to literary Latin as well as to the Latin of everyday speech on which church Latin was waxing strong. Both underwent a series of changes that completely transformed them. Literary Latin became more and more debased; popular Latin evolved into the various Romance languages in the South, while in the North it gave way before the Germanic tongues. Church Latin alone lived, thanks to the religion of which it was the organ and with which its destinies were linked. True, it lost a portion of its sway; in popular preaching it gave way to the vernacular after the seventh century; but it could still claim the Liturgy and theology, and in these it served the purpose of a living language. In the liturgy ecclesiastical Latin shows its vitality by its fruitfulness. Africa is once more in the lead with St. Cyprian. Besides the singing of the Psalms and the readings in public from the Bible, which made up the main portion of the primitive liturgy and which we already know, it shows itself in set prayers in a love for rhythm, for well- balanced endings that were to remain for centuries during the Middle Ages the main characteristics of liturgical Latin. As the process of development went on, this love of harmony held sway over all prayers; they followed the rules of metre and prosody to begin with, but rhythmical cursus gained the upper-hand from the fourth to the seventh, and from the eleventh to the fifteenth, century.

107 As is well known, the cursus consists in a certain arrangement of words, accents, and sometimes whole phrases, whereby a pleasing modulated effect is produced. The prayer of the "Angelus" is the simplest example of this; it contains all three kinds of cursus that are to be met with in the prayers of the Missal and the Breviary:

108 the cursus planus, "nostris infunde";

109 the cursus tardus, "incarnationem cognovimus";

110 the cursus velox, "gloriam perducamur." So great was their influence over the language that the cursus passed from the prayers of the liturgy into some of the sermons of St. Leo and a few others, to papal Bulls from the twelfth to the fifteenth century and into many Latin letters written during the Middle Ages.

111 Besides the prayers, hymns make up the most vital thing in the Liturgy. From St. Hilary of Poitiers, to whom St. Jerome attributes the earliest, down to Leo XIII, who composed many hymns, the number of hymn writers is very great, and their output, as we learn from recent research, is beyond computing. Suffice it to say that these hymns originated in popular rhythms founded on accent; as a rule they were modelled on classical metres, but gradually metre gave way to beat or number of syllables and accent. (See HYMNODY AND HYMNOLOGY.) Since the Renaissance, rhythm has again given way to metre; and many old hymns were even retouched, under Urban VIII, to bring then into line with the rules of classical prosody. Besides this liturgy which we may style official, and which was made up of words of the Mass, of the Breviary, or of the Ritual, we may recall the wealth of literature dealing with a variety of historical detail such as the "Pereginatio ad Loca sancta" formerly attributed to Silvia, many collections of rubrics, ordines, sacramentaries, ordinaries, or other books of a religious bearing, of which so many have been edited of late years in England either by private individuals or by the Surtees' Society and the Bradshaw Society. But the most we can do is to mention the brilliant liturgical efflorescence.

112 Development in Theology

113 Wider and more varied is the field theology opens up for ecclesiastical Latin; so wide that we must restrict ourselves to pointing out the creative resources which the Latin we speak of has given proof of since the beginning of the study of speculative theology, i. e., from the writings of the earliest Fathers down to our own day. More than elsewhere, it has here shown how capable it is of expressing the most delicate shades of theological thought, or the keenest hairsplitting of decadent Scholasticism. Need we mention what it has done in this field? The expression it has created, the meanings it has conveyed are only too well known. Whereas the major part of these expressions were legitimate, were necessary and successful — transsubstantio, forma, materia, individuum, accidens, appetitus — there are only too many that show a wordy and empty formalirm, a deplorable indifference for the sobriety of expression and for the purity of the Latin tongue — aseitas, futuritio, beatificativum, terminatio, actualitas, haecceitas, etc. It was by such words as these that the language of theology exposed itself to the jibes of Erasmus and Rabelais, and brought discredit on a study that was deserving of more consideration. With the Renaissance, men's minds became more difficult to satisfy, readers of cultured taste could not tolerate a language so foreign to the genius of the classical Latinity that had been revived. It became necessary even for renowned theologians like Melchior Cano in the preface to his "Loci Theologici", to raise their voices against the demands of their readers as well as against the carelessness and obscurity of former theologians. It may be laid down that about this time classic correctness began to find a place in theological as well as in liturgical Latin.

114 Present Position

115 Henceforth correctness was to be the characteristic of ecclesiastical Latin. To the terminology consecrated for the expression of the faith of the Catholic Church it now adds as a rule that grammatical accuracy which the Renaissance gave back to us. But in our own age, thanks to a variety of causes, some of which arise from the evolution of educational programmes, the Latin of the Church has lost in quantity what it has gained in quality. Until recently, Latin had retained its place in the Liturgy, as it was seen to point out and watch over, in the very bosom of the Church, that unity of belief in all places and throughout all times which is her birthright. But in the devotional hymns that accompany the ritual the vernacular alone is used, and these hymns are gradually replacing the liturgical hymns. All the official documents of the Church, Encyclicals, Bulls, Briefs, institutions of bishops, replies from the Roman Congregations, acts of provincial councils, are written in Latin. Within recent years, however, solemn Apostolic letters addressed to one or other nation have been in their own tongue, and various diplomatic documents have been drawn up in French or in Italian. In the training of the clergy, the necessity of discussing modern systems whether of exegesis or philosophy, has led almost everywhere to the use of the national tongue. Manuals of dogmatic and moral theology may be written in Latin, in Italy, Spain, and France, but often, save in the Roman universities, the oral explanation thereof is given in the vernacular. In German and English speaking countries most of the manuals are in their own tongue, and nearly always the explanation is in the same languages.

116 Antoine Degert.

Latin Church

91 The word Church (ecclesia) is used in its first sense to express whole congregation of Catholic Christendom united in one Faith, obeying one hierarchy in communion with itself. This is the sense of Matthew 16:18; 18:17; Ephesians 5:25-27, and so on. It is in this sense that we speak of the Church without qualification, say that Christ founded one Church, and so on. But the word is constantly applied to the various individual elements of this union. As the whole is the Church, the universal Church, so are its parts the Churches of Corinth, Asia, France, etc. This second use of the word also occurs in the New Testament (Acts 15:41; II Corinthians 11:28; Apocalypse 1:4, 11, etc). Any portion then that forms a subsidiary unity in itself may be called a local Church. The smallest such portion is a diocese — thus we speak of the Church of Paris, of Milan, of Seville. Above this again we group metropolitical provinces and national portions together as units, and speak of the Church of Africa, of Gaul, of Spain. The expression "Church of Rome", it should be noted, though commonly applied by non-Catholics to the whole Catholic body, can only be used correctly in this secondary sense for the local diocese (or possibly the province) of Rome, mother and mistress of all Churches. A German Catholic is not, strictly speaking, a member of the Church of Rome but of the Church of Cologne, or Munich-Freising, or whatever it may be, in union with and under the obedience of the Roman Church (although, no doubt, by a further extension Roman Church may be used as equivalent to Latin Church for the patriarchate).

92 The word is also used very commonly for the still greater portions that are united under their patriarchs, that is for the patriarchates. It is in this sense that we speak of the Latin Church. The Latin Church is simply that vast portion of the Catholic body which obeys the Latin patriarch, which submits to the pope, not only in papal, but also in patriarchal matters. It is thus distinguished from the Eastern Churches (whether Catholic or Schismatic), which represent the other four patriarchates (Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem), and any fractions broken away from them. The Latin patriarchate has always been considerably the largest. Now, since the great part of Eastern Christendom has fallen into schism, since vast new lands have been colonized, conquered or (partly) converted by Latins (America, Australia, etc.), the Latin part of the Catholic Church looms so enormous as compared with the others that many people think that everyone in communion with the pope is a Latin. This error is fostered by the Anglican branch theory, which supposes the situation to be that the Eastern Church is no longer in communion with Rome. Against this we must always remember, and when necessary point out, that the constitution of the Catholic Church is still essentially what it was at the time of the Second Council of Nicaea (787; see also canon 21 of Constantinople IV in 869 in the "Corp. Jur. can.", dist. xxii, c. vii). Namely, there are still the five patriarchates, of which the Latin Church is only one, although so great a part of the Eastern ones have fallen away. The Eastern Churches, small as they are, still represent the old Catholic Christendom of the East in union with the pope, obeying him as pope, though not as their patriarch. All Latins are Catholics, but not all Catholics are Latins. The old frontier passed just east of Macedonia, Greece (Illyricum was afterwards claimed by Constantinople), and Crete, and cut Africa west of Egypt. All to the west of this was the Latin Church.

93 We must now add to Western Europe all the new lands occupied by Western Europeans, to make up the present enormous Latin patriarchate. Throughout this vast territory the pope reigns as patriarch, as well as by his supreme position as visible head of the whole Church with the exception of very small remnants of other uses (Milan, Toledo, and the Byzantines of Southern Italy), his Roman Rite is used throughout according to the general principle that rite follows the patriarchate, that local bishops use the rite of their patriarch. The medieval Western uses (Paris, Sarum and so on), of which people at one time made much for controversial purposes, were in no sense really independent rites, as are the remnants of the Gallican use at Milan and Toledo. These were only the Roman Rite with very slight local modifications. From this conception we see that the practical disappearance of the Gallican Rite, however much the archeologist may regret it, is justified by the general principle that rite should follow patriarchate. Uniformity of rite throughout Christendom has never been an ideal among Catholics; but uniformity in each patriarchate is. We see also that the suggestion, occasionally made by advanced Anglicans, of a "Uniate" Anglican Church with its own rite and to some extent its own laws (for instance with a married clergy) is utterly opposed to antiquity and to consistent canon law. England is most certainly part of the Latin patriarchate. When Anglicans return to the old Faith they find themselves subject to the pope, not only as head of the Church but also as patriarch. As part of the Latin Church England must submit to Latin canon law and the Roman Rite just as much as France or Germany. The comparison with Eastern Rite Catholics rests on a misconception of the whole situation. It follows also that the expression Latin (or even Roman) Catholic is quite justifiable, inasmuch as we express by it that we are not only Catholics but also members of the Latin or Roman patriarchate. A Eastern Rite Catholic on the other hand is a Byzantine, or Armenian, or Maronite Catholic. But a person who is in schism with the Holy See is not, of course, admitted by Catholics to be any kind of Catholic at all.

94 Adrian Fortescue

Christian Latin Literature

94 Latin Literature, Classical.—Early Centuries—. The Latin language was not at first the literary and official organ of the Christian Church in the West. The Gospel was announced by preachers whose language was Greek, and these continued to use Greek, if not in their discourses, at least in their most important acts. Irenaeus, at Lyons, preached in Latin, or perhaps in the Celtic vernacular, but he refuted heresies in Greek. The Letter of the Church of Lyons concerning its martyrs is written in Greek; so at Rome, a century earlier, is that of Clement to the Corinthians. In both cases the language of those to whom the letters were addressed may have been designedly chosen; nevertheless, a document that may be called a domestic product of the Roman Church, the "Shepherd" of Hermas, was written in Greek. At Rome in the middle of the second century, Justin, a Palestinian philosopher, opened his school, and suffered martyrdom; Tatian wrote his "Apologia" in Greek at Rome in the third century; Hippolytus compiled his numerous works in Greek. And Greek is not only the language of books, but also of the Roman Christian inscriptions, the greater number of which, down to the third century were written in Greek. The most ancient Latin document emanating from the Roman Church is the correspondence of its clergy with Carthage during the vacancy of the Apostolic See following on the death of Pope Fabian (20 January, 250). One of the letters is the work of Novatian, the first Christian writer to use the Latin language at Rome. But even at this epoch, Greek is still the official language: the original epitaphs of the popes are still composed in Greek. We have those of Anterus, of Fabian, of Lucius, of Gaius, and the series brings us down to 296. That of Cornelius, which is in Latin, seems to be later than the third century. In Africa Latin was always the literary language of Christianity, although Punic was still used for preaching in the time of St. Augustine, and some even preached in the Berber language. These latter, however, had no literature; cultivated persons, as well as the cosmopolitan population of the seaports used Greek. The oldest Christian document of Africa, the Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs, was translated into Greek, as were some of the works of Tertullian, perhaps by the author himself, and certainly with the object of securing for them a wider diffusion. The Acts of Sts. Perpetua and Felicitas, originally written in Latin, were translated into Greek. In Spain all the known documents are written in Latin, but they appear very late. The Acts of St. Fructuosus, a martyr under Valerian, are attributed by some critics to the third century. The first Latin Christian document to which a quite certain date can be assigned is a collection of the canons of the Council of Elvira, about 300.

95 Side by side with literary works, the Church produced writings necessary to her life. In this category must be placed the most ancient Christian documents written in Latin, the translations of the Bible made either in Africa or in Italy. Beginning with the second century, Latin translations of technical works written in Greek became numerous treatises on medicine, botany, mathematics, etc. These translations served a practical purpose, and were made by professionals; consequently they had no literary merit and aimed at an almost servile exactitude resulting in the retention of many peculiarities of the original. Hellenisms, a very questionable feature in the literary works of preceding centuries, were frequent in these translations. The early Latin versions of the Bible had the characteristics common to all texts of this group; Hellenisms abounded in them and even Semitisms filtered in through the Greek. In the fourth century, when St. Jerome made his new Latin version of the Scriptures, the partisans of the older versions to justify their opposition praised loudly the harsh fidelity of these inelegant translations (Augustine, "De doct. christ.", II, xv, in P. L., XXXIV 46). These versions no doubt exercised great influence upon the imagination and the style of Christian writers, but it was an influence rather of invention and inspiration than of expression. The incorrectness and barbarism of the Fathers have been much exaggerated: profounder knowledge of the Latin language and its history has shown that they used the language of their time, and that in this respect there is no difference worth mentioning between them and their pagan contemporaries. No doubt some of them were men of defective education, writers of incorrect prose and popular verse, but there have been such in every age; the author of the "Bellum Hispaniae", the historian Justinus, Vitruvius, are profane authors who cared little for purity or elegance of style. Tertullian, the Christian author most frequently accused of barbarism, for his time, is by no means incorrect. He possesses strong creative power, and his freedom is mostly in the matter of vocabulary; he either invents new words or uses old ones in very novel ways. His style is bold; his imagination and his passion light it up with figures at times incoherent and in bad taste; but his syntax contains, it may be said almost no innovations. He multiplies constructions as yet rare and adds new constructions, but he always respects the genius of the language. His work contains no Semitisms, and the Hellenisms which his critics have pointed out in it are neither frequent nor without warrant in the usage of his day. This, of course, does not apply to his express or implicit citations from the Bible. At the other extreme, chronologically, of Latin Christian literary development, a pope like Gelasius gives evidence of considerable classical culture; his language is novel chiefly in its choice of words, but many of these neoterisms were in his time no longer new and had their origin in the technical usage of the Church and the Roman law.

96 In the historical development of Christian Latin literature three periods may be distinguished:

97 that of the Apologists, lasting until the fourth century,

98 that of the Fathers of the Church (the fourth century); and

99 the Gallo-Roman period.

100 The first period is characterized by its dominant tone of apology, or defence of the Christian religion. In fact, most of the earliest Christian writers wrote apologies, e.g. Minucius Felix, Tertullian, Arnobius, Lactantius. In face of paganism and the Roman State they plead the cause of Christianity, and they do it each according to his character, and each with his own line of arguments.

101 Minucius Felix represents, in a way, the transition from the traditional philosopher of the cultured classes to the popular preaching of Christianity and in this approaches closely to some of the Greek apologists converts from philosophy to Christianity, e.g. Justin, seeking at the same time to harmonize their inherited mental culture with their faith. Even the dialogue form they use is meant to retain the reader in that philosophic world with which Plato and Cicero had familiarized him.

102 Tertullian, perhaps identical with the jurisconsult mentioned in the "Digest" of Justinian lifts out boldest arguments of a legal order and examines the juridical bases of the persecution.

103 Arnobius, rhetorician and philosopher, is first and foremost a product of the school; he exhibits the resources of amplification and displays the erudition of a scholiast.

104 Lactantius is a philosopher, only more profoundly penetrated by Christianity than were the earlier apologists. He is also very particular about the maintenance of social order, good government, and the State. His writings are well adapted to a society that has recently been shaken by a long period of anarchy and is in process of reconstruction.

105 In this way the early Christian Latin literature presents all the varieties of apology. There are here mentioned only those apologies which formally present themselves as such, to them should be added some of St. Cyprian's works — the treatise on idols, and "Ad Donatum", the letter to Demetrianus, works which attack special weaknesses of polytheism, the vices of pagan society, or discuss the calamities of Rome. These writers do not confine their activity to controversy with the pagans. The extent and variety of the works of Tertullian and St. Cyprian are well known. At Rome, Novatian touches, in his treatises, on questions which more particularly interest the faithful, their religious life or their beliefs. Victorinus of Pettau, in the mountains of Styria, introduced biblical exegesis into Latin literature, and began that series of commentaries on the Apocalypse which so influenced the imagination, and echoed so powerfully among the artists and writers, of the Middle Ages. The same visions were embodied in the verses of Commodianus, the first Christian poet, but in a second work he took his place among the apologists and combatted paganism. In their other works St. Cyprian and Tertullian kept always in view the apologetic interest; indeed, this is the most noteworthy trait of the early Christian Latin literature. We may call attention here to another characteristic: many Latin writers of this time, Minucius Felix, Tertullian, Cyprian, Arnobius, perhaps Commodianus, were Africans, for which peculiarity two causes may be assigned. On the one hand, Gaul and Italy had long employed the Greek Language, while Spain was backward, and Christianity developed there but feebly at this period. On the other hand, Africa had become a centre of profane literature; Apuleius, the greatest profane writer of the age, was an African; Carthage possessed a celebrated school which is called in one inscription by the same name, studium, which was afterwards applied to the medieval universities. There is no doubt the second was the more potent cause.

106 The second period of Christian literature covers broadly speaking, the fourth century — i.e. from the Edict of Milan (313) to the death of St. Jerome (420). It was then that the great writers of the Church flourished, those known permanently as "the Fathers", both West and East. Though the term patristic belongs to the whole period here under consideration, as contrasted with the term scholastic applied to the Middle Ages, it may nevertheless be restricted to the period we are now describing. Literary productiveness was no longer the almost exclusive privilege of one country; it was spread throughout all the Roman West. Notwithstanding this diffusion, all the Latin writers are closely related; there are no national schools, the writers and their works are all caught up in the general current of church history. There is truly a Christian West, all parts of which possess nearly the same importance, and are closely united in spite of differences of climate and temperament. And this West is beginning to stand off from the Greek East, which tends to follow its own particular path. The causes of Western cohesion were various but it was principally rooted in community of interests and the similarity of questions arising immediately after the peace of the Church. At the beginning of the fourth century Christological problems agitated the Church. The West came to the aid of the orthodox communities of the East, but knew little of Arianism until the Teutonic invasions. When the conflict concerning the use of the basilicas at Milan arose, the Arians do not appear as the people of Milan: they are Goths (Ambrose Ep. xii. 12, in P. L., XVI., 997). In the fourth century the great personages of the West are champions of the faith of Nicaea: Hilary of Poitiers, Lucifer of Cagliari, Phoebadius of Agen, Ambrose, Augustine. Nevertheless the West has errors of its own:

107 Novatianism, a legacy from the preceding age;

108 Donatism in Africa;

109 Manichaeism, which came from the East, but developed chiefly in Africa and Gaul;

110 Priscillianism. akin to Manichaeism, and the firstfruits of Spanish mysticism.

111 Manichaeism has a complex character, and, in truth, appears to be a distinct religion. All other errors of the West have a bearing on discipline or morals, on practical life and do not arise from intellectual speculation. Even in the Manichaean controversy moral questions occupy a large place. Moreover, the characteristic and most important heresy of the Latin countries bears upon a problem of Christian psychology and life the reconciliation of human liberty with the action of Divine grace. This problem, raised by Pelagius, was solved by Augustine. Another characteristic of this period is the universality of the gifts and the activity displayed by its greatest writers: Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine are in turn moralists, historians, and orators; Ambrose and Augustine are poets; Augustine is the universal genius, not only of his own time but of the Latin Church — one of the greatest men of antiquity, to whom Harnack, without exaggeration, has found none comparable in ancient history except Plato. In him Christianity reached one of the highest peaks of human thought. This second period may be again subdivided into three generations.

112 First, the reign of Constantine after the peace of the Church (313-37), when Juvencus composed the Gospel History (Historia Evangelica) in verse; from the preceding period he had inherited the influence of Hosius of Cordova.

113 Second, the time between the death of Constantine and the accession of Theodosius (337-79). In this generation apologetic assumes an aggressive tone with Firmicus Maternus and appeals to the secular arm against paganism; Christianity, by many held responsible for the gathering misfortunes of the empire, is defended by Augustine in "The City of God"; Ambrose and Prudentius protest against the retention of paganism in official ceremonies; great bishops like Hilary of Poitiers, Zeno of Verona, Optatus of Mileve, Lucifer of Cagliari, Eusebius of Vercelli, take part in the controversies of the day; Marius Victorinus combines the erudition of a philologian with the subtlety of a theologian.

114 The third generation was that of St. Jerome, under Theodosius and his son (380-420), a generation rich in intellect — Ambrose, Prudentius, Sulpicius Severus, Rufinus, Jerome, Paulinus of Nola, Augustine, the secondary poets Proba, Damasus, Cyprian; the Spanish theologians Pacianus and Gregory of Elvira; Philastrius of Brescia and Phoebadius of Agen. The long-lived Augustine overlapped this period, at the same time by the sheer force of genius he is both the last great thinker of antiquity in the West and the great thinker of the Middle Ages.

115 Early Christian literature in the West may be regarded as ending with the accession of Theodoric (408). Thenceforth until the Carlovingian renascence there arises in the various barbarian kingdoms a literature which has for its chief object the education of the new-comers and the transmission of some of the ancient culture into their new civilization. This brings us to the last of our three periods? which may conveniently be called the Gallo-Roman, and comprises about two generations, from 420 to 493. It is dominated by one school, that of Lérins, but already the splintering of the old social and political unity is at hand in the new barbarian nationalities rooted on provincial soil. In Augustine's old age, and after his death, a few disciples and partisans of his teachings remain: Orosius, a Spaniard; Prosper of Aquitaine, a Gallo-Roman; Marius Mercator, an African. Later Victor Vitensis tells the story of the Vandal persecution, in him Roman Africa, overrun by barbarians furnishes almost the only writer of the second half of the century. To the list of African authors must be added the names of two bishops of Mauretania mentioned by Gennadius—Victor and Voconius. In Gaul a pleiad of writers and theologians develops at Lérins or within the radius of that monastery's influence — Cassian, Honoratus, Eucherius of Lyons, Vincent of Lérins, Hilary of Arles, Valerian of Cemelium, Salvianus, Faustus of Riez, Gennadius. Here we might mention Arnobius the Younger, and the author of the "Praedestinatus". No literary movement in the West, before Charlemagne, was so important or so prolonged. Gaul was then truly the scene of manifold intellectual activity; in addition to the writers of Lérins. that country reckons one polygrapher, Sidonius Apollinaris, one philosopher, Claudian Mamertus, several poets, Claudius Marius Victor, Prosper, Orientius. Paulinus of Pella, Paulinus of Périgueux, perhaps also Caelius Sedulius. Against this array Italy can offer only two preachers, St. Peter Chrysologus and Maximus of Turin, and one great pope, Leo I, still greater by his deeds than by his writings, whose name recalls a new influence of the Church of Rome on the intellectual movement of the time, but a juridical rather than a literary influence. Early in the fifth century Innocent I appears to have been occupied with a first compilation of the canon law. He and his successors intervene in ecclesiastical affairs with letters, some of which have the size and scope of veritable treatises. Spain is still poorer than Italy, even counting Orosius (already mentioned among the disciples of Augustine) and the chronicler Hydatius. The island peoples, which in the preceding period had produced the heresiarch Pelagius, deserve mention at this date also for the works attributed to St. Patrick.

116 A first general characteristic of Christian literature, common to both East and West, is the space it devotes to bibliographical questions, and the importance they assume. This fact is explained by the very origins of Christianity: it is a religion not of one book but of a collection of books, the date, source, authenticity, and canonicity of which are matters which it is important to determine. In Eusebius's "History of the Church" it is obvious with what care he pursues the inquiry as to the books of Scripture cited and recognized by his Christian predecessors. In this way there grows up a habit of classifying documents and references, and of describing in prefaces the nature of the several books. The Bible is not the only object of these minute studies; every important and complex work attracts the attention of editors. Let it suffice to recall the formation of the collection of St. Cyprian's letters and treatises, a more or less official catalogue of which, the "Cheltenham Catalogue ", was drawn up in 359, after a lengthy elaboration, the successive stages of which are still traceable in several manuscripts. Questions of authenticity play a large part in the dissensions of St. Jerome and Rufinus. Apocryphal writings, fabricated in the interest of heresy, engendered controversies between the Church and the heretical sects. Another illustration of the same literary interest is to be found in the inquiry, instituted at the end of the fourth century as to the Canons of Sardica, called Canons of Nicaea. The "Retractationes" of St. Augustine is a work unique in the history of ancient bibliography, not to speak of its psychological interest, a peculiar quality of all Christian literature in the West.

117 In part, therefore, Christian Latin literature naturally assumes a character of immediate utility. Catalogues are drawn up, lists of bishops, lists of martyrs (Depositiones episcoporum et martyrum), catalogues of cemeteries, later on church inventories, "Provinciales", or lists of dioceses according to countries. Besides these archive documents, in which we recognise an imitation of Roman bureaucratic customs, certain literary genres bear the same stamp. The accounts of pilgrimages have as much of the guide-book as of the narrative in them. History had already been reduced to a number of stereotyped scenes by the profane masters, and had been incorporated, at Alexandria, in that elementary literature which condensed all knowledge into a minimum of dry formula. The "Chronicle" of St. Jerome, really only a continuation of that of Eusebius, is in turn continued by a series of special writers, and even a Sulpicius Severus betrays the influence of the new form of chronicle. While in these departments of literature the West but imitates the East, it follows at the same time its own practical tendencies. Indeed, the Latin writers make no pretence to originality, they take their materials from their Eastern brethren. Five of them, Hilary, Jerome Ruffinus, Cassian and Marius Mercator, have been described as hellenizing Westerns. St. Ambrose is generally considered an authentic representative of the Latin mind, and this is true of the bent of his genius and of his exercise of authority as the head of a Church; but no one, perhaps, translated more frequently from the Greek writers, or did it with more spirit or more care. It is an acknowledged fact that his exegesis is taken from St. Basil's "Hexaemeron" and from a series of treatises on Genesis by Philo. The same holds good in respect to his dogmatic or mystical treatises: the "De mysteriis", written in his last years, before 397, is largely taken from Cyril of Jerusalem and a treatise of Didymus of Alexandria published a little before 381, while the "De Spiritu Sancto", written before Easter, 381, is a compilation from Athanasius, Basil, Didymus, and Epiphanius, from a recension of the "Catechesis" of Cyril made after 360, and from some theological discourses which had been delivered by Gregory of Nazianzus less than a twelvemonth previously (380). St. Augustine is less erudite; his learning, if not his philosophy, is more Latin than Greek. But it is the strength of his genius which makes him the most original of the Latin Fathers.

118 One influence, however, no Christian writer in the West escaped, that of the literary school and the literary tradition From the beginning similarities of style with Fronto and Apuleius appear numerous and distinctly perceptible in Minucius Felix, Tertullian and Zeno of Verona; owing, perhaps, to the fact that all writers, sacred and profane, adopted then the same fashions, particularly imitation of the old Latin writers. To its traditional character also, early Christian Latin literature owes two characteristics more peculiarly its own: it is oratorical, and it is moral. From remote antiquity there had existed a moral literature, more exactly a preaching, which brought certain truths within the reach of the masses, and by the character of its audience was compelled to employ certain modes of expression. On this common ground the Cynic and the Stoic philosophies had met since the third century before Christ. From the still extant remains of Teles and Bion of Borysthenes we can form some idea of this style of preaching. From this source the satire of Horace borrows some of its themes. This Cynico-Stoic morality finds expression also in the Greek of Musonius, Epictetus, and some of Plutarch's treatises, likewise in the Latin of Seneca's letters and opuscula. Its decidedly oratorical character it owes to the fact that with the beginning of the Christian era rhetoric became the sole form of literary culture and of teaching. This tradition was perpetuated by the Fathers. It furnished them the forms most needed for their work of instruction: the letter, developed into a brief treati se or reasoned exposition of opinion in the correspondence of Seneca with Lucilius; the treatise in the shape of a discourse or as Seneca again calls it a dialogus; lastly, the sermon itself, in all its varieties of conference, funeral oration, and homily. Indeed, homily (homilia) is a technical term of the Cynic and Stoic moralists. And the aforesaid literary tradition not only dominates the method of exposition, but also furnished some of the themes developed, commonplaces of popular morality modified and adapted, but still recognizable. Without repudiating this indebtedness of Christian literature to pagan literary form, one cannot help seeing in it a double character, oratorical and moral, the peculiar stamp of Roman genius. This explains the constant tone of exhortation which makes most works of ecclesiastical writers so monotonous and tiresome. Exegesis borrows from Greek and Jewish literature the system of allegory, but it lends to these parables a moralizing and edifying turn. Hagiography finds its models in biographies like those of Plutarch, but always accentuates their panegyrical and moral tone. Some compensation is to be found in the autobiographical writings, the personal letters, memoirs, and confessions. In the "Confessions" of St. Augustine we have a work the value of which is unique in the literature of all time.

119 Although its oratorical methods are chosen with an eye to the character of its public, there is nothing popular in the form of Christian Latin literature, nothing even corresponding to the freedom of the primitive translations of the Bible. In prose, the work of Lucifer of Cagliari stands almost alone, and reveals the aforesaid rhetorical influence almost as much as it does the writer's incorrectness. The Christian poets might have wandered somewhat more freely from the beaten path; nevertheless, they were content to imitate classical poetry in an age when prosody owing to the changes in pronunciation, had ceased to be a living thing. Juvencus was more typical than Prudentius. The verses of the Christian poets are as artificial as those of good scholars in our own time. Commodianus, out of sheer ignorance, supplies the defects of prosody with the tonic accent. Indeed, a new type of rhythm, based on accent, was about to develop from the new pronunciation; St. Augustine gives an example of it in his "psalmus abecedarius." It may therefore be said that from the point of view of literary history the work of the Latin Christian writers is little more than a survival and a prolongation of the early profane literature of Rome. It counts among its celebrities some gifted writers and one of the noblest geniuses that humanity has produced, St. Augustine.

120 Paul Lejay.

121 II. Sixth To Twentieth Century.—During the Middle Ages the so-called church Latin was to a great extent the language of poetry, and it was only on the advent of the Renaissance that classical Latin revived and flourished in the writings of the neo-Latinists as it does even today though to a more modest extent. To present to the reader an account of Latin poetry in a manner at once methodical and clear is not an easy task; a strict adherence to chronology interferes with clearness of treatment, and an arrangement according to the different kinds of poetry would demand a repeated handling of some of the poets. However, the latter method is preferable because it enables us to trace the historical development of this literature.

122 A. The Latin Drama

123 Both in its inception and its subsequent development Latin dramatic poetry displays a peculiar character. "In no domain of literature", says W. Creizenach in the opening sentence of his well-known work on the history of the drama "do the Middle Ages show so complete a suspension of the tradition of classical antiquity as in the drama." Terence was indeed read and taught in the schools of the Middle Ages, but the true dramatic art of the Roman poet was misunderstood. Nowhere do we find evidence that any of his comedies were placed on the stage in schools or elsewhere; for this an adequate conception of classical stagecraft was wanting. The very knowledge of the metres of Terence was lost in the Middle Ages, and, just as the difference between comedy and tragedy was misunderstood, so also the difference between these and other kinds of poetical composition was no longer understood. It is thus clear why we can speak of imitations of the Roman metre only in rare and completely isolated cases, for example, in the case of the nun Hroswitha of Gandersheim in the tenth century. But even she shared the mistaken views of her age concerning the comedies of Terence, having no idea that these works were written for the stage nor indeed any conception of the dramatic art. Her imitations therefore can be regarded only as literary dramas on spiritual subjects, which exercised no influence whatever on the subsequent development of the drama. Two centuries later we find an example of how Plautus fared at the hands of his poetical imitators. The fact that, like Seneca, Plautus is scarcely ever mentioned among the school-texts of the Middle Ages makes it easier to understand how at the close of the twelfth century Vitalis of Blois came to recast the "Amphitruo" and the "Querulus", a later sequel to the "Aulularia", into satirical epic poems.

124 That the drama might therefore never have developed in the Middle Ages were it not for the effective stimulus supplied by the ecclesiastical liturgy is quite conceivable. Liturgy began by assuming more solemn forms and finally gave rise to the religious drama which was at first naturally composed in the liturgical Latin language, but subsequently degenerated into a mixture of Latin and the vernacular until it finally assumed an entirely vernacular form. The origin of the drama may be traced to the so-called Easter celebrations which came into life when the strictly ecclesiastical liturgy as developed into a dramatic scene by the introduction of hymns and sequences in a dialogue form. A further step in the development was reached when narration in John, xx, 4 sqq., was translated into action and the Apostles Peter and John were represented as hastening to the tomb of the risen Saviour. This form appears in a Paschal celebration at St. Lambrecht and another at Augsburg, both dating back to the twelfth century. This expansion of the Easter celebration by the introduction of scenes participated in by the Apostles spread from Germany over Holland and Italy, but seems to have found a less sympathetic reception in France. The third and final step in the development of the Easter celebrations was the inclusion of the apparition of the risen Christ. Among others a Nuremberg antiphonary of the thirteenth century contains all three scenes, joined together so as to give unity of action, thus possessing the character of a little drama. Of such Paschal celebrations, which still formed a part of the ecclesiastical liturgy, 224 have been already discovered: 159 in Germany, 52 in France, and the remainder in Italy, Spain, and Holland. The taste for dramatic representations, awakened in the people by the Easter celebrations, was fostered by the clergy, and by bringing out the human side of such characters as Pilate, Judas, the Jews, and the soldiers, a true drama was gradually created.

125 That the Easter plays were originally composed in Latin is proved by numerous still existing examples, such as those of "Benediktbeuren", "Klosterneuburg ", and the "Mystery of Tours"; gradually, however, passages in the vernacular were introduced, and finally this alone was made use of. Passion-plays were first produced in connection with the Easter plays but soon developed into independent dramas, generally in the mother-tongue. As late as 1537 the passion-play "Christus Xylonicus" was written in Latin by Barthélemy de Loches of Orléans. As the Easter plays developed from the Easter celebrations, so Christmas plays developed from the ecclesiastical celebrations at Christmas. In these the preparatory season of Advent also was symbolized in the predictions of the Prophets. Similarly the plays of the Three Kings originated in connection with the Feast of the Epiphany; there the person of Herod and the Massacre of the Innocents are the materials for a very effective drama. It was but natural that all the plays dealing with the Christmas season should be brought together into a connected whole or cycle, beginning with the play of the Shepherds, continuing in that of the Three Kings, and ending with the Massacre of the Innocents. That this combination of plays actually existed we have abundant manuscript evidence, particularly famous is the Freising cycle.

126 The transition to the so-called eschatological plays — the climax of the history of the Redemption — was easy. Two such plays enjoy a special celebrity, "The Wise and Foolish Virgins", which appeared in France in the twelfth century, and "The Appearance and Disappearance of Antichrist, written by a German poet about 1160. The latter, which is also entitled "The Roman Emperor of the German Nation and Antichrist", has also been regarded as an Easter play, because the arrival of Antichrist was expected at Easter. The second title agrees better with the contents of the play. The poet, who must have been a learned scholar, drew his inspiration from the politico-religious constitution of the Roman Empire as it existed in the golden period of Frederick Barbarossa, and from the Crusades. This ambitious play with its minute directions for representation is divided into two main actions — the realization of a Christian world empire under the German nation, and the doings of Antichrist and his final overthrow by the Kingdom of Christ. The unity and conception of the two parts is indicated by the fact that the nations appearing in the first part suggest to the spectator what will be their attitude toward Antichrist. The drama was intended to convey the impression that the German people alone could fulfil the world-wide office of the Roman Empire and that the Church needed such a protector.

127 The extension of the ecclesiastical plays by the introduction of purely worldly elements led gradually to the disappearance of spiritual influence, the decay of which may also be gathered from the gradual adoption of the vernacular for these plays. While the first bloom of the neo-Latin drama is thus attributable to the influence of the Church, its second era of prosperity was purely secular in character and began with the labours of the so-called Humanists in Italy, who called into life the literary drama. Numerous as they were, we do not meet with a single genuine dramatist among them; still many sporadic attempts at play-writing were made by them. The pagan classics were naturally adopted as model — Seneca for tragedy as is shown b the plays of Mussato, Loschi, or Dati, and especially the "Progne" of Corraro. On the other hand Plautus and Terence found more numerous imitators, whose works did not degenerate into ribaldry, as is seen from the attempts of Poggio, Beccadelli, Bruni, Fidelfo, etc. These humanistic attempts attained a measure of success in the school drama. A beginning was made with the production of the ancient dramas in the original text; such productions were introduced into the curriculum of the Liège school of the Hieronomites and they are occasionally mentioned at Vienna, Rostock, and Louvain. A permanent school-stage was erected in Strasburg by the Protestant rector John Stunn, who wished that "all the comedies of Plautus and Terence should be produced if possible, within half a year."

128 The second step in the development was the imitation of the classical drama, which may be traced to Wimpfeling's "Stylpho"; produced for the first time at Heidelberg in 1470, this play was still produced in 1505, a proof of its great popularity. A glorification and defence of classical studies was found in the comedy of "Codrus" by Kerkmeister, master of the Münster grammar school. The contrast between humanistic studies and medieval methods, which does not come into prominence in Wimpfeling's "Stylpho", forms here the main theme. Into the same category falls a comedy by Bebel, demonstrating the superiority of humanistic culture over medieval learning. Into these plays important current events are introduced, such as the war of Charles VII against Naples, the Turkish peril, the political situation after the Battle of Guinegate (1513), etc. The best-known of these dialogue writers were Jacob Locher, Johann von Kitzcher, and Hetwann Schottenius Hessus.

129 Another hybrid class of drama was the allegorical festival plays, which were fitted out as show-pieces after the fashion of the Italian mask comedies. A brilliant example of this class is the "Ludus Diana" in which Conrad Celtes (1501) panagyrizes the pre-eminence of the emperor in the chase. Similar to that of the festival plays was the development of the so-called moralities in the Netherlands schools of rhetoric. These represented the strife between the good and the bad principles (virtus et voluptas) for the soul of man, e. g., Locher's Spectaculum de judicio Paridis" or the well-known dramatized version of the "Choice of Hercules . Side by side with these semi-dramatic plays proceeded the attempts to follow more closely the ancient dramatic form in the school drama with its varied contents. Reuchlin with his three-act comedy, which treats as subject the wonderful skull of Sergius may be regarded as the real founder of the school drama. With "Henno, his second and still more famous drama, the humanistic comedy became naturalized in Germany. The great master of this art is unquestionably George Macropedius (i. e., Langhveldt) with his three farces "Aluta (1535), Andriska" ( 1537), and "Bassarus" (1540). A further development led to the religious school drama, which generally drew its subject-matter from Holy Writ. To further his own objects Luther had counselled the dramatization of Biblical subjects, and tales from the Bible were thus by free treatment of the incidents made to mirror the conditions of the time while containing occasional satirical sallies. Among the numerous writers of this class must be mentioned before all as the pioneer, the Netherlander Wilhelm Graphäus (Willem van de Voltldergroft), who became a Protestant: his much-discussed Acolastus" (the story of the prodigal son), which follows the Protestant tendency of representing the uselessness of good works and justification by faith alone, was reprinted at least forty-seven times in various countries between 1529 and 1585, frequently translated, and produced everywhere.

130 This species of drama was cultivated by the Catholics also, who introduced greater variety of subject matter by including lives of the saints. Thus Cornelius Crocus wrote a "St. Joseph in Egypt", Petrus Papeus "[Good?] Samaritan", and George Holonius several martyr-plays. The founder of the school drama in Germany was Sixt Birk (Xistus Betulius): his "Susanna", "Judith", and "Eva" have primarily an educative aim, but are coupled with Protestant tendencies. His example was followed by a fair number of imitators: by George Buchanan (1582), a Scotchman, wrote Jephthe" and "Baptistes" and the bellicose Naogeorgus treats with still more bitterness the differences between Catholics and Protestants in his "Hamanus", "Jeremias", and "Judas Iscariot". Among the polemical dramatists on the Catholic side Cornelius Laurimanus and Andreas Fabricius must be mentioned.

131 Although the number of the Biblical school dramas was not small, it was far surpassed by the number of the moralities. As has been said, these originated in the Netherlands and it was the Maastricht priest Christian Ischyrius (Sterck), who freely adapted the famous English morality "Everyman". This is the dramatized and widely circulated Ars moriendi and represents the importance of a good preparation for death. The same subject in a somewhat more detailed form is treated by Macropedius in his "Hecastus" (1538). The conclusion of the drama is an exposition of justification by faith in the merits of Christ. This inclination of the Catholic poet towards Luther's teaching found great applause among Protestants, and fostered the development of polemico-satirical sectarian plays, as Naogeorgus's "Mercator" (1539) shows. The Catholic standpoint also found its exposition in the moralities, for example in the Miles Christianus" of Laurimanus (1575), the "Euripus" of the Minorite Levin Brecht, the Pornius" of Hannardus Gamerius the "Evangelicus fluctuans" (1569) of Andreas Fabricius, who had composed his "Religio patiens" three years earlier in the service of the Counter-Reformation. Still more bitter now grew the polemics in the dramas, which borrowed their material from contemporary history. The most notorious of this class is the "Pamachius" of the pope hater Thomas Naogeorgus, who found many imitators.

132 Towards the end of the sixteenth century materials derived from ancient popular legends and history first came into greater vogue, and gradually led to the Latin historical drama, of which we find numerous examples at the famous representations given at the Strasburg academy under its founder Sturm. This example found ready imitation, especially wherever the influence of the English comedy-writers had made itself felt. In this way Latin drama enjoyed a period of prosperity everywhere until the seventeenth century. The best known dramatic poet of the latter half of the sixteenth century was the unfortunate Nicodemus Frischlin. Examples of every kind of school drama may be found among his works: "Dido" (1581), "Venus" (1584), and "Helvetiogermani" (1588), owe their subjects to the ancient classical period; "Rebecca" (1576), "Susanna (1577), his incomplete Christianized drama of "Ruth", after the manner of Terence, the "Marriage of Cana", and a Prologue to Joseph" treat Biblical topics; German legend is represented by Hildegardis" the wife of Charlemagne, whose fate is copied from that of St. Geneviève; of a polemico-satirical nature are Priscianus vapulans (1578), a mockery of medieval Latin, and Phasma (1580), in which the sectarian spirit of the age is scourged. A play of an entirely original character is his Julius redivivus": Cicero and Caesar ascend from the lower world to Germany, and express their wonder at German discoveries (gunpowder, printing). All these attempts at a Latin school drama, in so far as they served educational purposes, were most zealously welcomed in the schools of the regular orders (especially those of the Jesuits), and cultivated with great success. Thus the purely external side of the dramatic art developed from the crudest of beginnings to the brilliant settings of the so-called ludi caesarii. With the suppression of the Society of Jesus the school drama came to a rapid end, and no serious attempt has been since made to revive it and restore it to its former position. However from time to time new plays have been produced both in Europe and America, and the "St. John Damascene", written by Father Harzheim of the Society of Jesus is worthy to take its place among the best productions of the Jesuit dramatists.

133 B. Latin Lyrical Poetry

134 This division of Latin poetry falls naturally into two classes: secular and religious. The former includes the poems of itinerant scholars and the Humanists, the latter hymnody. The development of vagrant scholars (clerici vagi) is connected with the foundation of the universities, as students wandered about to visit these newly founded institutions of learning. From the middle of the twelfth century imperial privileges protected these traveling scholars. The majority intended to devote themselves to theology, but comparatively few reached orders. The remainder found their callings as amanuenses or tutors in noble families, or degenerated into loose-living goliards or into wandering scholars who became a veritable plague during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. as they wandered, begging, from place to place, demanded hospitality in monasteries and castles and like the wandering minstrels paid with their songs, jugglery, buffoonery, and tales. Proud of their scholarly attainments, they used Latin in their poetical compositions. and thus arose a special literature, the goliardic poetry. Of this two great collections are still extant, the "Benediktbeuren" collection and the so-called Harleian manuscript (no. 978) at Cambridge. The arrangement of "Carmina burana", as the first publisher, Schmeller, named them, was upon a uniform plan, according to which they were divided into serious comic, and dramatic pieces. Songs celebrate the spring and the winter, in which sentiments of love also find expression, follow one another in great variety. Together with these are pious hymns of enthusiasm for the Crusades or of praise for the Blessed Virgin. We also find the most riotous drinking-songs, often of a loose, erotic nature, nor are diatribes of a satirical nature wanting: these soured and dissolute, though educated, tramps delighted especially in lampoons against the pope, bishops. and nobles, inveighing with bitter sarcasm against the avarice, ambition and incontinence of the clergy. In this Professor Schönbach sees the influence of the Catharists.

135 Concerning the composers of this extensive literature nothing can be stated with certainty. The poems were in a certain sense regarded as folk-songs, that is as common property and international in the full sense of the word. Some representative poets are indeed mentioned, e.g., Golias, Primas, Archipoeta, but these are merely assumed names. Particularly famous among the poems is the "Confessio Goliae" which was referred to the Archipoeta, and may be regarded as the prototype of the goliardic songs: strophes 12-17 (Meum est propositam in taberna mori) are even today sung as a drinking-song in German student circles. The identity of the Archipoeta has been the subject of much investigation, but so far without success. Paris was an important centre of these itinerant poets, particularly in the time of Abelard (1079-1142), and it was probably thence that they derived the name of goliards, Abelard having been called Golias by St. Bernard. From Paris their poetry passed to England and Germany, but in Italy it found little favour. At a later period, when the goliardic songs had become known everywhere, the origin of their title appears to have grown obscure, and thus emerged a Bishop Golias — a name referred to the Latin gula — to whom a parody on the Apocalypse and biting satires on the pope were ascribed. There even appeared poets as filius or puer or discipulus de familia Goliae, and frequent mention is made of a goliardic order with the titles of abbot, prior, etc. Apart from their satirical attitude towards ecclesiastical life, the goliards showed their free and at times heretical views in their parodies of religious hymns, their irreverence in adapting ecclesiastical melodies to secular texts. and their use of metaphors and expressions from church hymns in their loose verses.

136 In outward form the poetry of the goliards resembled the ecclesiastical sequences, rhyme being combined with an easily sung rhythm and the verses being joined into strophes. Singularly rapid in its development, its decay was no less sudden. The cause of its decline is traceable partly to the conditions of the time and partly to the character of the goliardic poets. In a burlesque edict of 1265 the goliards were compared to bats — neither quadrupeds nor birds. This was indeed a not inapt comparison, for their unfortunate begging rendered them odious to clergy and laity alike. Forgetting their higher educational parts, they found it necessary to ally themselves more and more closely with the strolling players and thus became subject to the ecclesiastical censures repeatedly decreed by synods and councils against these wandering musicians. Thus, regarded virtually as outlaws, they are heard of no more in France after the thirteenth century, although then are referred to in the synods of Germany until the following century. Together with the poets gradually disappeared their songs, and only a few are preserved in the Kommersbücher of the student world. Yet the influence of their poetry on the secular German lyric, and perhaps also on the outer form of religious poetry, was both stimulating and permanent. In this fact lies their principal literary importance and they are valuable as illustrations of the literary culture of the time.

137 Quite distinct in subject and form is the lyric poetry of the humanistic period, the era of the revival of classical learning. The work of a few scattered poets, it could not attain the popularity won by the goliardic poetry, even had its form not been exclusively imitation of ancient classical versification. From the beginning of the sixteenth century the Catholic humanist, Vida, had been engaged among other works on the composition of odes, elegies, and hymns: he belonged to the poetae urbani of the Medici period of Leo X, many of whom wrote lyrical, in addition to their epical, pieces. Johannes Dantiscus, who died in 1548 as Bishop of Ermland, composed thirty religious hymns after the fashion of the older ones in the Breviary, without any trace of classical imitation. Even the renowned Nicolaus Copernicus composed seven odes embodying the beautiful Christian truths associated with Advent and Christmas. Among the Humanists of France, John Salmon (Salmonius Macrinus) was named the French Horace, and among the numerous other names those of Erixius with his "Carmina" (1519) and Théodore de Bèze with his "Poemata" (1548) deserve special mention. In Belgium and the Netherlands Johannes Secundus (Jan Nicolai Everaerts, d. 1536) was conspicuous as a classical poet. From Holland Latin poetry found an entrance also into the Northern Empire under the patronage of Queen Christina, while even Iceland had its representative in the Protestant Bishop Sveinsson (1605-74), who among other works published a rich collection of poems to the Blessed Virgin in the most varied ancient classical metres.

138 As in the domain of drama, so also in that of lyrical poetry, Humanism showed itself most fruitful in Germany, particularly in connection with the dissemination of the new doctrine of Luther. "Thus among the neo-Latinist poets we meet a large number of preachers, school-rectors, university and grammar school professors who translated the Psalms into Horatian metres, converted ecclesiastical and edifying songs of every type into the most divine ancient strophes, and finally, an immeasurable number of occasional poems, celebrated in verse princes and potentates, religious and secular festivals, the consecration of churches, christenings, marriage, interments, installations, occasions of public rejoicing and calamity" (Baumgartner). The Jesuits were as distinguished for their fruitful activity in the field of lyrical poetry as in the school drama. With Sarbiewski (q. v.), the Polish Horace, were associated by Urban VIII for the revision of the old hymn in the Breviary Famian Strada, Tarquinius Galuzzi, Hieronymus Petrucci and Cardinal Robert Bellarmine. In addition to Balde (q. v.) there were among the German Jesuit poets a notable number of lyricists. Of the many names we may mention Jacob Masen, Nicola Avancini, Adam Widl, and John Bissel, who must be numbered among the best-known imitators of Horace. In the Netherlands, France, Italy, England, Portugal and Spain, their number was not smaller, nor their achievements of less value. For example the Dutch Hosschius (de Hossche, 1596-1669) excels both Balde and Sarbiewski in purity of language and smoothness of verse. Simon Rettenbacher (163-1706), the Benedictine imitator of Balde, whose lyrics show a true poetic gift, also deserves a place among the neo-Latinist writers of odes. The nineteenth century added but one name to the list of Latin lyricists, that of Leo XIII, whose poems evince an intimate knowledge of ancient classical literature. The other trend of neo-Latinist lyric poetry embraces religious hymnody. "The whole career of ecclesiastical and devotional hymnody from its cradle to the present day may be divided into three natural periods, of which the first is the most important, the second the longest and the third the most insignificant." Such is the division of Latin ecclesiastical hymnody (q. v.) given by the greatest authority, the late Father Guido Dreves formerly a member of the Society of Jesus.

139 C. The neo-Latin Epic

140 The epic forms, as is natural, the largest part of our inheritance of Christian Latin poetry. As a lucid treatment according to any regular division of the subject-matter is difficult, we shall content ourselves with a chronological sketch of it. The foundation of the Benedictine Order was in every respect an event of prime importance. The Benedictines advanced the interests of culture, not only to supply the needs of life, but also to embellish it. Thus among the earliest companions of St. Benedict we already find a poet, Marcus of Monte Cassino, who in his distich sang the praises of the deceased founder of his order. During the sixth century, while the foundations of a rich literature were being thus laid the culture formerly so flourishing in Northern Africa had almost died out. The imperial governor, Flavius Cresconius Corippus, and Bishop Verecundus were still regarded as poets of some merit: but the former lacked poetic inspiration, the latter, poetic form. Among the Visigoths in Spain, however, we find true poets, e. g., St. Eugenius II with his version of the Hexaemeron. In Gaul in the sixth century flourished the most celebrated poet of his age, Venantius Fortunatus. Most original is his "Epithalamium" on the marriage of Sigebert I of Austrasia to the Visigothic princess Brunehaut, Christian thought being clothed in ancient mythological forms. About 250 more or less extensive poems of Venantius are extant, including a "Life of St. Martin" in more than two thousand hexameter verses. Most of his composition are occasional poems. In addition to his well-known hymns "Vexilla regis" and "Pange lingua", his elegies treating of the tragical fate of the family of Radegundis found the greatest appreciation. About the same period there sprang up in the British Isles a rich harvest of Latin culture One of the most eminent poets is St. Aldhelm, a scion of the royal house of Wessex: his great work "De laudibus virginum", containing 3000 verses, attained a wide renown which it long enjoyed. The Venerable Bede also cultivated Latin poetry, writing a eulogy of St. Cuthbert in 976 hexameters.

141 Ireland transmitted the true Faith, together with higher culture, to Germany. The earliest pioneers were Saints Columbanus and Gall: the former is credited with some poems, the latter founded Saint-Gall. The real apostle of Germany, St. Boniface, left behind some hundreds of didactic verses. The seeds sown by this saint flourished and spread under the energetic Charlemagne, who succeeded without neglecting his extensive affairs of state, in making his Court a Round Table of Science and Art, at which Latin was the colloquial speech. The soul of this learned circle was Alcuin, who showed his knowledge of classical antiquity in two great epic poems, the "Life of St. Willibrord" and the history of his native York. In command of language and skill of versification as well as in the number of poems transmitted to posterity, Theodulf the Goth surpassed all members of the Round Table. Movements similar to that at Charlemagne's Court are observed in the contemporary monastic schools of Fulda, Reichenau, and Saint-Gall. It will suffice to mention a few of the chief names from the multitude of poets. Walafrid Strabo's "De visionibus Wettini", containing about 1000 hexameters, is justly regarded as the precursor of Dante's "Divine Comedy". His verses on the equestrian statue of Theodoric, "Versus de imagine tetrici", are of literary importance, because he represents the king as a tyrant hating God and man. Highly interesting also for the art of gardening is his great poem Hortulus", in which he describes the monastery garden with its various herbs, etc. Contemporary with Walafrid and characterized by the same spirit were the poets Ernoldas, Nigellus, Ermenrich, Sedulius Scottus, etc. As a "real gem from the treasury of old manuscripts" F. Rückert describes the elegy on Hathumod, the first Abbess of Gandersheim written by the Benedictine Father Agius. From the same monk of Corwey we have the poem "On the translation of St. Liborius" and a poetical biography of Charlemagne. A peculiar work was written by Albert Odo of Cluny under the title "Occupatio": it is an epico-didactic poem against pride and debauchery, which he demonstrates to be the chief vices in the history of the world.

142 The golden age of Saint-Gall begins with the end of the ninth century, after which opens the epoch of the four famous Notkers and the five not less renowned Ekkehards. The first Ekkehard is the author of the well-known "Waltharius" which Ekkehard IV revised. About the time when the "Waltharius" was revised, there appeared another epic poem "Ruodlieb" — a romance in Latin hexameters by an unknown author, describing the adventurous fate of the hero — which is unfortunately only partly extant. The name of the poet who in 1175 composed in Latin hexameters the first "animal" epic, "Ecbasis cuius dam captivi per tropologiam", is also unknown. The frame-work of the poem is the story of a monk mho runs away from the monastery but is brought back again under the form of a calf. The "Fable of the Bees" forms the "animal" epic in which the enmity of the wolf and fox is the central point. In the twelfth century this "animal" epic received an extension probably from Magister Nivardus of Flanders under the title "Ysengrimus" or "Renardus vulpes": from the poem thus extended an extract was made later and this is the last product of the animal" epic in the thirteenth century. Like Charlemagne Otto the Great (936-73) sought to make his Court the centre of science, art, and literature. The most brilliant representative of this period is the nun Hroswitha, pupil of the emperor's niece Gerberga. It was in the epic that she achieved her first poetic successes: these were her well-known "Legends", which were followed by two long epic poems in praise of the imperial house (see HROSWITHA) .

143 The chroniclers and historians of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries but seldom use verse in their narratives, their stories being intended above all else for strictly historical purposes. Histories in verse however, were not wanting. Thus Flodoard records in legendary fashion almost the whole ecclesiastical history of the first ten centuries. Walter of Speyer wrote during the same period the first Legend of St. Christopher", and an unknown poet composed "The Epic of the Saxon War" (of Henry IV). Other poets wrote on the Crusades, Walter of Châtillon even ventured on an "Alexandreis", while Hildebert produced a " Historia Mahumetis" in verse.

144 The Humanists of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries are characterized by a closer approach to ancient classical form. Marbod (d. 1123) was a scholarly poet, and left behind a considerable number of legends and didactic aphorisms. His younger contemporary Hildebert of Tours also wrote a fair number of religious poems: more important are the two "Roman Elegies", in which he treats of the remains of ancient Rome and the sufferings of the papal capital under Paschal II. Most artistic in its conception and execution, is his fragment "Liber mathematicus", in which the tragical complications caused by the superstitious fear arising from an unfavourable horoscope are depicted. That the medieval Scholastics could combine theological knowledge with humanistic culture may be seen from the works of the two scholars John of Salisbury and Alanus de Insulis. That the influence of this humanistic culture was unfortunately not always for good, the notorious prurient narratives of Matthew of Vendôme prove. In the days of the goliards there were also poets who depicted in verse contemporary events. Thus the achievements of Barbarossa were sung by no less than three poets.

145 Humanism attained its full bloom in the era of the Renaissance, which began in Italy. Dante gives strong evidence of this movement, as does even more strongly Francesco Petrarch, whose epic "Africa" enjoyed wide renown. Giovanni Boccaccio, a contemporary of the preceding, belongs rather to Italian literature, although he also cultivated Latin poetry. The humanistic movement found favourable reception and encouragement everywhere. In Florence there sprang up about the Augustinian monk, Luigi Marsigli (d. 1394), a kind of literary academy for the cultivation of ancient literature while in the following century the city of the Medici developed into the literary centre of all Italy. Most representatives of the new movement preserved their close connection with the Church, although a few isolated forerunners of the great revolt of the sixteenth century already made their appearance. The seeds of this religious revolution were sown by the lampoons and libidinous poems of such men as Poggio Bracciolini, Antonio Beccadelli and Lorenzo Valla. Maffeo Vegio on the other hand followed the purely humanistic direction of the true Renaissance; he added a thirteenth book to Virgil's "Aeneid", making the poem conclude with the death of Aeneas. He also composed poetic versions of the "Death of Astyanax" and " The Golden Fleece", and still later composed a "Life of St. Anthony . An epic eulogizing the elder Hunyadi was begun by the Hungarian Janus Pannonius, but unfortunately left unfinished. A legendary poem of an entirely original character is the "Josephina", written in twelve cantos by John Gerson, the learned chancellor of the University of Paris. It reminds us of a similar poem by Hroswitha, though the apocryphal narratives taken from the so-called Gospel of St. James are marked by greater depth. Humanism was planted in Germany by Petrarch during his residence there as ambassador to Charles IV, with whom he corresponded after his departure. The interest in humanistic studies was also spread by Aeneas Silvius at the Council of Basle.

146 As in Italy, the movement rapidly developed everywhere, evincing at first a religious tendency but afterwards becoming hostile to the Church. In the century preceding the "Reformation", indeed, the foremost representatives of Humanism remained true to the ancient Faith. Conrad Celtes, although his four Books of "Amores" are a reflection of his dissolute life sang later of Catholic truths and the lives of the saints. Similarly Willibald Pirkheimer (d. 1528) among many others, notwithstanding his satire "Eccius desolatus", remained faithful to the Church. On the other hand Esoban Hessus, Crotus Rubeanus, and above all Ulrich von Hutten espoused the cause of the new doctrine in their highly satirical writings. A somewhat protean character was displayed by Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam, whose early works include hymns to Christ and the Virgin Mary. "Laus stultitia", a satire on all the estates after the fashion of Brant's "Narrenschiff", was written in seven day to cheer his sick friend, Thomas More. In England especially at the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, the humanistic movement developed along the same lines as in Germany. The first direction was given to the movement mainly by Thomas More, whose "Utopia" (1515) is world renowned. In Italy the Renaissance movement continued into the sixteenth century. Sadolet's poem on "The Laocoon Group" is known throughout the literary world, while his epic on the heroic death of Caius Curtius is equally finished. Not less famous is Vida s "Christiad ": he also wrote didactic poems on "Silk-worms" and "Chess". Among the more important works of this period must also be included Jacopo Sannazaro with his classically finished epic "De partu Virginis", at which he laboured for twenty years. His Naenia" on the death of Christ also merits every praise. The example of Vida and Sannazaro spurred numerous other poets to undertake extensive epical works, of which none attained the excellence of their models.

147 In other countries also the new literary movement continued, although it produced richer fruit in the field of dramatic and lyric poetry than in epic poetry. The singular attempt of Laurenz Rhodomannus to compose a "Legend of Luther" in opposition to the Catholic legend deserves mention on account of its peculiarity. Among the works of the dramatists we also meet with more or less ambitious attempts at epic verse. This is especially true of the dramatists of the Society of Jesus. J. Masen's "Sarcotis", for example enjoys a certain fame as the proto-type of Milton's "Paradise Lost" and Vondel's "Lucifer". Biedermann and Avancini also composed small epic narratives. Balde produced many epical works, his "Batrachomyomachia" is an allegorical treatment of the Thirty Years' War, and his "Obsequies of Tilly bring to light many interesting particulars concerning the great general. He also celebrated in verse the heroic death of Dampierre and Bouquois. Not least among his works is his "Urania Victrix". But, instead of accumulating further names, let us bring forward just a few of the more important poems: the "Puer Jesus" of Tommaso Ceva must be placed in the front rank of idyllic compositions; the "Life of Mary" (2086 distichs) of the Brazilian missionary, Venerable Joseph de Anchieta, is a model for similar works. During the nineteenth century the Latin epic more or less centred around the endowment of the rich native of Amsterdam, Jacob Henry Hoeufft, who founded a competitive prize for Latin poetry. Peter Esseiva, a Swiss, is the best-known prize winner: he celebrated in beautiful classical verse and brilliant Latin such modern inventions as the railroad, etc., and also treated strictly religious and light topics (e. g., in "The Flood", "The Grievances of an Old Maid") . Leo XIII was the last writer who wrote short epical poems in addition to his odes. Baumgartner, the author of "Weltliteratur", assigns to Latin Christian poetry the well-merited praise: "It still contains creative suggestions and offers the noblest of intellectual enjoyment."

148 N. Scheid.

Classical Latin Literature in the Church

97 I. Early Period

98 This article deals only with the relations of the classical literature, chiefly Latin, to the Catholic Church. When Christianity at first appeared in Rome the instruction of youth was largely confined to the study of poets and historians, chief among whom at a very early date appear Horace and Virgil. Until the peace of the Church, early in the fourth century, the value and use of classical studies were, of course, not even questioned. The new converts to Christianity brought with them such mental cultivation as they had received while pagans. Their knowledge of mythology and ancient traditions they used as a means of attacking paganism; their acquirements as orators and writers were placed at the service of their new Faith. They could not conceive how a thorough education could be obtained under conditions other than those under which they had grown up. Tertullian forbade Christians to teach, but admitted that school attendance by Christian pupils was unavoidable (De idol., 10). In fact, his rigorous views were not carried out even so far as the prohibition of teaching is concerned. Arnobius taught rhetoric, and was very proud of having numerous Christian colleagues (Adv. nat., II, 4). One of his disciples was Lactantius, himself a rhetorician and imperial professor at Nicomedia. Among the martyrs, we meet with school teachers like Cassianus (Prudent., "Perist.", 9) whom his pupils stabbed to death with a stylus; Gorgonis, another humble teacher, whose epitaph in the Roman catacombs dates from the third century (De Rossi, "Roma Sotterranea", II, 810). During the fourth century however, there sprang up an opposition between profane literature and the Bible. This opposition is condensed in the accepted translation, dating from St. Jerome, of Psalm lxx, 15-16, "Quoniam non cognovi litteraturam, introibo in potentias Domini; Domine memorabor justitiae tuae solius". One of the variants of the Greek text (grammatias for pragmatias) was perpetuated in this translation. The opposition between Divine justice, i.e., the Law and literature became gradually an accepted Christian idea.

99 The persecution of Julian led Christian writers to express more definitely their views on the subject. It produced little effect in the West. However, Marius Victorinus, one of the most distinguished professors in Rome, chose "to give up the idle talk of the school rather than dens the Word of God" (Augustine "Conf.", VIII, 5). Thenceforth, Christians studied more closely and more appreciatively their own literature, i.e., the Biblical writings. St Jerome discovers therein a Horace, a Catullus, an Alcaeus (Epist. 30). In his "De doctrina christiana" St. Augustine shows how the Scriptures could be turned to account for the study of eloquence; he analyses periods of the Prophet Amos, of St. Paul, and shows excellent examples of rhetorical figures in the Pauline Epistles (Doctr. chr., IV, 6-7). The Church, therefore, it seemed ought to have given up the study of pagan literature. She did not do so. St. Augustine suggested his method only to those who wished to become priests, and even for these he did mean to make it obligatory. Men of less marked ability were to use the ordinary method of instruction. The "De doctrina christiana" was written in the year 427, at which time his advancing age and the increasing strictness of monastic life might have inclined Augustine to a rigorous solution. St. Jerome's scruples and the dream he relates in one of his letters are quite well known. In this dream he saw angels scourging him and saying: "Thou art not a Christian, thou art a Ciceronian" (Epist. 25). He finds fault with ecclesiastics who find too keen a pleasure in the reading of Virgil; he adds, nevertheless, that youths are indeed compelled to study him (Epist. 21). In his quarrel with Rufinus he declares that he has not read the profane authors since he left school, "but I admit that I read them while there. Must I then drink the waters of Lethe that I may forget?" (Adv. Ruf., I, 30).

100 In defending himself the first figure that occurs to him is taken from mythology. What these eminent men desired was not so much the separation but the combination of the treasures of profane literature and of Christian truth. St. Jerome recalls the precept of Deuteronomy: "If you desire to marry a captive, you must first shave her head and eyebrows, shave the hair on her body and cut her nails, so must it be done with profane literature, after having removed all that was earthly and idolatrous, unite with her and make her fruitful for the Lord" (Epist. 83). St. Augustine uses another Biblical allegory. For him, the Christian who seeks his knowledge in the pagan authors resembles the Israelites who despoil the Egyptians of their treasures in order to build the tabernacle of God. As to St. Ambrose, he has no doubts whatever. He quotes quite freely from Seneca, Virgil, and the "Consolatio" of Servius Sulpicius. He accepts the earlier view handed down from the Hebrew apologists to their Christian successors, viz., that whatever is good in the literature of antiquity comes from the Sacred Books. Pythagoras was a Jew or, at least, had read Moses. The pagan poets owe their flashes of wisdom to David and Job. Tatian, following earlier Jews had learnedly confirmed this view, and it recurs, more or less developed, in the other Christian apologists. In the West Minucius Felix gathered carefully into his "Octavius" whatever seemed to show harmony by tween the new doctrine and ancient learning. This was a convenient argument and served more than one purpose.

101 But this concession presupposed that pagan studies were subordinate to Christian truth, the "Hebraica veritas". In the second book of his "De doctrina christiana", St. Augustine explains how pagan classics lead to a more perfect apprehension of the Scriptures, and are indeed an introduction to them. In this sense St. Jerome, in a letter to Magnus, professor of eloquence at Rome, recommends the use of profane authors; profane literature is a captive (Epist. 85). Indeed, men neither dared nor were able to do without classical teaching. Rhetoric continued to inspire a kind of timid reverence. The panegyrists, for example, do not trouble themselves about the emperor's religion, but addressed him as pagans would a pagan and draw their literary embellishments from mythology. Theodosius himself did not dare to exclude pagan authors from the school. A professor like Ausonius pursued the same methods as his pagan predecessors. Ennodius, deacon of Milan under Theodoric and later Bishop of Pavia, inveighed against the impious person who carried a statue of Minerva to a disorderly house, and himself under pretext of an "epithalamium" wrote light and trivial verses. It is true that Christian society at the time of the barbarian invasions repudiated mythology and ancient culture, but it did not venture to completely banish them. In the meantime the public schools of antiquity were gradually closed. Private teaching took their place but even that formed its pupils, e.g. Sidonius Apollinaris, according to the traditional method. Christian asceticism, however, developed a strong feeling against secular studies. As early as the fourth century St. Martin of Tours finds that men have better things to do than study. There are lettered monks at Lérins, but their scholarship is a relic of their early education, not acquired after their monastic profession. The Rule of St. Benedict prescribes reading, it is true, but only sacred reading. Gregory the Great condemns the study of literature so far as bishops are concerned. Isidore of Seville condenes all ancient culture into a few data gathered into his withered herbarium known as the "Origines", just enough to prevent all further study in the original sources. Cassiodorus alone shows a far wider range and makes possible a deeper and broader study of letters. His encyclopedic grasp of human knowledge links him with the best literary tradition of pagan antiquity. He planned a close union of secular and sacred science whence ought to issue a complete and truly Christian method of teaching. Unfortunately the invasions of the barbarians followed and the Institutiones of Cassiodorus remained a mere project.

102 II. Medieval Period

103 At this period, i.e. about the middle of the sixth century, the first indication of classical culture were seen in Britain and a little later, towards the close of the century, in Ireland. Thenceforth a growing literary movement appears in these islands. The Irish, at first scholars and then teachers, create a culture which the Anglo-Saxons develop. This culture places profane literature and science at the service of theology and exegesis. They seem to have devoted themselves chiefly to grammar, rhetoric, and dialectics. Whence did the Irish monks draw the material of their learning? It is quite unlikely that manuscripts had been brought to the island between 350 and 450, to bring about very much later a literary renaissance. The small ecclesiastical schools almost everywhere preserved elementary teaching, reading and writing. But Irish scholarship went far beyond that. During the sixth and seventh centuries, manuscripts were still being copied in continental Europe. The writing of this period is uncial or semi-uncial. Even after eliminating fifth- century manuscripts there still remains a fair number of manuscripts in this style of writing. We find among these profane works practically useful writings, glossaries, treatises on land-surveying, medicine, the veterinary art, juridical commentaries. On the other hand, the numerous ecclesiastical manuscripts prove the persistence of certain scholarly traditions. The continuations of sacred studies sufficed to bring about the Carlovingian revival. It was likewise a purely ecclesiastical culture which in their turn the Irish brought back to the continent in the sixth and seventh centuries. The chief aim of these Irish monks was to preserve and develop religious life; for literature as such they did nothing. When we examine closely the scattered items of information, especially the hagiological indications, their importance is peculiarly lessened, for we find that the teaching in gouestion generally concerns Scripture or theology. Even St. Columbanus does not seem to have organized literary studies in his monasteries. The Irish monks had a personal culture which they did not make any effort to diffuse, for which remarkable fact two general reasons may be given. The times were too barbarous and the Church of Gaul had too long a road to travel to meet the Church of Ireland. Moreover, the disciples of the Irish were men enamoured of ascetic mortification, who shunned an evil world and sought a life of prayer and penance. For such minds, beauty of language and verbal rhythm were frivolous attractions. Then, too, the material equipment of the Irish religious establishments in Gaul scarcely admitted any other study than that of the Scriptures. Generally these establishments were but a group of huts surrounding a small chapel.

104 Thus, until Charlemagne and Alcuin, intellectual life was confined to Great Britain and Ireland. It revised in Gaul with the eighth century, when the classic Latin literature was again studied with ardour This is not the place to treat of the Carlovingian renaissance nor to attempt the history of the schools and studies of the Middle Ages. It sill be sufficient to point out a few facts. The study of classical texts for their own sake was at that period very uncommon. The pagan authors were read as secondary to Scripture and theology. Even towards the close of his life, Alcuin forbade his monks to read Virgil. Statius is the favourite poet, and, ere long, Ovid whose licentiousness is glossed over by allegorical interpretation. Mediocre abstracts and compilations, products of academic decadence, appear among the books frequently read, e.g. Homerus latinus (Ilias latina), Dictys, Dares, the distichs ascribed to Cato. Cicero is almost overlooked, and two distinct personages are made of Tullius and Cicero. However, until the thirteenth century the authors read and known are not a few in number. At the close of the twelfth century, in the early years of the University of Paris, the principal known authors are: Statius, Virgil, Lucian, Juvenal, Horace Ovid (with exception of the erotic poems and the satires), Sallust, Cicero, Martial, Petronius (judged as combining useful information and dangerous passages) Symmachus, Solinus, Sidonius Suetonius, Quintus Curtius, Justin (known as Trogus Pompeius), Livy, the two Senecas (including the tragedies), Donatus Priscian, Boethius, Quintilian, Euclid, Ptolemy. In the thirteenth century the influence of Aristotle restricted the field of reading.

105 There are, however, a few real Humanists among the medieval writers. Einhard (770-840), Rabanus Maurus (776-856), the ablest scholar of his time, and Walafrid Strabo (809-849) are men of extensive and disinterested learning. Servatus Lupus, Abbot of Ferrières (805-862), in his quest for Latin manuscripts labours as zealously as any scholar of the fifteenth century. At a later period Latin literature is more or less felicitously represented by such men as Remigius of Auxerre (d. 908), Gerbert (later Pope Sylvester II d. 1003), Liutprand of Cremona (d. about 972), John of Salisbury (1110-1180), Vincent of Beauvais (d. 1264), Roger Bacon (d. 1294) . Naturally enough medieval Latin poetry drew its inspiration from Latin poetry. Among the imitations must be mentioned the works of Hroswitha (or Roswitha), Abbess of Gandersheim (close of the tenth century), whom Virgil, Prudentius, and Sedulius inspired to celebrate the acts of Otho the Great. She is of particular interest in the history of the survival of Latin literature, because of her comedies after the manner of Terence. It has been said that she wished to cause the pagan author to be totally forgotten, but so base a purpose is not reconcilable with her known simplicity of character. A certain facility in the dialogue and clearness of style do not offset the lack of ideas in her writings, they exhibit only too clearly the fate of classical culture in the Middle Ages. Hroswitha imitates Terence, indeed but without understanding him, and in a ridiculous manner. The poems on actual life of Hugh of Orléans known as "Primas" or "Archipoeta" are far superior and betray genuine talent as well as an intelligent grasp of Horace.

106 During the Middle Ages the Church preserved secular literature by harboring and copying its works in monasteries, where valuable libraries existed as early as the ninth century:

107 in Italy, at Monte Casino (founded in 529), and at Bobbio founded in 612 by Columbanus);

108 in Germany at Saint Gall (614), Reichenau (794), Fulda (744), Lorsch (763), Hersfeld (768), Corvey (822), Hirschau (8430);

109 in France at St. Martin's of Tours (founded in 372, but later restored), Fleury or Saint-Benoît-sur-Loire (620), Ferrières (630), Corbie (662), Cluny (910).

110 The reforms of Cluny and later of Clairvaux were not favourable to studies, as the chief aim of the reformers was to combat the secular spirit and re-establish strict religious observances. This influence is in harmony with the tendencies of scholasticism. Consequently, from the twelfth century and especially the thirteenth, the copying of manuscripts became a secular business, a source of gain. The following is a list of the most ancient or most useful manuscripts of the Latin classics for the Middle Ages:

111 Eighth-ninth centuries: Cicero's Orations, Horace, the philosopher Seneca, Martial.

112 Ninth century: Terence, Lucretius, Cicero, Sallust, Livy, Ovid, Lucan, Valerius-Maximus, Columella, Persius, Lucan, the philosopher Seneca, Pliny the Elder, Quintus Curtius, the Thebaid of Statius, Silius Italicus, Pliny the Younger, Juvenal, Tacitus, Suetonius, Florus, Claudian.

113 Ninth-Tenth centuries: Persius, Quintus Curtius, Caesar, Cicero, Horace, Livy, Phaedrus, Persius, Lucan, the philosopher Seneca, Valerius Flaccus, Martial, Justin, Ammianus Marcellinus.

114 Tenth century: Caesar Catullus, Cicero, Sallust, Lio, Ovid, Lucan, Persius, Quintus Curtius, Pliny the Elder, Quintilian Statius, Juvenal.

115 Eleventh century: Caesar, Sallust Livy, Ovid, Tacitus, Apuleius.

116 Thirteenth century: Cornelius Nepos, Propertius, Varro, "De lingua latina".

117 This list, however, furnishes only incomplete information. An author like Quintus Curtius is represented by numerous manuscripts in every century; another, like Lucretius, was not copied anew between the ninth century and the Renaissance. Moreover, it was customary to compile manuscripts of epitomes and anthologies, some of which have preserved the only extant fragments of ancient authors. The teaching of grammar was very deficient; this may, perhaps account for the backwardness of philological science in the Middle Ages. Latin grammar is reduced to an abridgment of Donatius, supplemented by the meagre commentaries of the teacher, and replaced since the thirteenth century by the "Doctrinale" of Alexander de Villedieu (de Villa Dei).

118 III. The Renaissance

119 The Renaissance brought to light the hidden treasures of the Middle Ages. Prior to this period classical culture had been an individual, isolated fact. From the fourteenth century on it became collective and social. The attitude of the Church toward this movement is too important to be treated within the brief limits of this article (see HUMANISM; RENAISSANCE; LEO X; PIUS II; etc). As to Latin studies, in particular, the Church continued to influence very actively their development At the beginning of the modern era Latin was the court language of sovereigns, notably of the Italian chanceries. The Roman curia ranks with Florence and Naples, among the first for the eminence, fame, and grace of its Latinists. Poggio was a papal secretary. Bembo and Sadoleto became cardinals. Schools and universities son yielded to the influence of the Humanists. (see HUMANISM). In France, the Netherlands, and Germany the study of the ancient classics was more or less openly influenced by tendencies hostile to the Church and Christianity. But the Jesuits soon made Latin the basis of their teaching, organized the same in a systematic way and introduced compulsory and daily construing of Cicero. The newly founded Louvain University (1426) became a centre of Latin studies owing chiefly to the Ecole du I,is founded in 1437 and especially to the Ecole des Trois Langues (Greek Latin, Hebrew), opened in 1517. It was at the Ecole du Lis that Jan van Pauteran (Despauterius) taught, the author of a Latin grammar destined to survive two centuries, but unfortunately too clearly dependent on Alexander de Villedieu's above-mentioned "Doctrinale". In the seventeenth century Port Royal introduced a few reforms in the method of teaching, substituted French for Latin in the recitations, and added to the programme of studies. But the general lines of education remained the same.

120 In the nineteenth century, classical philology revived as a historical science. The men who brought about this progress were mainly Germans, Dutch, and English. The Catholic Church had no share in this labour until towards the close of the century. In the middle of the nineteenth century sprang up in France a controversy of a pedagogical nature, concerning the use of the Latin classics in Christian schools. Abbé Gaume insisted that Christians, especially future priests, should obtain their literary training from the reading and interpretation of the Fathers of the Church, and he went so far as to call classical education the canker-worm (ver rongeur) of modern society. Dupanloup, superior of the Paris seminary of Notre Dame des Champs, later Bishop of Orléans, took up the defence of the classical authors whereupon there broke out a long polemical controversy which belongs to the history of Catholic Liberalism. Louis Veuillot answered Dupanloup, but the Holy See was silent and the French bishops did not alter the curriculum of their "petits séminaires" or preparatory schools for the clergy. Veuillot withdrew from the discussion in 1852. Dübner edited a collection of patristic texts graded as to serve all Christian schools from the elementary to the upper classes. Less positive attempts were made to introduce selections from the principal ecclesiastical writers of Christian antiquity (Nourisson, for the state lycées and colleges; Monier for the Catholic colleges). In Belgium Guillaume urged the simultaneous comparative study of a Christian and a pagan author. Both in Belgium and France the traditional use of the pagan authors has held its own in most educational houses, in this respect, the Jesuit schools and the government institutions do not differ. In recent times attacks have been aimed, not merely at pagan authors, but in general at all mental training in Latin. The leaders of this new opposition are on the one hand the so-called "practical" men, i. e., representatives of the natural and applied sciences, and on the other declared adversaries of the Catholic Church, many of whom hold the opinion that the study of Latin makes men more ready to receive the teachings of Faith. Once again therefore, the destinies of the Church and of the Latin classics are brought into connection. On this subject see the various articles of THE CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA concerning schools, studies, education, the history of philology, etc.

121 Paul Lejay

Brunetto Latini

100 Florentine philosopher and statesman, born at Florence, c. 1210; the son of Buonaccorso Latini, died 1294.

101 A notary by profession. Brunetto shared in the revolution of 1250, by which the Ghibelline power in Florence was overthrown, and a Guelph democratic government established In 1260, he was sent by the Commune as ambassador to Alfonso X of Castile, to implore his aid against King Manfred and the Ghibellines, and he has left us in his "Tesoretto", (II, 27-50), a dramatic account of how, on his return journey, he met a scholar from Bologna who told him that the Guelphs had been defeated at Montaperti and expelled from Florence. Brunetto took refuge at Paris, where a generous fellow-countryman enabled him to pursue his studies while carrying on his profession of notary. To this unnamed friend he now dedicated his "Trésor". After the Guelph triumph of 1266 and the establishment of a new democratic constitution, Brunetto returned to Florence, where he held various offices, including that of secretary to the Commune, took an active and honoured part in Florentine politics, and was influential in the counsels of the Republic. Himself a man of great eloquence, he introduced the art of oratory and the systematic study of political science into Florentine public life. He was buried in the church of Santa Maria Maggiore. Among the individuals who had come under his influence was the young Dante Alighieri, and, in one of the most pathetic episodes of the "Inferno" (canto XV) Dante finds the sage, who had taught him "how man makes himself eternal", among the sinners against nature.

102 Brunetto's chief work, "Li Livres dou Trésor" is a kind of encyclopedia in which he "treats of all things that pertain to mortals". It was written in French prose during his exile, and translated into Italian by a contemporary, Bono Giamboni. Mainly a compilation from St. Isidore of Seville and other writers, it includes compendiums of Aristotle's "Ethics" and Cicero's treatise on rhetoric. The most interesting portion is the last, "On the Government of Cities", in which the author deals with the political life of his own times. The "Tesoretto", written before the "Trésor", is an allegorical didactic poem in Italian, which undoubtedly influenced Dante. Brunetto finds himself astray in a wood, speaks with Nature in her secret places, reaches the realm of the Virtues, wanders into the flowery meadow of Love, from which he is delivered by Ovid. He confesses his sins to a friar and resolves to amend his life, after which he ascends Olympus and begins to hold converse with Ptolemy. It has recently been shown that the "Tesoretto" was probably dedicated to Guido Guerra, the Florentine soldier and politician who shares Brunetto's terrible fate in Dante's Inferno. Brunetto also wrote the "Favolello", a pleasant letter in Italian verse to Rustico di Filippo on friends and friendship. The other poems ascribed to him, with the possible exception of one canzone, are spurious.

103 Edmund G. Gardner.

La Trappe

103 This celebrated abbey of the Order of Reformed Cistercians is built in a solitary valley surrounded by forests, and watered by numerous streams which form, in the vicinity, a number of beautiful lakes. The location is eighty-four miles from Paris, and nine miles from the little town of Mortagne in the Department of Orne and the Diocese of Séez, within the ancient Province of Normandy. At its beginning it was only a small chapel, built in 1122 in pursuance of a vow made by Rotrou II, Count of Perche, who, a few years afterwards, constructed a monastery adjoining, to which he invited the religious of Breuil-Benoit, an abbey belonging to the Order of Savigny, then in great renown for fervour and holi-ness; and in 1140 the monastery of La Trappe was erected into an abbey. In 1147 Savigny, with all its affiliated monasteries, was united to the Order of Cîteaux, and from this time forth La Trappe was a Cistercian abbey, immediately depending on the Abbot of Clairvaux. During several centuries La Trappe remained in obscurity and, as it were, lost in the vast multitude of monasteries that claimed Cîteaux for their mother. But in the course of the fif-teenth century La Trappe, on account of its geograph-ical situation, became a prey to the English troops during the wars between France and England, and in the sixteenth century, it, like all the other monasteries, had the misfortune to be given "in commen-dam"; after this the religious had nothing further to preserve than the mournful ruins of a glorious past.

104 However, the hour was soon to come when the monastery was to have a bright return to its primitive fervour. The author of this reform was de Rancé, fourteenth commendatory Abbot of La Trappe, who as regular abbot, employed all his zeal in this great enterprise, the noble traditions of the holy founders of C\îteaux being again enforced. The good odour of sanctity of the inhabitants of La Trappe soon made the monastery celebrated amongst all Christian nations. On 13 February, 1790, a decree of the Government was directed against the religious orders of France, and the Abbey of La Trappe was suppressed; but the religious, who had taken the road to exile under their abbot, Dom Augustin de Lestrange, were one day to see the doors reopen to them. In 1815, the abbey, which had been sold as national property, was repurchased by Dom Augustin, but on their return the Trappists found nothing besides ruin; they rebuilt their monastery on the foundations of the old one, and on 30 August, 1832, the new church was solemnly consecrated by the Bishop of Séez. In 1880 the Trappists were again expelled; they, however soon returned to the great joy and satisfaction of the working classes and the poor. Under the able administration of the present abbot, Dom Etienne Salasc, the forty-fifth abbot since the foundation and the fourteenth since the reform of de Rancé, the monastery has been entirely rebuilt: the new church, which is greatly admired, was consecrated on 30 August, 1895. The different congregations of Trappists are now united in a single order, the official name being the "Order of Reformed Cistercians", but for a long time they will continue to be known by their popular name of "Trappists" (see CISTERCIANS).

105 Bossuet was a frequent visitor at La Trappe, in order to spend a few days in retreat with his friend the Abbot de Rancé; James II of England, when a refugee in France, went there to look for consolation. Dom Mabillon, after his long quarrels with de Rancé visited him there to make peace with him. The Count of Artois, afterwards Charles X, spent several days at the abbey; and in 1847 Louis Philippe wished likewise to visit this celebrated monastery. Amongst those who have contributed to the glory of the abbey in modern times we will only mention Father Robert known to the world as Dr. Debreyne, one of the most renowned physicians of France, and held in high repute for his numerous medico-theological works.

106 Edmond M. Obrecht

Pierre-André Latreille

106 A prominent French zoologist; born at Brives, 29 November, 1762; died in Paris, 6 February, 1833. Left destitute by his parents in 1778, the boy found benefactors in Paris, and was adopted by the Abbé Haüy, the famous mineralogist. He studied theology and was ordained priest in 1786, after which he retired to Brives and spent his leisure in the study of entomology. In 1788 he returned to Paris, where he lived till driven out by the Revolution. Although not a pastor, he was arrested with several other priests, sentenced to transportation, and sent in a cart to Bordeaux in the summer of 1792. Before the vessel sailed, however, Latreille made the acquaintance of a physician, a fellow - prisoner, who had obtained a specimen of the rare beetle, Necrobia ruficollis. It was through this discovery that Latreille became acquainted with the naturalist, Bory de Saint-Vincent, who obtained his release.

107 He was again arrested in 1797 as an émigré, but was once more saved by influential friends. In 1799 he was placed in charge of the entomological department of the Museum of Natural History in Paris, and was elected a Member of the Academy in 1814. In 1829 he was appointed professor of entomology to succeed Lamarck. From 1796 to 1833 he published a great number of works on natural history. He was the real founder of modern entomology.

108 His lesser treatises and articles for various encyclopedias are too numerous for detailed mention here; details of them will be found in "Biographie générale", XXIX, and in Carus-Engelmann, "Bibliotheca zool.", II (Leipzig, 1861). In his "Précis des caractères génériques des Insectes" (Brives, 1795), and "Genera Crustaceorum et Insectorum" (4 vols., Paris, 1806-09), Latreille added very largely to the number of known genera, and he rendered an incomparable service to science by grouping the genera into families, which are treated in the complete work "Histoire naturelle générale et particulière des Crutaces et Insectes" (14 vols., Paris, 1802-05). But his two most conspicuous writings on this subject of natural classification are; "Considérations sur l'ordre naturel des animaux" (Paris, 1810), and "Familles naturelles du règne animal" ( Paris, 1825). His last work was "Cours d' Entomologie" (2 vols., Paris, 1831-33).

109 J. H. Rompel.

Latria

109 Latria (latreia) in classical Greek originally meant "the state of a hired servant" (Aesch., "Prom.", 966), and so service generally. It is used especially for Divine service (Plato, "Apol.", 23 B). In Christian literature it came to have a technical sense for the supreme honour due to His servants, the angels and saints. This latter was styled "dulia". Etymologically, however, there is no reason why latria should be preferred to designate supreme honour; and indeed the two words were often used indiscriminately. The distinction is due to St. Augustine, who says: "Latria . . . ea dicitur servitus quae pertinet ad colendum Deum" (De Civ. Dei, X, i). (See ADORATION; WORSHIP.)

110 T. B. Scannell.

Lauda Sion

112 The opening words (used as a title of the sequence composed by St. Thomas Aquinas, about the year 1264, for the Mass of Corpus Christi. That the sequence was written for the Mass is evidenced by the sixth stanza:

113 > Dies enim solemnis agitur

114 > In qua mensæ prima recolitur

115 > Hujus institutio.

116 ("for on this solemn day is again celebrated the first institution of the Supper"). The authorship of the sequence was once attributed to St. Bonaventure; and Gerbert, in his "De cantu et musica sacra", declaring it redolent of the style and rhythmic sweetness characteristic of the verse of this saint, moots the question whether the composition of the Mass of the feast should not be ascribed to him, and of the Office to St. Thomas. The fact that another Office had been composed for the local feast established by a synodal decree of the Bishop of Liège in 1246 also led some writers to contest the ascription to St. Thomas. His authorship has been proved, however, beyond question, thanks to Martine (De antiq. rit. eccl., IV, xxx), by the dissertation of Noël Alexandre, which leaves no doubt (minimum dubitandi scrupulum) in the matter. There is also a clear declaration (referred to by Cardinal Thomasius) of the authorship of St. Thomas, in a Constitution issued by Sixtus IV (1471-1484), and to be found in the third tome of the "Bullarium novissimum Fratrum Prædicatorum". In content the great sequence, which is partly epic, but mostly didactic and lyric in character, summons all to endless praise of the Blessed Sacrament of the Altar (lines 1-15); assigns the reason for the commemoration of its institution (lines 16-30); gives in detail the Catholic doctrine of the Sacrament (lines 31-62): "Dogma datur Christianis", etc.; shows the fulfillment of ancient types (lines 63-70): "Ecce panis angelorum", etc.; prays the Good Shepherd to feed and guard us here and make us sharers of the Heavenly Table hereafter (lines 71-80): "Bone pastor, panis vere" etc. Throughout the long poem the rhythmic flow is easy and natural, and, strange to say, especially so in the most didactic of the stanzas, despite a scrupulous theological accuracy in both thought and phrase. The saint "writes with the full panoply under his singing-robes"; but always the melody is perfect, the condensation of phrase is of crystalline clearness, the unction is abundant and, in the closing stanzas, of compelling sweetness. A more detailed description of the content of the "Lauda Sion" is not necessary here, since both Latin text and English version are given in the Baltimore "Manual of Prayers", p. 632. In form, the sequence follows the rhythmic and stanzaic build of Adam of St. Victor's "Laudes crucis attollanus", which is given by present-day hymnologists as the type selected by St. Thomas for the "Lauda Sion". Thus the opening stanzas of both sequences have the form:

117 which is continued through five stanzas. In the sixth stanza the form changes in the "Lauda Sion" to: "Dies enim solemnis agitur" etc., as quoted above; and in the "Laudes crucis" to the identical (numerical) rhythms of:

118 > Dicant omnes et dicant singuli,

119 > Ave salus totius sæculi

120 > Arbor salutifera.

121 Both sequences then revert to the first form for the next stanza, while in the following stanza both alter the form to:

122 in which all three lines are in the same rhythm. Both again revert to the first form, the "Lauda Sion" having ten such stanzas, the "Laudes crucis" twelve. We next come to a beautiful stanzaic feature of the sequences of Adam, which is imitated by the "Lauda Sion". The stanzaic forms thus far noticed have comprised three verses or lines. But now, as if the fervour of his theme had at length begun to carry the poet beyond his narrow stanzaic limits, the lines multiply in each stanza. Thus, the following four stanzas in both sequences have a form which, as it has in various ways become notable in the "Lauda Sion", may be given here in the text of one of its stanzas:

123 > Ecce panis angelorum

124 > Factus cibus viatorum;

125 > Vere panis filiorum

126 > Non mittendus canibus.

127 Finally, both sequences close with two stanzas having each five lines, as illustrated by the penultimate stanza of the "Lauda Sion":

128 > Bone Pastor, panis vere,

129 > Jesu, nostri miserere;

130 > Tu nos pasce, nos tuere,

131 > Tu nos bona fac videre

132 > In terra viventium.

133 It is clear from the above detailed comparison of the two sequences that St. Thomas, following the form of the "Laudes crucis" throughout all its rhythmic and stanzaic variations, composed a sequence which could be sung to a chant already in existence; but it is not a necessary inference from this fact that St. Thomas directly used the "Laudes crucis" as his model. In form the two sequences are indeed identical (except, as already noted, that one has two stanzas more than the other). But identity of form is also found in the "Lauda Sion" and Adam's Easter sequence, "Zyma vetus expurgetur", which Clichtoveus rightly styles "admodium divina", and whose spirit and occasional phraseology approximate much more closely to those of the "Lauda Sion". This is especially notable in the sixth stanza, where the first peculiar change of rhythm occurs, and where in both sequences the application of the theme to the feast-day is made directly and formally. Thus (in "Lauda Sion"): "Dies enim solemnis agitur", etc.; and (in "Zyma vetus"): "Hæc est dies quam fecit Dominus" (This is the day which the Lord hath made). It may well be surmised that Adam desired to include this famous liturgical text in his Easter sequence of "Zyma vetus expurgetur", even at the expense of altering the rhythm with which he had begun his poem; and St. Thomas, copying exactly the new rhythmic form thus introduced, copied also the spirit and pungency of its text. The same thing is not true, however, of the corresponding stanza of the "Laudes crucis", which gives us merely similarity of form and not of content or of spirit. Other verbal correspondences between the "Zyma vetus" and the "Lauda Sion" are observable in the closing stanzas. It may be said, then, that the "Lauda Sion" owes not only its poetic form, but much also of its spirit and fire, and not a little even of its phraseology, to various sequences of Adam, whom Guèranger styles "le plus grand poète du moyen áge". Thus, for instance, the two lines (rhythmically variant from the type set in the first stanza) of the "Lauda Sion":

134 > Vetustatem novitas,

135 > Umbram fugat veritas,

136 were directly borrowed from another Easter sequence of Adam's, Ecce dies celebris, in which occurs the double stanza:

137 > Lætis cedant tristia

138 > Cum sit major gloria

139 > Quam prima confusio.

140 > Umbram fugat veritas,

141 > Vetustatem novitas,

142 > Luctum consolatio —

143 while the "Pascha novum Christus est" of the Easter sequence of Adam, and the "Paranymphi novæ legis Ad amplexum novi Regis" of his sequence of the Apostles, find a strong echo in the "Novum pascha novæ legis" of the "Lauda Sion".

144 The plainsong melody of the "Lauda Sion" includes the seventh and eighth modes. Its purest form is found in the recently issued Vatican edition of the Roman Gradual. Its authorship is not known; and, accordingly, the surmise of W. S. Rockstro that the text-authors of the five sequences still retained in the Roman Missal probably wrote the melodies also (and therefore that St. Thomas wrote the melody of the "Lauda Sion"), and the conviction of a writer in the "Irish Ecclesiastical Record", August, 1888 (St. Thomas as a Musician), to the same effect, are incorrect. Shall we suppose that Adam of St. Victor composed the melody? The supposition, which would of course date the melody in the twelfth century, is not an improbable one. Possibly it is of older date; but the peculiar changes of rhythm suggest that the melody was composed either by Adam or by some fellow-monk of St. Victor's Abbey; and the most notable rhythmic change is, as has been remarked above, the inclusion of the intractable liturgical text: "Hæc dies quam fecit Dominus" — a change demanding a melody appropriate to itself. Since the melody dates back at least to the twelfth century, it is clear that the "local tradition" ascribing its composition to Pope Urban IV (d. 1264), who had established the feast-day and had charged St. Thomas with the composition of the Office, is not well-based: "Contemporary writers of Urban IV speak of the beauty and harmony of his voice and of his taste for music and the Gregorian chant; and, according to a local tradition, the music of the Office of the Blessed Sacrament — a composition as grave, warm, penetrating, splendid as the celestial harmonies — was the work of Urban IV" (Cruls, "The Blessed Sacrament"; tr., Preston, p. 76). In addition to the exquisite plainsong melody mention should be made of Palestrina's settings of the "Lauda Sion", two for eight voices (the better known of which follows somewhat closely the plainsong melody), and one for four voices; and also of the noble setting of Mendelssohn.

145 The "Lauda Sion" is one of the five sequences (out of the thousand which have come down to us from the Middle Ages) still retained in the Roman Missal. Each of the five has its own special beauty; but the "Lauda Sion" is peculiar in its combination of rhythmic flow, dogmatic precision, phraseal condensation. It has been translated, either in whole or in part, upwards of twenty times into English verse; and a selection from it, the "Ecce panis angelorum", has received some ten additional versions. Amongst Catholic versions are those of Southwell, Crashaw, Husenbeth, Beste, Oakeley, Caswall, Wallace, Aylward, Wacherbarth, Henry. Non-Catholic versions modify the meaning where it is too aggressively dogmatic and precise. E. C. Benedict, however, in his "Hymn of Hildebert", etc., gives a literal translation into verse, but declares that it is to be understood in a Protestant sense. On the other hand, as the editor of "Duffield's Latin Hymns" very sensibly remarks, certain stanzas express "the doctrine of transubstantiation so distinctly, that one must have gone as far as Dr. Pusey, who avowed that he held "all Roman doctrine", before using these words in a non-natural sense." The admiration tacitly bestowed on the sequence by its frequent translation, either wholly or in part, by non-Catholic pens, found its best expression in the eloquent Latin eulogy of Daniel (Thesaurus Hymnologicus, II, p. 88), when, speaking of the hymns of the Mass and Office of Curpus Christi, he says: "The Angelic Doctor took a single theme for his singing, one filled with excellence and divinity and, indeed, angelic, that is, one celebrated and adored by the very angels. Thomas was the greatest singer of the venerable Sacrament. Neither is it to be believed that he did this without the inbreathing of God (quem non sine numinis afflatu cecinisse credas), nor shall we be surprised that, having so wondrously, not to say uniquely, absolved this one spiritual and wholly heavenly theme, he should thenceforward sing no more. One only offspring was his — but it was a lion (Peperit semel, sed leonem)."

146 KAYSER, Beiträge zur Geschichte und Erklärung der alten Kirchenhymnen, II (Paderborn and Münster, 1886), 77; JULIAN, Dictionary of Hymnology (New York, 1882), s. v. for references to MSS. and translations; DREVES AND BLUME, Analecta Hymnica (Leipzig), x, 123; xxxvii, 58; xxxix, 226, 229; xl, 311; xlii, 104, 151, for poems founded on the Lauda Sion, and xxxvii, 269 (no. 312) for a sequence in honour of St. Thomas Aquinas, beginning Lauda Sion increatam; Ecclesiastical Review, IV, 443, for text and translation, notes and comment.

147 H.T. Henry

Lauds

115 In the Roman Liturgy of today Lauds designates an office composed of psalms and canticles, usually recited after Matins.

116 I. the Term Lauds and the Hour of the Office

117 The word Lauds (i.e. praises) explains the particular character of this office, the end of which is to praise God. All the Canonical Hours have, of course, the same object, but Lauds may be said to have this characteristic par excellence. The name is certainly derived from the three last psalms in the office (148, 149, 150), in all of which the word laudate is repeated frequently, and to such an extent that originally the word Lauds designated not, as it does nowadays, the whole office, but only the end, that is to say, these three psalms with the conclusion. The title Ainoi (praises) has been retained in Greek. St. Benedict also employs this term to designate the last three psalms; post haec [viz, the canticle] sequantur Laudes (Regula, cap. xiii). In the fifth and sixth centuries the Office of the Lauds was called Matutinum, which has now become the special name of another office, the Night Office or Vigils, a term no longer used (see MATINS). Little by little the title Lauds was applied to the whole office, and supplanted the name of Matins. In the ancient authors, however, from the fourth to the sixth or seventh century, the names Matutinum, Laudes matutinae, or Matutini hymni, are used to designate the office of daybreak or dawn, the Office of Matins retaining its name of Vigils. The reason of this confusion of names is, perhaps, that originally Matins and Lauds formed but a single office, the Night Office terminating only at dawn.

118 In the liturgy, the word Lauds has two other meanings: It sometimes signifies the alleluia of the Mass; thus a Council of Toledo (IV Council, c. xii) formally pronounced: "Lauds are sung after the Epistle and before the Gospel" (for this interpretation compare Mabillon, "De Liturgia gall.", I, iv). St. Isidore says: "Laudes, hoc est, Alleluia, canere" (De div. offic., xiii). The word Lauds also designates the public acclamations which were sung or shouted at the accession of princes, a custom which was for a long time observed in the Christian Church on certain occasions.

119 II. the Office in Various Liturgies

120 In the actual Roman Liturgy, Lauds are composed of four psalms with antiphons (in reality there are usually seven, but, following the ordinary rules, psalms without the Gloria and antiphon are not counted separately), a Canticle, Capitulum, Hymn, Versicle, the Benedictus with Antiphon, Oratio, or Collect, and, on certain days, the Preces, or Prayers and Versicles. The psalms, unlike those of Matins and Vespers, are not taken in the order of the Psalter, but are chosen in accordance with special rules without reference to their position in the Psalter. Thus the psalm "Miserere mei Deus" (Ps. 1) is said every day on which a feast does not occur. The psalms "Deus, Deus meus" (Ps. lxii) and "Deus misereatur nostri et benedicat nobis" (Ps. lxii) and "Deus misereatur nostri et benedicat nobis" (Ps. lxvi), and finally the last three psalms, "Laudate Dominum de coelis", "Cantate Domino canticum novum", and "Laudate Dominum in sanctis ejus" (Pss. cxlviii-cl), are recited every day without exception. As we have remarked, it is from these last that this office derives its name. It will be noticed that, in general, the other psalms used at Lauds have also been chosen for special reasons, because one or other of their verses contains an allusion either to the break of day, or to the Resurrection of Christ, or to the prayer of the morning which, as we shall presently point out, are the raison d'être of this office. Such are the verses; "Deus Deus meus ad te de luce vigilo"; "Deus misereatur nostri. . .illuminet vultum suum super nos"; "mane astabo tibi et videbo"; "Emitte lucem tuum et veritatem tuam"; "Exitus matutinum et vespere delectabis"; "Mane sicut herba transeat, mane floreat et transeat"; "Ad annuntiandum mane misericordiam tuam", etc. Another characteristic of this office are the canticles which take place between the psalms lxii-lxvi and the last three psalms. This collection of seven canticles from the Old Testament (Canticle "Benedicite", Canticle of Isaias, Canticle of Ezechias, Canticle of Anne, the two Canticles of Moses, the Canticle of Habacuc) is celebrated, and is almost in agreement with that of the Eastern Church. St. Benedict borrowed it from the Roman Church and, having designed the plan of the Office of Lauds in accordance with that of the Church of Rome, prescribed a special canticle for each day: "Canticum unumquodque die suo ex prophetis, sicut psallit Ecclesia Romana, dicatur" (Reg., xiii).

121 To these canticles the Roman Liturgy adds, as the finale to this office, that of Zachary, "Benedictus Dominus Deus Israel", which is recited every day and which is also a canticle to the Light, viz. Christ: "Illuminare his qui in tenebris et in umbra mortis sedent". The hymns of Lauds, which in the Roman Church were only added later, also form an interesting collection; they generally celebrate the break of day, the Resurrection of Christ, and the spiritual light which He has made to shine on earth. They are very ancient compositions, and are probably anterior to Saint Benedict. In the Ambrosian Office, and also in the Mozarabic, Lauds retain a few of the principal elements of the Roman Lauds — the Benedictus, canticles from the Old Testament, and the psalms cxlviii, cxlix, cl, arranged, however, in a different order (cf. Dom G. Morin, op. cit. in bibliography). In the Benedictine Liturgy, the Office of Lauds resembles the Roman Lauds very closely, not only in its use of the canticles which St. Benedict admits, as we have already remarked, but also in its general construction. The Greek office corresponding to that of Lauds is the orthos, which also signifies "morning"; its composition is different, but it nevertheless retains a few elements of the Western Lauds — notably the canticles and the three psalms, cxlviii-cl, which in the Greek Liturgy bear the name Ainoi or Praises, corresponding to the Latin word Laudes (cf. "Dict. d'archeol. chret. et de lit.", s.v. Ainoi; "Horologion", Rome, 1876, p. 55).

122 III. Lauds in the Early Christian Ages and Their Origin

123 Lauds, or, to speak more precisely, the Morning Office or Office of Aurora corresponding to Lauds, is incontestably one of the most ancient offices and can be traced back to Apostolic times. In the sixth century St. Benedict gives us a very detailed description of them in his Rule (chap. xii and xiii): the psalms (almost identical with those of the Roman Liturgy), the canticle, the last three psalms, the capitulum, hymn, versicle, the canticle Benedictus, and the concluding part. St. Columbanus and the Irish documents give us only very vague information on the Office of Lauds (cf. "Regula S. Columbani", c. vii, "De cursu psalmorum" in P. L., LXXX, 212). An effort has been made to reconstruct it in accordance with the Antiphonary of Bangor, but this document, in our opinion, gives us but an extract, and not the complete office (cf. Cabrol in "Dict. d'archéol. et de lit.", s. v. Bangor, Antiphonaire de). St. Gregory of Tours also makes several allusions to this office, which he calls Matutini hymni; he give us, as its constitutive parts, psalm 1, the Benedicite, the three psalms, cxlviii-cl, and the veriscles ("Hist. Francorum", II, vii, in P. L., LXXI, 201, 256, 1034 etc. Cf. Bäumer-Biron, "Hist. du brev. Rom.", I, 229-30). At an earlier period than that of the fifth and fourth centuries, we find various descriptions of the Morning Office in Cassian, in Melania the Younger, in the "Peregrinatio Ætheriae", St. John Chrysostom, St. Hilary, Eusebius (Bäumer-Biron, op. cit., I, 81, 114, 134, 140, 150-68, 208, 210).

124 Naturally, in proportion as we advance, greater varieties of the form of the Office are found in the different Christian provinces. The general features, however, remain the same; it is the office of the dawn (Aurora), the office of sunrise, the morning office, the morning praises, the office of cock-crow (Gallicinium, ad galli cantus), the office of the Resurrection of Christ. Nowhere better than at Jerusalem, in the "Peregrinatio Ætheriae", does this office, celebrated at the very tomb of Christ, preserve its local colour. The author calls it hymni matutinales; it is considered the principal office of the day. There the liturgy displays all its pomps; the bishop used to be present with all his clergy, the office being celebrated around the Grotto of the Holy Sepulchre itself; after the psalms and canticles had been sung, the litanies were chanted, and the bishop then blessed the people. (Cf. Dom Cabrol, "Etude sur la Peregrinatio Silviae, les Eglises de Jerusalem, la discipline et la liturgie au IVX siecle", Paris, 1895, pp. 39, 40. For the East cf. "De Virginitate", xx, in P G., XXVIII, 275.) Lastly, we again find the first traces of Lauds in the third, and even in the second, century in the Canons of Hippolytus, in St. Cyprian, and even in the Apostolic Fathers, so much so that Bäumer does not hesitate to assert that Lauds together with Vespers are the most ancient office, and owe their origin to the Apostles (Bäumer-Biron, op. cit., I, 58; cf. 56, 57, 64, 72 etc.).

125 IV. Symbolism and Reason of This Office

126 It is easy to conclude from the preceding what were the motives which gave rise to this office, and what its signification is. For a Christian the first thought which should present itself to the mind in the morning, is the thought of God; the first act of his day should be a prayer. The first gleam of dawn recalls to our minds that Christ is the true Light, that He comes to dispel spiritual darkness, and to reign over the world. It was at dawn that Christ rose from the tomb, Conqueror of Death and of the Night. It is this thought of His Resurrection which gives to this office its whole signification. Lastly, this tranquil hour, before day has commenced, and man has again plunged into the torrent of cares, is the most favourable to contemplation and prayer. Liturgically, the elements of Lauds have been most harmoniously combined, and it has preserved its significance better than other Hours.

127 BONA, De Divinia Psalmodia, v. in Opp. Omnia (Antwerp, 1677), pp. 705 sqq.; Commentarius historicus in Romanum Breviarium (Venice, 1724), 102; PROBST, Brevier u. Breviergebet (Tubingen, 1868), p. 146, 173, 184, 188; IDEM, Lehre u. Gebet in den drei ersten Jahrh. (Tubingen, 1871); BAUMER, Hist. du breviaire, French tr. BIRON, I (Paris, 1905), 58, 164, etc.; BATIFROL, Hist. du brev. Romain (Paris, 1893), 22 sqq.; DUCHESNE, Christian Worship (London, 1904), 448-9; HOTHAM in Dict. Christ. Antiq., s. v. Office, The Divine; SCUDAMORE, ibid., s. v. Hours of Prayer; MORIN, Les Laudes du dimanche du IVX au VIIX siecle, in Revue Benedictine (1889), 301-4; BINGHAM, Works (Oxford, 1855), IV, 342, 548, etc. See Also BREVIARY; HOURS, CANONICAL; VIGILS, MATINS.

128 F. Cabrol.

Laura

118 The Greek word laura is employed by writers from the end of the fifth century to distinguish the monasteries of Palestine of the semi-eremitical type. The word signifies a narrow way or passage, and in later times the quarter of a town. We find it used in Alexandria for the different portions of the city grouped around the principal churches; and this latter sense of the word is in conformity with what we know of the Palestine laura, which was a group of hermitages surrounding a church.

119 Although the term laura has been almost exclusively used with regard to Palestine, the type of monastery which it designated existed, not only there, but in Syria and Mesopotamia; in Gaul; in Italy; and among the Celtic monks. The type of life led therein might be described as something midway between purely eremitical inaugurated by St. Paul the first hermit- and purely cenobitical life. The monk lived alone though depended on a superior, and was bound only to the common life on Saturdays and Sundays, when all met in church for the solemn Eucharistic Liturgy. This central church was the origin of what was afterwards called the coenobium or house of the imperfect, or of "children". There the future solitary was to pass the time of his probation, and to it he might have to return if he had not the strength for the full rigour of the solitary life. The laura of palestine were originated by St. Chariton, who died about 350. He founded the laura of Pharan, to the northeast of Jerusalem and that of Douka, northeast of Jericho. But most of the lauras in the vicinity of Jerusalem owed their existence to a Cappadocian named Sabas. In 483 he founded the monastery which still bears his name, Mar Saba. It stands on the west bank of Cedron and was once known as the Great Laura. We know that in 814 the Laura of Pharan was still flourishing, and it appears that on Mount Athos this type of life was followed till late in the tenth century. It gave way, however, to the cenobitic, and no monastery now extant can be said really to resemble the ancient lauras.

120 R. Urban Butler.

Pierre-Sébastien Laurentie

121 French publicist; b. at Houga, in the Department of Gers, France, 21 January, 1793; d. 9 February, 1876. He went to Paris in the early part of 1817, and on 17 June of the same year entered the famous pious and charitable association known as "La Congrégation". Through the patronage of the Royalist writer Michaud, Laurentie became connected with the editorial staff of "La Quotidienne", in 1818; and in 1823 he was appointed Chief Inspector of Schools (inspecteur géréral des études), with the functions of which office he was able to combine his work as a publicist. His earliest writings won for him a great reputation. They were: "De l'éloquence publique et de son influence" (1819); "Etudes littéraires et morales sur les historiens latins" (1822); "De la justice au XIXe siècle" (1822); "Introduction à la philosophie" (1826); "Considérations sur les constitutions démocratiques" (1826). The complaint was made against the last-named of these works, that it was aimed at the Villele Ministry, and censured its legislation in regard to the press. This charge, together with the attacks on the Ministry which appeared in "La Quotidienne" and the fact of Laurentie's friendly relations with Lamennais, led to Laurentie's dismissal from the office of Chief Inspector of Schools (5 November, 1826). "La Quotidienne" supported the Martignac Ministry until it issued the decrees of 16 June, 1828, against the Jesuits, and the petits séminaires. Laurentie vigorously opposed these decrees. He purchased the old Benedictine college of Ponlevoy, which had existed for more than seven centuries and which, with the colleges of Juilly, Sorèze, and Vendôme, Napoleon had permitted to continue in existence side by side with the university. Laurentie's plan was to take advantage of this exceptional official authorization (which constituted a breach in the wall of the state university monopoly) to insure the prosperous existence of one independent educational institution. His work, "Sur l'étude et l'enseignement des lettres", published in 1828, was understood to embody the programme which he proposed to follow at Ponlevoy.

122 After 1830, Laurentie, defeated politically, devoted all his efforts as a publicist to three great causes: (1) freedom of education; (2) Legitimism; (3) the defence of religion. (1) For the first of these, we may mention his "Lettres sur l'éducation" (1835-37), his "Lettres sur la liberté d'enseignement" (1844), and the part he played, in 1849 and 1850, in regard to the commission which prepared the Falloux Law; also his treatise, "L'Esprit chrétien dans les études" (1852), his book on "Les Crimes de l'éducation française" (1872), and his successful efforts for freedom of higher education (1875). (2) In support of the second of these causes he wrote the pamphlet, "De la légitimité et de l'usurpation" (1830), the book "De la révolution en Europe" (1834), "De la démocratie et des périls de la société" (1849), "La Papauté" (1852), "Les Rois et le Pape" (1860), "Rome et le Pape" (1860), "Rome" (1861), "Le Pape et le Czar" (1862), "L'Athéisme social et l'Eglise, schisme du monde nouveau" (1869). Inspire d by the same cause, Laurentie also contributed, under the Monarchy of July, to "Le Rénovateur" and "La Quotidienne". Again, between 1848 and 1876, the battle for the principle of Legitimism went on day after day in the columns of the Royalist "L'Union", and in connection with this campaign Laurentie's "Histoire des ducs d'Orléans" was published in 1832, handling the Orleans family with great severity, and followed by the ten volumes of his "Histoire de France" (1841-55), a kind of historical illustration of his political doctrines. (3) As early as 1836 Laurentie conceived the idea, in defence of religion, of a Catholic encyclopedia which he prefaced with a Catholic theory of the sciences. In 1862 he published a pamphlet attacking scientific atheism. His "Histoire de l'Empire Romain" (1862) is an apology for infant Christianity, and his "Philosophie de la prière" (1864) contains the outpouring of a devout soul.

123 As an octogenarian, Laurentie was the confidant of the Comte de Chambord, whose rights he daily championed in "L'Union". His "Souvenirs", left unfinished at his death, were published by his grandson in 1893. "He was an honour to his party and to the press", wrote Louis Veuillot. From the beginning to the end of his career he was an anti-Gallican monarchist, never seeking in his theory of the Throne and the Altar a means of making the Altar subservient to the Throne, but advocating the liberty of the Church and of education.

124 LAURENTIE, Souvenirs inedits (Paris, 1893); GRANDMAISON, La Congregation, 1801-1830 (Paris, 1889), 209-74; VEUILLOT, Derniers melanges, III (Paris, 1909), 82,83

125 Georges Goyau

Diocese of Lausanne and Geneva

124 Diocese of Lausanne and Geneva (Lausannensis et Genevensis).

125 Diocese in Switzerland, immediately subject to the Holy See.

126 I. Lausanne

127 According to the most recent investigations, particularly those of Marius Besson, the origin of the See of Lausanne can be traced to the ancient See of Windisch (Vindonissa). Bubulcus, the first Bishop of Windisch, appeared at the imperial Synod of Epao in Burgundy, in 517 (Maassen, "Concilia ævi merov." in "Mon. Germ. Hist.: Leg.", III, I, Hanover, 1893, 15-30). The second and last known Bishop of Windisch was Gramatius (Grammatius), who signed the decrees of the Synod of Clermont in 535 (Maassen, 1. c., pp. 65-71) of Orléans, 541 (Maassen, 1. c., 86-99), and that of Orléans, 549 (Maassen 1. c., 99-112). Hitherto it has generally been believed that shortly after this the see was transferred from Windisch to Constance. Besson has made it probable that, between 549 and 585, the see was divided and the real seat of the bishops of Windisch transferred to Avenches (Aventicum), while the eastern part of the diocese was united with Constance. According to the Synod of Mâcon, 585 (Maassen, 1. c., 163-73), St. Marius seems to have been the first resident Bishop of Avenches. The Chartularium of Lausanne (ed. G. Waitz in "Mon. Germ.: Scriptores", XXIV, Hanover, 1879, 794; also in "Mémoires et documents pull, par la Société de la Suisse Romande", VI, Lausanne, 1851, 29) affirms that St. Marius was born in the Diocese of Autun about 530, was consecrated Bishop of Avenches in May, 574, and died 31 December, 594. (For his epitaph in verse, formerly in the church of St. Thyrsius at Lausanne, see "Mon. Germ.: Script.", XXIV, 795.) To him we are indebted for a valuable addition (455-581) to the Chronicle of St. Prosper of Aquitaine (P. L. LXXII, 793-802; also in "Mon. Germ.: Auctores Antiquissimi", XI, Berlin, 1894,232-39). The See of Avenches may have been transferred to Lausanne by Marius, or possibly not before 610.

128 Lausanne was originally a suffragan of Lyons (certainly about the seventh century), later of Besançon, from which it was detached by the French Concordat of 1801. In medieval times the diocese extended from the Aar, near Soleure, to the northern end of the Valley of St. Imier, thence along the Doubs and the ridge of the Jura to where the Aubonne flows into the Lake of Geneva, and thence along the north of the lake to Villeneuve whence the boundary-line followed the watershed between Rhône and Aar to the Grimsel, and down the Aar to Attiswil. Thus the diocese included the town of Soleure and part of its territory that part of the Canton of Berne which lay on the left bank of the River Aar, also Biel, the Valley of St. Imier, Jougne, and Les Longevilles in the Franche-Comté, the counties of Neuchâtel and Valangin, the greater part of the Canton de Vaud, the Canton of Fribourg, the county of Gruyère, and most of the Bernese Oberland. The present Diocese of Lausanne includes the Cantons of Fribourg, Vaud, and Neuchâtel.

129 Of the bishops who in the seventh century succeeded St. Marius almost nothing is known. Between 594 and 800 only three bishops are known: Arricus, present at the Council of Chalon-sur-Saône (Maassen, 1. c., 208-14), Protasius, elected about 651, and Chilmegisilus, about 670. From the time of Charlemagne until the end of the ninth century the following bishops of Lausanne are mentioned: Udalricus (Ulrich), a contemporary of Charlemagne; Fredarius (about 814); David (827-50), slain in combat with one of the lords of Degerfelden; Hartmann (851-78); Hieronymus (879-92). The most distinguished among the subsequent bishops are: Heinrich von Lenzburg (d. 1019), who rebuilt the cathedral in 1000; Hugo (1019-37), a son of Rudolf III of Burgundy, in 1037 proclaimed the "Peace of God"; Burkart von Oltingen (1057-89), one of the most devoted adherents of Henry IV, with whom he was banished, and made the pilgrimage to Canossa; Guido von Merlen (1130-44), a correspondent of St. Bernard; St. Amadeus of Hauterive, a Cistercian (1144-59), who wrote homilies in honour of the Blessed Virgin (P. L., CLXXXVIII, 1277-1348); Boniface, much venerated (1231-39), formerly a master in the University of Paris and head of the cathedral school at Cologne, resigned because of physical ill-treatment, afterwards auxiliary bishop in Brabant (see Ratzinger in "Stimmen aus Maria-Laach", L, 1896, 10-23, 139-57); the Benedictine Louis de la Palud (1432-40), who took part in the Councils of Constance (1414), Pavia-Siena (1423), Basle (1431—) and at the last-named was chosen, in January, 1432, Bishop of Lausanne, against Jean de Prangins, the chapter's choice; Palud was later vice-chamberlain of the conclave whence Amadeus VIII of Savoy emerged as the antipope, Felix V, by whom he was made a cardinal; George of Saluzzo, who published synodical constitutions for the reform of the clergy; Cardinal Giuliano della Rovere (1472-76), who in 1503 ascended the papal throne as Julius II.

130 Meanwhile the bishops of Lausanne, who had been Counts of Vaud since the time of Rudolf III of Burgundy (1011), and until 1218 subject only to imperial authority, were in 1270 made princes of the Holy Roman Empire, but their temporal power only extended over a small part of the diocese, namely over the city and district of Lausanne, as well as a few towns and villages in the Cantons of Vaud and Fribourg; on the other hand, the bishops possessed many feoffees among the most distinguished of the patrician families of Western Switzerland. The guardians of the ecclesiastical property (advocati, avoués) of the see were originally the counts of Genevois, then the lords of Gerenstein, the dukes of Zähringin, the of Kyburg, lastly, the counts (later dukes) of Savoy. These guardians, whose only duty originally was the protection of the diocese, enlarged their jurisdiction at the expense of the diocesan rights and even filled the episcopal see with members of their families. Wearisome quarrels resulted, during which the city of Lausanne, with the aid of Berne and Fribourg, acquired new rights, and gradually freed itself from episcopal suzerainty. When Bishop Sebastian de Montfaucon (1517-60) took sides with the Duke of Savoy in a battle against Berne, the Bernese used this as a pretext to seize the city of Lausanne. On 31 March, 1536, Hans Franz Nägeli entered Lausanne as conqueror, abolished Catholicism, and began a religious revolution. The bishop was obliged to fly, the ecclesiastical treasure was taken to Berne, the cathedral chapter was dissolved (and never re-established), while the cathedral was given over to Protestantism. Bishop Sebastian died an exile in 1560, and his three successors were likewise exiles. It was only in 1610, under Bishop Johann VII of Watteville, that the see was provisionally re-established at Fribourg, where it has since remained. The Cantons of Vaud, Neuchâtel, and Berne, were entirely lost to the See of Lausanne by the Reformation. By the French Constitution Civile du Clergé (1790) the Parishes of the French Jura fell to the Diocese of Belley, and this was confirmed by the Concordat of 1801. In 1814 the parishes of Soleure, in 1828 those of the Bernese Jura, and in 1864 also that district of Berne on the left bank of the Aar were attached to the See of Basle. In compensation, Pius VII assigned, in a papal brief of 20 September, 1819, the city of Geneva and twenty parishes belonging to the old Diocese of Geneva (which in 1815 had become Swiss) to the See of Lausanne. The bishop (in 1815 Petrus Tohias Yenni) retained his residence at Fribourg, and since 1821 has borne the title and arms of the Bishops of Lausanne and Geneva. His vicar general resides at Geneva, and is always parish priest of that city.

131 II. Geneva

132 Geneva (Genava of Geneva, also Janua and Genua), capital of the Swiss canton of the same name situated where the Rhône issues from the Lake of Geneva (Lacus Lemanus), first appears in history as a border town, fortified against the Helvetians, which the Romans took in 120 B.C. In A.D. 443 it was taken by Burgundy, and with the latter fell to the Franks in 534. In 888 the town was part of the new Kingdom of Burgundy, and with it was taken over in 1033 by the German Emperor. According to legendary accounts found in the works of Gregorio Leti ("Historia Genevrena", Amsterdam, 1686) and Besson ("Memoires pour l'histoire ecclésiastique des diocèses de Genève, Tantaise, Aoste et Maurienne", Nancy, 1739; new ed. Moutiers, 1871), Geneva was Christianised by Dionysius Areopagita and Paracodus, two of the seventy-two disciples, in the time of Domitian; Dionysius went thence to Paris, and Paracodus became the first Bishop of Geneva. The legend, however, is fictitious, as is that which makes St. Lazarus the first Bishop of Geneva, an error arising out of the similarity between the Latin names Genara (Geneva) and Genua (Genoa, in Italy). The so-called "Catalogue de St. Pierre", which gives St. Diogenus (Diogenes) as the first Bishop of Geneva, is untrustworthy. A letter of St. Eucherius to Salvius makes it almost certain that St. Isaac (c. 400) was the first bishop. In 440 St. Salonius appears as Bishop of Geneva; he was a son of St. Eucherius, to whom the latter dedicated his Instructiones'; he took part. in the Councils of Orange (441), Vaison (442), and Aries (about 455), and is supposed to be the author of two small commentaries, "In parabolas Salomonis", and on Ecclesisastis (published in P. L., LII, 967 sqq., 993 sqq. as works of an otherwise unknown bishop, Salonius of Vienne). Little is known about the following Bishops Theoplastus (about 475), to whom St. Sidonius Apollinaris addressed a letter; Dormitianus (before 500),under whom the Burgundian Princess Sedeleuba, a sister of Queen Clotilda, had the remains of the martyr and St. Victor of Soleure transferred to Geneva, where she built a basilica in his honour; St.. Maximus (about 512-41), a friend of Avitus, Archbishop of Vienne and Cyprian of Toulon, with whom he was in correspondence (Wawra in "Tubinger Theolog. Quartalschrift", LXXXV, 1905, 576-594). Bishop Pappulus sent the priest Thoribiusas his substitute to the Synod of Orléans (541). Bishop Salonius II is only known from the signatures of the Synods of Lyons (570) and Paris (573), and Bishop Cariatto, installed by King Guntram in 584, was present at the two Synods of Valence and Macon in 585.

133 From the beginning the See of Geneva was a suffragan of Vienne. The bishops of Geneva had been princes of the Holy Roman Empire since 1154, but, had to maintain a long struggle for their independence against the guardians (advocari) of the see, the counts of Geneva and, later, the counts of Savoy. In 1290 the latter obtained the right of installing the vice-dominus of the diocese — the official who exercised minor jurisdiction in the town in the bishop's name. In 1387 Bishop Adhémar Fabry granted the town its great charter, the basis of its communal selfgovernment, which every bishop on his accession was expected to confirm. When the line of the count of Geneva became extinct, in 1394, and the House of Savoy came into possession of their territory, assuming, after 1416, the title of Duke, the new dynasty sought by every means to bring the city of Geneva under their power, particularly by elevating members of their own family to the episcopal see. The city protected itself by union with the Swiss Federation (Eidgenossenschaft), uniting itself, in 1526, with Berne and Fribourg. The Reformation plunged Geneva into new entanglements: while Berne favoured the introduction of the new teaching, and demanded liberty of preaching for the Reformers Farel and Froment, Catholic Fibourg, in 1511, renounced its allegiance with Geneva. Calvin went to Geneva in 1536 and began systematically to preach his doctrine there. By his theocratic "Reign of Terror" he succeeded in forcing himself upon Geneva as absolute ruler, and converted the city into a Protestant. Rome, as early as 1532 the bishop had been obliged to leave his residence, never to return; in 1536 he fixed his see at Gex, in 1535 at Annecy. The Apostolic zeal and devotion of St. Francis de Sales, who was Bishop of Geneva from 1602 to 1621, restored to Catholicism a large part of the diocese.

134 Formerly the Diocese of Geneva extended well into Savoy, as far as Mont Cenis and the Great St. Bernard. Nyon, also, often erroneously considered a separate diocese, belonged to Geneva. "Under Charlemagne Taraittaise was detached from Geneva and became a separate diocese. Before the Reformation the See of Geneva ruled over 8 chapters, 423 parishes, 9 abbeys, and 68 priories. In 1802 the diocese was united with that of Chambéry. At the Congress of Vienna the territory of Geneva was extended to cover 15 Savoyard and 6 French parishes, with more than 16,000 Catholics; at the same time it was admitted to the Swiss Federation. The Congress expressly provided — and the same proviso was included in the Treaty of Turin (16 March, 1816) — that in these territories transferred to Geneva the Catholic religion was to be protected, and that no changes were to he made in existing conditions without agreement with the Holy See. Pius VII next (1819) united the city of Geneva and 20 parishes with the Diocese of Lausanne, while the rest of the ancient Diocese of Geneva (outside of Switzerland) was reconstituted, in 1822, as the Diocese of Annecy. The Great Council of Geneva (cantonal council) afterwards ignored the responsibilities thus undertaken; in imitation of Napoleon's "Organic Articles", it insisted upon the "Placet", or previous approval of publication, for all papal documents. Catholic indignation ran high at the civil measures taken against Marilley, the parish priest of Geneva, and later bishop of the see. Still greater indignation was aroused among the Catholics by the injustice created by the Kulturkanmpf, which obliged them to contribute to the budget of the Protestant Church and to that of the Old Catholic Church, while for their own religious needs they did not receive the smallest pecuniary aid from the public treasury. On 30 June, 1907, most of the Catholics of Geneva voted for the separation of Church and State. By this act of separation they were assured at least a negative equality with the Protestants and Old Catholics. Since then the Canton of Geneva has given aid to no creed out of either the state or the municipal revenues. The Protestants, however, have been favoured, for to them a lump compensation of 800,000 francs (about $160,000) was paid at the outset, whereas the Catholics, in spite of the international agreements assuring financial support to their religion — either from the public funds or from other sources — received nothing.

135 III. Lausanne and Geneva

136 Bishop Yenni's (d. 8 December, 1845) successor was Etienne Marilley. Deposed, in 1848, by the Cantons of Berne, Geneva, Vaud, and Neuchâtel, owing to serious differences with the Radical regime at Fribourg, he was kept a prisoner for fifty days in the castle of Chillom, on the Lake of Geneva, and then spent. eight years in exile at Divonne (France); he was allowed to return to his diocese 19 December, 1856. In 1864 Pius IX appointed the vicar-general of Geneva, Gaspard Mermillod, auxiliary bishop, and in 1873 Vicar Apostolic, of Geneva, thus detaching the Genevese territory from the diocese and making it a vicariate. This new Apostolic vicariate was, however, not recognized by either the State Council of Geneva or the Swiss Federal Council, and Mermillod was banished from Switzerland by a decree of 17 February, 1873. When the Holy See condemned this measure, the Government answered on 12 December, 1873, by expelling the papal nuncio. After Bishop Marilley had resigned his diocese (1879) Monsignor Cossandey, provost of the theological seminary at Fribourg, was elected Bishop of Lausanne and Geneva, and after his death, Mermillod. Thus the Apostolic Vicariate of Geneva was given up, the conflict with the Government ended, and the decree of expulsion against Mermillod was revoked. When, in 1890, Leo XIII made Mermillod a cardinal, he removed to Rome. The Holy See then appointed the present bishop, Monsignor Joseph Deruaz, and he was consecrated at Rome, 19 March, 1890, by his predecessor. Mgr. Deruaz was born 13 May, 1826, at Choulex in the Canton of Geneva, studied theology at Fribourg and he was vicar at Grand Sacconex near Geneva, and then curé at Rolle, in the Canton of Vaud, and at Lausanne. Hew was present at the Vatican Council with Bishop Marilley. As bishop he worked in the spirit of conciliation, and was successful in remedying the ills of the Kulturkamf in the Canton of Geneva.

137 Statistics

138 The present Diocese of Lausanne-Geneva comprises the Cantons of Fribourg, Geneva, Vaul, and Neuchâtel, with the exception of certain parishes of the right bank of the Rhône belonging to the Dioecse of Sion (Sitten). According to Büchi (see bibliography) and the "Dictionnaire géographique de la Suisse" (Neuchâtel, 1905), III, 49 sqq., the diocese numbers approxunately 434,049 Protestants and 232,056 Catholics; consequently, the latter form somewhat more than one-third of the whole population of the bishopric. The Catholics inhabit principally the Canton of Fribourg (excepting the Lake District) and the country parishes transferred to Geneva in 1515, four communes in the Canton of Neuchâtel, and ten in the Canton of Vaud. The Catholic population in the Cantons of Fribourg and Geneva consists principally of farmers, in both of the other cantons it is also recruited from the labouring classes. The Catholics are distributed among 193 parishes, of which 162 are allotted to Lausanne, 31 to Geneva. The number of secular priests is 390, those belonging to orders 70. The religious orders and congregatoints are almost entirely in the Canton of Fribourg. The Capuchins have monasteries at Fribourg and bulle, and hospices at Romont and Landeron; since 1861, the Carthusians have been in possession of their old convet of Val-Sainte, suppressed in the 2eighteenth century. The Franciscans conduct the German classes in the Fribourg Gymnasium. The Marists and the Congregation of the Divine Saviour (Societas Divini Salvatoris) have establishments at Fribourg. The female congregations represented in the diocese are: Cistercians at Maigrauge, near Fribourg, and Fille-Dieu near Romont; Dominicans at Estavayer; Sisters of Charity (Hospital Sisters) at Fribourg, Estavayer, and Neuchâtel, (Theodosia's of the Holy Cross) at Fribourg, Ueberstorf, St. Wolfgang and Neuchâtel, (of St. Vincent de Paul) at Fribourg, Chatel-St-Denis, Billens, and Tafers; Capucines at Montorge, near Fribourg. The Visitandines and the Ursulines conduct each a girls' school at Fribourg; the Teaching Sisters of the Holy Cross, of Menzingen and Ingenbohl, conduct several schools for girls (among them the Academy of the Holy Cross at Fribourg attached to the university); they are also employed as teachers in many of the village schools. The Filles de L'Ouvre de St. Paul (not properly religious) have, among other works, a Catholic bookstore at Fribourg, and a well-arranged printing house. Among the more important. educational establishments of diocese, besides those already mentioned, are: the University of Fribourg [see Fribourg (Switzerland). University of]; the theological seminary of St. Charles at Fribourg, with seven ecclesiastical professors; the cantonal school of St. Michel, also at Fribourg, which comprises a German and French gymnasium, a Realschule (corresponding somewhat to the English first-grade schools) and commercial school, as well as a lyceum, the rector of which is a clergyman. This school has at present (1910) about 800 pupils, with 40 ecclesiastical and as many lay professors. Three other cantonal universities exist in the diocese: Geneva (founded by Calvin in 1559, and in 1873 raised to the rank of a university with five faculties); Neuchâtel (1866, academy; 1909, university); Lausanne (1537, academy; university since 1890, with five faculties). Geneva and Lausanne both have cantonal Protestant theological faculties, Neuchâtel a "Faculté de théologie de l'église indépendante de l'état". For the government of the diocese there are, besides the bishop, two vicars-general, one of whom lives at Geneva, the other at Fribourg. There are, moreover, a provicarius generalis, who is also chancellor of the diocese, and a secretary. The cathedral chapter of Lausanne (with 32 canons was suppressed at the time of the reformation, and has never been re-established, in consequence of which the choice of a bishop rests with the Holy See. In 1512 Julius II established a collegiate chapter in the church of St. Nicholas at Fribourg, which is immediately subject to the Holy See, with a provost appointed by the Great Council, also a dean, a cantor, and ten prebends. This collegiate church takes the place of the diocesan cathedral, still lacking, since the cathedral of St. Pierre at Geneva and that of Notre-Dame at Lausanne were given over to Protestantism at the time of the Reformation.

139 Besides works cited under Calvinism and Fribourg, see:—

140 On Lausanne, Schmitt, Mémoires historiques sur le diocèse de Lausanne, ed. Gremaud in Mémorial de Fribourg, V, VI (Fribourg, 1858-59): Genoud, Les Saints de la Suisse française (Bar-le-Duc, 1882); Dellion, Dictionnaire hist. et statist. des paroisses cath. du canton de Fribourg (13 vols., 1884-1903); Secrétan, Hist. De la cathédrale de Lausanne (Lausanne, 1889); Dupraz, La Cathédrale de Lausanne (Lausanne, 1906); Stammler, Der Domschatz von Lausanne (Bern, 1894), French tr. by Galley (Lausanne, 1902); Büchi, Die kath. Kirche in der Schweiz (Munich, 1902), 56-57; Doumergue, Lausanne au temps de la Réformation (Lausanne 1903); Holder, Les visites pastorales dans le diocèse de Lausanne depuis la fin du 16e siècle jusqu'à vers le milieu du 19e siècle (Fribourg, 1903); Besson, Recherches sur les origines des évêchés de Genève, Lausanne, Sion et leurs premiers titulaires jusqu'au déclins de 6e siècle (Fribourg and Paris, 1906) (contains a copious bibliography, pp 230-44); Idem, Contribution à l'histoire du diocèses de Lausanne sous la domination franque, 534-888 (Fribourg, 1908); Direcorium Divocesis Lausannensis et Genevensis in annum 1910 (Fribourg, 1910).

141 On Geneva, cf. the older literature in Chevalier, Topo-Bibl., 1284 sqq. Also, Fleury, Histoire de l'église de Genève (3 vols., Geneva, 1880-81); Lafrasse, étude sur la liturgie dans l'ancien diocèse de Genève (Geneva and Parish, 1904); Duchesne, Fastes épiscopaux de l'ancienne Gaule, I (2nd ed., Paris, 1907), 255 sqq.; De Girard, Le Droit des catholiques romains de Genève au budget des cultes (Geneva, 1907); De La Rive, La Séparation de l'église et de l'état à Genève (Paris, 1909); Martin, La Situation du catholicisme à Genève 1815-1907 (Lausanne, 1909); S[peiser], Genf und die katholische Kirche im 19. Jahrhundert republished from the Neuen Zurcher Nachrichten (1909), nos. 344, 345.

142 Gregor Reinhold

Jean de Lauzon

127 Fourth governor of Canada, b. at Paris, 1583; d. there, 16 Feb., 1666. He was the son of François de Lauzon and Isabelle Lotin. In 1613 he was councillor of the Parlement of Paris; master of petitions (1623); appointed by Cardinal Richelieu Intendant of the Company of New France, he was lauded by Champlain for obtaining the restoration of Quebec taken by the Kertk brothers (1629). Lauzon's position enabled him to secure for his sons immense domains in Canada, including the seigniories of Lauzon (opposite Quebec), de la Citiere, with sixty leagues of frontage on the right shore of the St. Lawrence, and the Island of Montreal, later ceded to La Dauversiere, one of the founders of Ville Marie. His important office and services merited him a good reception as governor (1651). Times were critical. Lauzon, scholar, able magistrate and financier, organized the regular administration of civil and criminal justice, and provided, from the fur-trade at Tadoussac for the civil and military list, besides furnishing pensions for the Jesuits, Ursulines, and hospital nuns. But unused to war and already aged, he could not subdue the Iroquois, whose audacious cruelty made several victims under the walls of Quebec. Although his eldest son, Jean, destined like Dollard to an heroic death, represented him wherever danger threatened, Lauzon resigned before the expiration of a second term of office (1656), leaving the government ad interim to a younger son, Charles de Lauzon-Charny. Lauzon is credited for his probity, virtue, exemplary life, and great zeal for God's interests and the conversion of savages; but he lacked experience, decision under trials, and had assumed the direction of the colony under too adverse circumstances.

128 FERLAND, Cours d'histoire du Canada (Quebec, 1882); ROY, Histoire de la seignerie de Lauzon (Levis, 1897) GARNEAU, Histoire du Canada (Montreal, 1882) ROCHEMONTEIX, Les Jesuites et la Nouvelle-France (Paris, 1896).

129 Lionel Lindsay

Pierre de Lauzon

130 A noted missionary of New France in the eighteenth century, born at Poitiers, 26 September, 1687; died at Quebec, 5 September, 1742. Though sometimes mentioned as Jean, in his official acts he invariably signed Pierre. He joined the Jesuits at Limoges, 24 November, 1703, and after ordination was sent to Canada in 1716. From 1716 to 1718 he was Father Daniel Richer's assistant at Lorette, where he studied the Huron-Iroquois language. He did missionary duty at Sault St. Louis (Caughnawaga) from 1718 to 1731, with the exception of the scholastic year 1721-22, when he replaced Father François Le Brun as instructor in the royal school of hydrography in the college at Quebec, as the exhausting labours of the mission had undermined his health. His Iroquois Indians clamoured for his return, and on 12 May, 1722, they formally petitioned Governor Vaudreuil and the Intendant Bégon to that effect. These in turn, persuaded that it was he alone who, on the occasion of a change in the village site, had prevented two-thirds of the Indians from moving away and settling within easy reach of the English, urged the superior to send him back, and in 1722 he returned to Sault St. Louis. It was none too soon, for the spirit of revolt was spreading among the Caughnawaga Iroquois, in consequence of a menace of again quartering upon them a French garrison, an ever prolific cause of debauchery and disorder. He made his solemn profession of the four vows at Sault St. Louis on 2 February, 1721.

131 In 1723 he was named superior of the Caughnawaga mission, and the ability he displayed in governing during the nine succeeding years determined the general, Francis Retz, to place him in 1732 over the whole Canada mission. This, according to established custom in Canada entailed the duties of rector of the college at Quebec. During his term of office, which lasted seven years, he crossed over to France (1733) in quest of recruits. Among those whom he brought back with him was the saintly Father Jean-Pierre Aulneau, massacred in 1736 at the Lake of the Woods. Mgr Dosquet of Quebec, returned at the same time, bringing with him three Sulpicians. The party embarked 29 May and reached Quebec 16 August, after a distressing voyage of eighty days. Terrific winds and pestilential disease marked the long journey. De Lauzon, besides ministering to the sick, as did the other priests on board, was appointed boatswain's mate, for the ecclesiastics did not shirk their share of the work. In September, 1739, he resumed his missionary labours with the Caughnawaga Iroquois, but owing to failing strength he was recalled to Quebec in 1741, where, after a short illness of two and a half days, he died in the following year.

132 Arthur Edward Jones.

Lavabo

133 The first word of that portion of Psalm 25 said by the celebrant at Mass while he washes his hands after the Offertory, from which word the whole ceremony is named.

134 The principle of washing the hands before celebrating the holy Liturgy — at first an obvious practical precaution of cleanness, then interpreted also symbolically — occurs naturally in all rites. In the Eastern rites this is done at the beginning as part of the vesting; it is generally accompanied by the same fragment of Psalm 25 (vv. 6-12) said in the West after the Offertory. But in the "Apost. Const.", VIII, 11, the hands of the celebrants are washed just before the dismissal of the catechumens (Brightman, 13), in the Syriac and Coptic rites after the creed (ib., 82 and 162). Cyril of Jerusalem also mentions a washing that takes place in sight of the people (Cat. Myst., v). So also in the Roman Rite the celebrant washes his hands before vesting, but with another prayer ("Da, Domine, virtutem", etc., in the Missal among the "Orationes ante Missam"). The reason of the second washing, during the Mass, at Rome was no doubt the special need for it after the long ceremony of receiving the loaves and vessels of wine from the people at the Offertory (all of which is absent from the Eastern rites). The first Roman Ordines describe a general washing of hands by the celebrant and deacons, who have received and carried the offerings to the altar, immediately after they have done so ("Ordo Rom. I", 14; "Ordo of St. Amand" in Duchesne, "Origines du Culte", 443, etc.; in the St. Amand Ordo the Pontiff washes his hands both before and after the Offertory). There is as yet no mention of any psalm or prayers said at the time. In the Gallican Rite the offerings were prepared before Mass began, as in the East; so there was no Offertory nor place for a Lavabo later. At Milan there is now an Offertory borrowed from Rome, but no washing of hands at this point; the Mozarabic Liturgy also has a Romanizing Offertory and a washing, but without any prayer (Missale Mixtum", P.L., LXXXV, 538). The Roman Rite had in the Middle Ages two washings of the hands at the Offertory, one just before, while the deacon spread the corporal on the altar, one immediately after the incensing that follows the offertory (Durandus, "Rationale", IV, 28; Benedict XIV, "De SS. Missæ Sacrif.", II, 11). The first of these has now disappeared. The second was accompanied by the verses 6-12 of Psalm xxv. This psalm is first mentioned by the medieval commentators (e.g. Durandus, loc. cit.). No doubt it was said from very early times as a private devotion obviously suitable for the occasion. We have noted that it accompanies the washing before the Liturgy in the Byzantine Rite. Benedict XIV notes that as late as his time (eighteenth century) "in some churches only some verses are said" (loc. cit.) although the Missal requires that all (that is from v. 6 to the end) be recited. Cyril of Jerusalem (loc. cit.) already explains the washing as a symbol of purity of the soul; all the medieval writers (Durandus, loc. cit.; St Thomas Aquinas, "Summa Theol.", III, Q. lxxxiii, art. 5, ad 1um; etc.) insist on this idea.

135 The present rule is this: At high Mass (or sung Mass), as soon as the celebrant has incensed the altar after the Offertory and has been incensed himself at the Epistle side, he remains there while his hands are washed by the acolytes, who must be waiting by the credence-table. The first acolyte pours water from the cruet over his fingers into the little dish provided, the second then hands him the towel to dry the fingers. Meanwhile he says: "Lavabo inter innocentes", etc., to the end of the psalm, with "Gloria Patri" and "Sicut erat". The Gloria is left out in Masses for the dead and in Masses de tempore from Passion Sunday to Holy Saturday exclusively ("Ritus celebrandi", VII, 6, in the Missal). A bishop at high Mass wears the "precious" mitre (mitra pretiosa) while he is incensed and washes his hands (Cærim. Episc.,II, 8, 64); in this case a larger silver jug and basin are generally used, though the Cærimoniale Episcoporum" does not mention them. At low Mass, since there is no incense, the celebrant goes to the Epistle side and washes his hands in the same way immediately after the prayer "Veni sanctificator". For his convenience the altar-card on the Epistle side contains the prayer said when the water is blessed before it is put into the chalice ("Deus qui humanæ substantiæ") and the verses "Lavabo", etc.

136 GIHR, "Das heilige Messopfer" (Freiburg im Br., 1897), 502-05; BENEDICT XIV, "De SS. Missæ Sacrificio", II, 11 (ed. SCHNEIDER, Mainz, 1879, pp. 146-48); DURANDUS, "Rationale divinorum officiorum", IV, 28, DE HERDT, "S. Liturgiæ praxis", I (9th ed., Louvain, 1894), 307-08; 464-64; DUCHESNE, "Origines du Culte chretien" (Paris, 1898), 167, 443.

137 Adrian Fortescue

Diocese of Laval

136 Laval, Diocese of (VALLIS GUIDONIS) includes the Department of La Mayenne. Until 1855 the territory of this diocese was annexed to Le Mans. Since the seventeenth century the creation of a See of Laval had been under consideration. A constitutional bishopric existed there for a short time during the Revolution; and two titular incumbents, Vilar and Dorlodot, occupied the position. In 1846 the creation of the see was decided upon, but was not carried out until after the death of Bishop Bouvier of Le Mans in 1854. A Bull of Pius IX, June 30, 1855, established the See of Laval. The apologist Emile Bougaud (q. v.) was consecrated Bishop of Laval in February, 1888, and died a few months later. The request of the Holy See in 1904 for the resignation of Bishop Pierre Victor Geay (1896-1904) was one of the reasons assigned by the French Republic for breaking with the pope and preparing the separation of Church and State. During the French Revolution, Laval was captured by the Vendeans on October 22, 1793, after which the diocese became the seat of the "Chouannerie", a movement similar to the Vendean but less aristocratic, the "Chouans" consisting almost entirely of peasants who wore a picture of the Sacred Heart of Jesus on their arm or their breast and fought for the liberty of their priests and for the royalist cause, without, however, avoiding frequent acts of brigandage. They were organized into bands by a certain Jean Cottereau, called Jean Chouan (1757-1794) and after his death continued their adventurous resistance till 1796. For the principal saints venerated in the Diocese of Laval, see Diocese of Le Mans; only those whose memories are closely associated with the present confines of the diocese are here mentioned: St. Constantianus, a monk of Micy, who founded the monastery of Lassay, at the same time that St. Erneus, St. Bohemad, and St. Alveus, also monks of Micy, were founding the monasteries of Ceaulee, Saint-Bomer, Saint Auvieu in the forest of Passais, on the borders of the Departments of Mayenne and l'Orne (sixth century), the deacons Sts. Serenus and Serenic, hermits of Saulges, who belong to the seventh century. Blessed Merolus, a native of Evron and chorepiscopus of Saulges, later Bishop of Le Mans, is of the eighth century, and the hermit St. Simeon of Vauce of the ninth. Bernier (1764-1806), Bishop of Orleans, one of the negotiators of the concordat and Cardinal de Cheverus, Bishop of Boston, Mass. and Archbishop of Bordeaux (1768-1836), were natives of the diocese.

137 Two councils were held at Laval in 1207 and 1242 and four at Chateau Gontier in 1231, 1253, 1268 and 1336 for the restoration of discipline. The principal pilgrimages in the diocese are: Notre-Dame de Priz at Laval, a shrine of great antiquity; Notre-Dame de l'Epine at Evron. About 648 a pilgrim bearing a reliquary containing a relic of the Blessed Virgin stopped at a sanctuary which had been erected in her honor by St. Thuribius, second Bishop of Le Mans, and hung the reliquary on a hawthorn bush. Subsequent miracles, it is said, induced St. Hadouindus, Bishop of Le Mans, to build there a second shrine and a monastery. In the last half century more than 100,000 people visited Notre-Dame de l'Epine. Notre-Dame des Freux at Bellebranche, Notre-Dame d'Avenieres, and Notre-Dame de Courbefosse at Fougerolles date from the twelfth century. Notre-Dame des Bois at Contest dates from the fifteenth century. Notre-Dame de la Mariette at Beaumont, Notre-Dame de la Crue at St-Martin du Limet, and Notre-Dame du Chene at St-Martin de Connee, date from the sixteenth century. Notre-Dame de la Tremblaye at Daon (since 1660), Notre-Dame de Bon Secours at Craon Saint Nicholas (since 1709), and since 1871 two important pilgrimages, Notre-Dame Auxiliatrice de la Ducraie at Burest and Notre-Dame d'Esperance at Pontmain.

138 Before the application of the Associations Law of 1901, there were Jesuits, Fathers of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, and various orders of teaching brothers in this diocese. The Trappists are still at the monastery of Notre Dame du Port Salut, at Entrammes. The principal communities of women originating in this diocese are: the Ursulines of Chateau Gontier, founded in 1630 for teaching; the Hospitaller nuns of the Mercy of Jesus founded at Chateau Gontier in 1674; the Sisters of Our Lady of Mercy, hospitaller nuns founded in 1816 by Therese Agathe Rondeau, a poor working woman known as "Good Mother Therese"; the Sisters of Charity of Notre-Dame, teachers and hospitallers, founded in 1682 by Madame Thulard. The motherhouse of this community established at Evron in 1901, counts 1700 members and 184 institutions in the Diocese of Laval and 137 outside the diocese. In 1908 there remained twenty communities of women in this see. At the close of the nineteenth century the religious orders maintained here 27 infant schools, 2 institutes for the deaf and dumb, 1 orphanage for boys and 6 for girls; 4 work rooms, 12 hospitals or alms houses; 6 houses whose members care for the sick in their homes and 4 houses for retreats. In 1908 the Diocese of Laval numbered 305,457 inhabitants; 31 parishes; 265 "succursales"; 210 vicariates, and 705 secular priests.

139 Georges Goyau

François de Montmorency Laval

139 First bishop of Canada, b. at Montigny-sur-Avre, 30 April, 1623, of Hughes de Laval and Michelle de Péricard; d. at Quebec on 6 May, 1708. He was a scion of an illustrious family, whose ancestor was baptized with Clovis at Reims, and whose motto reads: "Dieu ayde au primer baron chrestien." He studied under the Jesuits at La Flèche, and learned philosophy and theology at their college of Clermont (Paris), where he joined a group of fervent youths directed by Father Bagot. This congregation was the germ of the Seminary of Foreign Missions, famous in the history of the Church, and of which the future seminary of Quebec was to be a sister institution. His two older brothers having died in battle, François inherited the family title and estate. But he resisted all worldly attractions and a mother's entreaties, and held fast to his vocation. After ordination (1747), he filled the office of archdeacon at Evereux. The renowned Jesuit missionary, Alexander de Rhodes, having obtained from Innocent X the appointment of three vicars Apostolic for the East, Laval was chosen for the Tonquin mission. The Portuguese Court opposed the plan and from 1655 to 1658 the future bishop lived at the "hermitage" of Caen, in the practice of piety and good works, emulating the example of the prominent figures of that period of religious revival, Olier, Vincent of Paul, Bourdoise, Eudes, and others, several of whom were his intimate friends. This solitude was a fitting preamble to his apostolic career. Appointed Vicar Apostolic of New France, with the title of Bishop of Petrea, Laval was consecrated on 8 Dec., 1658, by the papal nuncio Piccolomini in the abbatical church of St-Germain-des-Prés, Paris. He landed on 16 June, 1659, at Quebec, which then counted hardly 500 inhabitants, the whole French population of Canada not exceeding 2200 souls.

140 Laval's first relation to the pope (1660) breathes admiration for the natural grandeur of the country, courage and hope for the future, and praise for the zeal of the Jesuits. From the outset he had to assert his authority, which was contested by the Archbishop of Rouen, from whose province came most of the colonists, and whose pretensions were favoured by the court. Laval claimed jurisdiction directly from Rome. This conflict, which caused trouble and uncertainty, was ended when the See of Quebec was definitively erected by Clement X into a regular diocese depending solely on Rome (1674). But the hardest struggle, the trial of a life-time, was against the liquor-traffic with the Indians. The problem, on whose solution depended the civilization and salvation of the aboriginies and the welfare of New France, was rendered more arduous by the intense passion of the savage for firewater and the lawless greed of the white trader. Laval, after exhausting persuasive measures and consulting the Sorbonne theologians, forbade the traffic under pain of excommunication. The civil authorities pleaded in the interest of commerce, the eternal obstacle to temperance. First d'Avaugour relaxed the severity of the prohibition, but, through Laval's influence at court, was recalled. De Mésy, who owed his appointment to the bishop, first favoured, but then violently opposed his authority, finally dying repentant in his arms. His successors, envious of clerical authority and over-partial to commercial interests, obtained from the king a mitigated legislation. Thus, the Intendant Talon and Frontenac, notwithstanding their statesmanship and bravery, were imbued with Gallicanism and too zealous for their personal benefit. The viceroy de Tracey, however, seconded the bishop's action.

141 At this period the Diocese of Quebec comprised all North America, exclusive of New England, the Atlantic sea-board, and the Spanish colonies to the West, a territory now divided into about a hundred dioceses. Laval's zeal embraced all whom he could reach by his representatives or by his personal visitations. In season and out of season, he made long and perilous journeys by land and water to minister to his flock. His fatherly kindness sustained the far-off missionary. "His heart is always with us", writes the Jesuit Dablon. He was a protector and guide to the religious houses of Quebec and Montreal. He was deeply attached to the Jesuits, his former teachers, and recalled to Canada in 1670 the Franciscan Recollets, who had first brought thither the Gospel. By the solemn baptism of Garakontie, the Iroquois chief, an effacacious promoter of the true Faith was secured among his barbarous fellow-countrymen, who received the black-robed Jesuit and gave many neophytes. Laval's foresight made him foster the most cherished devotions of the Church: belief in the Immaculate Conception, the titular of his cathedral, and the cult of the Holy Family, which flourished on Canadian soil (Encyclical of Leo XIII). He was a devout client of St. Anne, whose shrine at Beaupre was rebuilt in 1673. As a patron of education Laval occupies a foremost rank. At that early period, with a handful of colonists and scanty resources, he organized a complete system of instruction: primary, technical, and classical. His seminary (1663) and little seminary (1668) trained candidates for the priesthood.

142 An industrial school, founded at St-Joachim (1678), provided the colony with skilled farmers and craftsmen. To these institutions, and particularly to the seminary, destined to become the university which bears his name, he gave all his possessions, including the seigniory of Beaupré and Isle Jésus. In view of the future he built the seminary on a relatively large scale, which excited the envy and criticism of Frontenac. No regular parishes having been yet established, the clergy were attached to the seminary, and thence radiated everywhere for parochial or mission work, even as far as the Illinois. The tithes, after much discussion and opposition, had finally been limited to the twenty-sixth bushel of grain harvested, an enactment still legally in force in the Province of Quebec. These tithes were paid to the seminary, which, in return provided labourers for Christ's vineyard. Laval's patriotism was remarkable. The creation of the Sovereign Council in lieu of the Company of New France was greatly due to his influence, and conduced to the proper administration of justice, to the progress of colonization, and the defence of the country against the ever-increasing ferocity and audacity of the Iroquois. He later concurred in obtaining the regiment of Carignan for the last-named object (1665). Exhausted by thirty years of a laborious apostolate, and convinced that a younger bishop would work more effacaciously for God's glory and the good of souls, he resigned in 1688. His successor, Abbé de St-Vallier, a virtuous and generous prelate, did not share all his views regarding the administration. Laval might have enjoyed a well-earned retreat in France, whither he had sailed for the fourth time. He preferred returning to the scene of his labours, where many opportunities occurred of displaying his zeal during the many years of St-Vallier's absence, five of which were spent in captivity in England. During that period, the seminary was twice burned (1701 and 1705) To Laval's intense sorrow, and rebuilt through his energy and generosity. The end was near. The last three years he spent in greater retirement and humility, and died in the odour of sanctity.

143 His reputation for holiness, though somewhat dimmed after the Conquest, revived during the nineteenth century, and the cause of his canonization having been introduced (1890), he now enjoys the title of Venerable. Laval has been accused of attachment to his own authority and disregard for the rights of civil authority, a reproach that savours somewhat of the Gallican spirit of the time, and of the historians who endorsed their prejudices. The truth is that he had to protect his flock from the greed, and selfishness of worldly potentates for whom material interests were often paramount; to defend the immunities of the church against a domineering Frontenac, who pretended to arraign clerics before his tribunal, and oblige missionaries to secure a passport for each change of residence, and refused the bishop the rank due to his dignity and sanctioned by the king, in the council of which the prelate was the chief founder, the soul and life. In an age when churchmen like Mazarin and Richelieu virtually ruled the State, Laval's authority, always exercised for the country's weal, was probably not exorbitant. He was loyal to the Crown when superior rights were not contradicted, and received nought but praise from the Grand Monarque. The charge of ambition and arbitrariness is equally groundless. In the Sovereign Council, Laval showed prudence, wisdom justice, moderation. His influence was always beneficent. Although firm and inflexible in the accomplishment of duty he was ready to consult and follow competent advice. He was of the race of Hildebrand, and to him likewise might have been applied the text: "Dilexisti justitiam et odisti iniquitatem." His sole ambition was to be a bishop according to God's heart. His spirit and practice of mortification and penance, his deep humility, his lively faith, his boundless charity towards the poor, rank him among the most holy personages.

144 GOSSELIN, "Vie de Mgr. De Laval" (Quebec, 1890); GARNEAU, "Histoire du Canada (Montreal, 1882); FERLAND, "Cours d'histoire du Canada" (Quebec, 1882); ROCHEMONTEIX, "Les Jesuites et la Nouvelle-France" (Paris, 1896); MARIE DE L'INCARNATION, "Lettres" (Tournai, 1876); "Souvenir des fetes du Monument Laval" (Quebec, 1908).

145 Lionel Lindsay

Jean Parisot de La Valette

142 Forty-eighth Grand Master of the Order of the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem; b. in 1494; d. in Malta, 21 Aug., 1568. He came from an old family of Southern France, several members of which had been capitouls (chief magistrates) in Toulouse. When still young he entered the Order of St. John as a knight of the Language of Provence. After the taking of Rhodes by the Sultan Soliman (1522), the order had, in 1530, settled in Malta which, with the city of Tripoli, the emperor Charles V had made over to them in full sovereignty. Here the knights devoted themselves to fighting the corsairs of Barbary, who were upheld by the Turkish Sultan. During this struggle La Valette made his first campaign, and soon rose to the highest ranks in the order. In 1537 he was appointed commander and governor of Tripoli. In that city, exposed to the attacks of the famous Dragut, chief of all the corsairs of Africa, La Valette displayed his power of organization, re-establishing discipline among the Christian and Moorish troops, driving useless persons out of the town, and punishing blasphemers. He was no longer Tripoli when it was taken by Dragut in 1556.

143 La Valette was unanimously chosen (18 Aug., 1557) to succeed Claude de la Sangle as grand master. He re-established his authority over the provinces of Germany and of Venice, which had refused to pay the taxes levied by general chapters, but was unable to secure from the Council of Trent a confirmation of the order's privileges, and the restitution of commanderies usurped by Protestants. Lastly, he ardently devoted himself to fighting the Moslems. In 1560 he formed an alliance with Juan de la Cerda, Admiral of Philip II, to recover Tripoli, but the Spanish squadron wasted time in the useless conquest of the island of Jorba. The Moors of Barbary, commanded by Piale and Dragut, destroyed 22 warships of the Christians, and 4,000 Christians were killed or died of disease. Thanks to La Valette's intrepidity, the galleys of the order were able to save several Christian ships and to capture many corsairs. At his own private expense La Valette had two galleys built and the wealthier commanders followed his example. The vessels of the Order were commanded by experienced navigators, like Romegas, who knew all the ports and even the smallest bays of the Mediterranean.

144 This naval strength soon made itself feared by the Moors of Barbary and even by the Turks. The Knights of Malta having aided Garcia of Toledo to take possession of Valez de la Gomera (southeast of the present Spanish military station of Peñon-de-Valez in the Rif), the alarmed Moors appealed to Constantinople. Before long the Maltese squadron gained a bloody victory between the islands of Zante and Cephalonia, and captured a Turkish galleon manned by 200 janizaries and laden with precious merchandise; and within five years they had taken 50 Turkish vessels. The Sultan Soliman, exasperated, ordered all his available vessels to assemble before Malta, where Dragut and the corsairs were incited to join them. Spies were sent to examine the fortifications. Don Marcia de Toledo, Viceroy of Sicily, having obtained secret information of all this, warned La Valette and endeavoured to induce Philip II to assist in the defence of Malta. La Valette summoned all the knights of Christendom, raised 2000 men in Italy, and obtained from Don Garcia two companies of Spanish troops. The inhabitants of Malta were organized as a militia, every priory sent money, and 600 knights from all the provinces of the order hastened to the rescue. La Valette displayed extraordinary activity, planning fortifications, helping the diggers with his own hands, inspecting magazines, and attending to the smallest details. He told the assembled knights that they had now entered upon a struggle between the Gospel and the Koran. After receiving Holy Communion, all vowed to shed their blood in defence of the Faith. But the Order of Malta was poorly supported in this crisis by the Christian princes. The King of Spain alone promised assistance, which, however, was not ready when the Turkish fleet, commanded by Mustapha, appeared before Malta on 18 May 1565. It consisted of 159 warships manned by 30,000 janizaries or spahis, and a large number of vessels were employed to carry the siege train. The defenders of Malta were 700 knights, with 8500 mercenaries and enrolled citizens and peasants.

145 Mustapha attacked the fort of St. Elmo, and Dragut joined him with 13 galleys. In spite of the Maltese artillery, in spite of the heroism of the besieged, the Turks succeeded in taking that fort on 23 June, after an assault lasting seven hours. Thousands of Turks and the famous Dragut died in the encounter. Mustapha, exasperated by the resistance, ordered the hearts of the wounded knights to be torn out of their bodies. La Valette, on his side, had all the Turkish prisoners beheaded and forbade any more prisoners to be taken. From that time the town proper and all the forts were surrounded. On 18 August the Turks tried to enter by a breach in the wall, but were driven back after six hours' fighting. La Valette himself, pike in hand, charged them, leading his knights. On 23 August another assault resulted in the taking of the Castille bastion, but La Valette spent that night constructing new defences. At last, on 7 September, the relieving fleet of Don Garcia de Toledo arrived. After four months of fighting, Mustapha, disheartened, raised the siege; he had lost more than 20,000 men, and abandoned his heavy artillery. Malta was saved, and the heroism of La Valette at last awakened Europe from its torpor. All the princes sent their congratulations; the pope offered him a cardinal's hat, which he refused; 300 noblemen, among them Brantôme came and offered him their services. To protect the island from any future attack, the grand master had another town built upon the site of Fort St. Elmo (1566). This was the city of Valette (or Valletta) which made Malta impregnable, and which was still sufficiently strong in 1798 to check Bonaparte. The last years of Valette's life were saddened by conflicts with the pope, but at the time of his death, in his seventy-fourth year, he was busy preparing "for some great deed of war and of conquest" (Brantôme).

146 BRANTOME, Grands capitaines francois, V (Paris, 1866), 215-39; IDEM, Des Couronnels francois: Recit du voyage de Brantôme a Malte (Paris, 1870), 407-410; Coleccion de documentos ineditos, XXVI, XXIX (Madrid, 1870), (letters of La Valette); VERLOT, Histoire des chevaliers hospitaliers, III, IV (Paris, 1726); FORNERON, Histoire de Philippe II, I (Paris, 1881), 378-89. - For bibliography of the siege of Malta, see POHLER, Bibliotheca Historico-militaris, I (Leipzig, 1880), 163 - 64.

147 LOUIS BRÉHIER

Laval University of Quebec

145 The University of Laval was founded in 1852 by the Seminary of Quebec; the royal charter granted to it by Queen Victoria was signed at Westminster, 8 December, 1852. By the Bull "Inter varias sollicitudines", 15 April, 1876, Pius IX completed the university by according it canonical erection together with the most extensive privileges. In virtue of this Bull the university has as its protector at Rome the Cardinal Prefect of Propaganda. The control of doctrine and discipline devolves upon a superior council composed of the archbishop and bishops of the Province of Quebec, under the presidency of the Archbishop of Quebec, who is himself chancellor of the university. By the terms of the royal charter the Visitor of the Laval University is always the Catholic Archbishop of Quebec, who has the right of veto in regard to all regulations and appointments. This shows in what a broad spirit the English Government permits the Catholic French Canadians, without other supervision than that of an archbishop of their Church and nationality, to organize their university education. The royal charter indeed guarantees liberty of higher education. By this charter the office of rector, the most important in the university belongs of right to the superior of Seminary of Quebec. This position is temporary, since the superior of the seminary, who is elected for three years and is eligible for re-election after this term, cannot hold office for more than six consecutive years, except with special authorization from the ecclesiastical authorities. The charter also provides for the establishment of a council which, conjointly with the rector, shall conduct the administration of the university. This council is composed of all the directors of the seminary and of the three oldest professors of each faculty. It is empowered to make whatever statutes and rules it judges suitable, on the sole condition that these enactments contain nothing contrary to the laws of the United Kingdom or to those of Canada.

146 The university comprises the four faculties of theology, Iaw, medicine, and arts. Each faculty is provided with a special council which discusses and submits to the university council all questions which most directly interest one or the other of these faculties. The professors of the faculty of theology are named by the visitor; all the others are appointed by the council. The degrees which may be obtained by students in each of these faculties are those of bachelor, master, licentiate, and doctor. Good conduct is an essential condition for securing degrees. In order that the right number of classical colleges may profit by its right of conferring diplomas granted by the royal charter, and may also take a more direct interest in its work, the university received, in virtue of a provision of this charter, the power to affiliate with itself such public educational establishments of the province as it may desire on the conditions laid down by the council. At present all the houses of secondary education in the Province of Quebec, except the Jesuit College at Montreal, have sought ard obtained this affiliation. The College of St. Dunstan, Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, has also secured for its students the advantages and privileges attached to the examinations for the university baccalaureate. To Laval University are also affiliated the Polytechnic School of Montreal, the School of Dental Surgery, thc School of Pharmacy, the French Veterinary School, and the Central School of Surveving of Quebec.

147 Conformably to a decision of the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda, dated 1 February, 1876, an extension of the faculties of the university was made in favour of Montreal, the archbishop of which was named vice-chancellor of the university. The decree "Jamdudum" of 2 February 1889, modified in some respects the constitution of the Montreal branch of the university. The direction of this branch is now confided to a vice-rector proposed to the university council of Quebec by the bishops of the ecclesiastical Province of Montreal. The branch has thus become nearly independent of the mother university.

148 The academic year comprises nine months, and is divided into three terms. Instruction is given by titular professors, associate professors, and instructors. Only the titular professors are professors in the required sense of the charter and as such may be members of the university council. The Physical museum for the use of faculty of arts at Quebec is very complete. It includes nearly fifteen hundred instruments in all the branches of physics, among them most of the apparatus for the demonstration of recent discoveries. The mineralogical museum is rich in specimens. Especially remarkable is a valuable general collection of Canadian minerals and rocks. The geological museum contains more than two thousand specimens. In the botanical museum there are a complete collection of Canadian woods used in industry, and having a commercial value, several collections of exotic woods, among others a very remarkable collection of woods sold in the English markets, and a fine collection of artificial fruits and mushrooms. The herbarium of the University of Quebec contains more twelve thousand plants. The zoological museum contains the most important Canadian mammals. The ornithological collection comprises nearly eight hundred species, represented by more than fiteen thousand individuals. The collection of rapacious birds or birds of prey is nearly complete as regards Canadian species, not including several rare exotic specimens. The entomological collection now numbers more than fifteen thousand species of insects from all parts of the world; the numismatic museum, over eleven thousand coins and medals; the library nearly one hundred and fifty thousand volumes. Students and strangers have access to it for purposes of study every day except Sunday. The Art Gallery contains nearly four hundred pictures, many of them of great value. Among them are canvases signed by renowned artists such as Salvator Rosa, Lesueur, Lanfranc, Poussin, Van Dyek, Puget, Vernet, Romanelli, Albano, Parrocel, Lebrun, etc.

149 The principal building of the University at Quebec, generally called Laval university, is that in which the courses in law and arts are held and in which the museums and the library are located. It is five stories high and more than three hundred feet long. The theological faculty resides in a more recent edifice two hundred and sixty feet long and five stories high. It accommodates over one hundred students, besides forty professors attached to the establishment. The names of the rectors of the university since its foundation are as follows: Abbé L. J. Casault, Mgr E. A Taschereau, Mgr. M. E. Méthot, Mgr. T. E. Hamel, Mgr. J. C. K. Laflamme, Mgr. O. E. Mathieu, and Abbé A. Gosselin. During 1908-09 four hundred and twenty-one students attended the various faculties, while the number who followed the courses at Montreal was much larger.

150 O.E. Mathieu

Lavant

148 (Lavantina)

149 An Austrian bishopric in the southern part of Styria, suffragan of Salzburg. The original seat of the bishopric lay in the eastern part of Carinthia in the valley of the Lavant. It was here that Eberhard II, Archbishop of Salzburg, established, 20 Aug., 1212, at St. Andrä, with the consent of Pope Innocent III and Emperor Frederick II, a collegiate chapter, the canons of which followed the Rule of St. Augustine; its members were chosen from the cathedral chapter of Salzburg. On account of the great remoteness and the difficulty of travelling, the archbishop, about the year 1223, asked Pope Honorius III to allow him to found a bishopric at St. Andrä. After the pope had had the archbishop's request examined by commissioners, and had given his consent, Eberhard drew up the deed of foundation, 10 May, 1228, wherein he secured the possession of the episcopal chair for himself and his successors in perpetuity. He named as first bishop his court chaplain Ulrich, who had formerly been priest of Haus, in Styria (died 1257).

150 In the deed of foundation of the new bishopric, no boundaries were defined. In a deed of Archbishop Frederick II of Salzburg of 1280, seventeen parishes, situated partly in Carinthia and partly in Styria, were described as belonging to Lavant; the extent of the diocese was rather small, but the bishops also attended to the office of vicar-general of the Archbishops of Salzburg for some scattered districts; they also frequently attended to the office of Vicedom (bishop's deputy in secular affairs) at Friesach. The tenth bishop, Dietrich Wolfhauer (1318-32), is mentioned in deeds as the first prince-bishop; he was also secretary of Frederick III the Handsome, of Austria, and was present at the battle of Mühldorf in 1322. Since the twenty-second bishop, Theobald Schweinbeck (1446-63), the bishops have borne without intermission the title of prince. The following prominent bishops deserve special mention: the humanist Johann I von Rott (1468-82), died as Prince-Bishop of Breslau; Georg II Agrikola (1570-84), who after 1572 was also at the same time Bishop of Seckau; Georg III Stobäus von Palmburg (1584-1618), a worthy promotor of the Counter-Reformation; Maximilian Gandolph Freiherr von Kienburg (1654-65), did much towards increasing the financial resources of the diocese.

151 By the new regulations under Emperor Joseph II, several bishoprics were added to the Diocese of Lavant. Prince-Archbishop Michael Brigido of Laibach in 1788 ceded a number of parishes in the southern part of what is now the Diocese of Lavant; and the district of Völkermarkt, which was afterwards again detached, was added to the bishopric at that time. The present extent of the diocese was brought about by the circumscription of 1 June, 1859. The valley of the Lavant and the district of Völkermarkt in Carinthia fell to Gurk; in consequence of which the District of Marburg was transferred from Seckau to Lavant; since then the diocese comprises the whole of southern Styria. By the decree of the Congregation of the Consistory of 20 May, 1857, the see of the bishop was removed from St. Andrä to Marburg; the parish church of St. John the Baptist in that place being erected into a cathedral, and the title "of Lavant" being preserved. On 4 Sept, 1859, Bishop Anton Martin Slomschek (1846-62) made his solemn entry into Marburg. His successors, Jakob Maximilian Stepischnegg (1862-89), and Michael Napotnik (since 1889) have shown great zeal for the promotion of the spiritual life by introducing religious orders and founding educational and charitable institutions and clubs. But the most beneficial work done for the religious life of the diocese was that of the diocesan synods, held by Stepischnegg (1883), and by Napotnik, who followed his example (1896, 1900, 1903, and 1906).

152 The bishopric is divided into 24 deaneries, and numbered (1909) 223 parishes, 200 chaplaincies (48 unoccupied), 7 unoccupied offices and benefices, 375 priests engaged in the cure of souls, 39 secular priests and 53 regular clergy in other positions, 37 clergy without office, 675 churches and chapels, and 521,896 souls. The cathedral chapter, which is four-fifths Slovene and one-fifth German, consists of one mitred cathedral provost, one mitred cathedral dean, and five canons. The old cathedral chapter, which was composed of the canons of the Augustinian order, was dissolved in 1808, and its property was assigned to the "Religionsfond" founded by Joseph II; in 1825 a new cathedral chapter was provisionally erected, and definitively so in 1847. Besides the actual canons, there are six stalls for honorary canons (four temporarily vacant). The council is composed of six advisors; the prince-bishop is the president. In the theological diocesan college there are eleven lecturers; the episcopal priests' seminary numbers (1909) 4 classes, with 42 students; the "Maximilianum-Viktorinum", an episcopal seminary for boys, 8 classes, with 80 students. Eight clerical teachers taught in 7 state schools.

153 In the diocese there are the following establishments of religious orders: 1 monastery of Minorites of Sts. Peter and Paul, at Pettau (founded 1239), with nine fathers; 4 Franciscan monasteries, with 31 fathers, 23 lay brothers, and 5 clerical novices; 1 Capuchin monastery at Cilli (founded 1611), with 6 fathers, and 4 lay brothers; 2 mission houses of the Fathers of St. Vincent de Paul, with 8 priests, and 10 lay brothers; 1 Trappist abbey, Maria Erlösung, at Reichenburg (founded 1881 by French Trappists), with 21 fathers, and 48 brothers. Orders of women: Sisters of Charity of St. Vincent de Paul, 82, in 6 establishments, who are dedicated to the nursing of the sick; School Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis of Assisi, 1 motherhouse, 14 affiliated houses, 190 sisters; School Sisters from the mother-house of Algersdorf, Graz, 9, with 1 institution 1 magdalen asylum, with 17 canonesses, and 15 lay sisters; Sisters of Mercy of the Holy Cross, 3, with one establishment; Sisters of the Teutonic Order, 9, with one hospital; 1 Carmelite Convent of Perpetual Adoration (10 sisters). The School Sisters conduct a training school for female teachers, 1 lyceum, 11 girls' schools, 5 boarding-schools, 6 kindergartens, 2 orphan asylums, 2 schools of domestic economy, and one home for servant-girls. There are 36 Catholic clubs and confraternities in the diocese, besides 25 associations for the building and adornment of churches.

154 The most prominent ecclesiastical buildings in the diocese are: the cathedral and parish church of St. John the Baptist, at Marburg, which was begun in the middle of the twelfth century as a Romanesque basilica, rebuilt after 1520 in the Gothic style, again restored after the fire in 1601, and once more in 1885; the provostship and parish church of St. Georg, at Pettau, erected in the Gothic style about 1314; the abbey and parish church of St. Daniel, at Cilli, dates from the middle of the sixteenth century; and the shrine of St. Maria der Wüste, in the neighbourhood of Marburg (built 1628), in the baroque style.

155 TANGL, Reihe der Bischöfe von Lavant (Klagenfurt, 1841); STEPISCHNEGG, Georg III. Stobäus von Palmburg, Fürstbischof von Lavant in Archiv. für Kunde österreichischer Geschichtsquellen (1856); Gesta et Statuta Synod. diœcesanæ, 1896 (Marburg, 1897); Die Zweite Diöcesansynode (Marburg, 1896); Ecclesiæ Lavantinæ Synodus diœcesana 1903 (Marburg, 1904); Synodus diœcesana 1906 (Marburg, 1907); Kirchliches Verordnungsblatt für die Lavanter Diöcese; Personalstand des Bistums Lavant in Steiermark für das Jahr 1909 (Marburg, 1909).

156 Joseph Lins

Charles-Honoré Laverdière

151 French-Canadian historian, born Chateau-Richer, Province of Quebec, 1826; died at Quebec, 1873. After his ordination (1851) he was attached to the Quebec Seminary, where he had studied the classics and theology, and he remained there till his death. He utilized his varied talents in teaching belles-lettres, physics, chemistry, mathematics, music and drawing. His favourite pursuits were Canadian history and archaeology. Although his original writings were few, including a school history of Canada and some historical pamphlets, he supervised the re-editing of several most important works, which are the very sources of Canadian history. Conspicuous among these are the "Relations des Jésuites" (1858), with erudite and exhaustive analytical tables; the "Journal des Jésuites" (1871); and finally, the realization of his most ardent wish, "Les Oeuvres de Champlain" of which he wrote the introduction and countless annotations of great historical exactness and value. He often spent a day in verifying a single date or the spelling of a name. When the recently completed edition was entirely destroyed by fire, Laverdière calmly remarked that some misprints that had escaped his vigilance might be avoided in a new edition. His thorough knowledge of plain-song enabled him to publish a series of liturgical works. He was of a mild and amiable character, esteemed by all who knew him. His mastery of Canadian history, especially the period from 1500 to 1700, gave his assertions great authority.

152 Lionel Lindsay

Pierre Gaultier de Varennes, Sieur de Lavérendrye

154 Discoverer of the Canadian West, born at Three Rivers, Quebec, 17 November, 1685; died at Montreal, 6 December, 1749. His early manhood was passed as a soldier in the service of France, and he was wounded on the battlefield of Malplaquet. Later he returned to his native country and engaged in the fur trade. As a step towards the exploration of the Pacific, or the Western Sea as it was then called, he established three trading posts west of Lake Superior, i.e. Forts St. Pierre, on Rainy River (1731), St. Charles on the Lake of the Woods (1732), and Maurepas, at the month of the Winnipeg River (1734). A sincere Christian, and having at heart his own religious interests as well as those of his men, he had taken with him Father Charles M. Mesaiger, a Jesuit, who did not go farther than the Lake of the Woods, where he was succeeded, in the summer of 1735, by Father Jean P. Aulneau de La Touche.

155 This young priest having temporarily left for the east (8 June, 1736) with Lavérendrye's eldest son, Jean-Baptiste, and nineteen "voyageurs", in quest of much needed provisions, the entire party was slain on an island of the Lake of the Woods on the very day of their departure. Lavérendrye prudently resisted the pressing solicitations of the natives, burning to avenge on the Sioux, the authors of the massacre, the wrong done to the French. Then, in spite of his many debts occasioned by explorations and establishments for which he had no other funds than the desultory returns of the fur trade in an unorganized country, he went on with the task entrusted to his patriotism by the French court. On 24 September, 1738, he reached the exact spot where now stands Winnipeg, and, ascending the Assiniboine to the present site of Portage la Prairie, he built there a post which he called Fort La Reine. Thence he made for the south, and by the end of 1738 he was at a Mandan village on the Upper Missouri. Early in the spring of the following year, he sent north one of his sons, who discovered Lakes Manitoba, Dauphin, Winnipegosis, and Bourbon, and erected a fort on Lake Dauphin. Meantime Lavérendrye had had to repair to Montreal to come to an understanding with his creditors. On his return to the west he took with the Jesuit Father Claude G.Coquart, the first priest to see the confluence of the Assiniboine with the Red River and reside at what is now Portage la Prairie (1741). In the spring of 1742 he commissioned two of his sons, Pierre Gauthier, dit the Chevalier, and Francois, to explore the country as far west as they could possibly go. In the company of savages who had never seen a white man, they reached, after many perils, one of the spurs of the Rocky Mountains, which they partially scaled (12 January, 1743). The desertion of their native guides, terrified at the unexpected discovery of a village of their traditional enemies, alone prevented further progress. The explorers must have penetrated to a point in the northwest corner of what is now Montana. Lavérendryre was naturally endowed, it is true, with indomitable energy, but he was struggling against too heavy odds. Dragged before the law courts by the Montreal merchants whom he could not pay, and accused by others of thinking more of filthy lucre than of discoveries, and ill sustained by the Paris authorities, he had to give up his work (1744), after consecrating to it the thirteen best years of his life. Gradually his worth became recognized at Paris, and honours were bestowed upon him by the French king. He was on the eve of resuming his explorations when he died, and was buried in the vault of Notre-Dame, Montreal.

156 An upright man and a good Christian, Lavérendrye was considerably more than a mere explorer. No less than six fur-trading stations attested to his efficiency as an organizer. On the other hand, the numerous personnel of "voyageurs" whom these posts necessitated eventually gave rise to that wonderful race, the Metis, which was in after years to play such an important part in the history of Central Canada.

157 A. G. Morice.

Jean-Nicolas Laverlochère

157 Missionary, born at St. Georges d'Espérance, Grenoble, France, 6 December, 1812; died at Temiscaming, Canada, 4 October, 1884. He began his religious life as a lay brother in the Congregation of the Oblates, but feeling called to evangelize the natives of Canada, he was allowed to study for the priesthood, and was ordained 5 May, 1844, at L'Acadie, near Montreal. He was sent in succession to Abittibbi, Moose Factory, and other posts on Hudson Bay, where he laboured for the conversion of the native tribes. Alone, or in collaboration with others, he published a number of devotional books in Indian. His letters in the "Annales de la Propagation de la Foi" attracted wide attention, and his reputation as a zealous missionary spread throughout Catholic Europe to such an extent that he was ultimately recognized as the Apostle of Hudson Bay. A stroke of palsy interrupted his labours in the course of 1851.

158 A. G. Morice

Charles-Martial-Allemand Lavigerie

160 French cardinal, b. at Huire near Bayonne, 13 Oct., 1825; d. at Algiers, 27 Nov., 1892. He studied at the diocesan seminary of Larressore, then went to St. Nicolas-du-Chardonnet in Paris, and finally to St. Sulpice. Ordained on 2 June, 1849, he devoted the first year of his priesthood to higher studies at the newly founded Ecole des Carmes, taking at the Sorbonne the doctorates of letters (1850), and of theology (1853), to which he added later the Roman doctorates of civil and canon law. Appointed chaplain of Sainte-Geneviève in 1853, associate professor of church history at the Sorbonne in 1854, and titular of the chair in 1857, Lavigerie did not confine his activity to his chaplaincy or chair, but took a leading part in the organization of the students' cercles catholiques, and of l'œuvre des écoles d'Orient. As director of the latter he collected large sums for the benefit of the Oriental Christians persecuted by the Druses, and even went to Syria to superintend personally the distribution of the funds (1860). His brilliant services were rewarded by rapid promotion, first in 1861 to the Roman Rota, and two years later to the See of Nancy. From the beginning of his episcopate he displayed that genius of organization which is the characteristic of his life. The foundation of colleges at Vic, Blamont, and Lunéville; the establishment at Nancy of a higher institute for clerics and of a Maison d'étudiants for law students; the organization of the episcopal curia; the publication of the "Recueil des Ordonnances épiscopales statuts et règlements du diocèse de Nancy", were but the first fruits of a promising episcopate, when he was transferred to Algiers on 27 March, 1867.

161 As Archbishop of Algiers he promptly reversed the policy of neutrality towards the Moslems imposed upon his predecessors by the French authorities, and inaugurated a strong movement of assimilation and conversion. With the help of the White Fathers and of the White Sisters, whom he founded for the purpose, he established and maintained at great cost orphan asylums, industrial schools, hospitals, and agricultural settlements, wherein the Arabs could be brought under the influence of the Gospel. Appointed as early as 1868 Apostolic Delegate of Western Sahara and the Sudan, he began in 1874 the work of southward expansion which was to bring his heroic missionaries into the very heart of the Dark Continent, and result in the erection of five vicariates Apostolic in Equatorial Africa. To those many burdens -- made heavier by the consequences (felt even in Algeria) of the Franco-Prussian war, the withdrawal of government financial support, and the threatened extension to the African colonies of anti-religious legislation passed in France -- Lavigerie added other cares: the administration of the Diocese of Constantina, 1871; the foundation at St. Anne of Jerusalem of a clerical seminary for the Oriental missions, 1878, and, after the occupation of Tunis by France, the government of that vicariate. Cardinal in 1881, he became the first primate of the newly restored See of Carthage in 1884, retaining meanwhile the See of Algiers. "I shall not seek one day's rest" was the remark of Lavigerie when he landed on African soil. He carried out that promise to the letter. While Notre-Dame d'Afrique at Algiers, the Basilica of St. Louis at Carthage, and the Cathedral of St. Vincent de Paul at Tunis will stand as monuments of his prodigious activity in Africa, his labours ranged far beyond the vast territories placed under his jurisdiction. Klein (Le Cardinal Lavigerie, p. 268) describes minutely the many ways in which he served the best interests of France in, and out of, Africa. He will, however, be best remembered by the leading rôle he played in furthering the policy of Leo XIII, with regard to French Catholics, and in promoting the anti-slavery movement.

162 Tinctured with Gallicanism through his early association with the Sorbonne, Lavigerie modified his views during his stay at Rome, and his attitude at the Vatican Council is fully expressed by the promise he made his clergy "to be with Peter". When Leo XIII, by his Encyclicals "Nobilissima Gallorum gens" of 8 Feb., 1884, and "Sapientiæ æternæ" of 3 Feb., 1890, directed the French Catholics to rally to the Republic, he generously put aside other political affiliations and again "was with Peter". A great sensation was created when at Algiers, on 12 Nov., 1890, he proclaimed before a vast assemblage of French officials the obligation for French Catholics of sincerly adhering to the republican form of government. The famous "toast d'Alger" was the object of harsh criticism and even vituperation from the monarchist element. With his usual vehemence Cardinal Lavigterie answered by his "Lettre à un catholique", in which he not only impugned the pretenders -- the Comte de Chambord, the Comte de Paris, and Prince Napoléon -- but even hinted that monarchy was an outgrown institution. In this he may have gone too far, but in the main point it was proved later by Cardinal Rampolla's letter of 28 November, 1890, and Pope Leo's Encyclical "Inter innumeras" of 16 Feb., 1892, that Lavigerie had been the self-sacrificing spokesman of the pope.

163 The suppression of slavery had been the subject of Lavigerie's first pastoral letter at Algiers. When Leo XIII in his Encyclical to the bishops of Brazil (5 May, 1888) appealed to the world in behalf of the slaves, the Primate of Carthage was the first to respond. In spite of age and infirmities he visited the capitals of Europe, teling of the horrors of African slavery and urging the formation of anti-slavery societies. The international "Conférence" of Brussels, 1890, practically adopted Lavigerie's suggestions as to the best means of achieving the desired abolition, and the "Congrés de Paris", called the same year by the cardinal himself, showed great enthusiasm and verified Lavigerie's saying: "pour sauver l'Afrique intérieure, il faut soulever la colère du monde."

164 After the "toast d'Alger" and the "Congrès de Paris", Lavigerie, broken in health, retired to Algiers. His last two years were saddened by the often unjust criticism of his cherished project -- the "frères pionniers du Sahara" -- the death of many of his missionaries, and, above all, the passing of Uganda under the control of the sectarian Imperial East-African Company. He died at Algiers as preparations were being made for the twenty-fifth anniversary of his African episcopate. The daily press throughout the world eulogized him, who had forbidden all eulogies at his funeral, and the "Moniteur de Rome" rightly summarized his life by saying that, in a few years of incredible activity, he had laid out work for generations. An able scholar and an orator of the first order, Lavigerie was also a writer. Besides some scholastic productions destined for his pupils at the Ecole des Carmes (1848), we have from his pen a doctorate thesis: "Essai sur l'école chrétienne d'Edesse" (Paris, 1850); several contributions to the "Bibliothèque pieuse et instructive à l'usage de la jeunesse chrétienne" (Paris, 1853); "Exposé des erreurs doctrinales du Jansénisme" (Paris, 1858), an abridgment of his lessons at the Sorbonne; "Decreta concilii provincialis Algeriensis in Africa" (1873); a large number of discourses, pamphlets, or reports, some of which were embodied in the two volumes of his "Œuvres choises" (Paris, 1884); "Documents pour la fondation de l'œuvre antiesclavagiste" (St. Cloud, 1889), etc.

165 BAUNARD, Le Cardinal Lavigerie (Paris, 1896 and 1898); KLEIN, Le Cardinal Lavigerie et ses œuvres d'Afrique (Tours, 1891 and 1897); DE LACOMBE, Le Card. Lavigerie in Le Correspondent (Sept., 1909); DE COLEVILLE, Le Cardinal Lavigerie (Paris, 1905); LAGES, Le Cardinal Lavigerie, sa vie, ses écrits, sa doctrine in Gloires Sacerdotales Contemporaines (Paris, s. d.); GRUSSENMEYER, Vingt-cinq années d'episcopat (Paris, 1888). See also PIOLET, Les Missions d'Afrique (Paris, 1908), and such periodicals as the Bulletin des Missions d'Alger, the Missions d'Afrique des Pères Blancs, the Bulletin official de la Societé anti-esclavagiste de France.

166 J.F. Sollier.

Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier

163 Chemist, philosopher, economist; born in Paris, 26 August, 1743; guillotined 8 May, 1794. He was the son of Jean-Antoine Lavoisier, a lawyer of distinction, and Emilie Punctis, who belonged to a rich and influential family, and who died when Antoine-Laurent was five years old. His early years were most carefully guarded by his aunt, Mlle Constance Punctis, to whom he was devotedly attached; and through her assistance he was secured the advantage of a good education. He attended the College Mazarin, which was noted for its faculty of science, and here he studied mathematics and astronomy under Abbé de la Caille, who had built an observatory at the college after having won renown by measuring an arc of the meridian at the Cape of Good Hope, by determining the length of the second's pendulum, and by his catalogue of the stars. Young Lavoisier also received instruction from Bernard de Jussieu in botany, from Guettard in geology and mineralogy, and from Rouelle in chemistry. In logic he was influenced by the writings of Abbé de Condillac, as he frequently acknowledges in his "Traité Elementaire de Chimi." He began his career by entering the profession of the law, but soon abandoned this to return to his favourite studies of chemistry and mineralogy. His first scientific communication to the Academy was upon the composition and properties of gypsum and plaster of Paris, and this is to-day a classic and a valuable contribution to our knowledge of crystallizing cements. He early learned to look to the balance for help in the definition of facts, and found its great value particularly when he began to study the phenomena we now know under the terms combustion or oxidation, and reduction or deoxidation.

164 The most advanced chemical philosophers of his day taught that there was something in every combustible substance which was driven out by the burning, that the reduction of an oxide of a metal to the metallic state meant the absorption of this substance or principle, which Stahl had called phlogiston. Lavoisier studied the teaching of the phlogistonists, but having also a mastery of physics and of pneumatic experimentation he became dissatisfied with their theory. He seized upon two important discoveries, that of oxygen by Priestley (1774), and that of the compound nature of water by Cavendish (1781) and by a masterly stroke of genius reconciled discordant appearances and threw the light of day upon every phase of the world's reacting elements. His theory, for a long time thereafter known as the antiphlogists' theory, was really the reverse of that of the phlogistonists, and was simply that something ponderable was absorbed when combustion took place; that it was obtained from the surrounding air; that the increase in the weight of a metallic substance when burned was equal to the decrease in the weight of the air used; that most substances thus burning were converted into acids, or metals into metallic oxides. Priestly had called this absorbed substance or gas dephlogisticated air; Scheele called it empyreal air; Lavoisier "air strictly pure" or "very respirable air" as distinct from the other and non-respirable constituent of the atmosphere. Later, he called it oxygen because it was acid-making (oxys, and geinomai).

165 So great a change ensued in experimental chemistry, and in theory and nomenclature, and such a mass of facts was co-ordinated and explained by Lavoisier that he has been justly called "the father of modern chemistry." He was the first to explain definitely, the formation of acids and salts, to enunciate the principle of conservation as set forth by chemical equations, to develop quantitative analysis, gas analysis, and calorimetry, and to create a consistent system of chemical nomenclature. He made deep researches in organic chemistry, and studied the metabolism of organic compounds. His memoirs and contributions to the Academiy were of extraordinary number and variety. His life in other fields was romantic, full of interest and a social triumph, but sadly destined to end in tragedy. Happily married, and having the aid of his wife even to the extent of employing her in the prosecution and recording of his experiments, he drew around his fireside and to his library at the State Gunpowder Works a circle of brilliant French savants and distinguished travellers from other lands. Early in his career he felt the need of increasing his resources to meet the necessities caused by his scientific experiments. With this in view he became a deputy fermier-général, whereby his income was much increased. But joining this association of State-protected tax-collectors only prepared the way for many years of bitter attack and a share of the public odium attaching to their privilege. He headed many public commissions requiring scientific investigation, he aimed at bringing France to such a state of agricultural and industrial expansion that the peasant and the working-man would have profitable employment and the small landed proprietor relief from the burdensome taxes hitherto purposely increased to make grants to corrupt favourites of the Court. Having incurred the hatred of Marat he found himself, together with his fellow fermiers-général, growing more and more unpopular during the terrible days of the Revolution. Finally in 1794 he was imprisoned with twenty-seven others. A farcical trial speedily followed, in which he was charged with "incivism" in that he had damaged public health by adding water to tobacco. He and his companions, amongst them Jacques Alexis Paulze, his father-in-law, were condemned to death. Lavoisier, who was devotedly attached to him, was obliged to stand and see M. Paulze's head fall under the guillotine, 8 May, 1794. Lavoisier was then 51 years old. His biographers say little as to his last hours. Grimaux relates that all the condemned men were silent and carried themselves with dignity and courage in the face of death. What Lavoisier's sentiments were can be assumed from a passage in Grimaux (p. 53) who had been the first biographer to obtain access to Lavoiosier's papers.

166 > Raised in a pious family which had given many priests to the Church, he had held to his beliefs. To Edward King, an English author who had sent him a controversial work, he wrote, 'You have done a noble thing in upholding revelation and the authenticity of the Holy Scriptures, and it is remarkable that you are using for the defence precisely the same weapons which were once used for the attack.'

167 His goods and chattels and all his scientific instruments were listed and appropriated on the day following his execution, though Mme Lavoisier succeeded in having some restored to her. She was childless and long survived him. THORPE in Contempory Review, Antonine Laurent Lavoisier (Dec., 1890); GRIMAUX, Lavoisier 1743-1794 (Paris, 1888); THORPE, Priestly, Cavendish, Lavoisier and La Revolution Chimique in Brit. Assoc. Address (Leeds, 1890); BERTHELOT, La Revolution Chimique (Paris, 1890); KOPP, Entdeckung der Chemie in der neueren Zeit (1874); HOFER, Histoire de la Chimie, II, 490; VON MEYER, Geschichte der Chemie (Leipzig, 1888); LAVOISIER, Memoires de Chimie (1805); Œuvres de Lavoisier, published by the Ministry of Public Instruction (Paris, 1864-8); DUMAS, Lecons sur la Philosophie Chimique.

168 C.F. McKenna

Law

166 I. Concept of Law

167 A. By law in the widest sense is understood that exact guide, rule, or authoritative standard by which a being is moved to action or held back from it. In this sense we speak of law even in reference to creatures that are incapable of thinking or willing and to inanimate matter. The Book of Proverbs (ch. viii) says of Eternal Wisdom that it was present when God prepared the heavens and when with a certain law and compass He enclosed the depths, when He encompassed the sea with its bounds and set a law to the waters that they should not pass their limits. Job (xxviii, 25 sqq.) lauds the wisdom of God Who made a weight for the winds and weighed the water by measure, Who gave a law for the rain and a way for the sounding storms.

168 Daily experience teaches that all things are driven by their own nature to assume a determinate, constant attitude. Investigators of the natural sciences hold it to be an established truth that all nature is ruled by universal and constant laws and that the object of the natural sciences is to search out these laws and to make plain their reciprocal relations in all directions. All bodies are subject, for example, to the law of inertia, i.e. they persist in the condition of rest or motion in which they may be until an external cause changes this condition. Kepler discovered the laws according to which the planets move in elliptical orbits around the sun, Newton the law of gravitation by which all bodies attract in direct proportion to their mass and inversely as to the square of the distance between them. The laws which govern light, heat, and electricity are known today. Chemistry, biology, and physiology have also their laws. The scientific formulae in which scholars express these laws are only laws in so far as they state what processes actually take place in the objects under consideration, for law implies a practical rule according to which things act. These scientific formulae exert of themselves no influence on things; they simply state the condition in which these things are. The laws of nature are nothing but the forces and tendencies to a determinate, constant method of activity implanted by the Creator in the nature of things, or the unvarying, homogeneous activity itself which is the effect of that tendency. The word law is used in this latter sense when it is asserted that a natural law has been changed or suspended by a miracle. For the miracle does not change the nature of things or their constant tendency; the Divine power simply prevents the things from producing their natural effect, or uses them as means to attaining an effect surpassing their natural powers. The natural tendency to a determinate manner of activity on the part of creatures that have neither the power to think nor to will can be called law for a twofold reason: first, because it forms the decisive reason and the controlling guide for the activities of such creatures, and consequently as regards irrational creatures fulfills the task which devolves upon law in the strict sense as regards rational beings; and further, because it is the expression and the effect of a rational lawgiving will. Law is a principle of regulation and must, like every regulation, be traced back to a thinking and willing being. This thinking and willing being is the Creator and Regulator of all things, God Himself. It may be said that the natural forces and tendencies placed in the nature of creatures, are themselves the law, the permanent expression of the will of the Eternal Observer Who influences creatures and guides them to their appointed ends, not by merely external influences but by their innate inclinations and impulses.

169 B. In a stricter and more exact sense law is spoken of only in reference to free beings endowed with reason. But even in this sense the expression law is used sometimes with a wider, sometimes with a more restricted meaning= By law are at times understood all authoritative standards of the action of free, rational beings. In this sense the rules of the arts, poetry, grammar, and even the demands of fashion or etiquette are called laws. This is, however, an inexact and exaggerated mode of expression. In the proper and strict sense laws are the moral norms of action, binding in conscience, set up for a public, self-governing community. This is probably the original meaning of the word law, whence it was gradually transformed to the other kinds of laws (natural laws, laws of art). Law can in this sense be defined with St. Thomas Aquinas (Summa Theologica I-II:90:4) as: A regulation in accordance with reason promulgated by the head of a community for the sake of the common welfare.

170 Law is first a regulation, i.e. a practical principle, which aims at ordering the actions of the members of the community. To obtain in any community a unified and systematized co-operation of all there must be an authority that has the right to issue binding rules as to the manner in which the members of the community are to act. The law is such a binding rule and draws its constraining or obligatory force from the will of the superior. Both because the superior wills and so far as he wills, is law binding. Not every regulation of the superior, however, is binding, but only those in accordance with reason. Law is the criterion of reasonable action and must, therefore, itself be reasonable. A law not in accordance with reason is a contradiction. That the Divine laws must of necessity be reasonable and just is self-evident, for the will of God is essentially holy and just and can only command what is in harmony with the Divine wisdom, justice, and holiness. Human laws, however, must be subordinate to the Divine law, or at least, must not contradict it, for human authority is only a participation in the supreme Divine power of government, and it is impossible that God could give human beings the right to issue laws that are unreasonable and in contravention of His will. Further, law must be advantageous to the common welfare. This is a universally acknowledged principle. That the Divine laws are advantageous to the common welfare needs no proof. The glory of the Creator is, truly, the final goal of the Divine laws, but God desires to attain this glory by the happiness of mankind. Human laws must also be useful to the common welfare. For laws are imposed upon the community as such, in order to guide it to its goal: this goal, however, is the common welfare. Further, laws are to regulate the members of the community. This can only come about by all striving to attain a common goal. But this goal can be no other than the common welfare. Consequently all laws must in some way serve the common welfare. A law plainly useless or a fortiori injurious to the community is no true law. It could have in view only the benefit of private individuals and would consequently subordinate the common welfare to the welfare of individuals, the higher to the lower.

171 Law therefore is distinguished from a command or precept by this essential application to the common welfare. Every law is a form of command but not every command is a law. Every binding rule which a superior or master gives to his subordinates is a command; the command, however, is only a law when it is imposed upon the community for the attainment of the common welfare. In addition, the command can be given for an individual person or case. But law is a permanent, authoritative standard for the community, and it remains in force until it is annulled or set aside. Another condition of law is that it should proceed from the representative of the highest public authority, be this a single person, several persons, or finally the totality of all the members of the community, as in a democracy. For law is, as already said, a binding rule which regulates the community for the attainment of the common welfare. This regulation pertains either to the whole community itself or to those persons in the highest position upon whom devolves the guidance of the whole community. No order or unity would be possible if private individuals had the liberty to impose binding rules on others in regard to the common welfare. This right must be reserved to the supreme head of the community. The fact that law is an emanation of the highest authority, or is issued by the presiding officer of the community by virtue of his authority, is what distinguishes it from mere counsels, requests, or admonitions, which presuppose no power of jurisdiction and can, moreover, be addressed by private persons to others and even to superiors. Laws, finally, must be promulgated, i.e. made known to all. Law in the strict sense is imposed upon rational, free beings as a controlling guide for their actions; but it can be such only when it has been proclaimed to those subject to it. From this arises the general axiom: Lex non promulgata non obligat—a law which has not been promulgated is not binding. But it is not absolutely necessary to promulgation that the law be made known to every individual; it suffices if the law be proclaimed to the community as such, so that it can come to the notice of all members of the community. Besides, all laws do not require the same kind of promulgation. At present, laws are considered sufficiently promulgated when they are published in official journals (State or imperial gazettes, law records, etc.)

172 In addition to the moral law as treated above, it is customary to speak of moral laws in a wider sense. Thus it is said it is a moral law that no one is willingly deceived, that no one lies without a reason, that every one strives to learn the truth. But it is only in an unreal and figurative sense that these laws are called moral. They are in reality only the natural laws of the human will. For although the will is free, it remains subject to certain inborn tendencies and laws, within which bounds alone it acts freely, and these laws are called moral only because they bear on the activities of a free will. Therefore they are not expressed by an imperative "must". They merely state that by reason of inborn tendencies, men are accustomed to act in a given way, and that such laws are observed even by those who have no knowledge of them.

173 To understand still better the significance of moral law in the strict sense, henceforth the sole sense intended in this article, two conditions of such law should be considered. It exists first in the intellect and will of the lawgiver. Before the lawgiver issues the law he must apprehend it in his mind as a practical principle, and at the same time perceive that it is a reasonable standard of action for his subjects and one advantageous to the common welfare. He must then have the will to make the observance of this principle obligatory on those under him. Finally, he must make known or intimate to those under him this principle or authoritative standard as the expression of his will. Strictly construed, legislation in the active sense consists in this last act, the command of the superior to the inferiors. This command is an act of the reason, but it necessarily presupposes the aforesaid act of the will and receives from the latter its entire obligatory force. The law, however, does not attain this obligatory force until the moment it is made known or proclaimed to the community. And this brings us to the point that the law can be considered objectively, as it exists apart from the lawgiver. At this stage law exists either in the mind of the subjects or in any permanent token which preserves the memory of it, e.g. as found in a collection of laws. Such outward tokens, however, are not absolutely necessary to law. God has written the natural moral law, at least in its most general outlines, in the hearts of all men, and it is obligatory without any external token. Further, an external, permanent token is not absolutely necessary for human laws. It suffices if the law is made known to the subjects, and such knowledge can be attained by oral tradition.

174 II. Obligation Imposed by Law

175 Law (in the strict sense) and command are preeminently distinguished from other authoritative standards of action, inasmuch as they imply obligation. Law is a bond imposed upon the subjects by which their will is bound or in some way brought under compulsion in regard to the performance or the omission of definite actions. Aristotle, therefore, said long ago that law has a compelling force. And St. Paul (Rom., xiii, 1 sqq.) teaches that we are bound to obey the ordinances of the authorities not only through fear but also for conscience' sake. In what then does this obligation which law imposes upon us consist? Modern ethical systems which seek to construct a morality independent of God and religion, are here confronted by an inexplicable riddle. The utmost pains have been taken to construct a true obligation without regard to God. According to Kant our reason itself is the final source of obligation, it obliges us of itself, it is nomothetic and autonomous, and the absolute form in which it commands us is the categorical imperative. We are obliged to fulfil the law only on account of itself or because it is the law of our reason; to do something because another has commanded us is not moral, even should this other be God. This view is entirely untenable. We do not owe obedience to the laws of Church and State because we bind ourselves thereto, but because their superior authority obliges us. The child owes obedience to its parents not because it engages so to do but because the authority of the parents obliges it. Whoever asserts that man can bind only himself, strikes at the root of all authority and asserts the principle of anarchism. Authority is the right to issue to others binding, obligatory regulations. Whoever maintains that none can put more than himself under obligation denies, thereby, all authority= What is said of human authority is equally valid of the Divine authority. We owe adoration, obedience, and love to God, not because we engage so to do, but because God obliges us by His commands. The assertion that to do something because God has commanded us is heteronomy (subjection to the law of another) and therefore not moral, implies in principle the destruction of all religion, which in its essence rests upon the subjection of the creature to his Creator.

176 The adherents of the Kantian autonomy can also be asked whether man binds himself of necessity or voluntarily? If voluntarily, then he can at any moment annul this obligation; consequently, in a practical sense, no obligation exists. If of necessity, the question arises whence comes this necessity to bind oneself unconditionally? To this question Kant has no answer to give. He refers us to an undemonstrable and incomprehensible necessity. He says: "All human reason is incapable of explaining how pure reason may be practical (imposing obligation)....Thus, it is true, we do not comprehend the practical, unconditioned necessity of the moral imperative, but we do, however, comprehend its incomprehensibility, which is all that can, in fairness, be demanded from a philosophy that seeks to reach the principles which mark the limit of human reason" ["Grundleg. zur Metaphys. der Sitten", ed. Hartenstein, IV (1838), 91-93]. Kant, who without hesitation sets aside all Christian mysteries, in this way imposes upon us in philosophy a mystery of his own invention. Kant's views contain a germ of truth, which, however, they distort until it can no longer be recognized. In order that a human law may be obligatory upon us we must have in ourselves from the beginning the conviction that we are to do good and avoid evil, that we are to obey rightful authority, etc. But the further question now arises, whence do we receive this conviction? From God, our Creator. Just as our whole being is an image of God, so also is our reason with its powers and inborn tendencies an image of the Divine Reason, and our cognitions which we involuntarily form in consequence of natural tendency are a participation in the Divine wisdom,—are, it may be said, a streaming in of the Divine light into the created reason. This is, indeed, not to be so understood as though we had innate ideas, but rather that the ability and inclination are inborn in us by virtue of which we spontaneously form universal concepts and principles, both in the theoretical and practical order, and easily discern that in these practical principles the will of the Supreme Director of all things manifests itself.

177 The Kantian philosophy has now but few adherents; most champions of independent ethics seek to explain the origin of duty by experience and development. Typical of writers on ethics of this school are the opinions of Herbert Spencer. This philosopher of evolution believed that he had discovered already in animals, principally in dogs, evidences of conscience, especially the beginnings of the consciousness of duty, the idea of obligation. This consciousness of duty is further developed in men by the accumulation of experiences and inheritance. Duty presents itself to us as a restraint of our actions. There are, however, several varieties of such restraints. The inner restraint is developed by induction, inasmuch as we discern by repeated experience that certain actions have useful, others injurious results. In this way we are attracted to the one, and frightened away from the other. Added to this is the external restraint, the fear of evil results or punishments which threaten us from without and are threefold in form. In the earliest stages of development man has to abstain from actions through fear of the anger of uncivilized associates (social sanction). At a higher stage man must avoid many actions, because such would be punished by a powerful and bold associate who has succeeded in making himself chief (state sanction). Finally, we have in addition the fear of the spirits of the dead, especially of the dead chiefs, who, it was believed, lingered near and still inflicted punishment upon many actions displeasing to them (religious sanction). The external restraint, i.e. the fear of punishment, created in mankind, as yet little developed, the concept of compulsion, of obligation in relation to certain actions. This concept originally arose only in regard to actions which were quickly followed by external punishments. Gradually, by association of ideas, it was also connected with other actions until then performed or avoided purely on account of their natural consequences. Through evolution, however, he goes on to say, the idea of compulsion, owing only to confusion or false generalization, tends to disappear and eventually is found only in rare cases. Spencer claimed to have found, even today, here and there men who regularly do good and avoid evil without any idea of compulsion. Most modern writers on ethics, who do not hold to a positive Christian point of view, adopt these Spencerian ideas, e.g. Laas, von Gizycki, Paulsen, Leslie, Fouillée, and many others. Spencer and his followers are nevertheless wrong, for their explanation of duty rests on entirely untenable premises. It presupposes that the animal has already a conscience, that man does not differ essentially from the animal, that he has gradually developed from a form of animal, that he possesses no essentially higher spiritual powers, etc. Moreover, their explanation of duty is meaningless. No one will assert of a man that he acts from duty if he abstains from certain actions through fear of police penalties, or the anger of his fellow-men. Besides, what is the meaning of an obligation that is only an accidental product of evolution, destined to disappear with the progress of the latter, and for disregarding which we are responsible to no superior?

178 In contrast with these modern and untenable hypotheses the Christian theistic conception of the world explained long since the origin and nature of duty in a fully satisfactory manner. From eternity there was present to the Spirit of God the plan of the government of the world which He had resolved to create. This plan of government is the eternal law (lex aeterna) according to which God guides all things towards their final goal: the glorifying of God and the eternal happiness of mankind. But the Creator does not move creatures, as men do, simply by external force, by pressure, or impact, and the like, but by tendencies and impulses which He has implanted in creatures and, what is more, in each one according to its individual nature. He guides irrational creatures by blind impulses, inclinations, or instincts. He cannot, however, guide in this way rational, free men, but only (as is suited to man's nature) by moral laws which in the act of creation He implanted in the human heart. As soon as man attains to the use of reason he forms, as already indicated, on account of innate predispositions and tendencies, the most general moral principles, e.g. that man is to do good and avoid evil, that man is to commit no injustice, etc. He also easily understands that these commands do not depend on his own volition but express the will of a higher power, which regulates and guides all things. By these commands (the natural moral law) man shares in a rational manner in the eternal law; they are the temporal expression of the eternal, Divine law. The natural moral law is also the foundation and root of the obligation of all positive laws. We recognize that we cannot violate the natural moral law, and the positive laws that are rooted in it, without acting in opposition to the will of God, rebelling against our Creator and highest Master, offending Him, turning away from our final end, and incurring the Divine judgment. Thus man feels himself to be always and everywhere bound, without losing his freedom in a physical sense, to the order appointed him by God. He can do evil but he ought not. If of his own will he violates God's law he brings guilt upon himself and deserves punishment in the eyes of the all-wise, all-holy, and absolutely just God. Obligation is this necessity, arising from this knowledge, for the human will to do good and avoid evil.

179 III. Classification of Laws

180 A. The actual, direct effect of law is obligation. According to the varieties of duty imposed, law is classified as: commanding, prohibitive, permissive, and penal. Commanding laws (leges affirmativae) make the performance of an action, of something positive, obligatory; prohibitive laws (leges negativae), on the other hand, make obligatory an omission. The principle holds good for prohibitive laws, at least if they are absolute, like the commands of the natural, moral law, ("Thou shalt not bear false witness", "Thou shalt not commit adultery", etc.) that they are always and for ever obligatory (leges negativae obligant semper et pro semper—negative laws bind always and forever), i.e. it is never permissible to perform the forbidden action. Commanding laws, however, as the law that debts must be paid, always impose an obligation, it is true, but not for ever (leges affirmativae obligant semper, sed non pro semper—affirmative laws are binding always but not forever), that is, they continue always to be laws but they do not oblige one at every moment to the performance of the action commanded, but only at a certain time and under certain conditions. All laws which inflict penalties for violation of the law are called penal, whether they themselves directly define the manner and amount of penalty, or make it the duty of the judge to inflict according to his judgment a just punishment. Laws purely penal (leges mere poenales) are those which do not make an action absolutely obligatory, but simply impose penalty in case one is convicted of transgression. Thus they leave it, in a certain sense, to the choice of the subject whether he will abstain from the penal action, or whether, if the violation is proved against him, he will submit to the penalty. The objection cannot be raised that purely penal laws are not actual laws because they create no bounden duty, for they oblige the violator of the law to bear the punishment if the authorities apprehend and convict him= Whether a law is a purely penal law or not is not so easy to decide in an individual case. The decision depends on the will of the lawgiver and also upon the general opinion and custom of a community.

181 B. In treating of promulgation a distinction has to be made between natural moral law and positive law. The first is proclaimed to all men by the natural light of reason; positive laws are made known by special outward signs (word of mouth or writing). The natural moral law is a law inseparable from the nature of man; positive law, on the contrary, is not. In regard to the origin or source of law, a distinction is made between Divine and human laws according as they are issued directly by God Himself or by men in virtue of the power granted them by God. If man in issuing a law is simply the herald or messenger of God, the law is not human but Divine. Thus the laws which Moses received from God on Mount Sinai and proclaimed to the people of Israel were not human but Divine laws. A distinction is further made between the laws of Church and State according as they are issued by the authorities of the State or of the Church. Laws are divided as to origin into prescriptive and statute law. Prescriptive, or customary, law includes those laws which do not come into existence by direct decree of the lawgiving power, but by long continued custom of the community. Yet every custom does not give rise to a law or right. In order to become law a custom must be universal or must, at least, be followed freely and with the intention of raising it to law by a considerable part of the population. It must further be a custom of long standing. Finally, it must be useful to the common welfare, because this is an essential requisite of every law. Custom receives its binding, obligatory force from the tacit or legal approval of the lawgiver, for every true law binds those upon whom it is imposed. Only he can impose a binding obligation on a community on whom the supervision of it or the power of jurisdiction over it devolves. If the legislative power belongs to a people itself it can impose obligation upon itself as a whole, if it has not this power the obligation can only be formed with the consent of the lawgiver (see CUSTOM).

182 A classification of law, as limited to law administered in the courts, and familiar to Roman jurisprudence, is that of law in the strict sense and equity (jus strictum et jus aequum et bonum). Equity is often taken as synonymous with natural justice. In this sense we say that equity forbids that anyone be judged unheard. Frequently, however, we speak of equity only in reference to positive laws. A human lawgiver is never able to foresee all the individual cases to which his law will be applied. Consequently, a law though just in general, may, taken literally, lead in some unforeseen cases to results which agree neither with the intent of the lawgiver nor with natural justice, but rather contravene them. In such cases the law must be expounded not according to its wording but according to the intent of the lawgiver and the general principles of natural justice. A reasonable lawgiver could not desire this law to be followed literally in cases where this would entail a violation of the principles of natural justice. Law in the strict sense (jus strictum) is, therefore, positive law in its literal interpretation; equity, on the contrary, consists of the principles of natural justice so far as they are used to explain or correct a positive human law if this is not in harmony with the former. For this reason Aristotle (Ethica Nicomachea, V, x) calls equity the correction (epanorthoma) of statute or written law.

183 ST. THOMAS, Summa Theologica, I-II:90 sqq.; SUAREZ, De legibus et legislatore Deo, I; LAYMANN, Theologia moralis, I, tract. iv; BOUQUILLON, Theologia fundamentalis, no. 52 sqq.; TAPARELLI, Saggio teoretico di diritto naturale, I, s. 93 sqq.

184 V. Cathrein

Canon Law

169 This subject will be treated under the following heads:

170 I. General Notion and Divisions

171 II. Canon Law as a Science

172 III. Sources of Canon Law

173 IV. Historical Development of Texts and Collections

174 V. Codification

175 VI. Ecclesiastical Law

176 VII. The Principal Canonists

177 Canon law is the body of laws and regulations made by or adopted by ecclesiastical authority, for the government of the Christian organization and its members. The word adopted is here used to point out the fact that there are certain elements in canon law borrowed by the Church from civil law or from the writings of private individuals, who as such had no authority in ecclesiastical society. Canon is derived from the Greek kanon, i.e. a rule or practical direction (not to speak of the other meanings of the word, such as list or catalogue), a term which soon acquired an exclusively ecclesiastical signification. In the fourth century it was applied to the ordinances of the councils, and thus contrasted with the Greek word nomoi, the ordinances of the civil authorities; the compound word "Nomocanon" was given to those collections of regulations in which the laws formulated by the two authorities on ecclesiastical matters were to be found side by side. At an early period we meet with expressions referring to the body of ecclesiastical legislation then in process of formation: canones, ordo canonicus, sanctio canonica; but the expression "canon law" (jus canonicum) becomes current only about the beginning of the twelfth century, being used in contrast with the "civil law" (jus civile), and later we have the "Corpus juris canonici", as we have the "Corpus juris Civilis". Canon law is also called "ecclesiastical law" (jus ecclesiasticum); however, strictly speaking, there is a slight difference of meaning between the two expressions: canon law denotes in particular the law of the "Corpus Juris", including the regulations borrowed from Roman law; whereas ecclesiastical law refers to all laws made by the ecclesiastical authorities as such, including those made after the compiling of the "Corpus Juris". Contrasted with the imperial or Caesarian law (jus caesareum), canon law is sometimes styled pontifical law (jus pontificium), often also it is termed sacred law (jus sacrum), and sometimes even Divine law (jus divinum: c. 2, De privil.), as it concerns holy things, and has for its object the wellbeing of souls in the society divinely established by Jesus Christ.

178 Canon law may be divided into various branches, according to the points of view from which it is considered:

179 If we consider its sources, it comprises Divine law, including natural law, based on the nature of things and on the constitution given by Jesus Christ to His Church; and human or positive law, formulated by the legislator, in conformity with the Divine law. We shall return to this later, when treating of the sources of canon law.

180 If we consider the form in which it is found, we have the written law (jus scriptum) comprising the laws promulgated by the competent authorities, and the unwritten law (jus non scripture), or even customary law, resulting from practice and custom; the latter however became less important as the written law developed.

181 If we consider the subject matter of the law, we have the public law (jus publicum) and private law (jus privatum). This division is explained in two different ways by the different schools of writers: for most of the adherents of the Roman school, e.g. Cavagnis (Instit. jur. publ. eccl., Rome, 1906, I, 8), public law is the law of the Church as a perfect society, and even as a perfect society such as it has been established by its Divine founder: private law would therefore embrace all the regulations of the ecclesiastical authorities concerning the internal organization of that society, the functions of its ministers, the rights and duties of its members. Thus understood, the public ecclesiastical law would be derived almost exclusively from Divine and natural law. On the other hand, most of the adherents of the German school, following the idea of the Roman law (Inst., I, i, 4; "Publicum jus est quad ad statuary rei Romanae spectat: privatum quad ad privatorum utilitatem"), define public law as the body of laws determining the rights and duties of those invested with ecclesiastical authority, whereas for them private law is that which sets forth the rights and duties of individuals as such. Public law would, therefore, directly intend the welfare of society as such, and indirectly that of its members; while private law would look primarily to the wellbeing of the individual and secondarily to that of the community.

182 Public law is divided into external law (jus externum) and internal law (jus internum). External law determines the relations of ecclesiastical society with other societies. either secular bodies (the relations therefore of the Church and the State) or religious bodies, that is, interconfessional relations. Internal law is concerned with the constitution of the Church and the relations subsisting between the lawfully constituted authorities and their subjects.

183 Considered from the point of view of its expression, canon law may be divided into several branches, so closely allied, that the terms used to designate them are often employed almost indifferently: common law and special law; universal law and particular law; general law and singular law (jus commune et speciale; jus universale et particulare; jus generale et singulare). It is easy to point out the difference between them: the idea is that of a wider or a more limited scope; to be more precise, common law refers to things, universal law to territories, general law to persons; so regulations affecting only certain things, certain territories, certain classes of persons, being a restriction or an addition, constitute special, particular, or singular law, and even local or individual law. This exceptional law is often referred to as a privilege (privilegium, lex privata), though the expression is applied more usually to concessions made to an individual. The common law, therefore, is that which is to be observed with regard to a certain matter, unless the legislator has foreseen or granted exceptions; for instance, the laws regulating benefices contain special provisions for benefices subject to the right of patronage. Universal law is that which is promulgated for the whole Church; but different countries and different dioceses may have local laws limiting the application of the former and even derogating from it. Finally, different classes of persons, the clergy, religious orders, etc., have their own laws which are superadded to the general law.

184 We have to distinguish between the law of the Western or Latin Church, and the law of the Eastern Churches, and of each of them. Likewise, between the law of the Catholic Church and those of the non-Catholic Christian Churches or confessions, the Anglican Church and the various Eastern Orthodox Churches.

185 Finally, if we look to the history or chronological evolution of canon law, we find three epochs: from the beginning to the "Decretum" of Gratian exclusively; from Gratian to the Council of Trent; from the Council of Trent to our day. The law of these three periods is referred to respectively as the ancient, the new, and the recent law (jus antiquum, novum, novissimum), though some writers prefer to speak of the ancient law, the law of the Middle Ages, and the modern law (Laurentius, "Instit.", n.4).

186 As we shall see in treating of the gradual development of the material of canon law (see below, IV), though a legislative power has always existed in the Church, and though it has always been exercised, a long period had necessarily to elapse before the laws were reduced to a harmonious systematic body, serving as a basis for methodical study and giving rise to general theories. In the first place, the legislative authority makes laws only when circumstances require them and in accordance with a definite plan. For centuries, nothing more was done than to collect successively the canons of councils, ancient and recent, the letters of popes, and episcopal statutes; guidance was sought for in these, when analogous cases occurred, but no one thought of extracting general principles from them or of systematizing all the laws then in force. In the eleventh century certain collections group under the same headings the canons that treat of the same matters; however, it is only in the middle of the twelfth century that we meet in the "Decretum" of Gratian the first really scientific treatise on canon law. The School of Bologna had just revived the study of Roman law; Gratian sought to inaugurate a similar study of canon law. But, while compilations of texts and official collections were available for Roman law, or "Corpus juris civilis", Gratian had no such assistance. He therefore adopted the plan of inserting the texts in the body of his general treatise; from the disordered mass of canons collected from the earliest days, he selected not only the law actually in force (eliminating the regulations which had fallen into desuetude, or which were revoked, or not of general application) but also the principles; he elaborated a system of law which, however incomplete, was nevertheless methodical. The science of canon law, i.e. the methodical and coordinated knowledge of ecclesiastical law, was at length established.

187 Gratian's "Decretum" was a wonderful work; welcomed, taught and glossed by the decretists at Bologna and later in the other schools and universities, it was for a long time the textbook of canon law. However his plan was defective and confusing, and, after the day of the glosses and the strictly literal commentaries, it was abandoned in favour of the method adopted by Bernard of Pavia in his "Breviarium" and by St. Raymund of Pennafort in the official collection of the "Decretals" of Gregory IX, promulgated in 1234 (see CORPUS JURIS CANONICI). These collections, which did not include the texts used by Gratian, grouped the materials into five books, each divided into "titles", and under each title the decretals or fragments of decretals were grouped in chronological order. The five books, the subject matter of which is recalled by the well-known verse: "judex, judicium, clerus, connubia, crimen" (i.e. judge, judgment, clergy, marriages, crime), did not display a very logical plan; not to speak of certain titles that were more or less out of place. They treated successively of the depositaries of authority, procedure, the clergy and the things pertaining to them, marriage, crimes and penalties. In spite of its defects, the system had at least the merit of being official; not only was it adopted in the latter collections, but it served as the basis for almost all canonical works up to the sixteenth century, and even to our day, especially in the universities, each of which had a faculty of canon law.

188 However, the method of studying and teaching gradually developed: if the early decretalists made use of the elementary plan of the gloss and literal commentary, their successors in composing their treatises were more independent of the text; they commented on the titles, not on the chapters or the words; often they followed the titles or chapters only nominally and artificially. In the sixteenth century they tried to apply, not to the official collections, but in their lectures on canon law the method and division of the "Institutes" of Justinian: persons, things, actions or procedure, crimes, and penalties (Institutes, I, ii, 12). This plan, popularized by the "Institutiones juris canonici" of Lancellotti (1563), has been followed since by most of the canonist authors of "Institutiones" or manuals, though there has been considerable divergence in the subdivisions; most of the more extensive works, however, preserved the order of the "Decretals". This was also followed in the 1917 code. In later times many textbooks, especially in Germany, began to adopt original plans. In the sixteenth century too, the study of canon law was developed and improved like that of other sciences, by the critical spirit of the age: doubtful texts were rejected and the raison d'être and tendency or intention of later laws traced back to the customs of former days. Canon law was more studied and better understood; writings multiplied, some of an historical nature, others practical, according to the inclination of the authors. In the universities and seminaries, it became a special study, though as might be expected, not always held in equal esteem. It may be noted too that the study of civil law is now frequently separated from that of canon law, a result of the changes that have come over society. On the other hand, in too many seminaries the teaching of ecclesiastical law is not sufficiently distinguished from that of moral theology. The publication of the new general code of canon law will certainly bring about a more normal state of affairs.

189 The first object of the science of canon law is to fix the laws that are in force. This is not difficult when one has exact and recent texts, drawn up as abstract laws, e.g. most of the texts since the Council of Trent, and as will be the case for all canon law when the new code is published. But it was not so in the Middle Ages; it was the canonists who, to a large extent, formulated the law by extracting it from the accumulated mass of texts or by generalizing from the individual decisions in the early collections of decretals. When the law in force is known it must be explained, and this second object of the science of canon law is still unchanged. It consists in showing the true sense, the reason, the extension and application of each law and each institution. This necessitates a careful and exact application of the triple method of exposition, historical, philosophical, and practical: the first explains the law in accordance with its source and the evolution of customs; the second explains its principles; the last shows how it is to be applied at present. This practical application is the object of jurisprudence, which collects, coordinates and utilizes, for more or less analogous cases, the decisions of the competent tribunal. From this we may learn the position of canon law in the hierarchy of sciences. It is a judicial science, differing from the science of Roman law and of civil law inasmuch as it treats of the laws of an other society; but as this society is of the spiritual order and in a certain sense supernatural, canon law belongs also to the sacred sciences. In this category it comes after theology, which studies and explains in accordance with revelation, the truths to be believed; it is supported by theology, but in its turn it formulates the practical rules toward which theology tends, and so it has been called "theologia practica", "theologia rectrix". In as far as it is practical the science of canon law is closely related to moral theology; however, it differs from the latter which is not directly concerned with the acts prescribed or forbidden by the external law, but only with the rectitude of human acts in the light of the last end of man, whereas, canon law treats of the external laws relating to the good order of society rather than the workings of the individual conscience. Juridical, historical, and above all theological sciences are most useful for the comprehensive study of canon law.

190 This expression has a twofold meaning; it may refer to the sources from which the laws come and which give the latter their judicial force (fortes juris essendi); or it may refer to the sources where canon law is to be found (fortes juris cognoscendi), i.e. the laws themselves such as they occur in the texts and various codes. These sources are also called the material and the formal sources of canon law. We shall consider first the sources under the former aspect.

191 The ultimate source of canon law is God, Whose will is manifested either by the very nature of things (natural Divine law), or by Revelation (positive Divine law). Both are contained in the Scriptures and in Tradition. Positive Divine law cannot contradict natural law; it rather confirms it and renders it more definite. The Church accepts and considers both as sovereign binding laws which it can interpret but can not modify; however, it does not discover natural law by philosophic speculation; it receives it, with positive Divine law, from God through His inspired Books, though this does not imply a confusion of the two kinds of Divine law. Of the Old Law the Church has preserved in addition to the Decalogue some precepts closely allied to natural law, e.g. certain matrimonial impediments; as to the other laws given by God to His chosen people, it considers them to have been ritual and declares them abrogated by Jesus Christ. Or rather, Jesus Christ, the Lawgiver of the spiritual society founded by Him (Con. Trid., Sess. VI, "De justif.", can. I), has replaced them by the fundamental laws which He gave His Church. This Christian Divine law, if we may so call it, is found in the Gospels, in the Apostolic writings, in the living Tradition, which transmits laws as well as dogmas. On this positive Divine law depend the essential principles of the Church's constitution, the primacy, the episcopacy, the essential elements of Divine worship and the Sacraments, the indissolubility of marriage, etc.

192 Again, to attain its sublime end, the Church, endowed by its Founder with legislative power, makes laws in conformity with natural and Divine law. The sources or authors of this positive ecclesiastical law are essentially the episcopate and its head, the pope, the successors of the Apostolic College and its divinely appointed head, Saint Peter. They are, properly speaking, the active sources of canon law. Their activity is exercised in its most solemn form by the ecumenical councils, where the episcopate united with its head, and convoked and presided over by him, with him defines its teaching and makes the laws that bind the whole Church. The canons of the Ecumenical councils, especially those of Trent, hold an exceptional place in ecclesiastical law. But, without infringing on the ordinary power of the bishops, the pope, as head of the episcopate, possesses in himself the same powers as the episcopate united with him. It is true that the disciplinary and legislative power of the popes has not always, in the course of centuries, been exercised in the same manner and to the same extent, but in proportion as the administration became centralized, their direct intervention in legislation became more and more marked; and so the sovereign pontiff is the most fruitful source of canon law; he can abrogate the laws made by his predecessors or by Ecumenical councils; he can legislate for the whole church or for a part thereof, a country or a given body of individuals; if he is morally bound to take advice and to follow the dictates of prudence, he is not legally obliged to obtain the consent of any other person or persons, or to observe any particular form; his power is limited only by Divine law, natural and positive, dogmatic and moral. Furthermore, he is, so to say, the living law, for he is considered as having all law in the treasury of his heart ("in scrinio pectoris"; Boniface VIII. c. i, "De Constit." in VI). From the earliest ages the letters of the Roman pontiffs constitute, with the canons of the councils, the principal element of canon law, not only of the Roman Church and its immediate dependencies. but of all Christendom; they are everywhere relied upon and collected, and the ancient canonical compilations contain a large number of these precious "decretals" (decreta, statuta, epistolae decretales, and epistolae synodicae). Later, the pontifical laws are promulgated more usually as constitutions, Apostolic Letters, the latter being classified as Bulls or Briefs, according to their external form, or even as spontaneous acts, "Motu proprio". Moreover, the legislative and disciplinary power of the pope not being an in communicable privilege, the laws and regulations made in his name and with his approbation possess his authority: in fact, though most of the regulations made by the Congregations of the cardinals and other organs of the Curia are incorporated in the Apostolic Letters, yet the custom exists and is becoming more general for legislation to be made by mere decrees of the Congregations, with the papal approval. These are the "Acts of the Holy See" (Acta Sancte Sedis), and their object or purpose permitting, are real laws (see ROMAN CURIA).

193 Next to the pope, the bishops united in local councils, and each of them individually, are sources of law for their common or particular territory; canons of national or provincial councils, and diocesan statutes, constitute local law. Numerous texts of such origin are found in the ancient canonical collections. At the present day and for a long time past, the law has laid down clearly the powers of local councils and of bishops; if their decrees should interfere with the common law they have no authority save in virtue of pontifical approbation. It is well known that diocesan statutes are not referred to the sovereign pontiff, whereas the decrees of provincial councils are submitted for examination and approval to the Holy See (Const. "Immensa" of Sixtus V, 22 Jan., 1587). We may liken to bishops in this matter various bodies that have the right of governing themselves and thus enjoy a certain autonomy; such are prelates with territorial jurisdiction, religious orders, some exempt chapters and universities, etc. The concessions granted to them are generally subject to a certain measure of control.

194 Other sources of law are rather impersonal in their nature, chief among them being custom or the unwritten law. In canon law custom has become almost like a legislator; not in the sense that the people are made their own lawgiver, but a practice followed by the greater part of the community, and which is reasonable and fulfills the legal requirements for prescription and is observed as obligatory, acquires the force of law by at least the tacit consent of the legislator. Under such circumstances custom can create or rescind a legal obligation, derogate from a law, interpret it, etc. But it must be remarked that in our days, owing to the fully developed body of written law, custom plays a much less important part than did the practices and habits of early Christian times, when there was but little written law and even that seldom of wide application. The civil law of different nations, and especially the Roman law, may be numbered among the accessory sources of canon law. But it is necessary to explain more exactly its role and importance. Evidently secular law cannot be, strictly speaking, a source of canon law, the State as such having no competence in spiritual matters; yet it may become so by the more or less formal acceptation of particular laws by the ecclesiastical authorities. We pass by in the first place the laws made by the mutual agreement of both parties, such as the legislation of the numerous assemblies in the Visigothic kingdom, and the Frankish kingdom and empire, where the bishops sat with the lords and nobles. Such also is the case of the concordats of later ages, real contracts between the two powers. In these cases we have an ecclesiastico-civil law, the legal force of which arose from the joint action of the two competent authorities. It is in a different sense that Roman law, Germanic law, and in a lesser degree modern law, have become a subsidiary source of canon law.

195 It must be remembered that the Church existed for a long time before having a complete and coordinated system of law; that many daily acts of its administration, while objectively canonical, were of the same nature as similar acts in civil matters, e.g. contracts, obligations, and in general the administration of property; it was quite natural for the Church to accommodate itself in these matters to the existing flows, with out positively approving of them. Later when the canonists of the twelfth century began to systematize the ecclesiastical law, they found themselves in presence, on the one hand, of a fragmentary canon law, and on the other hand of the complete methodical Roman code; they had recourse to the latter to supply what was wanting in the former, whence the maxim adopted by the canonists and inserted in the "Corpus Juris", that the Church acts according to Roman law when canon law is silent (cap. 1. "De novi op. nunc.", X, i, V, tit. xxxii). Moreover, in the Teutonic kingdoms the clergy followed the Roman law as a personal statute. However, in proportion as the written canon law increased, Roman law became of less practical value in the Church (cap. 28, X, "De priv.", X, lib. V, tit. xxxiii). Canon law, it may be said, adopted from Roman law what relates to obligations, contracts, judiciary actions, and to a great extent civil procedure. Other Roman laws were the object of a more positive recognition than mere usage, i.e. they were formally approved, those, for instance, which though of secular origin, concerned ecclesiastical things, e.g. the Byzantine ecclesiastical laws, or again laws of civil origin and character but which were changed into canonical laws, e.g. the impediment of marriage arising from adoption. The juridical influence of Teutonic law was much less important, if we abstract from the inevitable adaptation to the customs of barbarous races, yet some survivals of this law in ecclesiastical legislation are worthy of note: the somewhat feudal system of benefices; the computation of the degrees of kindred; the assimilating of the penitential practices to the system of penal compensation (wehrgeld); finally, but for a time only, justification from criminal charges on the oath of guarantors or co-jurors (De purgatione canonica, lib. V, tit. xxxiv).

196 Modern law has only a restricted and local influence on canon law, and that particularly on two points. On the one hand, the Church conforms to the civil laws on mixed matters, especially with regard to the administration of its property; on some occasions even it has finally adopted as its own measures passed by the civil powers acting independently; a notable case is the French decree of 1809 on the "Fabriques d'église". On the other hand, modern legislation is indebted to the canon law for certain beneficial measures: part of the procedure in criminal, civil, and matrimonial cases, and to some extent, the organization of courts and tribunals.

197 Considered under the second aspect, the sources of canon law are the legislative texts, and the collections of those texts whence we derive our knowledge of the Church's laws. In order to appreciate fully the reasons for and the utility of the great work of codification of the canon law, recently begun by order of Pius X, it is necessary to recall the general history of those texts and collections, ever increasing in number up to the present time. A detailed account of each of the canonical collections is here out of place; the more important ones are the subject of special articles, to which we refer the reader; it will suffice if we exhibit the different stages in the development of these texts and collections, and make clear the movement to wards centralization and unification that has led up to the present situation. Even in the private collections of the early centuries, in which the series of conciliary canons were merely brought together in more or less chronological order, a constant tendency towards unification is noticeable. From the ninth century onwards the collections are systematically arranged; with the thirteenth century begins the first official collections, thenceforth the nucleus around which the new legislative texts centre, though it is not yet possible to reduce them to a harmonious and coordinated code. Before tracing the various steps of this evolution, some terms require to be explained. The name "canonical collections" is given to all collections of ecclesiastical legislative texts, because the principal texts were the canons of the councils. At first the authors of these collections contented themselves with bringing together the canons of the different councils in chronological order; consequently these are called "chronological" collections; in the West, the last important chronological collection is that of Pseudo-Isidore. After his time the texts were arranged according to subject matter; these are the "systematic" collections, the only form in use since the time of Pseudo-Isidore. All the ancient collections are private, due to personal initiative, and have, therefore, as collections, no official authority: each text has only its own intrinsic value; even the "Decretum" of Gratian is of this nature. On the other hand, official or authentic collections are those that have been made or at least promulgated by the legislator. They begin with the "Compilatio tertia" of Innocent III; the later collections of the "Corpus Juris", except the "Extravagantes", are official. All the texts in an official collection have the force of law. There are also general collections and particular collections: the former treating of legislation in general, the latter treating of some special subject, for instance, marriage, procedure, etc., or even of the local law of a district. Finally, considered chronologically, the sources and collections are classified as previous to or later than the "Corpus Juris".

198 A. Canonical Collections In the East

199 Until the Church began to enjoy peace, the written canon law was very meagre; after making full allowance for the documents that must have perished, we can discover only a fragmentary law, made as circumstances demanded, and devoid of all system. Unity of legislation, in as far as it can be expected at that period, is identical with a certain uniformity of practice, based on the prescriptions of Divine law relative to the constitution of the Church, the liturgy, the sacraments, etc. The clergy, organized everywhere in the same way, exercised almost everywhere the same functions. But at an early period we discover a greater local disciplinary uniformity between the Churches of the great sees (Rome, Carthage, Alexandria, Antioch, later Constantinople) and the Churches depending immediately on them. Further it is the disciplinary decisions of the bishops of the various regions that form the first nucleus of local canon law; these texts, spreading gradually from one country to another by means of the collections, obtain universal dissemination and in this way are the basis of general canon law.

200 There were, however, in the East, from the early days up to the end of the fifth century, certain writings, closely related to each other, and which were in reality brief canon law treatises on ecclesiastical administration the duties of the clergy and the faithful, and especially on the liturgy. We refer to works attributed to the Apostles, very popular in the Oriental Churches, though devoid of official authority, and which may be called pseudo-epigraphic, rather than apocryphal. The principal writings of this kind are the "Teaching of the Twelve Apostles" or "Didache", the "Didascalia", based on the "Didache"; the "Apostolic Constitutions", an expansion of the two preceding works; then the "Apostolic Church Ordinance", the "Definitio canonica SS. Apostolorum", the "Testament of the Lord" and the "Octateuch of Clement"; lastly the "Apostolic Canons". Of all this literature, only the "Apostolic Canons" werein cluded in the canonical collections of the Greek Church. The most important of these documents the "Apostolic Constitutions", was removed by the Second Canon of the Council in Trullo (692), as having been interpolated by the heretics. As to the eighty-five Apostolic Canons, accepted by the same council, they rank yet first in the above-mentioned "Apostolic" collection; the first fifty translated into Latin by Dionysius Exiguus (c. 500), were included in the Western collections and afterwards in the "Corpus Juris".

201 As the later law of the separated Eastern Churches did not influence the Western collections, we need not treat of it, but go on to consider only the Greek collection. It begins early in the fourth century: in the different provinces of Asia Minor, to the canons of local councils are added those of the ecumenical Council of Nicea (325), everywhere held in esteem. The Province of Pontus furnished the penitentiary decisions of Ancyra and Neocaesarea (314); Antioch; the canons of the famous Council "in encaeniis" (341), a genuine code of metropolitan organization; Paphlagonia, that of the Council of Gangra (343), a reaction against the first excesses of asceticism; Phrygia, the fifty-nine canons of Laodicea on different disciplinary and liturgical matters. This collection was so highly esteemed that at the Council of Chalcedon (451) the canons were read as one series. It was increased later by the addition of the canons of (Constantinople (381), with other canons attributed to it, those of Ephesus (431). Chalcedon (451), and the Apostolic canons. In 692 the Council in Trullo passed 102 disciplinary canons, the second of which enumerates the elements of the official collection: they are the texts we have just mentioned, together with the canons of Sardica, and of Carthage (419), according to Dionysius Exiguus, and numerous canonical letters of the great bishops, SS. Dionysius of Alexandria, Gregory Thaumaturgus, Basil, etc. If to these be added the canons of the two ecumenical councils of Nicea (787) and Constantinople (869) we have all the elements of the definitive collection in its final shape. A few "systematic" collections may be mentioned as pertaining to this period: one containing fifty titles by an unknown author about 535; another with twenty-five titles of the ecclesiastical laws of Justinian; a collection of fifty titles drawn up about 550, by John the Scholastic, a priest of Antioch. The compilations known as the "Nomocanons" are more important, because they bring together the civil laws and the ecclesiastical laws on the same subjects; the two principal are the Nomocanon, wrongly attributed to John the Scholastic, but which dates from the end of the sixth century, with fifty titles, and another, drawn up in the seventh century, and afterwards augmented by the Patriarch Photius in 883.

202 B. The Canonical Collections in the West to Pseudo-Isidore

203 In the West, canonical collections developed as in the East, but about two centuries later. At first appear collections of national or local laws, and the tendency towards centralization is partially effected in the ninth century. Towards the end of the fourth century there is yet in the West no canonical collection, not even a local one, those of the fifth century are essentially local, but all of them borrow from the Greek councils. The latter were known in the West by two Latin versions, one called the "Hispana" or "Isidorian", because it was inserted in the Spanish canonical collection, attributed to St. Isidore of Seville, the other called the "Itala" or "ancient" (Prisca), because Dionysius Exiguus, in the first half of the sixth century, found it in use at Rome, and being dissatisfied with its imperfections improved it. Almost all the Western collections, therefore, are based on the same texts as the Greek collection, hence the marked influence of that collection on Western canon law.

204 (1) At the end of the fifth century the Roman Church was completely organized and the popes had promulgated many legislative texts; but no collection of them had yet been made. The only extra-Roman canons recognized were the canons of Nicea and Sardica, the latter being joined to the former, and at times even cited as the canons of Nicea. The Latin version of the ancient Greek councils was known, but was not adopted as ecclesiastical law. Towards the year 500 Dionysius Exiguus compiled at Rome a double collection, one of the councils, the other of decretals, i.e. papal letters. The former, executed at the request of Stephen, Bishop of Salona, is a translation of the Greek councils, including Chalcedon, and begins with the fifty Apostolic canons; Dionysius adds to it only the Latin text of the canons of Sardica and of Carthage (419), in which the more ancient African councils are partially reproduced. The second is a collection of thirty-nine papal decretals, from Siricius (384) to Anastasius II (496-98). (See CANONS, COLLECTIONS OF ANCIENT.) Thus joined together these two collections became the canonical code of the Roman Church, not by official approbation, but by authorized practice. But while in the work of Dionysius the collection of conciliary canons remained unchanged, that of the decretals was successively increased; it continued to incorporate letters of the different popes till about the middle of the eighth century when Adrian I gave (774) the collection of Dionysius to the future Emperor Charlemagne as the canonical book of the Roman Church. This collection, often called the "Dionysio-Hadriana", was soon officially received in all Frankish territory, where it was cited as the "Liber Canonum", and was adopted for the whole empire of Charlemagne at the Diet of Aachen in 802. This was an important step towards the centralization and unification of the ecclesiastical law, especially as the Latin Catholic world hardly extended beyond the limits of the empire, Africa and the south of Spain having been lost to the Church through the victories of Islam.

205 (2) The canon law of the African Church was strongly centralized at Carthage; the documents naturally took the form of a collection, as it was customary to read and insert in the Acts of each council the decisions of the preceding councils. At the time of the invasion of the Vandals, the canonical code of the African Church comprised, after the canons of Nicea, those of the Council of Carthage under Bishop Gratus (about 348), under Genethlius (390), of twenty or twenty-two plenary councils under Aurelius (from 393 to 427), and the minor councils of Constantinople. Unfortunately these records have not come down to us in their entirety; we possess them in two forms: in the collection of Dionysius Exiguus, as the canons of a "Concilium Africanum"; in the Spanish collection, as those of eight councils (the fourth wrongly attributed, being a document from Aries, dating about the beginning of the sixth century). Through these two channels the African texts entered into Western canon law. It will suffice to mention the two "systematic" collections of Fulgentius Ferrandus and Cresconius.

206 (3) The Church in Gaul had no local religious centre, the territory being divided into unstable kingdoms; it is not surprising therefore that we meet no centralized canon law or universally accepted collection. There are numerous councils, however, and an abundance of texts; but if we except the temporary authority of the See of Arles, no church of Gaul could point to a permanent group of dependent sees. The canonical collections were fairly numerous, but none was generally accepted. The most widespread was the "Quesnelliana", called after its editor (the Jansenist Paschase Quesnel), rich, but badly arranged, containing many Greek, Gallic, and other councils, also pontifical decretals. With the other collections it gave way to the "Hadriana", at the end of the eighth century.

207 (4) In Spain, on the contrary, at least after the conversion of the Visigoths, the Church was strongly centralized in the See of Toledo, and in close union with the royal power. Previous to this, we must note the collection of St. Martin of Braga, a kind of adaptation of conciliary canons, often incorrectly cited in the Middle Ages as the "Capitula Martini papae" (about 563). It was absorbed in the large and important collection of the Visigothic Church. The latter, begun as early as the council of 633 and increased by the canons of subsequent councils, is known as the "Hispana" or "Isidoriana", because in later times it was attributed (erroneously) to St. Isidore of Seville. It comprises two parts: the councils and the decretals; the councils are arranged in four sections: the East, Africa, Gaul, Spain, and chronological order is observed in each section; the decretals, 104 in number, range from Pope St. Damasus to St. Gregory (366-604). Its original elements consist of the Spanish councils from Elvira (about 300) to the Seventeenth Council of Toledo in 694. The influence of this collection, in the form it assumed about the middle of the ninth century, when the False Decretals were inserted into it, was very great.

208 (5) Of Great Britain and Ireland we need mention only the Irish collection of the beginning of the eighth century, from which several texts passed to the continent; it is remarkable for including among its canons citations from the Scriptures and the Fathers.

209 (6) The collection of the False Decretals, or the Pseudo-Isidore (about 850), is the last and most complete of the "chronological" collections, and therefore the one most used by the authors of the subsequent "systematic" collections; it is the "Hispana" or Spanish collection together with apocryphal decretals attributed to the popes of the first centuries up to the time of St. Damasus, when the authentic decretals begin. It exerted a very great influence.

210 (7) To conclude the list of collections, where the later canonists were to garner their materials, we must mention the "Penitentials", the "Ordines" or ritual collections, the "Formularies", especially the "Liber Diurnus"; also compilations of laws, either purely secular, or semi-ecclesiastical, like the "Capitularies" (q.v.). The name "capitula" or "capitularia" is given also to the episcopal ordinances quite common in the ninth century. It may be noted that the author of the False Decretals forged also false "Capitularies", under the name of Benedict the Deacon, and false episcopal "Capitula", under the name of Angilramnus, Bishop of Metz.

211 C. Canonical Collections to the Time of Gratian

212 The Latin Church was meanwhile moving towards closer unity; the local character of canonical discipline and laws gradually disappears, and the authors of canonical collections exhibit a more personal note, i.e. they pick out more or less advantageously the texts, which they borrow from the "chronological" compilations, though they display as yet no critical discernment, and include many apocryphal documents, while others continue to be attributed to the wrong sources. They advance, nevertheless, especially when to the bare texts they add their own opinions and ideas. From the end of the ninth century to the middle of the twelfth these collections are very numerous; many of them are still unpublished, and some deservedly so. We can only mention the principal ones:

213 A collection in twelve books, compiled in Northern Italy, and dedicated to an Archbishop Anselm, doubtless Anselm II of Milan (833-97), still unedited; it seems to have been widely used.

214 The "Libri duo de synodalibus causis" of Regino, Abbot of Prum (d. 915), a pastoral visitation manual of the bishop of the diocese, edited by Wasserschleben (1840).

215 The voluminous compilation, in twenty books, of Burchard, Bishop of Worms, compiled between 1012 and 1022, entitled the "Collectarium", also "Decretum", a manual for the use of ecclesiastics in their ministry; the nineteenth book, "Corrector" or "Medicus", treats of the administration of the Sacrament of Penance, and was often current as a distinct work. This widely circulated collection is in P.L., CXL. At the end of the eleventh century there appeared in Italy several collections favouring the reform of Gregory VII and supporting the Holy See in the in vestiture strife; some of the authors utilized for their works the Roman archives.

216 The collection of Anselm, Bishop of Lucca (d. 1086), in thirteen books, still unedited, an influential work.

217 The collection of Cardinal Deusdedit, dedicated to Pope Victor III (1087), it treats of the primacy of the pope, of the Roman clergy, ecclesiastical property, immunities, and was edited by Martinucci in 1869, more recently and better by Wolf von Glanvell (1905).

218 The "Breviarium" of Cardinal Atto; edited by Mai, "Script. vet. nova collect.", VI, app. 1832.

219 The collection of Bonizo, Bishop of Sutri in ten books, written after 1089, still unedited.

220 The collection of Cardinal Gregory, called by him "Polycarpus", in eight books, written before 1120, yet unedited.

221 In France we must mention the small collection of Abbo, Abbot of Fleury (d. 1004). in fifty-two chapters, in P. L., CXXXIX; and especially

222 the collections of Ives, Bishop of Chartres (d. 1115 or 1117), i.e. the "Collectio trium partium", the "Decretum", es pecially the "Panormia", a short compilation in eight books, extracted from the preceding two works, and widely used. The "Decretum" and the "Panormia" are in P. L., CLXI.

223 The unedited Spanish collection of Saragossa (Caesar-augustana) is based on these works of Ives of Chartres.

224 Finally, the "De misericordia et justitia", in three books, composed before 1121 by Algerus of Liège, a general treatise on ecclesiastical discipline, in which is fore shadowed the scholastic method of Gratian, reprinted in P.L., CLXXX.

225 D. The "Decretum" of Gratian: the Decretists

226 The "Concordantia discordantium canonum", known later as "Decretum", which Gratian published at Bologna about 1148, is not, as we consider it today, a collection of canonical texts, but a general treatise, in which the texts cited are inserted to help in establishing the law. It is true that the work is very rich in texts and there is hardly a canon of any importance contained in the earlier collections (including the decisions of the Lateran Council of 1139 and recent papal decretals) that Gratian has not used. His object, however, was to build up a juridical system from all these documents. Despite its imperfections, it must be admitted that the work of Gratian was as near perfection as was then possible. For that reason it was adopted at Bologna, and soon elsewhere, as the textbook for the study of canon law. (For an account of this collection see CORPUS JURIS CANONICI; CANONS.) We may here recall again that the "Decretum" of Gratian is not a codification, but a privately compiled treatise; further, that the building up of a general system of canon law was the work of the canonists, and not of the legislative authorities as such.

227 Quite as the professors at Bologna commented on Justinian's "Corpus juris civilis", so they began at once to comment on Gratian's work, the personal element as well as his texts. The first commentators are called the "Decretists". In their lectures (Lat. lecturae, readings) they treated of the conclusions to be drawn from each part and solved the problems (quaestiones) arising therefrom. They synopsized their teaching in "glosses", interlinear at first, then marginal, or they composed separate treatises known as "Apparatus", "Summae", "Repetitiones", or else collected "casus", "questiones", "Margaritae", "Breviaria", etc. The principal decretists are:

228 Paucapalea, perhaps the first disciple of Gratian, whence, it is said, the name "palea" given to the additions to the "Decretum" (his "Summa" was edited by Schulte in 1890);

229 Roland Bandinelli, later Alexander III (his "Summa" was edited by Thaner in 1874);

230 Omnibonus, 1185 (see Schulte, "De Decreto ab Omnibono abbreviate", 1892);

231 John of Faenza (d. bishop of that city in 1190);

232 Rufinus ("Summa" edited by Singer, 1902);

233 Stephen of Tournai (d. 1203; "Summa" edited by Schulte, 1891);

234 the great canonist Huguccio (d. 1910; "Summa" edited by M. Gillmann);

235 Sicard of Cremona (d. 1215);

236 John the Teuton, really Semeca or Zemcke (d. 1245);

237 Guido de Baysio, the "archdeacon" (of Bologna, d. 1313); and especially

238 Bartholomew of Brescia (d. 1258), author of the "gloss" on the "Decretum" in its last form.

239 E. Decretals and Decretalists

240 While lecturing on Gratian's work the canonists laboured to complete and elaborate the master's teaching; with that view they collected assiduously the decretals of the popes, and especially the canons of the Ecumenical councils of the Lateran (1179, 1215); but these compilations were not intended to form a complete code, they merely centred round and supplemented Gratian's "Decretum"; for that reason these Decretals are known as the "Extravagantes", i.e. outside of, or extraneous to, the official collections. The five collections thus made between 1190 and 1226 (see DECRETALS), and which were to serve as the basis for the work of Gregory IX, mark a distinct step forward in the evolution of canon law: whereas Gratian had inserted the texts in his own treatise, and the canonists wrote their works without including the texts, we have now compilations of supplementary texts for the purpose of teaching, but which nevertheless remain quite distinct; in addition, we at last find the legislators taking part officially in editing the collections. While the "Breviarium" of Bernard of Pavia, the first to exhibit the division into five books and into titles, which St. Raymund of Pennafort was later to adopt, is the work of a private individual, the "Compilatio tertia" of Innocent III in 1210, and the "Compilatio quinta" of Honorius III, in 1226, are official collections. Though the popes, doubtless, intended only to give the professors at Bologna correct and authentic texts, they nevertheless acted officially; these collections, however, are but supplements to Gratian.

241 This is also true of the great collection of "Decretals" of Gregory IX (see DECRETALS and CORPUS JURIS CANONICI). The pope wished to collect in a more uniform and convenient manner the decretals scattered through so many different compilations; he entrusted this synopsis to his chaplain Raymund of Pennafort, and in 1234 sent it officially to the universities of Bologna and Paris. He did not wish to suppress or supplant the "Decretum" of Gratian, but this eventually occurred. The "Decretals" of Gregory IX, though composed in great part of specific decisions, represented in fact a more advanced state of law; furthermore, the collection was sufficiently extensive to touch almost every matter, and could serve as a basis for a complete course of instruction. It soon gave rise to a series of commentaries, glosses, and works, as the "Decretum" of Gratian had done, only these were more important since they were based on more recent and actual legislation. The commentators of the Decretals were known as Decretalists. The author of the "gloss" was Bernard de Botone (d. 1263); the text was commented on by the most distinguished canonists; among the best known previous to the sixteenth century, we must mention:

242 Bernard of Pavia ("Summa" edited by Laspeyres, 1860),

243 Tancred, archdeacon of Bologna, d. 1230 ("Summa de Matrimonio", ed. Wunderlich, 1841);

244 Godfrey of Trani (1245);

245 Sinibaldo Fieschi, later Innocent IV (1254), whose "Apparatus in quinque libros decre taliurn" has been frequently reprinted since 1477;

246 Henry of Susa, later Cardinal-Bishop of Ostia (d. 1271), hence "Hostiensis"; his "Summa Hostiensis", or "Summa aurea" was one of the best known canonical works, and was printed as early as 1473;

247 Aegilius de Fuscarariis (d. 1289);

248 William Durandus (d. 1296, Bishop of Mende), surnamed "Speculator", on account of his important treatise on procedure, the "Speculum judiciale", printed in 1473;

249 Guido de Baysio, the "archdeacon", already mentioned;

250 Nicolas de Tudeschis (d. 1453), also known as "Abbes siculus" or simply "Panormitanus" (or also "Abbas junior seu modernus") to distinguish him from the "Abbas antiques", whose name is unknown and who commented on the Decretals about 1275); Nicolas left a "Lecture" on the Decretals, the Liber Sextus, and the Clementines.

251 For some time longer, the same method of collecting was followed; not to speak of the private compilations, the popes continued to keep up to date the "Decretals" of Gregory IX; in 1245 Innocent IV sent a collection of forty-two decretals to the universities, ordering them to be inserted in their proper places; in 1253 he forwarded the "initia" or first words of the authentic decretals that were to be accepted. Later Gregory X and Nicholas III did likewise, but with little profit, and none of these brief supplementary collections survived. The work was again undertaken by Boniface VIII, who had prepared and published an official collection to complete the five existing books; this was known as the "Sextus" (Liber Sextus). Clement V also had prepared a collection which, in addition to his own decretals, contained the decisions of the Council of Vienne (1311-12); it was published in 1317 by his successor John XXII and was called the "Clementina." This was the last of the medieval official collections. Two later compilations included in the "Corpus Juris" are private works, the "Extravagantes of John XXII", arranged in 1325 by Zenzelin de Cassanis, who glossed them, and the "Extra vagantes communes", a belated collection; it was only in the edition of the "Corpus Juris" by Jean Chappuis, in 1500, that these collections found a fixed form. The "Sextus" was glossed and commented by Joannes Andrae, called the "fons et tuba juris" (d. 1348), and by Cardinal Jean Le Moine (Joannes Monachus, d. 1313), whose works were often printed.

252 When authors speak of the "closing" of the "Corpus Juris", they do not mean an act of the popes for bidding canonists to collect new documents, much less forbidding themselves to add to the ancient collections. But the canonical movement, so active after Gratian's time, has ceased forever. External circumstances, it is true, the Western Schism, the troubles of the fifteenth century, the Reformation, were unfavourable to the compiling of new canonical collections; but there were more direct causes. The special object of the first collections of the decretals was to help settle the law, which the canonists of Bologna were trying to systematize; that is why they contain so many specific decisions, from which the authors gathered general principles; when these had been ascertained the specific decisions were of no use except for jurisprudence; and in fact the "Sextus", the "Clementinae", and the other collections contain texts only when they are the statement of a general law. Any changes deemed necessary could be made in teaching without the necessity of recasting and augmenting the already numerous and massive collections.

253 F. From the Decretals to the Present Time

254 After the fourteenth century, except for its contact with the collections we have just treated of, canon law loses its unity. The actual law is found in the works of the canonists rather than in any specific collection; each one gathers his texts where he can; there is no one general collection sufficient for the purpose. It is not a case of confusion, but of isolation and dispersion. The sources of law later than the "Corpus Juris" are:

255 the decisions of councils, especially of the Council of Trent (1545-1563) and the Second Vatican Council, which are so varied and important that by themselves they form a short code, though without much order;

256 the constitutions of the popes, numerous but hitherto not officially collected, except the "Bullarium" of Benedict XIV (1747);

257 the Rules of the Apostolic Chancery (q.v.);

258 the 1917 Code of Canon Law;

259 lastly the decrees, decisions, and various acts of the Roman Congregations, jurisprudence rather than law properly so called.

260 For local law we have provincial councils and diocesan statutes. It is true there have been published collections of councils and Bullaria. Several Roman Congregations have also had their acts collected in official publications; but these are rather erudite compilations or repertories. The method followed, both by private individuals and the popes, in drawing up canonical collections is generally rather that of a coordinated compilation or juxtaposition of documents than codification in the modern sense of the word, i.e. a redaction of the laws (all the laws) into an orderly series of short precise texts. It is true that antiquity, even the Roman law, did not offer any model different from that of the various collections, that method, however, long since ceased to be useful or possible in canon law. After the "closing" of the "Corpus Juris" two attempts were made; the first was of little use, not being official; the second, was official, but was not brought to a successful issue. In 1590 the jurisconsult Pierre Mathieu, of Lyons. published under the title "Liber septimus" a supplement to the "Corpus Juris", divided according to the order of the books and titles of the Decretals. It includes a selection of papal constitutions, from Sixtus IV to Sixtus V (1471-1590), but not the decrees of the Council of Trent. This compilation was of some service, and in a certain number of editions of the "Corpus Juris" was included as an appendix. As soon as the official edition of the "Corpus Juris" was published in 1582, Gregory XIII appointed a commission to bring up to date and complete the venerable collection. Sixtus V hastened the work and at length Cardinal Pinelli presented to Clement VIII what was meant to be a "Liber septimus". For the purpose of further studies the pope had it printed in 1598: the pontifical constitutions and the decrees of the Council of Trent were inserted in it in the order of the Decretals. For several reasons Clement VIII refused to approve this work and the project was definitively abandoned. Had this collection been approved it would have been as little used today as the others, the situation continuing to grow worse.

261 Many times during the nineteenth century, especially at the time of the Vatican Council (Collectio Lacensis, VII, 826), the bishops had urged the Holy See to draw up a complete collection of the laws in force, adapted to the needs of the day. It is true, their requests were complied with in regard to certain matters; Pius X in his "Motu proprio" of 19 March, 1904, refers to the constitution "Apostolicae Sedis" limiting and cataloguing the censures "latae sententie", the Constitution "Officiorum", revising the laws of the Index; the Constitution "Conditre" on the religious congregations with simple vows. These and several other documents were, moreover, drawn up in short precise articles, to a certain extent a novelty, and the beginning of a codification. Pius later officially ordered a codification, in the modern sense of the word, for the whole canon law. In the first year of his pontificate he issued the Tutu Proprio "Arduum", (De Ecclesiae legibus in unum redigendis); it treats of the complete codification and reformation of canon law. For this purpose the pope requested the entire episcopate, grouped in provinces, to make known to him the reforms they desired. At the same time he appointed a commission of consultors, on whom the initial work devolved, and a commission of cardinals, charged with the study and approval of the new texts, subject later to the sanction of the sovereign pontiff. The plans of the various titles were confided to canonists in every country. The general idea of the Code that followed includes (after the preliminary section) four main divisions: persons, things (with subdivisions for the sacraments, sacred places and objects, etc.). trials, crimes and penalties. It is practically the plan of the "Institutiones", or manuals of canon law. The articles were numbered consecutively. This great work was finished in 1917.

262 The sources of canon law, and the canonical writers. give us, it is true, rules of action, each with its specific object. We have now to consider all these laws in their common abstract element, in other words Ecclesiastical Law, its characteristics and its practice. According to the excellent definition of St. Thomas (I-II:90:1) a law is a reasonable ordinance for the common good promulgated by the head of the community. Ecclesiastical law therefore has for its author the head of the Christian community over which he has jurisdiction strictly so called; its object is the common welfare of that community, although it may cause inconvenience to individuals; it is adapted to the obtaining of the common welfare, which implies that it is physically and morally possible for the majority of the community to observe it; the legislator must intend to bind his subjects and must make known that intention clearly; finally he must bring the law under the notice of the community. A law is thus distinguished from a counsel, which is optional not obligatory; from a precept, which is imposed not on the community but on individual members; and from a regulation or direction, which refers to accessory matters.

263 The object therefore of ecclesiastical law is all that is necessary or useful in order that the society may attain its end, whether there be question of its organization, its working, or the acts of its individual members; it extends also to temporal things, but only indirectly. With regard to acts, the law obliges the individual either to perform or to omit certain acts; hence the distinction into "affirmative or preceptive" laws and "negative or prohibitory" laws; at times it is forced to allow certain things to be done, and we have "permissive" laws, or laws of forbearance; finally, the law in addition to forbidding a given act may render it, if performed, null and void; these are "irritant" laws. Laws in general, and irritant laws in particular, are not retroactive, unless such is expressly declared by the legislator to be the case. The publication or promulgation of the law has a double aspect: law must be brought to the knowledge of the community in order that the latter may be able to observe it, and in this consists the publication. But there may be legal forms of publication, requisite and necessary, and in this consists the promulgation properly so called (see PROMULGATION). Whatever may be said about the forms used in the past, today the promulgation of general ecclesiastical laws is effected exclusively by the insertion of the law in the official publication of the Holy See, the "Acta Apostolical Sedis", in compliance with the Constitution "Promulgandi", of Pius X, dated 29 September, 1908, except in certain specifically mentioned cases. The law takes effect and is binding on all members of the community as soon as it is promulgated, allowing for the time morally necessary for it to become known, unless the legislator has fixed a special time at which it is to come into force.

264 No one is presumed to be ignorant of the law; only ignorance of fact. not ignorance of law, is excusable (Reg. 1:3 jur. in VI). Everyone subject to the legislator is bound in conscience to observe the law. A violation of the law, either by omission or by act, is punishable with a penalty (q.v.). These penalties may be settled beforehand by the legislator, or they may be left to the discretion of the judge who imposes them. A violation of the moral law or what one's conscience judges to be the moral law is a sin; a violation of the exterior penal law, in addition to the sin, renders one liable to a punishment or penalty; if the will of the legislator is only to oblige the offender to submit to the penalty, the law is said to be "purely penal"; such are some of the laws adopted by civil legislatures, and it is generally admitted that some ecclesiastical laws are of this kind. As baptism is the gate of entrance to the ecclesiastical society, all those who are baptized, even non-Catholics, are in principle subject to the laws of the Church; in practice the question arises only when certain acts of heretics and schismatics come before Catholic tribunals; as a general rule an irritant law is enforced in such a case, unless the legislator has exempted them from its observance, for instance, for the form of marriage. General laws, therefore, bind all Catholics wherever they may be. In the case of particular laws, as one is subject to them in virtue of one's domicile, or even quasi-domicile, passing strangers are not subject to them, except in the case of acts performed within the territory.

265 The role of the legislator does not end with the promulgation of the law; it is his office to explain and interpret it (declaratio, interpretatio legis). The interpretation is "official" (authentica) or even "necessary", when it is given by the legislator or by some one authorized by him for that purpose; it is "customary", when it springs from usage or habit; it is "doctrinal", when it is based on the authority of the learned writers or the decisions of the tribunals. The official interpretation alone has the force of law. According to the result, the interpretation is said to be "comprehensive, extensive, restrictive, corrective," expressions easily understood. The legislator, and in the case of particular laws the superior, remains master of the law; he can suppress it either totally (abrogation), or partially (derogation), or he can combine it with a new law which suppresses in the first law all that is incompatible with the second (abrogation). Laws co-exist as far as they are reconcilable; the more recent modifies the more ancient, but a particular law is not suppressed by a general law, unless the fact is stated expressly. A law can also cease when its purpose and end cease, or even when it is too difficult to be observed by the generality of the subjects; it then falls into desuetude (see CUSTOM).

266 In every society, but especially in a society so vast and varied as the Church, it is impossible for every law to be applicable always and in all cases. Without suppressing the law, the legislator can permanently exempt from it certain persons or certain groups, or certain matters, or even extend the rights of certain subjects; all these concessions are known as privileges. In the same manner the legislator can derogate from the law in special cases; this is called a dispensation. Indults or the powers that the bishops of the Catholic world receive from the Holy See, to regulate the various cases that may arise in the administration of their dioceses, belong to the category of privileges; together with the dispensations granted directly by the Holy See, they eliminate any excessive rigidity of the law, and ensure to ecclesiastical legislation a marvellous facility of application. Without imperilling the rights and prerogatives of the legislator, but on the contrary strengthening them, indults impress more strongly on the law of the Church that humane, broad, merciful character, mindful of the welfare of souls, but also of human weakness, which likens it to the moral law and distinguishes it from civil legislation, which is much more external and inflexible.

267 It is impossible to draw up a detailed and systematic catalogue of all the works of special value in the study of canon law; the most distinguished canonists are the subject of special articles in this Encyclopedia. Those we have mentioned as commentators of the ancient canonical collections are now of interest only from an historical point of view; but the authors who have written since the Council of Trent are still read with profit; it is in their great works that we find our practical canon law. Among the authors who have written on special chapters of the "Corpus Juris", we must mention (the date refers to the first edition of the works):

268 Prospero Fagnani, the distinguished secretary of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, "Jus canonicum seu commentaria absolutissima in quinque libros Decretalium" (Rome, 1661),

269 Manuel González Téllez (d. 1649), "Commentaria perpetua in singulos textus juris canonici" (Lyons, 16, 3);

270 the Jesuit Paul Laymann, better known as a moral theologian, "Jus canonicum seu commentaria in libros Decretalium" (Dillingen, 1666);

271 Ubaldo Giraldi, Clerk Regular of the Pious Schools, "Expositio juris pontificii juxta re centiorem Ecclesiae disciplinam" (Rome, 1769).

272 Among the canonists who have followed the order of the titles of the Decretals:

273 the Benedictine Louis Engel, professor at Salzburg, "Universum jus canonicum secundum titulos libr. Decretalium" (Salzburg, 1671);

274 the Jesuit Ehrenreich Pirhing, "Universum jus canonicum" etc. (Dillingen, 1645);

275 the Franciscan Anaclet Reiffenstuel, "Jus canonicum universum" (Freising, 170O);

276 the Jesuit James Wiestner, "Institutiones canonical" (Munich, 1705);

277 the two brothers Francis and Benedict Schmier, both Benedictines and professors at Salzburg; Francis wrote "Jurisprudentia canonico-civilis" (Salzburg, 1716); Benedict: "Liber I Decretalium; Lib. II etc." (Salzburg, 1718);

278 the Jesuit Francis Schmalzgrueber, "Jus ecclésiasticum universum" (Dillingen, 1717);

279 Peter Leuren, also a Jesuit, "Forum ecclesiasticum" etc. (Mainz, 1717);

280 Vitus Pichler, a Jesuit, the successor of Schmalzgrueber, "Summa jurisprudential sacrae" (Augsburg, 1723);

281 Eusebius Amort, a Canon Regular, "Elementa juris canonici veteris et modern)" (Ulm, 1757);

282 Amort wrote also among other works of a very personal character; "De origine, progressu . . . indulgentiarum" (Augsburg, 1735);

283 Carlo Sebastiano Berardi, "Commentaria in jus canonicum universum" (Turin, 1766); also his "Institutiones" and his great work "Gratiani canonesgenuini ab apocryphis discreti", (Turin, 1752);

284 James Anthony Zallinger, a Jesuit, "Institutiones juris ecclesiastici maxime privati" (Augsburg, 1791), not so well known as his "Institutionum juris naturalis et ecclesiastici publici libri quinque" (Augsburg, 1784).

285 This same method was followed again in the nineteenth century by Canon Filippo de Angelis, "Praelectiones juris canonici", (Rome, 1877);

286 by his colleague Francesco Santi, "Praelectiones", (Ratisbon, 1884; revised by Martin Leitner, 1903); and

287 E. Grand claude, "Jus canonicum" (Paris, 1882).

288 The plan of the "Institutiones", in imitation of Lancelotti (Perugia, 1563), has been followed by very many canonists, among whom the principal are:

289 the learned Antonio Agustin, Archbishop of Tarragona, "Epitome jurispontificu veteris" (Tarragona, 1587); his "De emendatione Gratiani dialogorum libri duo" (Tarragona, 1587), is worthy of mention;

290 Claude Fleury, "Institution au droit ecclésiastique" (Paris, 1676);

291 Zeger Bernard van Espen, "Jus ecclesiasticum universum" (Cologne, 1748);

292 the Benedictine Dominic Schram, "Institutiones juris ecclesiastici" (Augsburg, 1774);

293 Vincenzo Lupoli, "Juris ecclesiastici praelectiones" (Naples, 1777);

294 Giovanni Devoti, titular Archbishop of Carthage, "Institutionum canonicarum libri quatuor" (Rome, 1785); his "Commentary on the Decretals" has only the first three books (Rome, 1803);

295 Cardinal Soglia, "Institutiones juris privati et publici ecclesiastici" (Paris, 1859) and "Institutiones juris publici", (Loreto, 1843);

296 D. Craisson, Vicar-General of Valence, "Manuale compendium totius juris canonici" (Poitiers, 1861).

297 School manuals in one or two volumes are very numerous and it is impossible to mention all.

298 We may cite in Italy those of G.C. Ferrari (1847); Vecchiotti (Turin, 1867); De Camillis, (Rome, 1869); Sebastiano Sanguinetti, S.J. (Rome, 1884); Carlo Lombardi (Rome, 1898); Guglielmo Sebastianelli (Rome, 1898), etc.

299 For German speaking countries, Ferdinand Walter (Bonn, 1822); F. M. Permaneder, 1846; Rosshirt, 1858; George Phillips (Ratisbon, 1859: in addition to his large work in eight volumes, 1845 sq.); J. Winckler, 1862 (specially for Switzerland); S. Aichner (Brixen, 1862) specially for Austria; J. F. Schulte (Geissen, 1863); F. H. Vering (Freiburg-im-B., 1874); Isidore Silbernagl (Ratisbon, 1879); H. Laemmer (Freiburg-im-B., 188fi); Phil. Hergenroether (Freiburg-im-B., 1888); T. Hollweck (Freiburg-im-B.. 1905); J. Laurentius (Freiburg-im-B., 1903); D. M. Prummer, 1907; J. B. Sägmüller (Freiburg-im-B., 1904).

300 For France: H. Icard, Superior of Saint-Sulpice (Paris, 1867); M. Bargilliat (Paris, 1893); F. Deshayes, "Memento juris ecclesiastici" (Paris, 1897).

301 In Belgium: De Braban dere (Bruges, 1903).

302 For English-speaking countries: Smith (New York, 1890); Gignac (Quebec, 1901); Taunton (London, 1906). For Spain: Marian Aguilar (Santo Domingo de la Calzada, 1904); Gonzales Ibarra (Valladolid, 1904).

303 There are also canonists who have written at considerable length either on the whole canon law, or on special parts of it, in their own particular manner; it is difficult to give a complete list, but we will mention:

304 Agostino Barbosa (d. 1639), whose works fill at least 30 volumes;

305 J.B. Cardinal Luca (d. 1683), whose immense "Theatrum veritatis" and "Relatio curiae romance" are his most important works;

306 Pignatelli, who has touched on all practica1 questions in his "Consultationes canoniccae", 11 folio volumes, Geneva, 1668;

307 Prospero Lambertini (Pope Benedict XIV), perhaps the greatest canonist since the Council of Trent;

308 in the nineteenth century we must mention the different writings of Dominique Bouix, 15 volumes, Paris, 1852 sq.;

309 the "Kirchenrecht" of J. F. Schulte, 1856 and of Rudolf v. Scherer, 1886; and above all

310 the great work of Franz Xavier Wernz, General of the Society of Jesus, "Jus decretalium" (Rome, 1898 sq.).

311 It is impossible to enumerate the special treatises. Among repertoires and dictionaries, it will suffice to cite the "Prompta Bibliotheca" of the Franciscan Ludovico Ferraris (Bologna, 1746); the "Dictionnaire de droit canonique" of Durand de Maillane (Avignon, 1761), continued later by Abbé Andre (Paris, 1847) etc.; finally the other encyclopedias of ecclesiastical sciences wherein canon law has been treated.

312 On ecclesiastical public law, the best-known hand books are, with Soglia,

313 T. M. Salzano, "Lezioni di diritto canonico pubblico et private" (Naples, 1845);

314 Camillo Cardinal Tarquini, "Juris ecclesiastici publici institutiones" (Rome, 1860);

315 Felice Cardinal Cavagrus, "Institutiones juris publici ecclesiastici" (Rome, 1888);

316 Msgr. Adolfo Giobbio, "Lezioni di diplomazia ecclesiastics" (Rome, 1899);

317 Emman. de la Peña y Fernéndez, "Jus publicum ecclesiasticum" (Seville, 1900).

318 For an historical view, the chief work is that of Pierre de Marco, Archbishop of Toulouse, "De concordia sacerdotii et imperi" (Paris, 1641).

319 For the history of canon law considered in its sources and collections, we must mention

320 the brothers Pietro and Antonio Ballerini of Verona, "De antiquis collectionibus et collectoribus canonum" (Venice, 1757);

321 among the works of St. Leo I, in P.L. LIII;

322 the matter has been recast and completed by Friedrich Maassen, "Geschichte der Quellen und der Literatur des kanonischen Rechts im Abendland", I, (Graz, 1870);

323 for the history from the time of Gratian see J. F. Schulte, "Geschichte der Quellenund der Literatur des kanonischen Rechts von Gratian his zum Gegenwart" (Stuttgart, 1875 sq.), and "Die Lehre von der Quellen des katholiscen Kirchen rechts" (Giessen, 1860);

324 Philip Schneider, "Die Lehre van den Kirchenrechtsquellen" (Ratisbon, 1892),

325 Adolphe Tardif, "Histoire des sources du droit canonique" (Paris, 1887);

326 Franz Laurin, "Introduc tio in Corpus Juris canonici" (Freiburg, 1889).

327 On the history of ecclesiastical discipline and institutions, the principal work is "Ancienne et nouvelle discipline de l'Eglise" by the Oratorian Louis Thomassin (Lyons, 1676), translated into Latin by the author, "Vetus et nova discipline" (Paris, 1688).

328 One may consult with profit A. J. Binterim, "Die vorzüglich sten Denkwurdigkeiten der christkatolischen Kirche" (Mainz, 1825);

329 the "Dizionario di erudizione storico ecclesiastica" by Moroni (Venice, 1840 sq.);

330 also J. W.Bickell, "Geschichte des Kirchenrechts" (Gies sen, 1843);

331 E. Loening, "Geschichte des deutschen Kirchenrechts (Strasburg, 1878);

332 R. Sohm, "Kirchenrecht, I: Die geschichtliche Grundlagen" (1892).

333 A. Boudinhon

Influence of the Church on Civil Law

172 Christianity is essentially an ethical religion; and, although its moral principles were meant directly for the elevation of the individual, still they could not fail to exercise a powerful influence on such a public institution as law, the crystallized rule of human conduct. The law of Rome escaped this influence to a large extent, because much of it was compiled before Christianity was recognized by the public authorities. But the leges barbarorum were more completely interpenetrated, as it were, by Christian influences; they received their definite form only after the several nations had submitted to the gentle yoke of Christ. This influence of the Church is particularly noticeable in the following matters:

173 (1) Slavery

174 The condition of the slaves was most pitiable in the ages of antiquity. According to Roman law and usage a slave was considered, not as a human being, but as a chattel, over which the master had the most absolute control, up to the point of inflicting death. Gradually, the spirit of Christianity restricted these inhuman rights. From the time of the Emperor Antoninus Pius (138-61) a master was punished if he killed his slave without reason, or even practiced on him excessive cruelty (Instit. Just., lib. I, tit. 8; Dig., lib. I, tit. 6, leges 1, 2). The emperor Constantine (306-37) made it homicide to kill a slave with malice aforethought, and described certain modes of barbarous punishment by which, if death followed, the guilt of homicide was incurred (Cod. Just., lib. IV, tit. 14). A further relief consisted in facilitating the manumission or liberation of slaves. According to several laws of Constantine the ordinary formalities could be dispensed with if the manumission took place in the church, before the people and the sacred ministers. The clergy were permitted to bestow freedom on their slaves in their last will, or even by simple word of mouth (Cod. Just., lib. I, tit. 13, leges 1, 2). The Emperor Justinian I (527-65) gave to freed persons the full rank and rights of Roman citizens, and abolished the penalty of condemnation to servitude (Cod. Just., lib. VII, tit. 6; Nov., VII, cap. viii; Nov. LVIII, praef. capp. i, iu). Similar provisions were found in the Barbarian codes. According to the Burgundian and Visigothic laws the murder of a slave was punished; emancipation in the church and before the priest was permitted and encouraged. In one point they were ahead of the Roman law; they recognized the legality of the marriage between slaves. in the Lombardic law, on the authority of the Scriptural sentence: "Whom God hath joined together, let no man put asunder." The Church could not directly abolish slavery; she was satisfied with admitting the slaves within her pale on a footing of equality with others, with counselling patience and submission on the part of the slave, forbearance and moderation on that of the master. Otherwise she concurred in the civil legislation, or even went beyond it in some cases. Thus, the killing of a slave was severely punished (Counc. of Elvira, D. 300, Can. v; Counc. of Epaon, A.D. 517, Can. xxviv); a fugitive slave who had taken refuge in the church was to be restored to his master only on the latter's promise of remitting the punishment (Counc. of Orleans, A.D. 511, Can. iii, c. vi, X, lib. III, tit. 49); marriage between slaves was recognized as valid (Counc. of Chalons, A.D. 813; Can. xxx; c. i, X, lib. IV, tit. 9); and even the marriage between a free person and a slave was ratified, provided it had been contracted with full knowledge (Counc. of Compiegne, A.D. 757, Can. viii).

175 (2) Paternal Authority (Potestas Paterna)

176 According to the Roman law the power of the father over his children was as absolute as that of the master over his slaves: it extended to their freedom and life. The harsher features of this usage were gradually eliminated. Thus, according to the laws of different emperors, the killing of a child either by the father or by the mother was declared to be one of the greatest crimes (Cod. Theod., lib. IX, tit. 14, 15; Cod. Just., lib. IX, tit. 17; Dig., lib. XLVIII, tit. 9, lex 1). Cruel treatment of children was forbidden, such as the jus liberos notice dandi, i.e., the right of handing children over to the power of someone injured by them (Instit. Just., lib. IV, tit. 8); children could not be sold or given away to the power of others (Cod. Just., lib. IV, tit. 43, lex 1); children that were sold by their father on account of poverty were to be set free (Cod. Theod., lib. III, tit. 3, lex 1); finally, all children exposed by their parents and fallen into servitude were to become free without exception (Cod. Just., lib. VIII, tit. 52, lex 3). The son of a family was entitled to dispose in his last will of the possessions acquired either in military service (peculium castrense), or in the exercise of an office (peculium quasi castrense), or in any other way (In stit. Just., Jib. II, tit. 11; c. iv, VI, lib. III, tit. 12). The children could not be disinherited at the simple wish of the father, but only for certain specified reasons based on ingratitude (Nov. CXV. cc. iii sqq.).

177 (3) Marriage

178 In the ancient law of Rome the wife was, like the rest of the family, the property of the husband, who could dispose of her at will. Christianity rescued woman from this degrading condition by attributing to her equal rights, and by making her the companion of the husband. This equality was in part recognized by imperial laws, which gave to women the right of controlling their property, and to mothers the right of guardianship (Cod. Theod., lib. II, tit. 17, lex 1; lib. III, tit. 17, lex 4). The boundless liberty of divorce, which had obtained since the time of Augustus, was restricted to a certain number of cases. The legislation of the Emperors Constantine and Justinian on this subject did not come up to the standard of Christianity, but it approached it and imposed a salutary check on the free desire of husband or wife for separation (Cod. Theod., lib. III, tit. 16, lex 1; Cod. Just., lib. V, tit. 17, leg. 8, 10, 11). Woman was highly respected among the barbarian nations; and with some, like the Visigoths, divorce was forbidden except for adultery.

179 (4) Wills and Testaments

180 The canon law introduced various modifications in the regulations of the civil law concerning last wills and testaments; among them there is one which enforced a particular fairness in favour of the necessary heirs, such as children. According to the Roman law, one who became heir or legates with the condition of a fideicommissum (i.e., of transmitting his inheritance or legacy to another after his death) had the right of deducting the fourth part from the inheritance or legacy, which was not transmitted; this fourth part being known as the Trebellian quarter. Again, the necessary heirs, such as children, had a claim on a certain part of the inheritance. If it happened that the share of the necessary heir was burdened with a fideicommissum, then the necessary heir was entitled only to deduct the part coming to him as a necessary heir, but not the Trebellian quarter (Cod. Just., lib. VI, tit. 49, lex 6). The canon law modified this provision by enjoining that the necessary heir in such a case was entitled first to the deduction of his natural share and then also to the deduction of the Trebellian quarter from the rest of the inheritance (cc. 16, 18, X, lib. III, tit. 26).

181 (5) Property Rights

182 According to a provision in the Roman law, a man who was forcibly ejected from his property could, in order to recover it, apply the process known as the interdictum under vi against the one who ejected him directly or indirectly, i.e., against him who perpetrated the act of ejection or who counselled it. But he could take action against the heirs of those who ejected him only in so far as they were enriched by the spoliation, and none against a third owner, who meanwhile had obtained possession of his former property (Dig., lib., VLVIII, tit. 16, lex 1. tit. 17, lex 3). The canon law modified this unfair measure by decreeing that he who was despoiled of his property could insist first on being reinstated; if the matter were brought to the courts, he could allege the exceptio spolii, or the fact of spoliation; and, finally, he was permitted to have recourse to the law against a third owner who had acquired the property with the knowledge of its unjust origin (c. 18, X, lib. II, tit. 13; c. 1, VI, lib. II, tit. 5).

183 (6) Contracts

184 The Roman law distinguished between pacts (pacta nuda) and contracts. The former could not be enforced by law or a civil action, while the latter, being clothed in special judicial solemnities, were binding before the law and the civil courts. Against this distinction the canon law insists on the obligation incurred by any agreement of whatever form, or in whatever manner it may have been contracted (c. 1, 3, X, lib. I, tit. 35).

185 (7) Prescriptions

186 The Roman law admitted the right of prescription in favour of him who had been in good faith only at the beginning of his possession, and it abstracted altogether from the good or bad faith in either party to a civil action, if it were terminated by prescription. The canon law required the good faith in him who prescribed for all the time of his possession; and it refused to acknowledge prescription in the case of a civil action against a possessor of bad faith (cc. 5, 20, X, lib. II, tit. 26: c. 2, VI, lib. V, tit. 12, De Reg. Jur.). (See PRESCRIPTION.)

187 (8) Legal Procedure

188 The spirit of Christianity made itself felt in the treatment of criminals and prisoners. Thus prisoners were not to be subjected to in human maltreatment before their trial (Cod. Theod., lib. IX, tit. 3, lex 1); criminals already sentenced were not to be branded on the forehead (Cod. Theod. lib. IX, tit. 40, lex 2); the bishops received the right of interceding for prisoners detained for lighter offenses, and to obtain their freedom on the feast of Easter; they were likewise empowered to visit the prisons on Wednesdays or Fridays in order to see that the magistrates heaped no extra afflictions on the prisoners (Cod. Theod., lib. IX, tit. 38, leges 3,4,6-8; Cod. Just., lib. I, tit. 4, leges 3,9,22,23). To all this may be added the recognition of the right of asylum in the churches, which prevented a hasty and vindictive administra tion of justice (Cod. Theod., lib. IX, tit. 15, lex 4). A great evil among the Germanic nations was the trial by ordeals, or judgments of God. The Church was unable for some time to suppress them, but at least she tried to control them, placed them under the direction of the priests, and gave to them a Christian appearance by prescribing special blessings and ceremonies for such occasions. The popes, however were always opposed to the ordeals as implying a tempting of God; decrees to that effect were enacted by Nicholas I (858-67), Stephen V (885-91), Alexander II (1061-73), Celestine III (1191-98), Innocent III (1198-1216), and Honorius III (1216-27) (cc. 22, 20, 7, C. II, q. 5; cc. 1, 3, X, lib. V, tit. 35; c. 9, X, lib. III, tit. 50). Another evil consisted in the feuds or sanguinary conflicts between private persons in revenge for injuries or murders. The Church could not stop them altogether, owing to the conditions of anarchy and barbarism prevailing among the nations in the Middle Ages; but she succeeded at least in restricting them to certain periods of the year, and certain days of the week, by what is known as the treuga Dei or "Truce of God". By this institution private feuds were forbidden from Advent to the Octave of Epiphany, from Septuagesima Sunday until the Octave of Pentecost, and from sunset of Wednesday until sunrise of Monday. Laws to that effect were enacted as early as the middle of the eleventh century in nearly all countries of Western Europe — in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, England. The canon law insisted on certain principles of fairness: thus, it acknowledged that a civil action might extend sometimes over three years, against the ordinary rule (c. 20, X, lib. II, tit. 1); connected questions, such as disputes about possessions and the right of property, were to be submitted to the same court (c. 1, X, lib. II, tit. 12; c. 1, X, lib. II, tit. 17); a suspected judge could not be refused, unless the reasons were manifested and proved (c. 61, X, lib. II, tit. 28); of two contradictory sentences rendered by different judges the one favouring the accused was to prevail (c. 26, X, lib. II, tit. 27); the intention of appealing could be manifested outside of the court in the presence of good men, if anyone entertained fear of the judge (c. 73, X, lib. II, tit. 28).

189 (9) Legislation, Government, and Administration of Justice

190 The Church was allowed to exercise a wide influence on civil law by the fact that her ministers, chiefly the bishops and abbots, had a large share in framing the leges barbarorum. Practically all the laws of the barbarian nations were written under Christian influences; and the illiterate barbarians willingly accepted the aid of the literate clergy to reduce to writing the institutes of their forefathers. The cooperation of the clergy is not expressly mentioned in all the codes of this kind: in some only the learned in the law, or, again, the proceres, or nobles, are spoken of; but the ecclesiastics were, as a rule, the only learned men, and the higher clergy, bishops and abbots, belonged to the class of the nobles. Ecclesiastics — priests or bishops — were certainly employed in the composition of the "Lex Romana Visigothorum" or "Breviarium Alarici", the "Lex Visigothorum" of Spain, the "Lex Alamannorum", the "Lex Bajuwariorurn", the Anglo-Saxon laws, and the capitularies of the Frankish kings. The bishops and abbots also had a great share in the government of states in the Middle Ages. They took a leading part in the great assemblies common to most of the Germanic nations; they had a voice in the election of the kings; they performed the coronation of the kings; they lived much at the Court, and were the chief advisors of the kings. The office of chancellor in England and in the medieval German Empire was the highest in the State (for the chancellor was the prime minister of the king or emperor, and responsible for all his public acts, it was the chancellor who annulled iniquitous decrees of the king or emperor, and righted all that was wrong); and this office was usually entrusted to an ecclesiastic, in Germany generally to a distinguished bishop. The bishops also had a great share in the administration of justice. As in the East so also in the West, they had a general superintendence over the courts of justice. They always had a seat in the highest tribunal; to them the injured parties could appeal in default of justice; and they had the power to punish subordinate judges for injustice in the absence of the king. In Spain they had a special charge to keep continual watch over the administration of justice, and were summoned on all great occasions to instruct the judges to act with piety and justice. What is more, they often acted directly as judges in temporal matters. By a law of the Emperor Constantine (321) the parties to a litigation could, by mutual consent, appeal to the bishop in any stage of their judicial controversy, and by a further enactment (331) either party could do so even without the consent of the other. This second part, however, was again abrogated by subsequent legislation.

191 In the Middle Ages the bishops acted likewise as judges, both in civil and in criminal matters. In civil matters the Church drew to its jurisdiction all things of a mixed character — the causae spirituali annexae, which were partly temporal and partly ecclesiastical. Criminal matters were brought before the bishap's court, which was held usually in connection with the episcopal visitation throughout the diocese. The methods employed by the ecclesiastical or episcopal courts in a judicial process were such that they served as a model for secular courts. At the beginning the proceedings were very simple; the bishop decided the case presented to him with the advice of the body of presbyters, but without any definite formalities. After the twelfth century the Church elaborated her own method of procedure, with such comparative perfection that it was imitated to a large extent by modern courts. Several principles prevailed in this regard: first, all essential parts of a trial were to be recorded in writing — such as the presentation of the complaint, the citation of the defendant, the proofs, the deposition of witnesses, the defence, and the sentence; secondly, both parties were entitled to a full opportunity of presenting all material relating to the accusation or to the defence; thirdly, the parties in a litigation had the right of appealing to a higher court after the lapse of the ordinary term for a trial (which was two years), the party dissatisfied with the decision was permitted to appeal within ten days after the rendering of the sentence.

192 (10) Sacred Scripture in Legislation

193 A last instance of the influence of Christianity on legislation is found in the appeal to the books of Sacred Scripture in support of civil laws. In the Roman law there is hardly any reference to Scripture. And that is not surprising, since the spirit of Roman legislation, even under the Christian emperors, was heathen, and the emperor — the principle voluntas — was conceived of as the supreme and ultimate source of legislation. On the contrary, the codes of the barbarian nations are replete with quotations from Scripture. In the prologue to several of them reference is made to the leftist ration given by Moses to the Jewish people. Mention has been made above of a Lombardic law which recognizes the legality of marriages among slaves on the authority of the Scriptural text: "whom God hath joined together, let no man put asunder " (Matt., xix, 6; Mark, x, 9). Many other examples may be found, e.g., in the "Leges Visigothorum" and in the Capitularies of the Frankish kings, where almost every book of the Old and New Testament is resorted to for argument or illustration.

194 Francis J. Schaefer

Common Law

175 (Lat. communis, general, of general application; lex, law)

176 The term is of English origin and is used to describe the juridical principles and general rules regulating the possession, use and inheritance of property and the conduct of individuals, the origin of which is not definitely known, which have been observed since a remote period of antiquity, and which are based upon immemorial usages and the decisions of the law courts as distinct from the lex scripta; the latter consisting of imperial or kingly edicts or express acts of legislation. That pre-eminent English lawyer and law-writer, Sir William Blackstone, states in his "Commentaries upon the Laws of England" that the common law consists of rules properly called leges non scriptœ, because their original institution and authority were not set down in writing as Acts of Parliament are, but they receive their binding power and the force of laws, by long immemorial usage, and by their universal reception throughout the kingdom; and, quoting from a famous Roman author, Aulus Gellius, he follows him in defining the common law as did Gellius the Jus non scriptum as that which is "tacito illiterato hominum consensu et moribus expressum" (expressed in the usage of the people, and accepted by the tacit unwritten consent of men).

177 When a community emerges from the tribal condition into that degree of social development which constitutes a state and, consequently, the powers of government become defined with more or less distinctness as legislative, executive, and judicial, and the arbitration of disputes leads to the establishment of courts, the community finds itself conscious of certain rules regarding the conduct of life, the maintenance of liberty, and the security of property which come into being at the very twilight of civilization and have been consistently observed from age to age. Such were the usages and customs, having the force of law which became the inheritance of the English people and were first compiled and recorded by Alfred the Great in his famous "Dome-book" or "Liber Judicialis", published by him for the general use of the whole kingdom. That famous depository of laws was referred to in a certain declaration of King Edward, the son of Alfred, with the injunction: "Omnibus qui reipublicæ præsunt etiam atque etiam mando ut omnibus æquos se præbeant judices, perinde ac in judiciali libro scriptum habetur: nec quicquam formident quin jus commune audacter libereque dicant" (To all who are charged with the administration of public affairs I give the express command that they show themselves in all things to be just judges precisely as in the Liber Judicialis it is written; nor shall any of them fear to declare the common law freely and courageously).

178 In modern times the existence of the "Liber Judicialis" was the subject of great doubt, and such doubt was expressed by many writers upon the constitutional history of England, including both Hallam and Turner. After their day the manuscript of the work was brought to light and was published both in Saxon and English by the Record Commissioners of England in the first volume of the books published by them under the title, "The Ancient Laws and Institutes of England". The profound religious spirit which governed King Alfred and his times clearly appears from the fact that the "Liber Judicialis" began with the Ten Commandments, followed by many of the Mosaic precepts, added to which is the express solemn sanction given to them by Christ in the Gospel: "Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy but to fulfil." After quoting the canons of the Apostolic Council at Jerusalem, Alfred refers to the Divine commandment, "As ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them", and then declares, "From this one doom, a man may remember that he judge every one righteously, he need heed no other doom-book." The original code of the common law compiled by Alfred was modified by reason of the Danish invasion, and from other causes, so that when the eleventh century began the common law of England was not uniform but consisted of observances of different nature prevailing in various districts, viz: Mercen Lage, or Mercian laws, governing many of the midland counties of England and those bordering upon Wales, the country to which the ancient Britons had retreated at the time of the Anglo-Saxon invasion. These laws were, probably, influenced by and intermixed with the British or Druidical customs. Another distinct code was the West-Saxon Lage (Laws of the West-Saxons) governing counties in the southern part of England from Kent to Devonshire. This was, probably, identical for the most part with the code which was edited and published by Alfred. The wide extent of the Danish conquest is shown by the fact that the Dane Lage, or Danish law, was the code which prevailed in the rest of the midland counties and, also, on the eastern coast. These three systems of law were codified and digested by Edward the Confessor into one system, which was promulgated throughout the entire kingdom and was universally observed. Alfred is designated by early historians as Legum Anglicanarum Conditor; Edward the Confessor as Legum Anglicanarum Restitutor.

179 In the days of the Anglo-Saxon kings the courts of justice consisted principally of the county courts. These county courts were presided over by the bishop of the diocese and the ealdorman or sheriff, sitting en banc and exercising both ecclesiastical and civil jurisdiction. In these courts originated and developed the custom of trial by jury. Prior to the invasion led by William the Norman, the common law of England provided for the descent of lands to all the males without any right of primogeniture. Military service was required in proportion to the area of each free man's land, a system resembling the feudal system but not accompanied by all its hardships. Penalties for crime were moderate; few capital punishments being inflicted and persons convicted of their first offence being allowed to commute it for a fine or weregild; or in default of payment, by surrendering themselves to life-long bondage. The legal system which thus received form under the direction of the last Saxon King of England, was common to all the realm and was designated as "Jus commune" or Folk-right.

180 In contradistinction to English jurisprudence the Civil Law of Rome prevailed throughout the Continent. William the Conqueror brought with him into England jurists and clerics thoroughly imbued with the spirit of the civil law and distinctly adverse to the English system. However, the ancient laws and customs of England prevailing before the Conquest, withstood the shock and stress of opposition and remained without impairment to any material extent. The first great court of judicature in England after the Conquest was the Aula Regis or King's Court wherein the king either personally or constructively administered justice for the whole kingdom. The provision in Magna Charta to the effect that the King's Court of Justice should remain fixed and hold its sessions in one certain place, instead of being a peripatetic institution, constitutes historic evidence of the existence of such a court and, also, gives expression to the public discontent created by the fact that its sessions were held at various places and thus entailed great expense and trouble upon litigants. In later days, the Aula Regis became obsolete and its functions were divided between the three great common-law courts of the realm, viz; the Court of King's Bench, the Court of Common Pleas, and the Court of Exchequer. The Court of King's Bench was considered the highest of these three tribunals, although an appeal might be taken from the decisions thereof to the House of Lords. The Court of Common Pleas had jurisdiction over ordinary civil actions, while the Court of Exchequer was restricted in its jurisdiction to causes affecting the royal revenues. Besides these courts the canon law was administered by the Catholic clergy of England in certain ecclesiastical courts called "Curiæ Christianitatis" or Courts Christian. These courts were presided over by the archbishop and bishops and their derivative officers. The canon law at an early date laid down the rule that "Sacerdotes a regibus honorandi sunt, non judicandi," i. e. the clergy are to be honoured by kings, but not to be judged by them, based on the tradition that when some petitions were brought to the Emperor Constantine, imploring the aid of his authority against certain of his bishops accused of oppression and injustice, he caused the petitions to be burned in their presence bidding them farewell in these words, "Ite et inter vos causas vestras discutite, quia dignum non est ut nos judicemus deos" (judge your own cases; it is not meet that we should judge sacred men).

181 The ecclesiastical courts of England were:

182 The Archdeacon's Court which was the lowest in point of jurisdiction in the whole ecclesiastical polity. It was held by the archdeacon or, in his absence, before a judge appointed by him and called his official. Its jurisdiction was sometimes in concurrence with and sometimes in exclusion of the Bishop's Court of the diocese, and the statute 24 Henr. VIII, c. XII, provided for an appeal to the court presided over by the bishop.

183 The Consistory Court of the diocesan bishop which held its sessions at the bishop's see for the trial of all ecclesiastical causes arising within the diocese. The bishop's chancellor, or his commissary, was the ordinary judge; and from his adjudication an appeal lay to the archbishop of the province.

184 The Court of Arches was a court of appeal belonging to the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the judge of such court was called the Dean of the Arches because in ancient times he held court in the church of St. Mary le bow (Sancta Maria de arcubus), one of the churches of London.

185 The Court of Peculiars was a branch of and annexed to the Court of Arches. It had jurisdiction over all those parishes dispersed throughout the Province of Canterbury in the midst of other dioceses, which were exempt from the ordinary's jurisdiction and subject to the metropolitan only. All ecclesiastical causes arising within these peculiar or exempt jurisdictions were, originally, cognizable by this court. From its decisions an appeal lay, formerly, to the pope, but during the reign of Henry VIII this right of appeal was abolished by statute and therefor was substituted an appeal to the king in Chancery.

186 The Prerogative Court was established for the trial of testamentary causes where the deceased had left "bona notabilia" (i. e. chattels of the value of at least one hundred shillings) within two different dioceses. In that case, the probate of wills belonged to the archbishop of the province, by way of special prerogative, and all causes relating to the wills, administrations or legacies of such persons were, originally, cognizable therein before a judge appointed by the archbishop and called the Judge of the Prerogative Court. From this court an appeal lay (until 25 Henr. VIII, c. XIX) to the pope; and after that to the king in Chancery.

187 These were the ancient courts. After the religious revolution had been inaugurated in England by Henry VIII, a sixth ecclesiastical court was created by that monarch and designated the Court of Delegates (judices delegati), and such delegates were appointed by the king's commission under his great seal, issuing out of chancery, to represent his royal person and to hear ordinary ecclesiastical appeals brought before him by virtue of the statute which has been mentioned as enacted in the twenty-fifth year of his reign. This commission was frequently filled with lords, spiritual and temporal, and its personnel was always composed in part of judges of the courts at Westminster and of Doctors of the Civil Law. Supplementary to these courts were certain proceedings under a special tribunal called a Commission of Review, which was appointed in extraordinary cases to revise the sentences of the Court of Delegates; and, during the reign of Elizabeth, another court was created, called the Court of the King's High Commission in Cases Ecclesiastical. This court was created in order to supply the place of the pope's appellate jurisdiction in regard to causes appertaining to the reformation, ordering and correcting of the ecclesiastical state and of ecclesiastical persons "and all manner of errors, heresies, schisms, abuses, offences, contempts and enormities". This court was the agent by which most oppressive acts were committed and was justly abolished by statute, 16 Car. I, c. XI. An attempt was made to revive it during the reign of King James II.

188 The Church of England was the name given to that portion of the laity and clergy of the Catholic Church resident in England during the days of the Anglo-Saxon monarchy and during the history of England under William the Conqueror and his successors down to the time when Henry VIII assumed unto himself the position of spiritual and temporal head of the English Church. Prior to the time of Henry VIII, the Church of England was distinctly and avowedly a part of the Church universal. Its prerogatives and its constitution were wrought into the fibre of the common law. Its ecclesiastical courts were recognized by the common law - the jus publicum of the kingdom - and clear recognition was accorded to the right of appeal to the sovereign pontiff; thus practically making the pontiff the supreme judge for England as he was for the remainder of Christendom in all ecclesiastical causes. The civil courts rarely sought to trench upon the domain of ecclesiastical affairs and conflict arose only when the temporalities of the church were brought within the scope of litigation. The common law is chiefly, however, to be considered in reference to its protection of purely human interests. As such it proved to be powerful, efficient and imposing. The Court of King's Bench, Common Pleas and the Exchequer, together with the High Court of Chancery, were justly famous throughout Christendom. The original Anglo-Saxon juridical system offered none but simple remedies comprehended, for the most part, in the award of damages for any civil wrong and in the delivery to the proper owners of land or chattels wrongfully withheld. Titles of an equitable nature were not recognized and there was no adequate remedy for the breach of such titles. The prevention of wrong by writs of injunction was unknown.

189 The idea of a juridical restoration of conditions which had been disturbed by wrongful act as well as the idea of enforcing the specific performance of contracts had never matured into either legislation or judicial proceedings. Such deficiencies in the jurisprudence of the realm were gradually supplied, under the Norman kings, by the royal prerogative exercised through the agency of the lord chancellor by special adjudications based upon equitable principles. In the course of time, a great Court of Chancery came into being deriving its name from the fact that its presiding judge was the lord chancellor. In this court were administered all the great principles of equity jurisprudence. The lord chancellor possessed as one of his titles that of Keeper of the King's Conscience; and, hence, the High Court of Chancery was often called a Court of Conscience. Its procedure did not involve the presence of a jury and it differed from the courts of common law in its mode of proof, mode of trial, and mode of relief. The relief administered was so ample in scope as to be conformable in all cases with the absolute requirements of a conscientious regard for justice. Among the most eminent of the Chancellors of England was Sir Thomas More who laid down his life rather than surrender the Catholic Faith, and Lord Bacon who was the pioneer in broadening the scope of modern learning. After the time when courts became established and entered upon the exercise of their various functions, the common law developed gradually into a more finished system because of the fact that judicial decisions were considered to be an exposition of the common law and, consequently, were the chief repository of the law itself. For this reason the observance of precedents is a marked feature in English jurisprudence and prevails to a much greater extent than under other systems. As the law is deemed to be contained in the decisions of the courts, it necessarily follows that the rule to be observed in any particular proceeding must be found in some prior decision.

190 When the period of English colonization in America began, the aborigines were found to be wholly uncivilized and, consequently, without any system of jurisprudence, whatsoever. Upon the theory that the English colonists carried with them the entire system of the English law as it existed at the time of their migration from the fatherland, the colonial courts adopted and acted upon the theory that each colony, at the very moment of its inception, was governed by the legal system of England including the juridical principles administered by the common law courts and by the High Court of Chancery. Thus, law and equity came hand in hand to America and have since been the common law of the former English colonies.

191 When the thirteen American colonies achieved their independence, the English common law, as it existed with its legal and equitable features in the year 1607, was universally held by the courts to be the common law of each of the thirteen states which constituted the new confederated republic known as the United States of America. As the United States have increased in number, either by the admission of new states to the Union carved out of the original undivided territory, or by the extension of territorial area through purchase or contest, the common law as it existed at the close of the War of the American Revolution has been held to be the common law of such new states with the exception that, in the State of Louisiana, the civil law of Rome, which ruled within the vast area originally called Louisiana, has been maintained, subject only to subsequent legislative modifications. The Dominion of Canada is subject to the common law with the exception of the Province of Quebec and the civil laws of that province are derived from the old customary laws of France, particularly the Custom of Paris, in like manner as the laws of the English-speaking provinces are based upon the common law of England. In process of time, the customary laws have been modified or replaced by enactments of the Imperial and Federal parliament and by those of the provincial parliament; they were finally codified in the year 1866 upon the model of the Code Napoléon. However, the criminal law of the Province of Quebec is founded upon that of England and was to a great extent codified by the federal statute of 1892. Practice and procedure in civil causes are governed by the Code of Civil Procedure of the year 1897.

192 The common law of England is not the basis of the jurisprudence of Scotland; that country having adhered to the civil law as it existed at the time of the union with England except so far as it has been modified by subsequent legislation. The English common law with the exceptions which have been noted prevails throughout the English-speaking world. Mexico, Central America, and South America, with the exception of an English Colony and a Dutch Colony, remain under the sway of the civil law. The common law of England has been the subject of unstinted eulogy and it is, undoubtedly, one of the most splendid embodiments of human genius. It is a source of profound satisfaction to Catholics that it came into being as a definite system and was nurtured, and to a great extent administered, during the first ten centuries of its existence by the clergy of the Catholic Church.

193 REEVES, History of the English Law (Philadelphia, 1880); BLACKSTONE, Commentaries on the Laws of England, SHARSWOOD edition (Philadelphia, 1875); POLLOCK AND MAITLAND, The History of English Law (Boston, 1875); KENT, Commentaries upon American Law (12th ed., Boston, 1873).

194 John Willey Willis.

Moral Aspect of Divine Law

178 Divine Law is that which is enacted by God and made known to man through revelation. We distinguish between the Old Law, contained in the Pentateuch, and the New Law, which was revealed by Jesus Christ and is contained in the New Testament. The Divine Law of the Old Testament, or the Mosaic Law, is commonly divided into civil, ceremonial, and moral precepts. The civil legislation regulated the relations of the people of God among themselves and with their neighbours; the ceremonial regulated matters of religion and the worship of God; the moral was a Divine code of ethics. In this article we shall confine our attention exclusively to the moral precepts of the Divine Law. In the Old Testament it is contained for the most part and summed up in the Decalogue (Ex., xx, 2-17; Lev., xix, 3, 11-18; Deut., v, 1-33).

179 The Old and the New Testament, Christ and His Apostles, Jewish as well as Christian tradition, agree in asserting that Moses wrote down the Law at the direct inspiration of God. God Himself, then, is the lawgiver, Moses merely acted as the intermediary between God and His people; he merely promulgated the Law which he had been inspired to write down. This is not the same as to say that the whole of the Old Law was revealed to Moses. There is abundant evidence in Scripture itself that many portions of the Mosaic legislation existed and were put in practice long before the time of Moses. Circumcision is an instance of this. The religious observance of the seventh day is another, and this indeed, seems to be implied in the very form in which the Third Commandment is worded: "Remember that thou keep holy the sabbath day." If we except the merely positive determinations of time and manner in which religious worship was to be paid to God according to this commandment, and the prohibition of making images to represent God contained in the first commandment, all the precepts of the Decalogue are also precepts of the natural law, which can be gathered by reason from nature herself, and in fact they were known long before Moses wrote them down at the express command of God. This is the teaching of St. Paul - "For when the Gentiles, who have not the law, do by nature those things that are of the law; these having not the law [of Moses], are a law to themselves: who shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness to them" (Rom., ii, 14, 15). Although the substance of the Decalogue is thus both of natural and Divine law, yet its express promulgation by Moses at the command of God was not without its advantages. The great moral code, the basis of all true civilization, in this manner became the clear, certain, and publicly recognized standard of moral conduct for the Jewish people, and through them for Christendom.

180 Because the code of morality which we have in the Old Testament was inspired by God and imposed by Him on His people, it follows that there is nothing in it that is immoral or wrong. It was indeed imperfect, if it be compared with the higher morality of the Gospel, but, for all that, it contained nothing that is blameworthy. It was suited to the low stage of civilization to which the Israelites had at the time attained; the severe punishments which it prescribed for transgressors were necessary to bend the stiff necks of a rude people; the temporal rewards held out to those who observed the law were adapted to an unspiritual and carnal race. Still its imperfections must not be exaggerated. In its treatment of the poor, of strangers, of slaves, and of enemies, it was vastly superior to the civilly more advanced Code of Hammurabi and other celebrated codes of ancient law. It did not aim merely at regulating the external acts of the people of God, it curbed also licentious thoughts and covetous desires. The love of God and of one's neighbour was the great precept of the Law, its summary and abridgment, that on which the whole Law and the Prophets depended. In spite of the undeniable superiority in this respect of the Mosaic Law to the other codes of antiquity, it has not escaped the adverse criticism of heretics in all ages and of Rationalists in our own day. To meet this adverse criticism it will be sufficient to indicate a few general principles that should not be lost sight of, and then to treat a few points in greater detail.

181 It has always been freely admitted by Christians that the Mosaic Law is an imperfect institution; still Christ came not to destroy it but to fulfil and perfect it. We must bear in mind that God, the Creator and Lord of all things, and the Supreme Judge of the world, can do and command things which man the creature is not authorized to do or command. On this principle we may account for and defend the command given by God to exterminate certain nations, and the permission given by Him to the Israelites to spoil the Egyptians. The tribes of Chanaan richly deserved the fate to which they were condemned by God; and if there were innocent people among the guilty, God is the absolute Lord of life and death, and He commits no injustice when He takes away what He has given. Besides, He can make up by gifts of a higher order in another life for sufferings which have been patiently endured in this life. A great want of historical perspective is shown by those, critics who judge the Mosaic Law by the humanitarian and sentimental canons of the twentieth century. A recent writer (Keane, "The Moral Argument against the Inspiration of the Old Testament" in the Hibbert Journal, October, 1905, p. 155) professes to be very much shocked by what is prescribed in Exodus, xxi, 5-6. It is there laid down that if a Hebrew slave who has a wife and children prefers to remain with his master rather than go out free when the sabbatical year comes round, he is to be taken to the door-post and have his ear bored through with an awl, and then he is to remain a slave for life. It was a sign and mark by which he was known to be a lifelong slave. The practice was doubtless already familiar to the Israelites of the time, as it was to their neighbours. The slave himself probably thought no more of the operation than does a South African beauty, when her lip or ear is pierced for the lip-ring and the ear-ring, which in her estimation are to add to her charms. It is really too much when a staid professor makes such a prescription the ground for a grave charge of inhumanity against the law of Moses. Nor should the institution of slavery be made a ground of attack against the Mosaic legislation. It existed everywhere and although in practice it is apt to lead to many abuses, still, in the mild form in which it was allowed among the Jews, and with the safeguards prescribed by the Law, it cannot be said with truth to be contrary to sound morality.

182 Polygamy and divorce, though less insisted on by Rationalist critics, in reality constitute a more serious difficulty against the holiness of the Mosaic Law than any of those which have just been mentioned. The difficulty is one which has engaged the attention of the Fathers and theologians of the Church from the beginning. To answer it they take their stand on the teaching of the Master in the nineteenth chapter of St. Matthew and the parallel passages of Holy Scripture. What is there said of divorce is applicable to plurality of wives. The strict law of marriage was made known to our first parents in Paradise: "They shall be two in one flesh" (Gen., ii, 24). When the sacred text says two it excludes polygamy, when it says one flesh it excludes divorce. Amid the general laxity with regard to marriage which existed among the Semitic tribes, it would have been difficult to preserve the strict law. The importance of a rapid increase among the chosen people of God so as to enable them to defend themselves from their neighbours, and to fulfil their appointed destiny, seemed to favour relaxation. The example of some of the chief of the ancient Patriarchs was taken by their descendants as being a sufficient indication of the dispensation granted by God. With special safeguards annexed to it Moses adopted the Divine dispensation on account of the hardness of heart of the Jewish people. Neither polygamy nor divorce can be said to be contrary to the primary precepts of nature. The primary end of marriage is compatible with both. But at least they are against the secondary precepts of the natural law: contrary, that is, to what is required for the well-ordering of human life. In these secondary precepts, however, God can dispense for good reason if He sees fit to do so. In so doing He uses His sovereign authority to diminish the right of absolute equality which naturally exists between man and woman with reference to marriage. In this way, without suffering any stain on His holiness, God could permit and sanction polygamy and divorce in the Old Law.

183 Christ is the author of the New Law. He claimed and exercised supreme legislative authority in spiritual matters from the beginning of His public life until His Ascension into heaven. In Him the Old Law had its fulfilment and attained its chief purpose. The civil legislation of Moses had for its object to form and preserve a peculiar people for the worship of the one true God, and to prepare the way for the coming of the Messias who was to be born of the seed of Abraham. The new Kingdom of God which Christ founded was not confined to a single nation, it embraced all the nations of the earth, and when the new Israel was constituted, the old Israel with its separatist law became antiquated; it had fulfilled its mission. The ceremonial laws of Moses were types and figures of the purer, more spiritual, and more efficacious sacrifice and sacraments of the New Law, and when these were instituted the former lost their meaning and value. By the death of Christ on the Cross the New Covenant was sealed, and the Old was abrogated, but until the Gospel had been preached and duly promulgated, out of deference to Jewish prejudices, and out of respect for ordinances, which after all were Divine, those who wished to do so were at liberty to conform to the practices of the Mosaic Law. When the Gospel had been duly promulgated the civil and ceremonial precepts of the Law of Moses became not only useless, but false and superstitious, and thus forbidden.

184 It was otherwise with the moral precepts of the Mosaic Law. The Master expressly taught that the observance of these, inasmuch as they are prescribed by nature herself, is necessary for salvation - "If thou wouldst enter into life keep the commandments", - those well-known precepts of the Decalogue. Of these commandments those words of His are especially true - "I came not to destroy the law but to fulfil it." This Christ did by insisting anew on the great law of charity towards God and man, which He explained more fully and gave us new motives for practising. He corrected the false glosses with which the Scribes and Pharisees had obscured the law as revealed by God, and He brushed aside the heap of petty observances with which they had overloaded it, and made it an intolerable burden. He denounced in unmeasured terms the externalism of Pharisaic observance of the Law, and insisted on its spirit being observed as well as the letter. As was suited to a law of love which replaced the Mosaic Law of fear, Christ wished to attract men to obey His precepts out of motives of charity and filial obedience, rather than compel submission by threats of punishment. He promised spiritual blessings rather than temporal, and taught His followers to despise the goods of this world in order to fix their affections on the future joys of life eternal. He was not content with a bare observance of the law, He boldly proposed to His disciples the infinite goodness and holiness of God for their model, and urged them to be perfect as their heavenly Father is perfect. For such as were specially called, and who were not content to observe the commandments merely, He proposed counsels of consummate perfection. By observing these His specially chosen followers, not only conquered their vices, but destroyed the roots of them, by constantly denying their natural propensities to honours, riches, and earthly pleasures. Still it is admitted by Catholic theologians that Christ added no new merely moral precepts to the natural law. There is of course a moral obligation to believe the truths which the Master revealed concerning God, man's destiny, and the Church. Moral obligations, too, arise from the institution of the sacraments, some of which are necessary to salvation. But even here nothing is added directly to the natural law; given the revelation of truth by God, the obligation to believe it follows naturally for all to whom the revelation is made known; and given the institution of necessary means of grace and salvation, the obligation to use them also follows necessarily.

185 As we saw above, the Master abrogated the dispensations which made polygamy and divorce lawful for the Jews owing to the special circumstances in which they were placed. In this respect the natural law was restored to its primitive integrity. Somewhat similarly with regard to the love of enemies, Christ clearly explained the natural law of charity on the point, and urged it against the perverse interpretation of the Pharisees. The Law of Moses had expressly enjoined the love of friends and fellow-citizens. But at the same time it forbade the Jews to make treaties with foreigners, to conclude peace with the Ammonites, Moabites, and other neighbouring tribes; the Jew was allowed to practise usury in dealing with foreigners; God promised that He would be an enemy to the enemies of His people. From these and similar provisions the Jewish doctors seem to have drawn the conclusion that it was lawful to hate one's enemies. Even St. Augustine, as well as some other Fathers and Doctors of the Church, thought that hatred of enemies, like polygamy and divorce, was permitted to the Jews on account of their hardness of heart. It is clear, however, that, since enemies share the same nature with us, and are children of the same common Father, they may not be excluded from the love which, by the law of nature, we owe to all men. This obligation Christ no less clearly than beautifully expounded, and taught us how to practise by His own noble example. The Catholic Church by virtue of the commission given to her by Christ is the Divinely constituted interpreter of the Divine Law of both the Old and the New Testament.

186 ST. THOMAS, Summa theologica (Parma, 1852); SUAREZ, De Legibus (Paris, 1856); PESCH, Prœlectiones dogmaticœ, V (Freiburg, 1900); KNABENBAUER, Commentarius in Evangelia (Paris, 1892); GIGOT, Biblical Lectures (New York, 1901); PALMIERI, De Matrimonio (Rome, 1880); PELT, Histoire de l'ancien Testament (Paris, 1901); VON HUMMELAUER, Commentarius in Exodum, Leviticum, Deuteronomium (Paris, 1897, 1901); VIGOUROUX, Dict. de la Bible (Paris, 1908); HASTINGS, Dict. of the Bible (Edinburgh, 1904).

187 T. Slater.

International Law

181 International law has been defined to be "the rules which determine the conduct of the general body of civilized states in their dealings with each other" (American and English Encycl. of Law). Different writers have given varying views of the foundation of the law of nations, some holding that it is founded merely upon consent and usage, and others that it is the same as the law of nature, applied to the conduct of nations in the character of moral persons susceptible of obligations and laws. Chancellor Kent holds that neither of these views is strictly true; that the law of nations is purely positive law founded on usage, consent, and agreement, but that it must not be separated entirely from natural jurisprudence, since it derives its force "from the same principles of right reason, the same views of the nature and constitution of man, and the same sanction of Divine revelation, as those from which the science of morality is deduced". It follows, then, that by the natural law every state is bound to conduct itself towards other states in accordance with the rules of justice, irrespective of the general rules that have arisen from long established custom and usage. International law is a part of the law of the land of which the courts take judicial notice, and municipal statutes are construed so as not to infringe on its doctrines. The rules of international law are to be found in writers of recognized authority, in treaties between civilized nations, in the decisions of international tribunals, in state papers and diplomatic correspondence, and its application is to be sought especially in the decisions of the courts of the different nations where the rules have been defined in litigated cases, arising especially in the admiralty where judgment has been sought in prize cases. The first great modern authority on the subject was Grotius. His works have been followed by those of Puffendorf, Burlamaqui, Bynkershoek, and Vattel. The works of these learned authors have been adapted and expanded by various writers, so that now there is a vast body of literature upon the subject representing great learning and ability.

182 The law of nations is essentially the product of modern times. Ancient nations looked upon strangers as enemies, and upon their property as lawful prize. Among the Greeks prisoners of war might lawfully be put to death or sold into slavery with their wives and children, and there was no duty owed by the nation to a foreign nation. Some beginnings of diplomatic intercourse may be traced in the relations of the Greek states towards one another, by agreements relating to the burying of the dead and the exchange of prisoners, while the Amphictyonic Council affords an instance of an attempt to institute a law of nations among the Grecian states themselves. The Romans show stronger evidence of appreciation of international law, or at least of the beginnings of it. They had a college of heralds charged with the Fetial Law relating to declarations of war and treaties of peace, and as their power and civilization grew, there came an appreciation of the moral duty owed by the state to nations with which it was at war. After the establishment of the empire, especially in its later periods, the law of nations became recognized as part of the natural reason of mankind. After the fall of the empire there was a relapse into the barbarism of earlier ages, but, when in the ninth century Charlemagne consolidated his empire under the influence of Christianity, the law of nations took on a new growth. As commerce developed, the necessity of an international law providing for the enforcement of contracts, the protection of shipwrecked sailors and property, and the maintaining of harbours, became more apparent. Various codes and regulations containing the laws of the sea gradually developed, the most famous of which are the "Judgments of Oléron", said to have been drawn up in the eleventh century and long recognized in the Atlantic ports of France and incorporated in part in the maritime ordinances of Louis XIV; the "Consolato del Mare", a collection of rules applicable to questions arising in commerce and navigation both in peace and war, probably drawn up in the twelfth century and founded upon the Roman maritime law and early maritime customs of the commercial cities of the Mediterranean; the "Guidon de la Mar", which dates from the close of the sixteenth century and deals with the law of maritime insurance, prize, and the regulations governing the issue of letters of marque and reprisal. In addition to these there were various bodies of sea laws, notably the maritime law of Wisby, the customs of Amsterdam, the laws of Antwerp, and the constitutions of the Hanseatic League. All of these codes contained provisions extracted from the earliest known maritime code, the Rhodian Laws, which were incorporated into the general body of Roman law, and were recognized and sanctioned by Tiberius and Hadrian.

183 During the long period between the fall of the Roman Empire and the definitive beginning of modern European states the greatest influence working for a recognition of international law among all peoples was the Church. A common faith, imposing the same obligations upon the individual members of the Church among all nations, obviously tended to the establishment and recognition of rules of justice and morality as among the nations themselves; and, when the more general acceptance of the obligations of Christianity became the rule, it followed naturally that the Head of the Church, the pope holding the Divine commission, should become the universal arbiter in disputes among nations. For centuries the great offices of state, especially those having to do with foreign relations, were held by bishops learned in canon law, and, as canon law was based upon Roman law and especially adapted to the government of the Church whose jurisdiction was not bounded by state lines, it naturally suggested many of the rules that have found a place in international law. The pope became the natural arbitrator between nations, and the power to which appeals were made when the laws of justice and morality were flagrantly violated by sovereigns either in relation to their own subjects or to foreign nations.

184 As the empire founded by Charlemagne gained in power and extent, the controversies precipitated by the conflicting claims of civil and ecclesiastical jurisdiction developed still further the position of the pope as the highest representative of the moral power of Christendom. It has been justly said therefore that, "of all the effects of Christianity in altering the political face of Europe throughout all its people, and which may therefore very fairly be denominated a part of its Law of Nations, none are so prominent to observation during these centuries as those which sprang from the influence and form of government of the Church" (Ward, "Law of Nations", II, 31). At first without territory or temporal power, on account of his spiritual influence alone the pope was recognized as the ultimate tribunal of Christendom, and as such was known as the Father of Christendom. Under the Holy Roman Empire from the time of Otho I, as is pointed out by Janssen, there was a close alliance between the Church and the State, though they were at no time identical. "Church and State", he says, "granting certain presupposed conditions, are two necessary embodiments of one and the same human society, the State taking charge of the temporal requirements, and the Church of the spiritual and supernatural. These two powers would, however, be in a state of continual contention were it not for a Divine Law of equilibrium keeping each within its own limits." He points out further that the original cause of the separation between the spiritual and temporal powers, as "taught by Pope Gelasius at the end of the fifth century, lies in the law established by the Divine founder of the Church, Who, 'cognizant of human weakness, was careful that the two powers should be kept separate, and each limited to its own province. Christian princes were to respect the priesthood in those things which relate to the soul, and the priests in their turn to obey the laws made for the preservation of order in worldly matters; so that the soldiers of God shall not mix in temporal affairs, and the worldly authorities shall have naught to say in spiritual things. The province of each being so marked out, neither power shall encroach on the prerogatives of the other, but confine itself to its own limit.'"

185 "While it is recognized that the kingdoms of this world, as opposed to the one universal Church, may exist and prosper while remaining separate and independent, yet it was thought that the bond with the Church would be of a higher nature if the partition walls between people and people were broken down, all nations joined together in one, and the unity of the human race under one lord and ruler acknowledged. It was this idea which inspired the popes with the desire to found the Holy Roman Empire, whose Emperor would deem it his highest prerogative to protect the Christian Church. The Gospel was to be the law of nations. The State would consolidate the nations, while the Church would sow the seeds of revealed truth" (Janssen, "History of the German People", II, 110 sq.). In this ideal we find the medieval conception of the State. Although the ideal was never completely realized, yet it met such general acceptance that the emperor became the chief protector of law and order and the arbiter between lesser princes. The growth of the power of the State gradually diminished that of the feudal barons, whose petty contentions and the violence of whose lives were a hindrance to the development of international justice. Until this phase of the beginnings of civilization changed there was little to ameliorate the brutality of conduct between warring peoples, except as the individual education of knights in chivalry affected their conduct.

186 Another influence of great importance in the formation of international law were the general councils of the Church, affecting as they did all Christian nations and laying down rules of faith and discipline binding alike upon individuals and governments. The history and development of rules of international law from these early beginnings have been traced to contemporary times, and, notwithstanding periods when the influence of a lofty and Christian ideal of the relations between nations seems almost to have been lost, it will appear that there has been a steady advance in the recognition of the existence of a moral law of nations whose sanction is the public opinion of the world. So far has this system progressed that its underlying principles are, in the main, well-defined, universally recognized, and constantly appealed to, both in times of war and in times of peace, by all civilized nations. Rules governing the acquisition of territorial property, jurisdiction over rivers and seas, protectorates over independent peoples; measures allowed to compel the rendering of justice, short of war; intervention in the affairs of foreign nations, have all been measurably settled; and so far as relates to the rights and duties of belligerents and of neutral states in declaring and carrying on war, the fixing of the character of property, the regulating of the effect of intercourse between individuals, many vexed points have also been carefully defined and to a large extent settled. Some of the most delicate questions, such as the right to visit and search the blockaded ports of the enemy, and the character of correspondence permitted between the subjects or citizens of neutral states and the belligerents, may be considered as well settled and recognized by decisions of the highest courts of all civilized nations as any of the rules of municipal law.

187 Earnest and intelligent efforts to bring about a permanent court of arbitration have resulted in the formation of an international tribunal at The Hague, which has already been accepted by the voluntary action of the various nations as a proper forum for the decision of many international questions specially referred to it. The principles of arbitration accepted by the United States and Great Britain in the settlement of the so-called Alabama Claims and the frequent agreements between the contending parties over questions of boundary, fisheries, and damages to private property of their respective citizens or subjects, have given emphasis to international law. Its rules have enforced respect for private property on the part of contending armies, and, under certain conditions, when such is carried by ships, have forbidden the use of certain destructive missiles, and in very many ways have alleviated the horrors of war. While there must always remain questions that no self-respecting nation would be willing to submit to arbitration, yet the field for the exercise of the latter is indefinitely great, and, as the demands of modern civilization, the means of communication between nations, and the development of trade relations increase, questions more frequently arise requiring appeal to some tribunal, acceptable to both parties, whose decision shall be final and absolute. Until the revolt against the Church in the first quarter of the sixteenth century, this power of arbitration, as has been stated, rested in the pope. With the decline of recognition of this moral power, religious sanctions in the relations between nations have gradually lessened. Instead of a decision of the pope, bearing with it the impress of the revealed truth of religion, the agreements of modern courts of arbitration or other referees for the settlement of international disputes have for their sanction the general sense of justice existing naturally among men, strengthened by such faith in revealed religion as may exist among them irrespective of the teaching of the Church. This is the great difference between the sanction of modern international law and that existing previous to the so-called Reformation. Previous to that event the power of the Church was exercised merely in a moral way by an appeal to the faith and consciences of all men and nations, enforcing the decrees of the arbiter of Christendom - the pope.

188 Controversy concerning this arbitration has been carried on, at first with great violence, but since with a calmer and fairer recognition of the exceeding advantage to nascent civilization of such power as that exercised by the popes during the Middle Ages. It has been insisted that the popes not alone wished to vindicate their supreme spiritual power, but cherished a desire to reduce all princes to a condition of vassalage to the Roman See. This is a grave error. The Church has never declared it to be an article of faith that temporal princes, as such, are in temporal matters subject to the pope. The confusion of thought has arisen from the fact that in the eyes of the Church the kingly power has never been looked upon as absolute and unlimited. The rights of the people were certainly not less important than those of the ruler, who owed them a duty, as they owed a duty to him. They did not exist for his benefit, and his power was to be employed, not for his own ends, but for the welfare of the nation. He was to be, above all, the servant of God, the defender of the Church, of the weak, and of the needy. In many states the monarch was elected only on the express condition of professing the Catholic Faith and defending it against attack. In Spain, from the seventh to the fourteenth century, the king had to take such an oath, and, even when it was no longer formally administered, he was still understood to be bound by the obligation. The laws of Edward the Confessor, published by William the Conqueror and his successors, expressly provide that a king who does not fulfil his duties towards the Church must forfeit his title of king. Kings were constantly reminded that their temporal power was given them for the defence of the Church, and that they should imitate King David in their submission to God.

189 With this intimate relation of Church and State, the clergy, by reason of their education and force of character and the respect paid to them because of their office, took an active part in the civic affairs of the various nations, and, until the controversies arose between them and the emperors who succeeded Charlemagne, the civil and religious powers existed harmoniously in the main. Owing to the limitations of human nature, and especially because the support of both Church and State necessarily came from voluntary or enforced contributions of the people, causes of friction would arise from time to time between the two powers. The decrees of the councils of the Church were confirmed as laws of the empire to secure their being put in force by the civil power, and the sentence was pronounced at Chalcedon (451) that imperial laws that were contrary to canon law should be null and void. Freedom and religion were mutually supported because the Church, in which religion was incorporated, was at the same time the guardian of freedom. The power of the pope as Head of the Church Universal gained somewhat, but not sufficiently to affect in a very marked degree his influence as the Head of Christendom from the fact of his becoming a temporal prince during the eighth century. Again and again the popes have declared it was part of their duty to make and preserve peace on all sides; to mediate between royal families; to hinder wars or bring them to a speedy close; to defend Christendom against the incursions of the Mohammedans; to incite Christian nations to carry on the crusades for the recovery of the Holy Places of Jerusalem. Whoever felt himself oppressed turned to the Roman See, and, if it did not give him help, the pope was thought to have neglected his duty. "In an age", says Lingard, "when warlike gains alone were prized, Europe would have sunk into endless wars had not the popes striven unceasingly for the maintenance and restoration of peace. They rebuked the passions of princes, and checked their unreasonable pretensions; their position of common father of Christendom gave an authority to their words which could be claimed by no other mediator; and their legates spared neither journeys nor labour in reconciling the conflicting interests of courts, and in interposing between the swords of contending factions the olive-branch of peace" (History of England, IV, 72; quoted by Hergenröther). The great Protestant writer Grotius says: "Quot dissidia sanata sint auctoritate Romanæ Sedis, quoties oppressa innocentia ibi præesidium repent, non alium testem quam eundem Blondellum volo" (Hergenröther, "Church and State", pp. 286-7), i. e., how many quarrels were healed by the authority of the Roman See, how often oppressed innocence found support there, the same Blondel abundantly testifies.

190 Much misunderstanding as to the attitude of the popes has arisen from the Bull of Pope Alexander VI, when, acting at the solicitation of the sovereigns of Castile, he drew the limits of a line from the North to the South Pole, 100 Spanish leagues to the west of the most westerly island of the Azores; all that was east of the line belonged to Portugal, and all that was west of it to Spain. By this decision it has been said that the maxim "de externis non judicat ecclesia" has been violated, and also the further maxim that the conversion of subjects to the Catholic Faith takes nothing from the rights of infidel princes. The true explanation of this Bull will be found when it is remembered that the pope was acting as arbitrator between two nations of explorers, when it was most desirable that a line of demarcation should be drawn between the fields to be explored. It was intended only to prevent dissension and struggles likely to arise from rival pretensions, and, since by its terms it precluded any Christian prince from interfering within the boundaries assigned to each nation, it was a powerful preventive of wrong-doing. It being admitted that sovereignty over uncivilized peoples can be claimed under certain conditions by civilized nations, the pope sought only to regulate the rights of such nations so as to avoid war. It must be borne in mind, moreover, that the principal motive, as professed by the Spanish explorers, was not commerce or the acquisition of wealth alone, but the conversion of heathen nations to the Christian Faith.

191 It will appear from a review of the history of the centuries from the accession of Charlemagne to the crown of the Holy Roman Empire until modern times, the power of the pope as the supreme and common tribunal between nations has been exercised for the advantage of mankind in the extension of justice to all. In England, the excommunication of King John compelled the submission of a monarch, who, according to the Protestant writer Ward, had "by his violence and depravity drawn down upon himself the just detestation of mankind". In the example of Emperor Lothair of Lorraine in the ninth century, an instance may be found of an intervention of the pope to prevent the repudiation by this monarch of his lawful wife in order that he might marry another. The pope intervened to secure the release of Richard I of England from the prison, of the Duke of Austria and the emperor. By his interposition in 1193 he procured the liberty of the three daughters of King Tancred of Sicily; who had been unjustly carried off and retained captive by Emperor Henry VI. So in the case of the infant son of the King of Aragon. In 1214 Simon de Montfort was compelled to surrender his prisoner on the application of the prince's mother. Many other instances of equal importance show the reverence of peoples and sovereigns for the pope and for the fearless and impartial way in which his authority was exercised. The same author, from whom these instances have been quoted, speaks of the Councils of the Church. He says they were "composed of delegates from every nation of Christianity, and under this appearance Europe may fairly be said to deserve the appellation which has sometimes been bestowed upon it of a Republic of States." He points out that the two Councils of Lyons give an idea of "an almost perfect Court of Parliament of Christendom, in which the affairs of sovereigns were discussed, and sovereigns themselves proceeded against, under all the forms of a regular trial and sentence" (Ward, "Law of Nations", II, 55, 59).

192 The influence of the structure of the Roman State, with the emperor as the supreme ruler in temporal matters, educated the minds of the northern peoples, especially the Germans, who, on the fall of the Empire, gradually took possession of its former territory. After the acceptance of Christianity as the state religion in the reign of Constantine, it was not difficult for even the most ignorant of men to grasp an idea of the dual powers ruling human life - that of the sovereign with supreme jurisdiction in temporal matters, and that of the pope, the primate of all the bishops, the successor of St. Peter, the Head of the Church, the visible representative of the moral power of God on earth. While, in his human capacity, the pope in any given era may have been affected by the prevailing habit of thought of that era, and as a man has been subject to the limitations of our common nature, it may be safely said of the papacy that no institution has had so profound an effect upon the evolution of the laws of justice and right in the conduct of nations, and that without such a power of moral influence modern civilization would not have attained a higher plane than that of Imperial Rome. The sense of duty and obligation, which is a cardinal principle of Christianity, has been enforced among princes and peoples, so that even in our day the various nations, although to a great extent separated from the Catholic Faith, still recognize that the pope, as the head of the most venerable and most numerous body of professed Christians, embodies the moral power of Christianity and must be respected accordingly. As has been said by Hergenröther, "the perfection of international law depends upon two conditions:

193 the degree in which the notion of a common humanity is developed among nations;

194 the closeness of the connexion by which they feel themselves united.

195 Christendom and the Church have had a powerful influence upon both these conditions. After the fall of the Roman Empire it created amongst new States common interests and an international law, which, founded upon the principles and laws of the Church, was administered by her and her Head as an international tribunal under the protection of the penalty of the Church's ban" (Church and State, 369).

196 In giving an address at the conference held under the auspices of the Civic Federation in Washington on 18 Jan., 1910, Elihu Root, former Secretary of State of the United States, said: "Since the Congress of Vienna in 1815, in which the powers of Europe for the first time undertook to deal with subjects of general interest to them, as distinct from specific situations which were the results of war, up to three years ago there had been over one hundred and twenty congresses or conferences of representatives of a considerable part, practically the whole of the civilized powers of the earth, and those conferences or congresses have accomplished a great variety of things. They have established an international postal union; they have agreed upon and put into force rules for the protection of industrial property, patents, copyrights, and trademarks; they have established rules for sanitation or control, and, to some degree, the prevention of disease, under which each country binds itself to so legislate and so enforce its laws as to prevent its being a nuisance to the other countries with whom it is in conference. They have united in measures for the abolition of the slave trade, for the abolition of privateering, for the establishment of agreement upon rules of the private international law, so that private rights depending up on the laws of different countries may be recognized and dealt with under uniform rules; they have in a series of conferences held at Geneva established rules for the enforcement of humane principles for the conduct of war, and by rules adopted at The Hague, for the enforcement of humane rules in the conduct of war by sea; they have established for the greater part of the world uniform weights and measures; they have agreed upon rules designed for the prevention of the white slave trade; they have, by a series of conferences, agreed in Europe upon a number, as yet a comparatively small number, of provisions for the protection of labour; they have agreed upon rules for telegraphic communication, rules for the protection of ocean cables, rules for the government of wireless telegraphy."

197 It will be seen from the foregoing sketch that all these beneficent results have followed from the development of the Christian idea of the brotherhood of mankind. International law, like all other systems, will be found to be but an endeavour to bring into the affairs of life the eternal principles of right at all times taught by the Christian Church. For the actual status of the Holy See concerning conflicts and wars between Christian nations, peace, peace conferences, and international arbitration, see PAPACY; PEACE; WAR.

198 HERGENRÖTHER, Catholic Church and Christian State (London, 1876); JAUGEY, Dict. Apologétique de la foi catholique (Paris, 1889), s.v. Alexandre VI; WARD, Law of Nations (London, 1795); KENT. Commentaries (1884); MANNING, International Law (London, 1875); DAVIS, The Elements of International Law (New York, 1908); WHEATON, International Law, ed. ATTAY (1904); LAWRENCE, International Law (1885); American and English Encyclop. of Law (1900); PERRIN, L'ordre international (Paris, 1888); PRADIER-FODÉRÉ. Traité de droit internation (Paris, 1885); The Peacemaker of the Nations in The Month (May, 1869); Speech of LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY in the House of Lords (25 July, 1887); letter (1870) of URQUHART to Pius IX in Acta Conc. Vaticani; in Coll. Lacensis, VII; HALLS, The Peace Conference at The Hague (New York, 1900), and critique of same by SHAHAN in Cath. Univ. Bulletin, VII (1901), 1-22.

199 Walter George Smith.

Natural Law

184 I. Its Essence

185 In English this term is frequently employed as equivalent to the laws of nature, meaning the order which governs the activities of the material universe. Among the Roman jurists natural law designated those instincts and emotions common to man and the lower animals, such as the instinct of self-preservation and love of offspring. In its strictly ethical application-the sense in which this article treats it-the natural law is the rule of conduct which is prescribed to us by the Creator in the constitution of the nature with which He has endowed us.

186 According to St. Thomas, the natural law is "nothing else than the rational creature's participation in the eternal law" (I-II, Q. xciv). The eternal law is God's wisdom, inasmuch as it is the directive norm of all movement and action. When God willed to give existence to creatures, He willed to ordain and direct them to an end. In the case of inanimate things, this Divine direction is provided for in the nature which God has given to each; in them determinism reigns. Like all the rest of creation, man is destined by God to an end, and receives from Him a direction towards this end. This ordination is of a character in harmony with his free intelligent nature. In virtue of his intelligence and free will, man is master of his conduct. Unlike the things of the mere material world he can vary his action, act, or abstain from action, as he pleases. Yet he is not a lawless being in an ordered universe. In the very constitution of his nature, he too has a law laid down for him, reflecting that ordination and direction of all things, which is the eternal law. The rule, then, which God has prescribed for our conduct, is found in our nature itself. Those actions which conform with its tendencies, lead to our destined end, and are thereby constituted right and morally good; those at variance with our nature are wrong and immoral.

187 The norm, however, of conduct is not some particular element or aspect of our nature. The standard is our whole human nature with its manifold relationships, considered as a creature destined to a special end. Actions are wrong if, though subserving the satisfaction of some particular need or tendency, they are at the same time incompatible with that rational harmonious subordination of the lower to the higher which reason should maintain among our conflicting tendencies and desires (see ). For example, to nourish our bodies is right; but to indulge our appetite for food to the detriment of our corporal or spiritual life is wrong. Self-preservation is right, but to refuse to expose our life when the well-being of society requires it, is wrong. It is wrong to drink to intoxication, for, besides being injurious to health, such indulgence deprives one of the use of reason, which is intended by God to be the guide and dictator of conduct. Theft is wrong, because it subverts the basis of social life; and man's nature requires for its proper development that he live in a state of society. There is, then, a double reason for calling this law of conduct natural: first, because it is set up concretely in our very nature itself, and second, because it is manifested to us by the purely natural medium of reason. In both respects it is distinguished from the Divine positive law, which contains precepts not arising from the nature of things as God has constituted them by the creative act, but from the arbitrary will of God. This law we learn not through the unaided operation of reason, but through the light of supernatural revelation.

188 We may now analyse the natural law into three constituents: the discriminating norm, the binding norm (norma obligans), and the manifesting norm. The discriminating norm is, as we have just seen, human nature itself, objectively considered. It is, so to speak, the book in which is written the text of the law, and the classification of human actions into good and bad. Strictly speaking, our nature is the proximate discriminating norm or standard. The remote and ultimate norm, of which it is the partial reflection and application, is the Divine nature itself, the ultimate groundwork of the created order. The binding or obligatory norm is the Divine authority, imposing upon the rational creature the obligation of living in conformity with his nature, and thus with the universal order established by the Creator. Contrary to the Kantian theory that we must not acknowledge any other lawgiver than conscience, the truth is that reason as conscience is only immediate moral authority which we are called upon to obey, and conscience itself owes its authority to the fact that it is the mouthpiece of the Divine will and imperium. The manifesting norm (norma denuntians), which determines the moral quality of actions tried by the discriminating norm, is reason. Through this faculty we perceive what is the moral constitution of our nature, what kind of action it calls for, and whether a particular action possesses this requisite character.

189 The Contents of the Natural Law

190 Radically, the natural law consists of one supreme and universal principle, from which are derived all our natural moral obligations or duties. We cannot discuss here the many erroneous opinions regarding the fundamental rule of life. Some of them are utterly false-for instance, that of Bentham, who made the pursuit of utility or temporal pleasure the foundation of the moral code, and that of Fichte, who taught that the supreme obligation is to love self above everything and all others on account of self. Others present the true idea in an imperfect or one-sided fashion. Epicurus, for example, held the supreme principle to be, "Follow nature"; the Stoics inculcated living according to reason. But these philosophers interpreted their principles in a manner less in conformity with our doctrine than the tenor of their words suggests. Catholic moralists, though agreeing upon the underlying conception of the Natural Law, have differed more or less in their expression of its fundamental formula. Among many others we find the following: "Love God as the end and everything on account of Him"; "Live conformably to human nature considered in all its essential respects"; "Observe the rational order established and sanctioned by God"; "Manifest in your life the image of God impressed on your rational nature." The exposition of St. Thomas is at once the most simple and philosophic. Starting from the premise that good is what primarily falls under the apprehension of the practical reason-that is of reason acting as the dictator of conduct-and that, consequently, the supreme principle of moral action must have the good as its central idea, he holds that the supreme principle, from which all the other principles and precepts are derived, is that good is to be done, and evil avoided (I-II, Q, xciv, a. 2).

191 Passing from the primary principle to the subordinate principles and conclusions, moralists divide these into two classes: (1) those dictates of reason which flow so directly from the primary principle that they hold in practical reason the same place as evident propositions in the speculative sphere, or are at least easily deducible from the primary principle. Such, for instance, are "Adore God"; "Honour your parents"; "Do not steal"; (2) those other conclusions and precepts which are reached only through a more or less complex course of inference. It is this difficulty and uncertainty that requires the natural law to be supplemented by positive law, human and Divine. As regards the vigour and binding force of these precepts and conclusions, theologians divide them into two classes, primary and secondary. To the first class belong those which must, under all circumstances, be observed if the essential moral order is to be maintained. The secondary precepts are those whose observance contributes to the public and private good and is required for the perfection of moral development, but is not so absolutely necessary to the rationality of conduct that it may not be lawfully omitted under some special conditions. For example, under no circumstances is polyandry compatible with the moral order, while polygamy, though inconsistent with human relations in their proper moral and social development, is not absolutely incompatible with them under less civilized conditions.

192 III. the Qualities of the Natural Law

193 (a) The natural law is universal, that is to say, it applies to the entire human race, and is in itself the same for all. Every man, because he is a man, is bound, if he will conform to the universal order willed by the Creator, to live conformably to his own rational nature, and to be guided by reason. However, infants and insane persons, who have not the actual use of their reason and cannot therefore know the law, are not responsible for that failure to comply with its demands. (b) The natural law is immutable in itself and also extrinsically. Since it is founded in the very nature of man and his destination to his end-two bases which rest upon the immutable ground of the eternal law-it follows that, assuming the continued existence of human nature, it cannot cease to exist. The natural law commands and forbids in the same tenor everywhere and always. We must, however, remember that this immutability pertains not to those abstract imperfect formulæ in which the law is commonly expressed, but to the moral standard as it applies to action in the concrete, surrounded with all its determinate conditions. We enunciate, for instance, one of the leading precepts in the words: "Thou shalt not kill"; yet the taking of human life is sometimes a lawful, and even an obligatory act. Herein exists no variation in the law; what the law forbids is not all taking of life, but all unjust taking of life.

194 With regard to the possibility of any change by abrogation or dispensation, there can be no question of such being introduced by any authority except that of God Himself. But reason forbids us to think that even He could exercise such power, because, given the hypothesis that He wills man to exist, He wills him necessarily to live conformably to the eternal law, by observing in his conduct the law of reason. The Almighty, then, cannot be conceived as willing this and simultaneously willing the contradictory, that man should be set free from the law entirely through its abrogation, or partially through dispensation from it. It is true that some of the older theologians, followed or copied by some later ones, hold that God can dispense, and, in fact in some instances, has dispensed from the secondary precepts of the natural law, while others maintain that the bearing of the natural law is changed by the operation of positive law. However, an examination of the arguments offered in support of these opinions shows that the alleged examples of dispensation are: (a) cases where a change of conditions modifies the application of the law, or (b) cases concerning obligations not imposed as absolutely essential to the moral order, though their fulfillment is necessary for the full perfection of conduct, or (c) instances of addition made to the law.

195 As examples of the first category are cited God's permission to the Hebrews to despoil the Egyptians, and His command to Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. But it is not necessary to see in these cases a dispensation from the precepts forbidding theft and murder. As the Sovereign Lord of all things, He could withdraw from Isaac his right to life, and from the Egyptians their right of ownership, with the result that neither would the killing of Isaac be an unjust destruction of life, nor the appropriation of the Egyptians' goods the unjust taking of another's property. The classic instance alleged as an example of (b) is the legalization of polygamy among the Hebrews. Polygamy, however, is not under all circumstances incompatible with the essential principles of a rationally ordered life, since the chief ends prescribed by nature for the marital union-the propagation of the race and the due care and education of offspring-may, in certain states of society, be attained in a polygamous union. The theory that God can dispense from any part of the law, even from the secondary precepts, is scarcely compatible with the doctrine, which is the common teaching of the School, that the natural law is founded on the eternal law, and, therefore, has for its ultimate ground the immutable essence of God himself. As regards (c), when positive law, human or Divine, imposes obligations which only modify the bearing of the natural law, it cannot correctly be said to change it. Positive law may not ordain anything contrary to the natural law, from which it draws its authority; but it may-and this is one of its functions-determine with more precision the bearing of the natural law, and for good reasons, supplement its conclusions. For example, in the eyes of the natural law mutual verbal agreement to a contract is sufficient; yet, in many kinds of contract, the civil law declares that no agreement shall be valid, unless it be expressed in writing and signed by the parties before witnesses. In establishing this rule the civil authority merely exercises the power which it derives from the natural law to add to the operation of the natural law such conditions as the common good may call for. Contrary to the almost universally received doctrine, a few theologians held erroneously that the natural law depends not on the essential necessary will of God, but upon His arbitrary positive will, and taught consistently with this view, that the natural law may be dispensed from or even abrogated by God. The conception, however, that the moral law is but an arbitrary enactment of the Creator, involves the denial of any absolute distinction between right and wrong-a denial which, of course, sweeps away the very foundation of the entire moral order.

196 IV. Our Knowledge of the Law

197 Founded in our nature and revealed to us by our reason, the moral law is known to us in the measure that reason brings a knowledge of it home to our understanding. The question arises: How far can man be ignorant of the natural law, which, as St. Paul says, is written in the human heart (Rom., ii, 14)? The general teaching of theologians is that the supreme and primary principles are necessarily known to every one having the actual use of reason. These principles are really reducible to the primary principle which is expressed by St. Thomas in the form: "Do good and avoid evil". Wherever we find man we find him with a moral code, which is founded on the first principle that good is to be done and evil avoided. When we pass from the universal to more particular conclusions, the case is different. Some follow immediately from the primary, and are so self-evident that they are reached without any complex course of reasoning. Such are, for example: "Do not commit adultery"; "Honour your parents". No person whose reason and moral nature is ever so little developed can remain in ignorance of such precepts except through his own fault. Another class of conclusions comprises those which are reached only by a more or less complex course of reasoning. These may remain unknown to, or be misinterpreted even by persons whose intellectual development is considerable. To reach these more remote precepts, many facts and minor conclusions must be correctly appreciated, and, in estimating their value, a person may easily err, and consequently, without moral fault, come to a false conclusion.

198 A few theologians of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, following some older ones, maintained that there cannot exist in anyone practical ignorance of the natural law. This opinion however has no weight (for the controversy see Bouquillon, "Theologia Fundamentalis", n. 74). Theoretically speaking, man is capable of acquiring a full kowledge of the moral law, which is, as we have seen, nothing but the dictates of reason properly exercised. Actually, taking into consideration the power of passion, prejudice, and other influences which cloud the understanding or pervert the will, one can safely say that man, unaided by supernatural revelation, would not acquire a full and correct knowledge of the contents of the natural law (cf. Vatican Council, Sess. III, cap. ii). In proof we need but recall that the noblest ethical teaching of pagans, such as the systems of Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics, was disfigured by its approbation of shockingly immoral actions and practices.

199 As the fundamental and all-embracing obligation imposed upon man by the Creator, the natural law is the one to which all his other obligations are attached. The duties imposed on us in the supernatural law come home to us, because the natural law and its exponent, conscience, tell us that, if God has vouchsafed to us a supernatural revelation with a series of precepts, we are bound to accept and obey it. The natural law is the foundation of all human law inasmuch as it ordains that man shall live in society, and society for its constitution requires the existence of an authority, which shall possess the moral power necessary to control the members and direct them to the common good. Human laws are valid and equitable only in so far as they correspond with, and enforce or supplement the natural law; they are null and void when they conflict with it. The United States system of equity courts, as distinguished from those engaged in the administration of the common law, are founded on the principle that, when the law of the legislator is not in harmony with the dictates of the natural law, equity (æquitas, epikeia) demands that it be set aside or corrected. St. Thomas explains the lawfulness of this procedure. Because human actions, which are the subject of laws, are individual and innumerable, it is not possible to establish any law that may not sometimes work out unjustly. Legislators, however, in passing laws, attend to what commonly happens, though to apply the common rule will sometimes work injustice and defeat the intention of the law itself. In such cases it is bad to follow the law; it is good to set aside its letter and follow the dictates of justice and the common good (II-II, Q. cxx, a. 1). Logically, chronologically, and ontologically antecedent to all human society for which it provides the indispensable basis, the natural or moral law is neither-as Hobbes, in anticipation of the modern positivistic school, taught-a product of social agreement or convention, nor a mere congeries of the actions, customs, and ways of man, as claimed by the ethicists who, refusing to acknowledge the First Cause as a Personality with whom one entertains personal relations, deprive the law of its obligatory basis. It is a true law, for through it the Divine Mind imposes on the subject minds of His rational creatures their obligations and prescribes their duties.

200 On this subject consult ; ; ; ; Summa Theol., I-II, QQ. xci, xciv; I, Q. lxxix, a. 12; Suarez, De Legibus, II, v-xvii; Meyer, Institutiones Juris Naturalis, II. The natural law is treated in all Catholic text-books of ethics. A good exposition in English will be found in Rickaby, Moral Philosophy (London, 1888); Hill, Ethics or Moral Philosophy (Baltimore, 1888). Consult also: Robinson, Elements of American Jurisprudence (Boston, 1900); Lilly, Right and Wrong (London, 1890); Ming, The Data of Modern Ethics Examined (New York, 1897); Bouquillon, Theologia Moralis Fundamentalis (Ratisbon and New York, 1890); Blackstone, Commentaries, I, introd., sec. i.

201 James J. Fox.

Roman Law

187 In the following article this subject is briefly treated under the two heads of; I. Principles; II. History. Of these two divisions, I is subdivided into: A. Persons; B. Things; C. Actions. The subdivisions of II are: A. Development of the Roman Law (again divided into periods) and B. Subsequent Influence.

188 I. Principles

189 The characteristic of the earlier Roman law was its extreme formalism. From its first secret administration as the law of the privileged classes it expanded until it became the basis of all civilized legal systems. The Roman law in its maturity recognized a definite natural-law theory as the ultimate test of the reasonableness of positive law, and repudiated the concept that justice is the creature of positive law. Cicero (De leg., I, v) tells us "Nos ad justitiam esse natos, neque opinione sed natura constitutum esse jus" (i. e. Justice is natural, not the effect of opinion). Justice was conformity with perfect laws, and jurisprudence was the appreciation of things human and divine - the science of the just and the unjust, but always the science of law with its just application to practical cases. Law was natural or positive (man-made); it was natural strictly speaking (instinctive), or it was natural under the Roman concept of the jus gentium (law of nations) - natural in itself or so universally recognized by all men that a presumption arose by reason of universality. The Romans attributed slavery to the jus gentium because it was universally practised, and therefore implied the consent of all men, yet the definition of slavery expressly states that it is contra naturam, "against nature". The precepts of the law were these: to live honestly; not to injure another; to give unto each one his due. Positive law was the jus civile, or municipal law, of a particular state.

190 Gaius says that all law pertains to persons, to things, or to actions.

191 A. Persons

192 Man and person were not equivalent terms. A slave was not a person, but a thing; a person was a human being endowed with civil status. In other than human beings personality might exist by a fiction. Status was natural or civil. Natural status existed by reason of natural incidents, such as posthumous or already born (jam nati), sane and insane, male and female, infancy and majority. Civil status had to do with liberty, citizenship, and family. If one had no civil status whatever, he had no personality and was a mere thing. Men were either free or slaves: if free they were either free born or freedmen. Slaves were born such or became slaves either by the law of nations or by civil law. By the law of nations they became slaves by reason of captivity; by civil law, by the status of their parents or in the occasional case where they permitted themselves to be sold in order to participate in the price, if they were over twenty years of age. An ungrateful freedman, again, might become a slave, as might one condemned to involuntary servitude in punishment for crime. Freeborn, in the later law, were such as were born of a mother who was free at conception, at birth, or at any time between conception and birth. Freedmen were former slaves who had been emancipated under one of several forms. They owed obsequium - i. e., respect and reverence - to their former masters. The Lex Ælia Sentia placed restrictions on emancipation by minors and in fraud of creditors. The Lex Fusia Caninia restricted the right of manumission proportionately to the number of slaves owned.

193 Men were either citizens or foreigners (peregrini), perhaps more accurately "denizens". Assuming that one had civil status, he might be either sui juris (his own master) or alieni juris (subject to another). The power to which he was subject was termed a potestas: slaves were under the dominical power, and children were under the patria potestas exercised by a male ascendant; the marital power was termed manus (i. e., "the hand", signifying force).

194 Slaves were at first insecure in their lives, but later the master's power of life and death was taken away. They were in commerce and might be sold, donated, bequeathed by legacy, alienated by testament, or manumitted. They had nothing of their own, and whatever was acquired through them accrued to the masters. Only very rarely could they bring their masters into legal relations with third persons.

195 The paternal power over children (descendants) was a close patriarchal relationship, dating from remote antiquity and at first extending to life and death. Between paterfamilias and filius familias (father and son), no obligation was legally enforceable (see Prejudicial action below). During his lifetime the paterfamilias was the owner of accessions made by the filius familias. The later law, however, recognized a quasi-partnership of blood and conceded an inchoate ownership in the paternal goods, which was given expression in the system of successions. A child under power might have the administration of separate goods called his peculium. The paterfamilias did not part with the ownership. The military and quasi-military peculium became a distinct, separate property. Even the slave at his master's sufferance might enjoy a peculium. The paternal power was stripped of the power of life and death, the right of punishment was moderated, and the sale of children was restricted to cases of extreme necessity. In the earlier law, it had been permitted to the father to give over his child (as he might give over a slave) to some person injured through the act of the child, and thus escape liability. With the growth of humane sentiment, the noxal action in the case of children was abolished. Between parents and children, only affirmative or negative actions on the question of filiation or the existence of the paternal power were permitted. The paternal power was held only by males, and extended indefinitely downward during the lifetime of the patriarch: i. e., father and son were under the patria potestas of the grandfather. The potestas was in no wise influenced by infancy or majority. In the case given, upon the death of the grandfather the paternal power would fall upon the father. The patria potestas was acquired over children born in lawful wedlock, by legitimation, and by adoption.

196 Marriage (nuptiœ or connubium) was the association or community of life between man and woman, for the procreation and rearing of offspring, validly entered into between Roman citizens. It was wont to be preceded by sponsalia (betrothal), defined as an agreement of future marriage. Sponsalia might be verbally entered into, and required no solemnities. The mutual consent of the spouses was requisite, and the object of marriage was kept in mind so that marriage with an impotent person (castratus) was invalid: the parties must have attained puberty, and there could be but one husband and one wife. It is true that more or less continuous extra-matrimonial relations between the same man and woman in the absence of any other marriage were considered as a kind of marriage, under the jus gentium, by the jurists of the second and third centuries. The connubium, or Roman marriage, was for Roman citizens: matrimonium existed among other free persons, and contubernium was the marital relation of slaves. The latter was a status of fact, not a juridical status. Marriage might be incestuous, indecorous, or noxal: incestuous, e. g., between blood relations or persons between whom affinity existed; indecorous, e. g., between a freeman and a lewd woman or actress; noxal, e. g., between Christian and Jew, tutor or curator and ward, etc.

197 Cognation or blood relationship is indicated by degrees and lines; the degree measures the distance between cognates, and the line shows the series, either direct (ascending or descending) or collateral; the collateral line is either equal or unequal in the descent from the common ancestor. In the direct line, in both civil and canon law, there are as many degrees as there are generations. In the collateral line there is a difference: by civil law, brother and sister are in the second degree, although each is only one degree removed from the common ancestor, the father; by canon law, they are in the first degree. The civil law counts each degree up to the common ancestor and then down to the other collateral. The canon law measures the cognation of collaterals by the distance in degrees of the collateral farthest removed from the common ancestor. Uncle and niece are three degrees distant by civil law; by canon law they are only two degrees removed. Affinity is the artificial relationship which exists between one spouse and the cognates of the other. Affinity has no degrees. By Roman law, marriage in the direct line was prohibited; in the collateral line it was prohibited in the second degree.

198 Marriage was usually accompanied by the dowry, created on behalf of the wife, and by donations propter nuptias, on behalf of the husband. The dowry (dos) was what the wife brought or what some other person on her behalf supplied towards the expenses of the married state. Property of the wife in excess of the dowry was called her paraphernalia. The dowry was profective, if it came from the father; adventitious, if from the wife or from any other source. The husband enjoyed its administration and control, and all of its fruits accrued to him. Upon the dissolution of the marriage the profective dowry might be reclaimed by the wife's father, and the adventitious by the wife or her heirs. Special actions existed for the enforcement of dotal agreements.

199 The offspring of incest or adultery could not be legitimated. Adoption, which imitates nature, was a means of acquiring the paternal power. Only such persons as in nature might have been parents could adopt, and hence a difference of eighteen years was necessary in the ages of the parties. Adoption was of a minor, and could not be for a time only. Similar to adoption was adrogation, whereby one sui juris subjected himself to the patria potestas of another.

200 The paternal power was dissolved by the death of the ancestor, in which case each descendant in the first degree became sui juris; those in remoter degrees fell under the paternal power of the next ascendant: Upon the death of the grandfather, his children became sui juris, and the grandchildren came under the power of their respective fathers. Loss of status (capitis diminutio, media or maxima), involving loss of liberty or citizenship, destroyed the paternal power. Emancipation and adoption had a similar effect.

201 One might be sui juris and yet subject to tutorship or curatorship. Pupillary tutorship was a personal public office consisting in the education and in the administration of the goods of a person sui juris, but who had not yet attained puberty. Tutorship was testamentary, statutory, or dative: testamentary when validly exercised in the will of the paterfamilias with respect to a child about to become sui juris, but under puberty. A testamentary tutor could not be appointed by the mother nor by a maternal ascendant. The agnates, who were an important class of kinsmen, in the early Roman law were cognates connected through males either by blood relationship or by the artificial tie of agnation. Statutory tutorship was that which the law immediately conferred, as the tutorship of agnates, of patrons, etc. The first statutory tutors were the agnates and gentiles called to tutorship by the Twelve Tables. Justinian abolished the distinction in this respect between agnates and cognates, and called them promiscuously to the statutory tutorship.

202 Similar to tutorship, although distinct in its incidents, was curatorship. In tutorship the office terminated with the puberty of the ward. The interposition of the tutor's auctoritas in every juridical act was required to be concurrent, both in time and place. He had no power of ratification, nor could he supply the auctoritas by letter or through an agent. Curators were given to persons sui juris after puberty and before they had reached the necessary maturity for the conduct of their own affairs. Curators were appointed also for the deaf and dumb, for the insane and for prodigals. The curator of a minor was given rather to the goods than to the person of his ward; the curator's consent was necessary to any valid disposition of the latter's goods. Tutors and curators were required to give security for the faithful performance of their duties and were liable on the quasi-contractual relationship existing between them and their wards. In certain cases the law excused persons from these duties, and provision was made for the removal of persons who had become "suspect".

203 In the law of persons, status depended upon liberty, citizenship, and family; and the corresponding losses of status were known respectively as capitis diminutio maxima, media, and minima. The minima, by a fiction at least, was involved even when one became sui juris, although this is disputed.

204 B. Things

205 Things were divini vel humani juris (i. e., governed by divine or by human law). Things sacrœ were publicly consecrated to the gods; places of burial were things religiosœ; things sanctœ were so called because protected by a penal sanction - thus the city walls, gates, ditch, etc. were sanctœ. None of these could be part of an individual's patrimony, because they were considered as not in commerce.

206 Things humani juris were the things with which the private law concerned itself. Things are common when the ownership is in no one, and the enjoyment open to all. In an analogous way, things are public when the ownership is in the people, and the use in individuals. The air, flowing water, the sea, etc. were things common to all, and therefore the property of none. The seashore, rivers, gates, etc., were public. Private things were such as were capable of private ownership and could form part of the patrimony of individuals. Again, things were collective or singular. The once important distinction between res mancipi and nec mancipi was suppressed by Justinian. Res mancipi were those things which the Romans most highly prized: Italian soil, rural servitudes, slaves, etc. These required formal mancipation.

207 Things were either corporeal or incorporeal: corporeal were those quœ tangi possunt (which can be touched - tangible). Detention or naked possession of a thing was the mere physical faculty of disposing of it. Possession was the detention of a corporeal thing coupled with the animus dominii, or intent of ownership. It might be in good faith or in bad: if there was a just title, the possession was just: if not, unjust. A true possession was possible of a corporeal thing only; quasi-possession was the term employed in reference to an incorporeal thing, as a right. The jus possessionis was the entirety of rights which accrued to the possession as such. The advantages of possession as independent of ownership were as follows: the possessor had not the burden of producing and proving title; sometimes he enjoyed the fruits of the thing; he retained the thing until the claimant made proof; he stood in a better position in law than the claimant, and received the decision where the claim was not fully established; the possessor might retain the thing by virtue of the jus retertionis, until reimbursed for charges and outlays; the possessor in good faith was not liable for culpa (fault). One might not recover possession by violence or self-help.

208 A right in re was a real right, valid against all the world; a right ad rem was an obligation or personal right against a particular person or persons. Rights in re were ownership, inheritance, servitudes, pledge, etc. Ownership was quiritarian or bonitarian: quiritarian, when acquired by the jus civile only available to Roman citizens; bonitarian, when acquired by any natural, as distinguished from civil, means. This distinction was removed by Justinian. There could be co-ownership or sole ownership.

209 The modes of acquiring ownership were of two genera, arising from natural law and from civil law. One acquired, by natural law, in occupation, accession, perception of fruits, and by tradition (delivery). Occupation occurred in acquisition by hunting, fishing, capture in war, etc. The right of post-liminium was the recovery of rights lost through capture in war, and in proper cases applied to immoveables, moveables, and to the status of persons. Finding was also a means of occupation, since a thing completely lost or abandoned was res nullius, and therefore belonged to the first taker.

210 Accession was natural, industrial, or mixed. The birth of a child to a slave woman was an instance of natural accession; so also, was the formation of an island in a stream. This accrued to the riparian owners proportionately to their frontage along the side of the river towards which the island was formed. Alluvion was the slow increment added to one's riparian property by the current. Industrial accession required human intervention and occurred by adjunctio, specificatio, or commixtio, or by a species of the latter, confusio. Mixed accession took place by reason of the maxim: Whatever is planted on the soil, or connected with it, belongs to the soil.

211 In perception of fruits the severance or taking of revenue might be by the owner or by another, as by the usufructuary, the lessee (in locatio-conductio), by the creditor (in antichresis), and by the possessor in good faith.

212 Tradition was the transfer of possession and was a corporeal act, where the nature of the object permitted. Corporeal things were moveables or immoveables. In modern civil law, incorporeal things are moveables or immoveables, depending upon the nature of the property to which the rights or obligations attach. In Roman law obligations, rights, and actions were not embraced in the terms moveables and immoveables.

213 The vindicatory action (rei vindicatio) went to the direct question of ownership, and ownership was required to be conclusively proved. Complete proof of ownership was often extremely difficult, or impossible, and the Prætor Publicius devised the actio publiciana available to an acquirer by just title and in good faith, but who could not establish the ownership of his author. It was available to such an acquirer against a claimant who possessed infirmiore jure.

214 Ownership (dominium) is an absolute right in re. A servitude (sometimes called a dismemberment of ownership) was a constituted right in the property of another, whereby the owner was bound to suffer something, or abstain from doing something, with respect to his property, for the utility of some other person or thing. A servitude was not a service of a person, but of a thing, and to adjoining land or to a person. Servitudes due to land were real (predial), while servitudes due to a person as such were personal. There were servitudes which might be considered as either real or personal, and others, again, which could only be personal, such as usufruct, use, habitation, and the labour of slaves. A real servitude existed when land was servient to land. Such a servitude was either urban or rural, depending not so much on whether the servitude was exercised in the city or country as upon its relation to buildings. Servitudes consisted in something essentially passive, in patiendo vel in non faciendo; never in faciendo. Servitudes which consisted in patiendo were affirmative and those in non faciendo were negative. Servitudes could arise by agreement, last will, or prescription.

215 There were numerous urban predial servitudes: as onus ferendi, by which one's construction was bound to sustain the columns of another or the weight of his wall; tigni immittendi, the right to seat one's timbers in his neighbour's wall; projiciendi, the right to overhang one's timbers over the land of another, although in no way resting on the other's soil; protegendi, a similar right of projecting one's roof over another's soil. The servitudes stillicidii and fluminis recipiendi, were similar: stillicidium was the right to drip; and fluminis recipiendi, the right to discharge rainwater collected in canals or gutters. The servitude altius non tollendi was a restriction on the height of a neighbour's construction while altius tollendi was an affirmative right to carry one's construction higher than otherwise permitted. Servitudes of light and prospect were of similar nature.

216 Rural predial servitudes were iter, actus, via, aquœductus, and the like. The servitude of iter (way) was an eight-foot roadway in the stretches, with accommodation at the turns. It included the right of driving vehicles and cattle, and the lesser right of foot-passage. Actus was a right of trail of four feet in which cattle or suitable narrow vehicles might be driven. Iter was a mere right of path. In these servitudes the lesser was included in the greater. The nature of the right of aquœductus is obvious, as well as the various servitudes of drawing water, of driving cattle to water, of pasturage, of burning lime, of digging sand or gravel, and the like. Servitudes of this character could be extinguished by the consolidation of ownership of both servient and dominant estate in the same owner, and by remission or release; by nonuser for the prescriptive period, and by the destruction of the dominant or servient estate.

217 Usufruct was the greatest of personal servitudes; yet, as its measure was not the strict personal needs of its subject, it exceeded a personal servitude. During the period of enjoyment it was almost ownership, and was described as a personal servitude consisting in the use and enjoyment of the corporeal things of another without change in their substance. Ususfructus was the right utendi, fruendi, salva substantia. In a strict sense it applied only to corporeal things which were neither consumed nor diminished by such use. After Tiberius a quasi-usufruct (as of money) was recognized. 1Ioney, although not consumable naturaliter, was consumable civiliter. Usufruct could arise by operation of law, by judicial decision (as in partition), by convention, by last will, and even by prescription. The natural or civil death of the usufructuary extinguished the right, as did non-user and the complete loss of the thing.

218 Use and habitation were lesser rights of the same general nature. Usus was the right to use the things of another, but only to the extent of the usee's necessities, and always salva substantia. Habitation was the right of dwelling in another's building in those apartments which were intended for habitation, salva substantia (i. e., without substantial modification). The personal servitude operœ servorum embraced every utility from the labour of another's slave or slaves. The actions from servitudes were confessoria or negatoria, in assertion of the servitude or in denial of it.

219 Ownership might further be acquired by usucaption (usucapio) and prescription for a long period. Prescription (a slight modification of the older usucaption) is the dispensing with evidence of title, and is acquisitive when it is the means of acquiring Ownership and extinctive (divestitive) when it bars a right of action. Acquisitive prescription required

220 (1) a thing subject to prescription,

221 (2) good faith,

222 (3) continuous possession, and

223 (4) the lapse of the prescribed time.

224 Again, ownership could be acquired by donation, the gratuitous transfer of a thing to another person. Donations were mortis causa or inter vivos, and the former was in reality a conditional testamentary disposition and very similar to a legacy, while the latter did not require the death of the donor for its perfection. A species of donation inter vivos was the donatio propter nuptias from the husband.

225 The juridical consequence of ownership is the power of alienation, and yet the law limited certain owners in this respect. The husband owned the dowry, but was subject to restrictions; the pupil under tutorship was owner, but without power to alienate, except probably in the single case of a sister's dowry. Even where one was owner without these specific limitations, if he had conceded rights in re to another, he could not alienate prejudicially to such other: thus, the pledge debtor could not prejudice the rights in re of the pledge creditor.

226 Acquisition could be made, not only personally, but through children and slaves; and, in the later law, through a mandatory or procurator. Acquisition could be made of possession, of ownership, and of the right of pledge.

227 Succession

228 Succession to a deceased person was either testate or intestate: particular things were acquired by legacies or by trust-bequests (fidei-commissa). A universal succession was an inheritance. The Twelve Tables recognized the right of testation, and the civil law later conceived of a partnership of blood in both testate and intestate successions. The præetor's intervention was frequent in testamentary matters; and in equitable cases he softened the rigour of the law and gave the possessio bonorum. A testament was the legally declared last will in which an heir was instituted. Some departure from the strict formalities was permitted in the case of soldiers' wills. The right of testament was active and passive. Persons generally who were under no incapacity could make a will; those prohibited were such as had some defect of status, some vice or defect of mind, or even some sufficient defect of body, and those guilty of crime or improbity. The passive right of testament was the right to take under a will. Heirs were voluntary or necessary (forced). In the early freedom of the law, Romans might disinherit without cause; later, this liberty was restricted to disherison for just cause, and a legitima, or statutory provision, was prescribed. Disherison was the express exclusion from the whole inheritance of one who was entitled to the legitima. One was prœteritus who was neither instituted an heir nor disinherited. Since disherison was required to be express, one conditionally instituted was only pretermitted. Further, disherison required exclusion from all heirs and from every degree. Under the early law, Sons were required to be excluded by name; daughters and grandchildren could be excluded by class. The later law required that all children should be deprived by name. Justinian enumerated the "just" causes of disherison in Novel cxv; they are substantially the same in the modern civil codes.

229 The instituted heir, as successor to the universal rights of the decedent, was required to have passive testamentary capacity at the time of the will and at the time of the death; the intervening period was of no consequence. It was, however, requisite that he should retain capacity from the time of the death until the taking of the inheritance. In a conditional institution of the heir, capacity was necessary at the time of the will, at the time of the death, and at the time of the happening of the condition. Slaves as well as freemen could be instituted heirs, and, in the case of a slave the gift of liberty was implied. Uncertain and indeterminate persons might be instituted if they could be rendered certain; such were the poor, the municipalities, and licit corporations. Where coheirs were instituted without definite shares, they took equally. The heir might be instituted absolutely or conditionally, but not merely for a time. A physically impossible condition, negatively added, left the institution absolute; in general, the conditions annexed were various and quite similar to the classes of conditions known to the modern civil law. Where one of several co-heirs failed to take, his portion accrued to the others as a matter of law, without their knowledge and even against their will: this was called the jus accrescendi.

230 As already intimated, the testator might institute one or several heirs; if all were instituted at the same time, they were direct heirs; but one might be direct and the other substituted by way of fidei-commissum. Again, the testator could substitute an heir, in case the first should not take. Direct substitution, therefore, was the institution of a second heir, in case the first failed to take: with respect to the person making the substitution, it was either military or non-military. The case in which the substitution was intended to take place classed it as vulgar, pupilary, or quasi-pupilary: vulgar was the ordinary substitution in which one was named to take, in case the first heir defaulted or died; pupillary, was where an heir was instituted to succeed a child under puberty (since such child could not make a will, the parent in a sense made two wills, one for himself to the child and one for the child in case the latter should die before puberty).

231 Testaments were vitiated in several ways: nullum, void from the beginning, where there was a defect in the institution of the heir or incapacity in the testator; injustum, not legally executed and hence void; ruptum, by revocation or by the agnation of a posthumous child, either natural or civil; irruptum, where the testator had lost the civil status necessary for testation; destitutum, where the heir defaulted because dead or unwilling, or upon failure of the condition; recissum, as the consequence of a legal attack upon an undutiful will.

232 It has been said that heirs were either necessary or voluntary: necessary heirs were either such as could not be pretermitted or such as were forced to accept. These were again sui et necessarii or necessarii only. The former were children under the patria potestas, and they were sui because one's own, and necessarii, because the civil law made them forced heirs, although the prætor gave to such the beneficium abstinendi. Voluntary heirs were strangers who had a perfect right of election to accept or reject the inheritance. The prætor conceded to the heir a period of time in which to balance the advantages and disadvantages of the inheritance, called the jus deliberandi. Justinian added to this the benefit of inventory.

233 Aside from the inheritance proper, a will could contain legacies whereby things were bequeathed by a single title and by express words; they could be imperative or precative. Legacies were by vindication, where the express words justified a direct legal claim by the legatee; by condemnation, where the language condemned or ordered the heir to transmit the legacy; by prœceptio, where a legacy was left to one only of several co-heirs; and sinendi modo, by permissive words. As in the case of joint-heirs, the jus accrescendi existed also among joint-legatees.

234 By reason of the ambulatory character (as Heineccius terms it) of man's will, legacies and trust-bequests (fidei-commissa) were subject to ademption and transfer to another legatee. The Lex Falcidia, which created the statutory fourth portion, applied to legacies as well as to other testamentary provisions. Fidei-commissa were created by precative words addressed to the conscience of the heir, and were at first not legally enforceable. Trust-bequests were later given legal sanction; and they were universal or of single things. The modern civil law is hostile to trusts of any kind.

235 If a last will contained the institution of an heir, it was a testament; if it contained less, it was a codicii. Originally, codicils were only letters; later, they began to have testamentary force, containing, however, nothing which pertained to the direct institution of the heir. There could be several nonrepugnant codicils. Not only could they contain no institution of an heir, but they could not provide for disherison or substitution. They were made either in connexion with a will or, in some cases, with a view to the intestate succession of the heir.

236 If there was an invalid will or no will at all, the succession was intestate: in. the ancient law the basis of intestate succession was the peculiarly Roman artificial family made up of the agnates. Emancipated children and non-agnatic cognates did not succeed, since they were no part of the family. In the first rank, the heirs were the decedent's children (natural or adoptive) who took per capita, in the nearest degree and per stirpes, or by representation, in remoter degrees. Emancipated children had no claim until later, when they were aided by the prætor's edict, "Unde liberi". The Twelve Tables provided that, in the absence of children, the nearest agnate should be called: this was known as the statutory succession of the agnates. Those only were called who were bound in agnation to the deceased through males; hence females beyond sisters were not called. The prætor, however, provided for the more remote in the edict, "Unde cognati". Agnates by adoption enjoyed the same rights as agnates by nature. The nearest agnate took, and there was no right of representation, although here again the prætor made innovations which were supplemented by the legislation of Justinian. The father did not succeed to the son, consistently with the idea that the son could have nothing of his own, and, where the father took, it was by right of resumption. The father succeeded to his emancipated child, not as an agnate, but as a manumissor. The mother was not an agnate, and did not succeed to her children, nor did they succeed to her. Here, again, changes were effected by the edict, "Unde cognati", and by the Senatus-consulta Tertullianum and Orphitianum. The former senatus-consultum provided that, if a free mother gave birth to three children, or a freedwoman to four, there should be a right of succession, and this legislation was modified by Justinian even more favourably to the mother. The Senatus-consultum Orphitianum was the complement of the other, and provided that the right of succession between mother and children should be reciprocal. These rights were extended by imperial constitution to grandchildren.

237 If agnates were wanting, the Twelve Tables called the gentiles in the next rank, and not the cognates: the prætor, however, in the edict "Unde cognati", called the cognates in this rank.

238 Servile cognation (that contracted in slavery) had been an impediment of marriage; but the slave woman, manumitted with her children, could not avail herself either of the Senatus-consultum Tertullianum or of the possession of goods derived from the edict "Unde cognati". Justinian created rights of succession to remedy this defect.

239 The former master or, by assignment of freedmen, his children, stood in loco parentis to the freedman, and succeeded to his patrimony. Even the predeceased patron, through his nearest children (representation being excluded) succeeded to the goods of his former slave. Libertini, freedmen, were restricted. in their capacity to make a will. The prætor considered it no more than equitable that the libertinus should leave one-half his property to his former master. A higher equity arose where the freedman left children of his own, and in this case the patron might be excluded, the whole patrimony going to the freedman's children. In all other cases, and even contra tabulas, the patron took one half: later, in special circumstances depending upon the freedman's wealth, Justinian, developing the principles of the Lex Papia Poppæa, increased the patron's portion.

240 The prætor's intervention in succession matters did not directly overturn the provisions of the jus civile, but he devised the possessio bonorum, applicable to both testate and intestate successions. Justinian recognized and gave sanction to three kinds of possessio: first, contra tabulas (contrary to the will), where persons had been inequitably pretermitted; second, secundum tabulas; third, possession of an intestate's estate. The bonorum possessor was not an heir in accordance with jus civile, yet he enjoyed all of the privileges of an heir. Justinian placed the right of succession upon a basis of cognation, or blood relationship, and succession by right of blood occurred in four orders which may be indicated as follows:

241 First order

242 (a) the sui heredes, or natural heirs, who succeeded in virtue of the con-dominium in the inheritance;

243 (b) those whose strict legal right had been barred (as by emancipation), but whom the prætor called to the inheritance;

244 (c) emancipated sons to whom Justinian's constitution restored natural rights.

245 Second order

246 (a) statutory heirs, agnates;

247 (b) persons entitled under the Senatus-consultum Tertullianum;

248 (c) those entitled under the Senatus-consultum Orphitianum.

249 Third order

250 the cognates. (Heineccius gives tables of descent both before and after Justinian's legislation).

251 None of these orders being entitled to take, the estate escheated to the fiscus, or public treasury. The adjective law (below, under C. Actions) supplied various forms for the hereditas petitio. Collatio, or the return of advancements, was required in order that there might be a fair distribution. This is the collation of the modern civil codes.

252 Another means for the acquisition of ownership was adrogation, whereby a person sui juris was adopted into the paternal power of another. Originally the obligations of the adrogatus were strictly and logically extinguished, but the injustice to creditors was the subject of remedial legislation.

253 Again, one might acquire the goods of another by sectio or venditio bonorum, a sale at auction for the benefit of creditors.

254 The rights growing out of pledge were also a means for the acquisition of property. This institution was, in its inception, only a fiduciary pact without means of enforcement, and the title passed to the pledge creditor; later, it took the form of pignus, or pledge proper, whereby the creditor was placed in possession of a moveable with certain duties towards the debtor; a form of the same contract was extended to immoveables, and this was known as antichresis. In antichresis the creditor was placed in possession of the immoveables and obliged to pay, first, his interests and charges, and then to deduct from the principal debt whatever he received as revenue. Hypotheca, or mortgage, was a development and in scientific theory is the substructure of the modern law of mortgage. Privileges were akin to modern civil-law rights of the same name and to the liens of the common law; but possession was not of prime importance.

255 Pledge was extinguished by the extinction of the principal debt, by express release, by expiration of the time, by destruction of the thing pledged, etc. The actions growing out of it were the Servian and general hypothecary, or quasi-Servian action.

256 Real rights (in re) differ essentially from personal rights (ad rem), or obligations, which have persons as their immediate objects. Even these have things as their remote objects, since they tend to the attainment of a thing through a particular person and by reason of their being usually convertible into a money value. Obligations (dismissing at once those which were purely natural and hence unenforceable) were broader than either contract or tort, and included liability arising from both. They were civil or prætorian, and could arise from contract, quasi-contract, delict, and quasi-delict. In conventional obligations some things were essential, others accidental. Contractual obligations arose through delivery of a thing, through words, through writing, or merely through the consent of the parties; and were, accordingly, contracts re, verbis, littens, or consensu.

257 Contracts re were the bailments, loan for use, loan for consumption, deposit, and pledge.

258 Contracts verbis were entered into by a formal stipulation consisting of a direct question and an adequately responsive answer. They could take immediate effect, could commence in futuro, or could be conditional. Stipulations were prætorian, judicial, common, and Aquilian: the prætorian and judicial were scarcely voluntary. The common stipulation was used in the ordinary affairs of men and by persons in fiduciary relationships (e. g., in this form the tutor gave security for the faithful discharge of his duties). The Aquilian stipulation, in connexion with acceptilatio, was a means of general release for the dissolution of any obligation. Stipulations required the same consensual elements that were necessary in other agreements, in addition to their own peculiar formalism. If a conditional response were made to a direct question, the stipulation was void; so also, if made by letter or messenger. The relation of suretyship could be created by stipulation: suretyship was an accessory contract, and the surety was known as the fidei-jussor. Sureties had the beneficium divisionis, which was conceded by Hadrian. They enjoyed also the beneficium ordinis, invented by Justinian, and the beneficium cedendarum actionum, or subrogation to the right of action of the creditor against the principal debtor, or pro rata against the co-sureties.

259 Contracts litteris took their juridical efficacy from writings, which evidenced the fact that an obligation subsisted or that it had been extinguished. The latter were called apochœ. Writings evidencing a subsisting obligation were syngraphic or chirographic respectively, as they expressed a mutual or a unilateral obligation. A writing in the book of the debtor which supported the creditor's entry was conclusive, and even he creditor's entry created a strong presumption.

260 Contracts consensu were not peculiar in that they required consent, which was requisite in all contracts. Their peculiarity was in the fact that consent alone sufficed. They were five in number: buying and selling (emptio-venditio); letting and hiring (locatio-conductio); the emphyteuticary contract; partnership (societas); and mandate (gratuitous agency). In sale, there was necessary the consent of the parties, an object and an agreed price. Letting and hiring might be considered a temporary sale, and the essential incidents of a valid contract were the same as in sale. Emphyteusis strictly was neither a sale nor a letting; it was rather a quit-rent lease dependent in its duration upon the payment of the agreed canon. Its special incidents were a quasi-ownership in the tenant and a right of pre-emption in the dominus. Similar to emphyteusis was the right of superficies; but as it applied only to the surface - that is, to buildings - it was less permanent. Partnership was general or universal; particular or special; and, finally, singular. As consent was of its essence, withdrawal of consent worked its dissolution. Partnership was an entity distinct from the individual partners; it gave rise to the actio pro socio. The leonine partnership (societas leonina) was illegal. Mandate was a consensual contract whereby one undertook gratuitously to attend to an affair for another; it was commissioned agency and was an actual contract; it was distinguishable from negotiorum gestio (uncommissioned agency) in that the latter belonged to quasi-contract. It gave rise to the actio mandati, directa, or contraria.

261 The contracts which had a definite name and form of action for their enforcement were nominate contracts. There were others termed innominate because they had no special names: these were summed up in the four formula: Do, ut des; Do, ut facias; Facio, ut des; and Facio, ut facias. They were enforced by the general action in factum or by the action prœscriptis verbis.

262 All of the foregoing contracts, nominate and innominate, were contracts in the true sense of the word, but there was another class of relations in which the law imposed duties and obligations as if the parties had actually contracted. These were the so-called quasi-contracts, and the forms were negotiorum gestio, tutorship, inheritance, administration in common, hereditatis aditio, indebiti solutio (payment under mistake of fact), and a few others of similar nature.

263 Obligations could be acquired through the paternal and dominical powers and through mandataries. A civil obligation once constituted could be extinguished by an exception (plea in bar) or by its own terms. Pleas in bar were divers and could arise from a will, a contract or pact, a judicial decision, etc.

264 The means of extinction common to all obligations were: solutio (payment); compensatio (set-off); confusio (merging of the character of debtor and creditor) oblatio et consignatio (tender); rei interitus (loss of the thing); novatio (substitution of obligations as to person or thing); prœscriptio (lapse of time); and further, in proper cases, by acceptilatio (release) and by mutuus dissensus (mutual change of intention).

265 The prætorian restitutio in integrum was an equitable restoration of the parties to their former situation, and could be invoked for metus (duress), dolus (fraud), minority, and generally by all who had suffered hardship through no fault of their own.

266 Obligations and rights of action arose also out of delictum, which was the voluntary penal violation of human law. Delicts were either actual or quasi-delicts - the former deliberate, the latter negligent. When public, they were crimes; when private, torts. Instances were: furtum (theft), either manifest or concealed; rapina (robbery with violence); damnum injuria datum (injury to property); and injuria (a kind of outrage, or defamatory wrong by word or action). In furtum, the thief could be prosecuted either civilly or criminally, and in the civil action the thing or the penalty could be recovered. The Roman criminal law imposed a fine to the fiscus and corporal or capital punishment. Justinian abolished mutilation and capital punishment for theft and substituted fines and exile. Rapina, like furtum, required a criminal intent. Where the putative owner, in the belief of ownership, sought to recover his property by violence, this was not robbery, but the offence against public order was punished by the loss of the property without, however, any fine to the fiscus. Damage to the property of another injuria datum was the subject matter of the Aquilian Law, and the damage must have been inflicted by a freedman; if by a slave, it was a noxal tort; if by a quadruped, the tort and liability were designated pauperies. The measure of damages in injuria depended upon the atrocity of the wrong and the status of the parties; the right of action accrued to the father for injuria to the son; to the husband, for the wife; to the master, for the slave, etc. Quasi-delictual obligations were torts or wrongs based on culpa (fault or negligence), and not upon dolus (evil intent). An instance was where anything was negligently or carelessly thrown from a house (dejecta vel effusa). Quasi-delictual, also, were the obligations of persons employed in a public calling, such as shipmasters and innkeepers, for the wrongful acts of their servants.

267 C. Actions

268 Adjective Law

269 An action was the legal means for the enforcement of a right, and the Roman law included in the term actio both the right of action and the action itself. Actions were petitory, when they sought to recover the very thing in controversy, or possessory, where the right of possession only was in issue. Specific nominate actions were provided in most of the relations between men, and where the relations were innominate there were actiones in factum, prœscriptis verbis, and condictiones ex lege.

270 According to their origin, actions were civil or honorary, the latter emanating either from the prætor or from the ædiles. Civil actions were either directœ or utiles: directœ, if brought in the express words of the law or by the logical parties; utiles, if brought upon equitable facts not within the strict letter, and possibly, in the case of a ceded action, by the nominal plaintiff for the use of the real plaintiff. Actions aiming to establish personal status were called prejudicial. Real actions were vindicationes; personal were condictiones.

271 Rei vindicatio and the Publician action went to the question of ownership. Succession gave rise to the hereditas petitio and to the querela inofficiosi. Servitudes were affirmed or denied by an actio confessoria or negatoria. In pledge, there was the Servian or quasi-Servian action. The prætor or the ædile granted equitable actions, such as the actio ad exhibendum for the production of moveables; the actio in factum de edendo, an action of account against bankers; and the redhibitoria and quanti minoris, actions for redhibition and abatement of the price. The actions based on duress, fraud, and minority were purely equitable, and there was a condictio sine causa in cases of failure of consideration. This may be considered as equitable or as growing out of quasi-contract. Indeed, all of the quasi-contractual relations had their appropriate actions. Private wrongs, too, were redressed in suitable forms of action. In delicts the recovery might be simply the value, as in the persecutory actions; or double the value, as in the actio furti nec manifesti and in the action for corrupting a slave. In some instances, a triple, or even quadruple recovery might be had.

272 Actions founded on the consensual contracts of sale, hire, emphyteusis, partnership, and mandate, and on the real contracts of commodatum, depositum, and pignus were actions bonœ fidei: so also, the actio prœscriptis verbis for innominate contracts and the quasi-contractual actions negotiorum gestorum, funeraria, tutelœ, etc., as well as the personal action hereditas petitio.

273 The actio ex stipulatu and the condictio ex chirographo were actions of strict law (stricti juris).

274 An arbitrary action was one in which a non-compliant party was forced to comply or be held liable in a larger discretionary sum.

275 Certain exemptions to judgment debtors were favoured by the Roman law; among these was the beneficium competentiœ.

276 Ordinarily the foundation of liability was personal, yet one might incur liability through the act of another - as a son, a slave, or even a stranger. The actio quod jussu was properly brought against father or master for an act done by his order. The master of a ship, whether freeman or slave, by a sort of necessary agency could incur liability for the ship-owner and the right of action was enforced by the actio exercitoria. Similar in theory was the actio institoria which was the proper form in which to bring an action against one who had placed another in charge of a shop for the buying and selling of wares. The age and condition of the institor were immaterial. The prætor gave an actio de peculio to persons who contracted with son or slave in respect to the peculium, and this action was effective against the father or master to the extent of the peculium.

277 Aside from the specific remedies sought in particular cases, actions were perpetual or temporary, depending upon the lapse of time. Perpetual actions were ordinarily such as were barred by thirty years' prescription, while temporary actions were barred by shorter periods.

278 Exceptions or pleas to actions, like actions themselves, were civil or prætorian; and in general were perpetuœ and peremptoriœ (complete pleas in bar); or temporariœ (only dilatory).

279 The developed written altercations, or pleadings, of the parties were as follows: the actor (plaintiff) brought his actio, which the reus (defendant) met with his exceptio (plea). To this the plaintiff could reply with a replicatio, which in turn might be met with a duplicatio, and in exceptional cases the pleadings might advance to a triplicatio and a quadruplicatio.

280 The interdicts were formulæ, or conceptions of words, whereby the prætor, in an urgent cause or in one affecting the public interest, ordered or forbade something to be done. They were, in effect, prohibitory or mandatory injunctions; they were prohibitoria, as against violence to possession, obstructing a public place, etc.; they were restitutoria, to restore possession, etc.; and, finally, exhibitoria, as for the production of a free man or for the production of a will. The object to be attained by a possessory interdict was to receive, to retain, or to recover possession. The interdicts quorum bonorum and quod legatorum had to do with successions. The Salvian and quasi-Salvian interdicts were used for foreclosure in pledge obligations.

281 (The subject of Roman criminal law is beyond the scope of this article; its most concise arrangement is to be found in Pothier's "Pandectæ: de pœnis.")

282 II. History and Sources

283 A. Its Development

284 The classic period of development of Roman Law was in the second and third centuries of our era, and this is known to us for the greater part through the compilations of Justinian, in the sixth century. In the form given it by Justinian, the Roman Law, through the revival of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, spread over Europe and became the foundation of modern European law.

285 The history of Roman law has been variously divided into periods. One division is into the Regal Period, from the foundation of the city, the Republican, until the time of Augustus, and, finally, the Imperial, closing with the legislation of Justinian in the year 1280 (A. D. 526) from the foundation of the city (Howe). Again, the lapse of almost 1000 years, from the Twelve Tables to the reign of Justinian, has been divided into three periods: the first, A. U. C. 303-648; the second A. U. C. 648-988, the splendid age from the birth of Cicero to the reign of Alexander Severus; the third, from Alexander to Justinian, in which "the oracles of Jurisprudence were almost mute" (Gibbon). A better division, and one which more accurately corresponds with the growth of Roman political institutions, gives four periods: the first, from the foundation of the city down to the laws of the Twelve Tables; the second, to the battle of Actium (beginning of the empire); the third, from the battle of Actium to the accession of Diocletian; the fourth, from Diocletian to the death of Justinian (565). The first of these four periods is that of infancy; the second, of adolescence; the third, of mature age; the fourth, of senility and decay (Ortolan; Staedtler).

286 (1) From the Foundation of Rome to the Twelve Tables

287 Our knowledge of this period is largely conjectural, from data furnished by the subsequent period. Roman history begins with pure myth and fable, then passes through a stage of blended fable and fact, and finally becomes history properly so called. The history of Roman Law has no vital interest with the petty communities and subordinate nationalities that were finally absorbed in the three ethnological elements, Latin, Sabine, and Etruscan, with which the dawn of Rome's legal history begins. Of these three elements the Etruscan was more advanced in civilization, with definite religious and political institutions (Ortolan). The only Etruscan text we have is that of the nymph Vegoia (lasa Veku), which recognizes the right of property and protects it with the wrath of the gods (Casati). It is customary to speak of certain leges in the earliest historical period as leges regiœ: whether these were real statutes enacted during the regal period or the mere formulation of customary law is disputed (Bruns, introd. note to "Leges Regiœ" in "Fontes Jur. Rom. Antiqui"). There were some well established, though crude and radical, rules of private law, such as the harsh paternal power and the equally drastic right of the creditor over his unfortunate debtor. It may safely be affirmed that during this primitive period customary law was the only law.

288 Pomponius says: "At the beginning of our city, the people began their first activities without any fixed law and without any fixed rights: all things were ruled despotically by kings" (2, ß1. D. 1. 2). In the next paragraph he speaks of the so-called leges regiœ as collected and still extant in the book of Sextus Papirius. Again, after the expulsion of the kings the people resorted to customary law. The great mass of historical facts prove that there was no private law other than custom down until this period closed with the enactment of the Twelve Tables (Stædtler). The lack of a precise definition of their rights was the principal grievance of the plebeians, and in A. U. C. 292 their tribune, Terentilius Arsa, proposed the nomination of magistrates to formulate written laws. In 303 decemvirs were appointed, and they agreed upon ten tables during the first year of their magistracy, and two additional tables the second year. The political object sought by the plebeians, namely, the fusing of both classes into one, was not attained: private rights, however, were given definite form. These laws of the Twelve Tables contained the elements from which, in process of time, the vast edifice of private law was developed.

289 (2) From the Twelve Tables to Actium

290 The law expanded rapidly and commensurately with the expansion of Rome in territory and civilization. The jurists, however, had not yet the imperium, or power of developing the law through judicial legislation. The growth of law was simply the result of interpretation of the Twelve Tables. The jurists of this period were skilled lawyers who penetrated the spirit of the law, but were not free to depart from it. The few leges passed by the people in assembly had practically little to do with private law. The Senate, which was really an administrative body, began to assume legislative powers, but this source of law was as yet unimportant. The activity of the jurisconsults in interpreting the Twelve Tables was the most conspicuous factor in the growth of private law, and their labours were designated by the same term which designated the Twelve Tables, i. e., jus civile. The Roman magistrate, however, did possess the imperium and, while at first he used it sparingly, he at length began to develop an equitable jurisdiction, giving remedies in a limited number of cases where the jus civile gave none. He proceeded cautiously and upon a rational theory, and, since he could not introduce chaos into the law by varying it in the particular case, he anticipated its defects in hypothetical cases and announced the relief which he would give. The prætor made an announcement in an edict upon assuming magistracy: he was bound by his edict, yet he did not discard the edicts of his predecessors, and in this sense the prætor's edict became an edictum perpetuum, i. e., permanent. When experience showed the value of an innovation, the prætor made it, and thus the honorary law became a developing system, modified and improved from year to year. In the course of time it became voluminous. Most of the changes wrought by the prætor were inroads (after the manner of the English chancellors), upon the harsh rigour of the Twelve Tables. The Twelve Tables were deferentially treated by the prætor, whose functions were constructive, and not destructive, yet, by reason of his imperium, he was not bound by the jus civile in the drafting of his edict. Hence the prætor had the power to engraft upon Roman law new ideas and new principles derived from the jus gentium. There were many non-citizens at Rome, and non-Roman relations were administered by a special magistrate, called the prœtor peregrinus, under a body of principles which were conceived to be common to all men. There was a naturalness and an equity in these principles in which all men were presumed to concur. This was in striking contrast with the jus civile, and the contact of legal ideas began to broaden and liberalize Roman law. This influence, however, had not yet overpowered the jus civile at the close of this second period.

291 (3) From Actium (31 B. C.) to Diocletian (died A. D. 313)

292 In this, the classic period, the science of law reached a high degree of perfection. Leges were very rare, and were usually measures of public policy to which some slight elements of private law were incidental; such were the legislative measures rewarding marriage and dealing with the emancipation of slaves (Stædtler). Senatus-consulta, on the contrary, became of increasing importance, and, whereas at first their constitutionality, so to speak, had been doubted, they were fully recognized as law. Other sources were the constitutiones principum, or imperial constitutions; these took the form of edicts, mandates, decrees, and rescripts. The edictal legislation of the magistrates (the honorary law) had become so voluminous that it was incapable of further growth; it was, moreover, out of harmony with changed positive legislation and with changed conditions. Salvius Julianus was commissioned by Hadrian to revise and edit it, and on this revision many of the jurisconsults made their commentaries ad edictum. In the literary splendour of the Augustan age the jurisconsults took high rank; their work was not only scientific, but literary, and it has been said that, had all its other monuments perished, classical Latin would have survived in the fragments of the jurisconsults of this period. Augustus granted to the most eminent in law the startling jus respondendi, i. e., the right of officially giving, in the name of the prince, opinions which were legally binding upon the judge. These responsa were in writing and were sealed before delivery to the judge. Among the celebrated jurisconsults were Capito and Labeo, founders of rival schools (2, ß 47, D. 1. 2). Others were Salvius Julianus and Sextus Pompomus, both represented by copious fragments in the Pandects. In the second century came Gaius, of whose "Institutes" those of Justinian are only a recension. In 1816 a palimpsest was discovered by Niebuhr in the library of the cathedral chapter of Verona. On it were some compositions of St. Jerome, in places superimposed on an earlier writing, which proved to be a copy of the lost "Institutes" of Gaius. Gaius himself was a contemporary of the Emperor Hadrian, but scientific research has fixed the date of this copy of his great work as a little earlier than the time of Justinian, in the sixth century.

293 In the third century lived Papinian, "the Prince of the Jurisconsults". Ulpian and Paulus also were among the greatest lawyers of the period: approximately one-sixth of the Digest is made up of fragments from Ulpian, while Paulus is represented by upwards of two thousand fragments (Staedtler). Modestinus was the last of the great series. We have in manuscript part of an elementary work by Ulpian and the Institutes of Gaius. In Justinian's Digest a very large part of the writings of the classical jurists is to be found. Most of the original treatises have perished; two thousand of these, containing three million unpunctuated and unspaced lines, were abridged to one hundred and fifty thousand lines or sentences. The originals became useless in practice, and were for the greater part soon lost. A number of classic jurists are represented in a collection of 341 fragments, discovered in the Vatican Library in the early part of the nineteenth century by Cardinal Mai, and edited by him at Rome in 1823. Another edition was published in Germany in 1828, under the title "Fragmenta Vaticana". Fragments of the classic jurists are also contained in the "Collatio Mosaicarum et Romanarum Legum", known also as the "Lex Dei", compiled in the fourth and fifth centuries. They are found also in the "Breviary of Alaric" or "Lex Romana Wisigothorum", which contains the Sentences of Paulus and the excerpts from Papinian's "Responsa". Fragments from the jurisconsults are found in the "Edictum Theodorici" or "Lex Romana Ostrogothorum" and in the "Lex Romana Burgundionum" (see below).

294 (4) From Diocletian (died 313) to Justinian (died 565)

295 The seat of an absolute monarchy was now shifted from Rome to Constantinople, and the Empire was divided into East and West. Constructive jurisprudence was a thing of the past, and the sources of law were merged in the will of the prince. The edicts of the prætorian prefect were given the same effect as the imperial constitutions, which were concerned principally with public law. Private law was vast and diversified, but it had long since ceased to have any stimulating growth. The jus civile, expanded by the ancient jurists in the interpretation, of the Twelve Tables, the honorary law of the magistrates, the public legislative acts of the early empire, the mass of imperial constitutions, and the writings of the classic jurisconsults, composed a heterogeneous jumble of legal materials from which a systematic jurisprudence was destined to arise. An attempt was made in the early fifth century to effect a workable system, and the law of citations was adopted by which the relative authority of the classic jurists was posthumously fixed by statute. Numerical weight of authority was done away with, and the great galaxy were the recognized authorities, although other jurists might be cited if approved by any of the five. Collections of imperial constitutions were made at an interval of fifty years, and published under the names of the Gregorian and Theodosian Codes respectively; the latter was republished in the "Breviary of Alaric". Something at least, had been done for the simplification of a difficult legal situation. The Eastern and Western emperors thenceforward agreed to mutually communicate their legislative designs for simultaneous publication in both empires, and these future projects were to be known as novellœ constitutiones.

296 Upon Justinian's accession there were in force two principal sources of law: the imperial constitutions and the classical jurisprudence operating under the law of citations (Staedtler). To Justinian's practical mind, the state of the law was still chaotic; the empire was poor, and it was a hardship for lawyers to possess themselves of the necessary Manuscripts. The very bulk of the law produced a situation analogous to that which exists in common-law jurisdictions to-day, and which always ushers in more or less abortive efforts towards codification. Justinian undertook to make these immense materials more accessible and more responsive to the practical needs of his empire. That, in the opinion of some, he wronged posterity by destroying the original sources, is entirely beside the mark. He has been lauded as a great lawgiver when measured by the needs of his time and situation; and, on the other hand, he has been as heartily abused and reviled for an unscientific iconoclast. The first task of the commission appointed by Justinian was to edit the imperial constitutions as a code, published under the title, "Codex Justiniani". After this the emperor directed the compilation of a complete repository of the law made up of fragments of the classical writings strung together without any too scientific arrangement. This work is the great treasury of juridical lore, and was the most valuable part of Justinian's compilation. It was called the "Digest" or "Pandects". Occasionally Tribonian, who, with two other jurists, was intrusted with the task, complacently or ignorantly modified the text. The emperor forbade commentaries and abbreviations.

297 Upon the completion of the Pandects, Justinian, always intelligently interested in legal education, ordered an abridgment of the Digest for the purposes of instruction; these are the Institutes of Justinian. The Institutes of Gaius (see above, under 3) furnished a ready model; indeed, the Institutes of Gaius and those of Justinian are even to-day the most essential first books of the law. The first draft of the Code was not in complete harmony with the Digest and the Institutes, and a revision of it became necessary; this was promulgated as the "Codex Repetitæ Prælectionis". The second edition of the code was intended to be final, and upon its publication Justinian announced that any new imperial legislation would take the form of detached constitutions to be known as "novels" (novellœ, i. e. "new"); of these he issued a large number, but two only (the 118th and 127th) have great importance for modern law.

298 The Justinian compilation is sometimes elegantly termed the Imperial Code; it is, however, more accurate to refer to it as the "Corpus Juris Civilis". It is the whole body of the civil law comprising the four books of the Institutes, the fifty books of the Digest, the twelve books of the Code, and the Novels. Early editions divide the Pandects into three parts, the Digestum vetus, the Infortiatum, and the Digestum novum. The labours of Justinian have come down to us in the form of texts of the so-called glossators during the Middle Ages. The glossators worked from earlier manuscripts and harmonized conflicting texts into a generally accepted lectio vulgata ("vulgate", or "common reading"). We have one text known as the "Florentine Pandects" which dates from the seventh century, one hundred years after Justinian. It is, however, in all probability, only one of the texts from which the glossators worked, and, when the errors of copyists are considered, its antiquity should not entitle it to overrule the vulgate. This Florentine text is the subject of legend, and the revival of the study of Roman law has been attributed to its discovery. Savigny and others have demonstrated that the revival was well under way before the discovery of this codex. The publication of a photographic reproduction of the Florentine Pandects was begun at Rome in 1902, and seven of the ten parts are already at hand.

299 In what had been the Western Empire, Justinian no longer held sway at the date of the promulgation of his laws; the subject race were, however, permitted by their barbarian conquerors to retain the pre-Justinian law as their personal law. The conquerors themselves caused to be made the several compilations known as the "Roman Barbarian Codes" (see LEX). Justinian did, however, effect the reconquest of Italy, and held it long enough to promulgate his laws. When the Ostrogoths again became masters they left the legislation of Justinian undisturbed, and it flourished in a less corrupted form than in the Eastern Empire, which was its logical field. The Roman law of Justinian superseded the barbarian codes and, with the revival, was taught in the medieval schools and thus spread all over Europe.

300 B. Subsequent Influence

301 In the Eastern Empire subsequent changes are of interest to the historian rather than to the jurist. There was a lull of nearly three centuries after the death of Justinian, until Leo the Philosopher revised the legislation and published what is known as the "Basilica". While Byzantine materials throw many side lights upon the Roman legal system, they are relatively unimportant, though they were of service to the Humanists. The Eastern law schools only (Constantinople and Berytus) were subject to Justinian at the time of his constitution on legal education, yet he speaks of Rome as a royal city and prohibits the teaching of law elsewhere than in these three cities (Ortolan). Professors of law had been active in all of his reforms: Tribonian was a professor of law and an able, but venal, jurist, whose career had much resemblance with that of Bacon. Theophilus was also a professor of law who, like Tribonian, had taken part in the work of Justinian, and he composed a paraphrase of the Institutes in Greek. A number of commentaries in Greek were produced and an abridgment of the Novels. The greater part of the Byzantine writings were from secondary sources and are abridgments, condensations, manuals, etc. Among others were the "Enchiridium" of Isaurian law, the "Prochiron" of Basil, and the revision entitled "Epanagoge"; and the revised Basilica from A. D. 906 to A. D. 911. In the composition of these collections it is highly probable that the sources were secondary and that the originals of Justinian were not directly consulted. The Basilica through its scholia or annotations grew so bulky that a synopsis of it was made, and this continued in high repute until the fall of the empire, in 1453, when the Greek legal authorities were supplanted by the Mohammedan Koran. Enough of personal law was suffered to the vanquished by the conqueror to constitute the historic element and principal basis of Greek civil law (Ortolan, Morey). Greek fugitives also carried over with them into Italy and elsewhere the relics of their law, and many manuscripts are still extant: of these the Humanist Cujas possessed a valuable library. Thus, the Greek texts, while of little value to the glossators, were yet a potent factor in the second renaissance of Roman law in the sixteenth century. This was of service to the historical and philological school, the inspirations and traditions of which are still active in modern scholarship, particularly that of Germany, where, as Montreuil wrote fifty years ago, the French school is refound in the labours of Reitz, Ruhneken, Biener, Witte, Heimbach, and Zacharia.

302 The most flourishing school of law following the first revival of Roman law was that of Bologna, towards the end of the eleventh century. Its founder was Irnerius, and he was the first of the glossators. Placentinus and Vacarius were others of the glossators. Vacarius was a Lombard, and he it was who carried the texts of Justinian to England and founded a law school at Oxford, about the middle of the twelfth century. The glossators known as the four doctors all belonged to Bologna; and that school acquired a reputation in civil law equal to that of Paris in theology and canon law. So attractive was the Roman law that the clergy had to be restrained from its study, and the study of canon law stimulated by a decretal in 1220 (Morey). The early Church had been governed by councils, synods, etc. Collections had been made in the fifth and sixth centuries, but it was only in the ninth century that a real collection of ecclesiastical legal documents was made. There began to be collections of decrees of the popes, and the revival of Roman law at Bologna in the twelfth century gave impetus to a systematic canon law. About 1130 Gratian, a Benedictine monk, made the compilation which developed into the "Corpus Juris Canonici". The external similarity of this compilation to the "Corpus Juris Civilis" is thus given by Duck: "The Roman pontiffs effected that in the Church which Justinian effected in the Roman Empire. They caused Gratian's Decree to be published in imitation of the Pandects; the Decretals in imitation of the Code; the Clementine Constitutions and the Extravagantes in imitation of the Novels; and to complete the work Paul IV ordered Launcellot to prepare Institutes which were published at Rome under Gregory XIII, and added to the Corpus Juris Canonici." (In qualification of this, see CORPUS JURIS CANONICI.)

303 To return to the Roman law, the school of the glossators (of whom Accursius in the middle of the thirteenth century was the last) was succeeded by the school of which Bartolus of Sasso Ferrato and Alciat were representatives. From 1340 the Bartolists flourished for two hundred and fifty years, to be succeeded in turn by the Humanist school, of which Cujas was the chief ornament. Until the sixteenth century Roman law was most cultivated in Italy; its glory then passed to France, and, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, though there were conspicuous Dutch jurists of great ability in the application of the law, it may fairly be said to belong to Germany during that period. France, Italy, Belgium, and even England, however, are awakening in the dawn of the twentieth century.

304 The survival of Roman-law principles was in great measure due to the principle of personality. The Roman-Greek law ha not been entirely supplanted by the Koran in the Moslem states, such as Egypt and Syria (Amos). In modern Egypt there has been a reaffirmation of many Roman principles in the Civil Code proposed by the international commission which "harmonized the rules of Arabic jurisprudence which were not repugnant to European legislation, with the chief provisions of the Code Napoleon". An interesting Syrian text has been edited by Bruns (Syrisch-Romisches Rechtsbuch aus dem 15. Jahrhundert). This principle of personality permitted by the kings of the Visigoths, Ostrogoths, and Burgundians sufficed to keep alive the Roman law in the West. Except as to the municipalities, the Roman political system had been destroyed. The concession of personal law to Roman subjects and the influence of the clergy, who always preferred to claim the civil law, was a barrier "between Roman civilization and barbarism" (Morey). In the military tenures of feudalism, it has been attempted to trace the idea of two distinct ownerships, the dominium eminens and the dominium vulgare, to the Roman contract of emphyteusis. A collection of feudal law known as the "Consuetudines Feudorum" is contained as a kind of appendix in most editions of the "Corpus". In the Amsterdam edition of 1681, is the note after the second book: "Hic est finis Feudorum in editione vulgata" (End of the feudal constitutions in the vulgate edition). The third book is missing; fragments of the fourth are given, as well as parts of a fifth book, reconstructed by Cujas. In feudalism the institutions of Roman law and Germanic customs became merged; the impress of the former upon the latter was not simply one of terminology; with the terminology was much of interpretation and illuminating principle. It would be rash to assert that feudalism owed more to Roman public law than to theories and analogies drawn from the private law of Rome. Charlemagne favoured the civil-law ideas which savoured of imperialism, and adopted Roman methods of administration. The German emperors also found in Roman legal institutions a plausible support for their claim to the imperial power. The predominant influence in the survival of Roman private law in all the countries of central and southern Europe was that of the clergy. In all national codes there is present a large quantity of customary law; yet, in concept and in classification, all of the civil codes are Roman through and through, and this is as true of the German civil code (and, in part, of the Japanese code) as of those other national codes which trace their immediate parentage to the Code Napoléon and their remote ancestry to the Twelve Tables.

305 England, from a purely external point of view, is less indebted to the Roman system, but the jurist trained in both systems is at no pains to discover analogies and runs upon evidence of the common law's indebtedness at every step. Anglo-Saxon legal institutions have been jealously and persistently represented as in no wise beholden to Rome. This is to be accounted for in part by a peculiarity in the manner of administration of the common law. With its narrow tradition and its abject rule of stare decisis, it has offered until recently, at least, an unattractive field for historical jurisprudence. The courts and lawyers of the common law have always been intensely practical and have accepted their system, not only as purely indigenous, but also, in the words of the Blackstonian tradition, as "the perfection of reason". For four centuries after Cæsar's conquest Roman law held sway in Britain; her soil was trodden by the great Papinian himself, and possibly by others of the immortal five (Morey). There must indeed have remained in Britain a substantial deposit of Roman law, and it is not to be affirmed that this was completely destroyed by subsequent invasions or by the conquest. The earliest English treatises are for the most part transcriptions of Roman law: such was the book of Bracton (Güterboch). The Roman law was historically in the early English law of persons, of property, of contracts, and of procedure, although not always with equal obviousness. While it had little in common with the law of real property, we are fairly justified in maintaining that Roman law has always continued a substantial ingredient in English law, from the Roman occupation down to the time when we can cite specific decisions in which Roman law principles were engrafted in the chancery law of England. In respect to admiralty, chancery, and ecclesiastical law there has never been, nor could there well be, any disposition to withhold acknowledgment to Rome. The practice is quite common of referring to the chancellor as the prætor. This indebtedness, so begrudgingly acknowledged by many early English jurists in a mistaken sense of national pride, is now frankly admitted by all who lay claim to a knowledge of both Civil and Common law.

306 A complete bibliography of Roman Law is precluded by the space allotted to this article. A list (by no means exhaustive) of the more modern authoritative civilians, whose works are found on the shelves of a good American collection gives some idea of the wealth of this literature: -

307 AMOS; ARNDDTS; ACCARIAS; BARON; BERNARD; BONFANTE; BÖCKING; BRINI; BRINZ; BRUNS; CLARK; COLQUHOUN; CONRAT (COHN); CORNIL; COSTA; COULANGES; CUQ: DE MANGEAT; DERNBERG; DEURER; DU CAURROY; DIRKSEN; ESMARCH; ESMEIN; FADDA; FERRINI; FLACK; FITTING; FRESQUET; GIRARD; GLUCK; GÜTERBOCH; HÄNEL; HALLIFAX; HAUBOLD; HEIMBACH; HERZOG; HUNTER; HUSCHKE; IHNE; IHRING; JACQUELIN; JOBBÉ-DUVAL; JORS; LENEL; MACKELDEY; MACKENZIE; MAREZOLL; MARQUART; MOLITOR; MOMMSEN; MÜHLENBRUCK; MONTREUIL; ORTOLAN; PHILLIMORE; POSTE; PUCHTA; ROBY; SANDARS; SAVIGNY; SCHEURL; SCHMIDT; SCHULTING; STAEDTLER; VOIGT; WACHTER; WALKER; WALTER; WARNKÖNIG; WINDSCHIED; VANGEROW; VERING; ZACHARIA.

308 The writer of this article acknowledges special indebtedness in its preparation to STAEDTLER, Cours de Droit Romain (Louvain and Paris, 1902); and to Manuscript notes on lectures by PROF. STAEDTLER.

309 HEINECCIUS, Elementa Juris Civilis (Göttingen, 1787); MÜHLENBRUCH, Doctrina Pandectarum (Halle, 1839); SOHM, Inst. of Rom. Law, tr. LEDLIE (Oxford, 1901); MOREY, Outlines of Rom. Law (New York, 1893); CHAMIER, Manual of Rom. Law (London, 1893); HOWE, Studies in the Civil Law (Boston, 1896); MOYLE, Inst. of Just. (Oxford, 1883); VON SAVIGNY, Geschichte des römischen Rechts im Mittelalter (Heidelberg, 1822); ORTOLAN, Hist. of Rom. Law, tr. CUTLER (London 1896); AMOS, Hist. and Principles of Rom. Law (London, 1883).

310 Important fac-simile reproductions of original texts are the photographic copies of the Manuscript of the Florentine Pandects (Rome, 1902) and of the Manuscript of GAIUS, Institutes (Leipzig, 1909). Among the approved texts are the following:

311 (a) Pre-Justinian; GAIUS, tr. by MEARS (London, 1883), by POSTE (Oxford, 1875), and by TOMPKINS AND LEMON (London, 1869); Jus Civile Antejustinianeum (Berlin, 1815); Flores Juris Romani Antejustinianei (Paris, 1839); Corpus Juris Antejustinianei (Bonn, 1841); Fontes Juris Romani Antigui (Leipzig, 1893).

312 (b) The Justinian texts: The Institutes in English by MOYLE, SANDARS, COOPER, etc., The Digest, of which two vols. in English, by PROF. MONRO, of Cambridge, have appeared (his untimely death leaves the completion to another); The Digest has been tr. into German, French, and Spanish; Corpus Juris Civilis, of which the standard Latin text is the German ed. (Berlin, 1904-08) (Institutes by KRUEGER, Digest by MOMMSEN, Code by KRUEGER, and Novels by SCHOELL but completed after the latter's death, by KROLL). Recently Italian scholars, under the leadership of BONFANTE, have produced a similar critical text the first part of which appeared in 1908.

313 (c) Roman Barbarian texts: Edictum Theorodici, or Lex Romana Ostrogothorum and Lex Romana Burgundionum are given in BLUHME, Monumenta (Hanover, 1875); Lex Romana Wisigothorum, or Breviary of Alaric has been edited by HÄNEL (Leipzig, 1849) and more recently in Spain.

314 (d) Byzantine texts: Paraphrasis Theophili (Amsterdam, 1860); BASILICA, ed. HEIMBACH (Leipzig, 1833-1870); HAUBOLD, Manuale Basilicorum (Leipzig, 1819).

315 Joseph I. Kelly

St. Lawrence (2)

190 Martyr; died 10 August, 258.

191 St. Lawrence, one of the deacons of the Roman Church, was one of the victims of the persecution of Valerian in 258, like Pope Sixtus II and many other members of the Roman clergy. At the beginning of the month of August, 258, the emperor issued an edict, commanding that all bishops, priests, and deacons should immediately be put to death ("episcopi et presbyteriet diacones incontinenti animadvertantur" — Cyprian, Epist. lxxx, 1). This imperial command was immediately carried out in Rome. On 6 August Pope Sixtus II was apprehended in one of the catacombs, and executed forthwith ("Xistum in cimiterio animadversum sciatis VIII id. Augusti et cum eo diacones quattuor." Cyprian, ep. lxxx, 1). Two other deacons, Felicissimus and Agapitus, were put to death the same day. In the Roman Calendar of feasts of the fourth century their feast day is on the same date. Four days later, on the 10th of August of that same year, Lawrence, the last of the seven deacons, also suffered a martyr's death. The anniversary of this holy martyr falls on that day, according to the Almanac of Philocalus for the year 354, the inventory of which contains the principal feasts of the Roman martyrs of the middle of the fourth century; it also mentions the street where his grave is to be found, the Via Tiburtina ("III id. Aug. Laurentii in Tibertina"; Ruinart, "Acta sincera", Ratisbon, 1859, 632). The itineraries of the graves of the Roman martyrs, as given in the seventh century, mention the burial-place of this celebrated martyr in the Catacomb of Cyriaca in agro Verano (De Rossi, "Roma Sott.", I, 178).

192 Since the fourth century St. Lawrence has been one of the most honoured martyrs of the Roman Church. Constantine the Great was the first to erect a little oratory over his burial-place, which was enlarged and beautified by Pope Pelagius II (579-90). Pope Pope Sixtus III (432-40) built a large basilica with three naves, the apse leaning against the older church, on the summit of the hill where he was buried. In the thirteenth century Honorius III made the two buildings into one, and so the basilica of San Lorenzo remains to this day. Pope St. Damasus (366-84) wrote a panegyric in verse, which was engraved in marble and placed over his tomb. Two contemporaries of the last-named pope, St. Ambrose of Milan and the poet Prudentius, give particular details about St. Lawrence's death. Ambrose relates (De officiis min. xxviii) that when St. Lawrence was asked for the treasures of the Church he brought forward the poor, among whom he had divided the treasure, in place of alms; also that when Pope Sixtus II was led away to his death he comforted Lawrence, who wished to share his martyrdom, by saying that he would follow him in three days. The saintly Bishop of Milan also states that St. Lawrence was burned to death on a gird-iron (De offic., xli). In like manner, but with more poetical detail, Prudentius describes the martyrdom of the Roman deacon in his hymn on St. Lawrence ("Peristephanon", Hymnus II).

193 The meeting between St. Lawrence and Pope Sixtus II, when the latter was being led to execution, related by St. Ambrose, is not compatible with the contemporaneous reports about the persecution of Velarian. The manner of his execution—burning on a red-hot gridiron—also gives rise to grave doubts. The narrations of Ambrose and Prudentius are founded rather on oral tradition than on written accounts. It is quite possible that between the year 258 and the end of the fourth century popular legends may have grown up about this highly venerated Roman deacon, and some of these legends have been preserved by these two authors. We have, in any case, no means of verifying from earlier sources the details derived from St. Ambrose and Prudentius, or of ascertaining to what extent such details are supported by earlier historical tradition. Fuller accounts of the martyrdom of St. Lawrence were composed, probably, early in the sixth century, and in these narratives a number of the martyrs of the Via Tiburtina and of the two Catacombs of St. Cyriaca in agro Verano and St. Hippolytius were connected in a romantic and wholly legendary fashion. The details given in these Acts concerning the martyrdom of St. Lawrence and his activity before his death cannot claim any credibility. However, in spite of this criticism of the later accounts of the martyrdom, there can be no question that St. Lawrence was a real historical personage, nor any doubt as to the martyrdom of that venerated Roman deacon, the place of its occurrence, and the date of his burial. Pope Damasus built a basilica in Rome which he dedicated to St. Lawrence; this is the church now known as that of San Lorenzo in Damaso. The church of San Lorenzo in Lucina, also dedicated to this saint, still exists. The feast day of St. Lawrence is kept on 10 August. He is pictured in art with the gridiron on which he is supposed to have been roasted to death.

194 J.P. Kirsch

St. Lawrence (1)

193 Second Archbishop of Canterbury, d. 2 Feb., 619. For the particulars of his life and pontificate we rely exclusively on details added by medieval writers being unsupported by historical evidence, though they may possibly embody ancient traditions. According to St. Bede, he was one of the original missionaries who left Rome with St. Augustine in 595 and finally landed in Thanet in 597. After St. Augustine had been consecrated he sent St. Lawrence back to Rome, to carry to the pope the news of the conversion of King Ethelbert and his people, to announce his consecration, and to ask for direction on certain questions. In this passage of the historian St. Lawrence is referred to as presbyter, in distinction to Peter who is called monachus. From this it has been conjectured that he was a secular priest and not a monk; but this conclusion has been questioned by Benedictine writers such as Elmham in the Middle Ages and Mabillon in later times. When St. Gregory had decided the questions asked, St. Lawrence returned to Britain bearing the replies, and he remained with St. Augustine sharing his work. That saint, shortly before his death which probably took place in 604, consecrated St. Lawrence as bishop, lest the infant Church should be left for a time without a pastor. Of the new archbishop's episcopate Bede writes: "Lawrence, having attained the dignity of archbishop, strove most vigorously to add to the foundations of the Church which he had seen so nobly laid and to forward the work by frequent words of holy exhortation and by the constant example of his devoted labour." The only extant genuine document relating to him is the fragment preserved by Bede of the letter he addressed to the Celtic bishops exhorting them to peace and unity with Rome. The death of King Ethelbert, in 616 was followed by a heathen reaction under his son Eadbald, and under the sons of Sebert who became kings of the East Saxons. Saints Mellitus and Justus, bishops of the newly-founded Sees of London and Rochester, took refuge with St. Lawrence at Canterbury and urged him to fly to Gaul with them. They departed, and he, discouraged by the undoing of St. Augustine's work, was preparing to follow them, when St. Peter appeared to him in a vision, blaming him for thinking of leaving his flock and inflicting stripes upon him. In the morning he hastened to the king, exhibiting his wounded body and relating his vision. This led to the conversion of the king, to the recall of Saints Mellitus and Justus, and to their perseverance in their work of evangelizing Kent and the neighbouring provinces. These events occurred about 617 or 618, and shortly afterwards St. Lawrence died and was buried near St. Augustine in the north porch of St. Peter's Abbey church, afterwards known as St. Augustine's. His festival is observed in England on 3 February.

194 Bede, Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Anglorum, I, xxvii; Ii, iv-vii; Elmham, Historia Monasterii S. Augustini in Rolls Series (London, 1858); Acta SS. Boland., February, I; Hardy, Descriptive Catalogue (London, 1862-71), giving a list of MS. lives; Haddan and Stubbs, Ecclesiastical Documents I (London, 1869), ii; Stubbs in Dict. Christ. Biog., s. v. Laurentius (25); Hunt in Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v. Lawrence.

195 Edwin Burton

St. Lawrence Justinian

196 Bishop and first Patriarch of Venice, b. in 1381, and d. 8 January, 1456. He was a descendant of the Giustiniani, a Venetian patrician family which numbered several saints among its members. Lawrence's pious mother sowed the seeds of a devout religious life in the boy's youth. In 1400 when he was about nineteen years old, he entered the monastery of the Canons Regular of St. Augustine on the Island of Alga near Venice. In spite of his youth he excited admiration by his poverty, mortifications, and fervour in prayer. At that time the convent was changed into a congregation of secular canons living in community. After his ordination in 1406 Lawrence was chosen prior of the community, and shortly after that general of the congregation. He gave them their constitution, and was so zealous in spreading the same that he was looked upon as the founder. His reputation for saintliness as well as his zeal for souls attracted the notice of Eugene IV and on 12 May, 1433, he was raised to the Bishopric of Castello. The new prelate restored churches, established new parishes in Venice, aided the foundation of convents, and reformed the life of the canons. But above all he was noted for his Christian charity and his unbounded liberality. All the money he could raise he bestowed upon the poor, while he himself led a life of simplicity and poverty. He was greatly respected both in Italy and elsewhere by the dignitaries of both Church and State. He tried to foster the religious life by his sermons as well as by his writings. The Diocese of Castello belonged to the Patriarchate of Grado. On 8 October, 1451, Nicholas V united the See of Castello with the Patriarchate of Grado, and the see of the patriarch was transferred to Venice, and Lawrence was named the first Patriarch of Venice, and exercised his office till his death somewhat more than four years later. His beatification was ratified by Clement VII in 1524, and he was canonized in 1690 by Alexander VIII. Innocent XII appointed 5 September for the celebration of his feast. The saint's ascetical writings have often been published, first in Brescia in 1506, later in Paris in 1524, and in Basle in 1560, etc. We are indebted to his nephew, Bernardo Giustiniani, for his biography.

197 BERNARDUS JUSTINIANUS, Opusculum de vita beati Laurentii Justiniani (Venice, 1574); SURIUS, De vitis sanctorum, ed. 1618, I, 126-35; Acta SS., January, I, 551-63; Bibliotheca hagiographica latina, ed. BOLLANDISTS, II, 1708; Bullarium Romanum, ed. TAURIN., V, 107 sqq.; EUBEL, Hierarchia catholica medii aevi, II, 134-290; ROSA, Summorum Pontificum, illustrium virorum . . . de b. Laurentii Justiniani vita, sanctitate ac miraculis testimoniorum centuria (Venice, 1614); BUTLER, Lives of the Saints, III (Baltimore, 1844), 416-422; REGAZZI, Note storiche edite ed inedite di S. Lorenzo Giustiniani (Venice, 1856); CUCITO, S. Lorenzo Giustiniani, primo patriarca di Venezia (Venice, 1895).

198 J.P. Kirsch

St. Lawrence O'Toole

199 (Lorcan ua Tuathail; also spelled Laurence O'Toole)

200 Confessor, born about 1128, in the present County Kildare; died 14 November, 1180, at Eu in Normandy; canonized in 1225 by Honorius III.

201 His father was chief of Hy Murray, and his mother one of the Clan O'Byrne. At the age of ten he was taken as a hostage by Dermot McMurrogh, King of Leinster. In 1140 the boy obtained permission to enter the monastic school of Glendalough; in that valley-sanctuary he studied for thirteen years, conspicuous for his piety and learning. So great was his reputation in the eyes of the community that on the death of Abbot Dunlaing, early in 1154, he was unanimously called to preside over the Abbey of St. Kevin. Dermot, King of Leinster, married Mor, sister of St. Lawrence, and, though his character has been painted in dark colours by the native annalists, he was a great friend to the Church. He founded an Austin nunnery, of the reform of Aroaise, in Dublin, with two dependent cells at Kilculliheen (County Kilkenny) and at Aghade (County Carlow), in 1151. He also founded an abbey for Cistercian monks at Baltinglass, and an abbey for Austin canons at Ferns.

202 St. Lawrence, through humility, declined the See of Glendalough in 1160, but on the death of Gregory, Archbishop of Dublin (8 October, 1161), he was chosen to the vacant see, and was consecrated in Christ Church cathedral by Gilla Isu (Gelasius), Primate of Armagh, early in the following year. This appointment of a native-born Irishman and his consecration by the successor of St. Patrick marks the passing of Scandinavian supremacy in the Irish capital, and the emancipation from canonical obedience to Canterbury which had obtained under the Danish bishops of Dublin. St. Lawrence soon set himself to effect numerous reforms, commencing by converting the secular canons of Christ Church cathedral into Aroasian canons (1163). Three years later he subscribed to the foundation charter of All Hallows priory, Dublin (founded by King Dermot), for the same order of Austin canons. Not content with the strictest observance of rules, he wore a hair shirt underneath his episcopal dress, and practised the greatest austerity, retiring for an annual retreat of forty days to St. Kevin's cave, near Glendalough. At the second siege of Dublin (1170) St. Lawrence was active in ministration, and he showed his political foresight by paying due deference to Henry II of England, during that monarch's stay in Dublin. In April, 1178, he entertained the papal legate, Cardinal Vivian, who presided at the Synod of Dublin. He successfully negotiated the Treaty of Windsor, and secured good terms for Roderic, King of Connacht. He attended the Lateran Council in 1179, and returned as legate for Ireland. The holy prelate was not long in Dublin till he deemed it necessary again to visit King Henry II (impelled by a burning charity in the cause of King Roderic), and he crossed to England in September of that year. After three weeks of detention at Abingdon Abbey, St. Lawrence followed the English King to Normandy. Taken ill at the Augustinian Abbey of Eu, he was tended by Abbot Osbert and the canons of St. Victor; before he breathed his last he had the consolation of learning that King Henry had acceded to his request.

203 W. H. Grattan-Flood.

Lay Abbot

202 (abbatocomes, abbas laicus, abbas miles).

203 A name used to designate a layman on whom a king or someone in authority bestowed an abbey as a reward for services rendered; he had charge of the estate be longing to it, and was entitled to part of the income. This baneful custom had a bad effect upon the life of the cloister. It existed principally in the Frankish Empire from the eighth century till the ecclesiastical reforms of the eleventh. Charles Martel (q.v.) was the first to bestow extensive ecclesiastical property upon laymen, political friends, and warriors who had helped him in his campaigns. At an earlier period the French Merovingians had bestowed church lands on laymen, or at least allowed them their possession and use, though not ownership. Numerous synods held in France in the sixth and seventh cen turies passed decrees against this abuse of church property. The French kings were also in the habit of appointing abbots to monasteries which they had founded; moreover, many monasteries, though not founded by the king, placed themselves under royal patronage in order to share his protection, and so be came possessions of the Crown. This custom of the Merovingian rulers of disposing of church property in individual cases, as also that of appointing abbots to monasteries founded by or belonging to themselves, was taken as a precedent by the French kings for rewarding laymen with abbeys, or giving them to bishops in commendam. Under Charles Martel the Church was greatly injured by this abuse, not only in her pos sessions, but also in her religious life. St. Boniface and later Hincmar of Reims picture most dismally the consequent downfall of church discipline, and though St. Boniface tried zealously and even successfully to reform the Frankish Church, the bestowal of abbeys on secular abbots was not entirely abolished, Under Pepin the monks were permitted, in case their abbey should fall into secular hands, to go over to an other community.

204 Charlemagne also frequently gave church property, and sometimes abbeys, in feudal tenure. It is true that Louis the Pious aided St. Benedict of Aniane in his endeavours to reform the monastic life. In order to accomplish this it was necessary to restore the free election of abbots, and the appointment as well of blameless monks as heads of the monastic houses. Although Emperor Louis shared these principles, he continued to bestow abbeys on laymen, and his sons imitated him. The important Abbey of St. Riquier (Centula) in Picardy had secular abbots from the time of Charlemagne, who had given it to his friend Angilbert, the poet and the lover of his daughter Ber tha, and father of her two sons (see ANGILBERT, SAINT). After Angilbert's death in 814, the abbey was given to other laymen. Under such influences the Church was bound to suffer; frequently the abbeys were scenes of worldliness and revelry. Various syn ods of the ninth century passed decrees against this custom; the Synod of Diedenhofen (October, 844) de creed in its third canon, that abbeys should no longer remain in the power of laymen, but that monks should be their abbots (Hefele, "Konziliengeschichte", 2nd ed., IV, 110). In like manner the Synods of Meaux and Paris (845-846) complained that the monasteries held by laymen had fallen into decay, and emphasized the king's duty in this respect (op. cit., IV, 115). But abbeys continued to be bestowed upon laymen espe cially in France and Lorraine, e.g. St. Evre near Toul, in the reign of Lothaire I. Lothaire II, however, restored it to ecclesiastical control in 858, but the same king gave Bonmoutier to a layman; and the Abbeys of St. Germain and St. Martin, in the Diocese of Toul, were also given to secular abbots. In the Dio cese of Metz, the Abbey of Gorze was long in the hands of laymen, and under them fell into decay. Stavelot and Malmédy, in the Diocese of Liège, were in the eleventh century bestowed on a certain Count Ragin arius, as also St. Maximin near Trier on a Count Adal hard, etc. (Hauck, "Kirchengeschichte Deutschland", II, 598). In 888 a Synod of Mainz decreed (can. xxv) that the secular abbots should place able provosts and provisors over their monasteries.

205 Councils, however, were unable to put an end to the evil; in a synod held at Trosly, in the Diocese of Soissons, in 909, sharp complaints were made (ch. iii) about the lives of monks; many convents, it was said, were governed by laymen, whose wives and children, soldiers and dogs, were housed in the precincts of the religious. To better these conditions it was neces sary, the synod declared, to restore the regulur abbots and abbesses; at the same time ecclesiastical canons and royal capitularies declared laymen quite devoid of authority in church affairs (Hefele, op. cit., IV, 572-73). Lay abbots existed in the tenth century, also in the eleventh. Gosfred, Duke of Aquitaine, was Abbot of the monastery of St. Hilary at Poitiers, and as such he published the decrees issued (1078) at the Synod of Poitiers (Hefele, op. cit., V, 116). It was only through the so-called investitures conflict that the Church was freed from secular domination; the reform of religious and ecclesiastical life brought about by the papacy, put an end to the bestowal of abbeys upon laymen.

206 THOMASSINUS, Vetus et nova ecclesiæ disciplina circa beneficia, part II, lib. II, c. 12 sqq. (Lyons, 1705, 586-622); Hefele, History of the Councils; Digby, Ages of Faith; FOSTER, British Monasticism; LINGARD, History of England (Dublin, 1878); D'Alton, History of Ireland; STUART AND COLEMAN, History of the Diocese of Armagh.

207 J.P. Kirsch

Lay Brothers

205 Religious occupied solely with manual labour and with the secular affairs of a monastery or friary. They have been known, in various places and at various times, as fratres conversi, laici barbati, illiterati, or idiotæ, and, though members of their respective orders, are entirely distinct from the choir monks or brothers, who are devoted mainly to the opus Dei and to study.

206 There is some dispute as to the origin of lay brothers. They are first heard of in the eleventh century, and are stated by Mabillon to have been first instituted by St. John Gualbert at Vallombrosa, about 1038. But, though the name conversi is first applied to religious of this kind in the life of St. John Gualbert, written by the Bl. Andrea Strumensis about the end of the eleventh century, it seems certain they were instituted before the founding of Vallombrosa. St. Peter Damian indicates that servants who were also religious were set apart to perform the manual labour at Fonte Avellana, which was founded about the year 1000, while, at the monastery of Fonte Buono, at Camaldoli, founded about 1012, there were certainly brethren who were distinct from the choir monks, and were devoted entirely to the secular needs of the house.

207 In early Western monasticism no such distinction existed. The majority of St. Benedict's monks were not clerics, and all performed manual labour, the word conversi being used only to designate those who had received the habit late in life, to distinguish them from the oblati and nutriti. But by the beginning of the eleventh century the time devoted to study had greatly increased, a larger proportion of the monks were in Holy orders, while great numbers of illiterate persons embraced the religious life. At the same time it was found necessary to regulate the position of the famuli, the hired servants of the monastery, and to include some of these in the monastic family. So in Italy the lay brothers were instituted; and we find similar attempts at organization at the abbey of St. Benignus, at Dijon, under William of Dijon (d. 1031) and Richard of Verdun (d. 1046), while at Hirschau the Abbot William (d. 1091) gave a special rule to the fratres barbati and exteriores. At Cluny the manual work was relegated mostly to paid servants, but the Carthusians, the Cistercians, the Order of Grandmont, and most subsequent religious orders possessed lay brothers, to whom they committed their secular cares. At Grandmont, indeed, the complete control of the order's property by the lay brothers led to serious disturbances, and finally to the ruin of the order; but the wiser regulations of the Cistercians provided against this danger and have formed the model for the later orders. The English Black Monks have made but slight use of lay brothers, finding the service of paid attendants more convenient; but Father Taunton was mistaken in his assertion that "in those days in English Benedictine monasteries there were no lay brothers", for they are mentioned in the customaries of St. Augustine's at Canterbury and St. Peter's at Westminster.

208 Lay brothers are now to be found in most of the religious orders. They are mostly pious and laborious persons, usually drawn from the working classes of the community, who, while unable to attain to the degree of learning requisite for Holy orders, are yet drawn to the religious life and able to contribute by their toil to the prosperity of the house or order of their vocation. Not seldom they are skilled in artistic handicrafts, sometimes they are efficient administrators of temporal possessions, always they are able to perform domestic services or to follow agricultural pursuits. The Cistercians, especially their lay brethren, are famous for their skill in agriculture, and many a now fertile spot owes its productiveness to their unremitting labour in modern as well as in medieval times.

209 Lay brothers are usually distinguished from the their brethren by some difference in their habit: for instance, the Cistercian lay brother wears a brown habit, instead of white, with a black scapular; in choir they wear a large cloak instead of a cowl; the Vallombrosan lay brothers wore a cap instead of a hood, and their habit was shorter; the English Benedictine lay brothers wear a hood of a different shape from that of the choir monks, and no cowl; a Dominican lay brother wears a black, instead of a white, scapular. In some orders they are required to recite daily the Little Office of Our Lady, but usually their office consists of a certain number of Paters, Aves, and Glorias. Wherever they are found in considerable numbers they possess their own quarters in the monastery; the domus conversorum is still noticeable in many of the ruins of English monasteries.

210 Lay sisters are to be found in most of the orders of women, and their origin, like that of the lay brothers, is to be found in the necessity at once of providing the choir nuns with more time for the Office and study, and of enabling the unlearned to embrace the religious life. They, too, are distinguished by their different habit from the choir sisters, and their Office consists of the Little Office of Our Lady or a certain number of Paters, etc. They seem to have been instituted earlier than the lay brothers, being first mentioned in a life of St. Denis written in the ninth century. In the early medieval period we even hear of lay brothers attached to convents of women and of lay sisters attached to monasteries. In each case, of course the two sexes occupied distinct buildings. This curious arrangement has long been abolished.

211 BESSE, Le Moine Benedictine(Ligug , 1898), 190-1; GR TZ- MACHER in HERZOG U. HAUCK, Realencyklop die (Leipzig, 1903), s.v. Monchtum; HEIMBUCHER, Die Orden u. Kongregationen. der katholischen Kirche, I (Paderborn, 1907), 268- 71; H LYOT, Dictionnaire des Ordres Rel igieux (Paris, 1863),s. v. Hirsauge; HERGOTT, Vetus Disciplina Monastica (Paris, 1726); HOFF MAN, Das Konversen-Institut des Cistercienserordens in seinem Ursprung und seiner Organisation (Freiburg, 1905); MABILLON, Acta Sanctorum O.S.B. (Venice, 1732-40), s c. III (I). v-ix; saec. VI (II), xl-xli, 281, 733; MABILLON, Annales O.S.B., IV (Lucca,. 1739), 411; MART NE, De antiquis Monachorum ritibus (Lyons, 1690); MART NE AND DURAND, Thesaurus Novus Anecdotorurn (Paris, 1617), IV, 1547-1652; MITTARELLI AND COSTADONI Annales Camaldulenses O.S.B., I (Venice, 1755; App., 336-457; THOMPSON, Customary of the Benedictine Monasteries of St. Augustine, Canterbury, and St. Peter, Westminster, ed. HENRY BRADSHAW SOCIETY (London, 1902-4); Z CKLER, Askese und Monchtum, 403, 405, 407.

212 Leslie A. St. L. Toke

Lay Communion

208 The primitive discipline of the Church established a different punishment for certain crimes according as they were committed by laymen or clerics. The former entailed a shorter and ordinarily lighter penance than the latter, which were punished with a special penalty. The layman was excluded from the community of the faithful, the cleric was excluded from the hierarchy and reduced to the lay communion, that is to say, he was forbidden to exercise his functions. The nature of the latter punishment is not quite certain. According to one opinion, it consisted in excommunication, together with a prohibition to receive the Blessed Eucharist; according to another, the penitent was allowed to receive Holy Communion but only with the laity. Canon xv of the so-called Apostolical Canons (see CANONS, APOSTOLIC) forbids any priest, residing outside his diocese without authorization, to celebrate the Holy Sacrifice, but grants him permission to receive the Eucharist along with the faithful. The canon lxii ordained that clerics who apostatized during the persecutions were to be received among the laity. In 251, a letter of Pope Cornelius to Fabius, Bishop of Antioch, informs us that the pope, in presence of all the people received into his communion, but as a layman, one of the bishops guilty of having conferred sacerdotal ordination on the heretic Novatian. A letter of St. Cyprian of Carthage mentions a certain Trophimus, who was admitted to communion among the laity. It would be easy to mention similar cases, in which we find it stated that the penitent was admitted to receive communion among the laity. The Council of Elvira (c. 300) which reveals to us in many ways the religious life of an entire ecclesiastical province, in canon lxxvi, àpropos of a deacon, mentions the same discipline. This is the most ancient canonical text that speaks of the custom of lay communion. We do not cite the Council of Cologne (346) since its authenticity may yet be questioned. But from that time forward we find, in a series of councils, declarations which show conclusively that, when lay communion is mentioned, there is question of the reception of the Blessed Eucharist. Besides the Council of Sardica, those of Hippo (303), canon xli; Toledo (400), canon iv; Rome (487) canon ii, are too explicit to admit of any doubt that we have here an established discipline. We may also cite the Councils of Agde (506), canon 1; Lerida (524), canon v; Orléans (538), canon ii; etc.

209 Speaking generally, the expression "lay communion" does not necessarily imply the idea of the Eucharist, but only the condition of a layman in communion with the Church. But as the Eucharist was granted only to those in communion with the Church, to say that a cleric was admitted to the lay communion is equivalent to saying that he received the Holy Eucharist. The person who passed from the condition of a penitent to the lay communion, had necessarily to be received by the bishop into the bosom of the Church, before being admitted to communion. There are no grounds for supposing that this transition implied an intermediate stage in which he who was admitted to the communion was deprived of the Blessed Eucharist. This discipline applied not only to those who were guilty of a secret sin, but also to those who had for some time belonged to an heretical sect. But there was no absolute rule, since the Council of Nicæa (325) received back the Novatian clergy without imposing this penalty on them, while we see it enforced in the case of the Donatists. In modern times lay communion is sometimes imposed, but only in exceptional cases, which need not be treated of here.

210 SCUDAMORE in Dict. Christ. Antiq., s.v.

211 H. Leclercq

Lay Confession

211 This article does not deal with confession by laymen but with that made to laymen, for the purpose of obtaining the remission of sins by God. It has no practical importance, and is treated merely from an historical point of view.

212 It is found under two forms: first, confession without relation to the sacrament, second, confession intended to supply for the sacrament in case of necessity. In the first instance, it consists of confession of venial sins or daily faults which need not necessarily be submitted to the power of the keys; in the second, it has to do with the confession of even grievous sins which should be declared to a priest, but which are confessed to a layman because there is no priest at hand and the case is urgent. In both cases the end sought is the merit of humiliation which is inseparable from freely performed confession; but in the first no administration of the sacrament, in any degree, is sought; in the second, on the contrary, sacramental confession is made to a layman for want of a priest. Theologians and canonists in dealing with this subject usually have two historical texts a basis. The optional and meritorious confession of slight faults to any Christian is set forth in Venerable Bede's "Commentary on the Epistle of St. James": "Confess your sins one to another" (Confitemini alterutrum peccata vestra). "It should be done", says the holy doctor, "with discernment; we should confess our daily and slight faults mutually to our equals, and believe that we are saved by their daily prayer. As for more grievous leprosy (mortal sin), we should, according to the law, discover its impurity to the priest, and according to his judgement carefully purify ourselves in the manner and time he shall fix" (In Ep. Jacob, c.v; P.L., XCIII, 39). Clearly Bede did not consider such mutual avowal a sacramental confession; he had in mind the monastic confession of faults. In the eleventh century Lanfranc sets forth the same theory, but distinguishes between public sins and hidden faults; the first he reserves "to priest, by whom the Church binds and looses:, and authorizes the avowal of the second to all members of the ecclesiastical hierarchy, and in their absence to an upright man (vir mundus), and in the absence of an upright man, to God alone ("De celanda confess.", P.L., CL. 629). So also Raoul l'Ardent, after having declared that the confession of venial sins may be made to any person, even to an inferior" (cuilibet, etiam minori), but he adds this explanation: "We make this confession, not that the layman may absolve us; but because by reason of our own humiliation and accusation of our sins and the prayer of our brethren, we may be purified of our sins: (Hom. lxiv, P.L., CLV, 1900). Confession to laymen made in this way has, therefore, theological objection. The passage from Bede is frequently quoted by the Scholastics.

213 The other text on which is based the second form of confession to laymen, is taken from a work widely read in the Middle Ages, the "De vera et falsa poenitentia", until the sixteenth century unanimously attributed to St. Augustine and quoted as such (P.L., XL, 1122). To-day it is universally regarded as apocryphal, though it would be difficult to determine its author. After saying that "he who wishes to confess his sins should seek a priest who can bind and loose", he adds these words often repeated as an axiom: "So great is the power of confession that if a priest be wanting, one may confess to his neighbour" (tanta vis est confessionis ut, si deest sacerdos, confiteatur proximo). He goes on to explain clearly the value of this confession made to a layman in case of necessity: "Although the confession be made to one who has no power to loose, nevertheless he who confesses his crime to his companion becomes worthy of pardon through his desire for a priest." Briefly, to obtain pardon, the sinner performs his duty to the best of his ability, i.e. he is contrite and confesses with the desire of addressing himself to a priest; he hopes that the mercy of God will supply what in this point is lacking. The confession is not sacramental, if we may so speak, except on the part of the penitent; a layman cannot be the minister of absolution and he is not regarded as such. Thus understood confession to laymen is imposed as obligatory later only counselled or simply permitted, by the greater number of theologians from Gratian and Peter Lombard to the sixteenth century and the Reformation. Though Gratian is not so explicit (can. 78, Dist. I, De Poenit.; can. 36, Dist. IV, De Cons.), the Master of the Sentences (IV, dist. xvii) makes a real obligation of confession to a layman in case of necessity. After having demonstrated that the avowal of sins (confessio oris) is necessary in order to obtain pardon, he declares that this avowal should be made first to God, then to a priest, and in the absence of a priest, to one's neighbour (socio). This doctrine of Peter Lombard is found, with some differences, in many of his commentators, among them, Raymond of Penafort, who authorizes this confession without making it an obligation (Summa, III, xxxiv, 84); Albertus Magnus (in Iv, dist. xvii, aa. 58, 59), who, arguing from baptism conferred by a layman in case of necessity, ascribes a certain sacramental value to absolution by a layman. St. Thomas (in IV, dist. xvii, q. 3, art. 3, sol. 2) obliges the penitent to do what he can, and sees something sacramental (quodammodo sacrametalis) in his confession; he adds, and in this many followed him, that if the penitent survives he should seek real absolution for a priest (cf. Bonav. In IV, sent., d. 17, p. 3, a. 1, q. 1, and Alex. of Hales, in IV, q. 19 m. 1, a. 1). Scotus, on the other hand (in dist. xiv, q. 4; dist. xvii, q. 1), not only does not make this confession obligatory, but discovers therein certain dangers; after him John of Freiburg, Durandus of Saint-Pourcain, and Astesanus declare this practice merely licit. Besides the practical manuals for the use of the priests may be mentioned the "Manipulus curatorum" of Guy de Montrocher (1333), the synodal statutes of William, Bishop of Cahors, about 1325, which oblige sinners to confess to a layman in case of necessity; all, however, agree in saying that there is no real absolution and that recourse should be had to a priest if possible.

214 Practice corresponds to theory; in the medieval chansons de gestes and in annals and chronicles, examples of such confessions occur (see Laurain, "De l'intervetion des laiques, des diacres, et des abbesses dans l'administration de la Pénitence", Paris, 1897). Thus, Joinville relates (Hist. De S. Louis, §70), that the army of the Christians having been put to flight by the Saracens, each one confessed to any priest he could find, and at need to his neighbour; he himself thus received the confession of Guy d'Ybelin, and gave him a kind of absolution saying: "Je vous asol de tel pooir que Diex m'a donnei" (I absolve you with such power as God may have given me). In 1524 Bayard, wounded to death, prayed before his cross-shaped sword-hilt and made his confession to his "maistre d'ostel" (Hist. De Bayard par le loyal serviteur, ch. lxiv-v). Neither theory nor practice, it will readily be seen, was erroneous from a theological pint of view. But when Luther (Prop. Damn., 13) attacked and denied the power of the priest to administer absolution, and maintained that laymen had a similar power, a reaction set in. The heresy of Luther was condemned by Leo X and the council of Trent; this Council (sess. xiv, cap. 6, and can. 10), without directly occupying itself with confession to a layman in case of necessity, defined that only bishops and priests are the ministers of absolution. Sixteenth-century authors, while not condemning the practice, declared it dangerous, e.g. the celebrated Martin Aspilcueta (Navarrus) (Enchirid., xxi, n. 41), who with Dominicus Soto says that it had fallen into desuetude. Both theory and practice disappeared by degrees; at the end of the seventeenth century there remained scarcely a memory of them.

215 Morin, comment. Histor. De discipl. In administr. sacram. Poenit., VIII (paris, 1651), c. xxiii-iv; Chardon, Histoire des Sacrements; la Penitence, sect. II, c. vii (in Migne, Pat. Lat., XX): Laurain, op. Cit.; Martene, Deantiq. Eccl. Ritibus (Rouen, 1700), I, a, 6, n. 7; and II, 37; and Vacant, Dict. De Theologie cath., I, 182; Koniger, Die Beicht nach Casarius von Heisterbach (1906). From a Protestant pint of view, to be corrected by the foregoing, Lea, Hisotry of Auricular Confession, I (Philadelphia, 1896), 218.

216 A. Boudinhon

Paul Laymann

214 A famous Jesuit moralist, b. in 1574 at Arzl, near Innsbruck; d. of the plague on 13 November, 1635, at Constance. After studying jurisprudence at Ingolstadt, he entered the Jesuit Order there in 1594, was ordained priest in 1603, taught philosophy at the University of Ingolstadt from 1603-9, moral theology at the Jesuit house in Munich from 1609-25, and canon law at the University of Dillingen from 1625-32. He was one of the greatest moralists and canonists of his time, and a copious writer on philosophical, moral, and juridical subjects. The most important of his thirty-three literary productions is a compendium of moral theology "Theologia Moralis in quinque libros partita" (Munich, 1625), of which a second and enlarged edition in six volumes appeared in 1626 at the same place. Until the second quarter of the eighteenth century it was edited repeatedly (latest edition, Mainz, 1723), and was extensively used as a textbook in seminaries. Especially in the third edition of his "Theologia Moralis", Laymann stands up resolutely for a milder treatment of those who had been accused of witchcraft. The reason why Laymann is often represented as an advocate of the horrible cruelties practised at trials for witchcraft lies in the false assumption that he is the author of a book entitled "Processus juridicus contra sagas et vene fico." (Cologne, 1629). Quite in contrast with Laymann's "Theologia Moralis", this book is a defence of the extreme severity at trials for witchcraft. Father Duhr, S.J., has now proved beyond doubt that Laymann is not the author of this work. See "Zeitschrift für katholische Theologie", XXIII (Innsbruck, 1899), 733-43; XXIV (1900), 585-92; XXV (1901), 166-8; XXIX (1905), 190-2. At the instance of Bishop Heinrich von Knöringen of Augsburg, Laymann wrote "Pacis compositio inter Principes et Ordines Imperii Romani Catholicos atque Augustanæ Confessionis adhærentes" (Dillingen, 1629), an elaborate work of 658 pages, explaining the value and extent of the Religious Peace of Augsburg, effected by King Ferdinand I in 1555. Another important work of Laymann is entitled "Justa defensio S. Rom. Pontificis, augustissimi Cæsaris, S.R.E. Cardinalium, episco porum, principum et alioram, demum minimæ Societatis Jesu, in causa monasteriorum extinctorum et bonorum ecclesiasticorum vacantium . . ." (Dillingen, 1631). It treats of the Edict of Restitution, issued by Ferdinand II in 1629, and sustains the point that in case of the ancient orders the property of suppressed monasteries need not be restored to the order to which these monasteries belonged, because each monastery was a corporation of its own. Such property, therefore, may be applied to Catholic schools and other ecclesiastical foundations. In the case of the Jesuit Order, however, he holds that all confiscated property must he restored to the order as such, because the whole Jesuit Order forms only one corporation. His work on canon law, "Jus Canonicum seu Commentaria in libros decretales" (3 vols., Dillingen, 1666-98), was published after his death.

215 SOMMERVOGEL, Biblioth que de La Compagnie de Jésus (Brus sels and Paris, 1890-1909),IV, 1582-94; SCIWICKERATH, Attitude of the Jesuits in the trials for witchcraft in American Cath. Quarterly Review, XXVII (Philadelphia, 1902). 493-8: SPECHT, Geschichte der Universität Dillingen (Freiberg im Br., 1902), 325, etc.

216 Michael Ott

Lay Tithes

217 Under this heading must be distinguished (1) secular tithes, which subjects on crown-estates were obliged to pay to princes, or tenants, or vassals on leased lands or lands held in fief to their landlords (decimæ origine laicales), and (2) ecclesiastical tithes, which in the course of time became alienated from the Church to lay proprietors (decimæ ex post laicales s. sæcularizatæ). There is question here only of the latter. In the secularizations initiated under the Merovingians the transference of ecclesiastical property and their tithes or of the tithes alone to laymen was effected. In subsequent times church lands with their tithes, or the tithes alone, were bestowed even by bishops and abbots on laymen to secure servants, vassals, protectors against violence and defenders of their civil rights. Other church property with tithes, or the tithes alone, were forcibly seized by laymen. Finally, the development of churches, once the property of private individuals, into parish churches subject to the bishop gave rise to the landlord appropriating the tithes due to the parish church. The church soon took measures to repress this spoliation, beginning as early as the ninth century at the Synod of Diedenhofen (844; cap. iii, 5) and that of Beauvais (845; cap. iii, 6). Gregory VII revived in a stricter form these old canons at the Autumn Synod of 1078, demanding that the laity should return all tithes to the Church, even though they had been given them by bishops, kings, or other persons, and declared all who refused obedience to be sacrilegi (C. 1, C. XVI, q. 7). Succeeding popes and synods repeated this order, declaring that Church tithes to be iuris divini (C. 14, X, de decim., III, 30); that, as the inalienable source of income of the parish church, they could not be transferred to another church or monastery (C. 30, X, de decim., III,30); that they could not be acquired by a layman through prescription or inheritance, or otherwise alienated.

218 But it was quite impossible for the Church to recover the tithes possessed for centuries by laymen, to whom in fact they had been in many cases transferred by the Church itsclf. Laymen gave then, in preference to the monastery instead of the parish church, but this became thenceforth subject to the approval of the bishop (C. 3, X, do privil., III 33). The decision of the Lateran Council (1179), forbidding the alienation of the church tithes possessed by the laity, and demanding their return to the Church (C. 19, X. de decim., III, 30) was interpreted to mean that, those ecclesiastical tithes, which up to the time of this council were in possession of 1aymen, might be retained by them, but no further transference should take place (C. 25, X, de decim., III, 30, c. 2, A in Vito, h.t., III, 13). But even this cou1d not be carried out. There thus existed side by side with church tithes a quantity of lay tithes; the latter were dealt. with by secular courts as being purely secular rights, while ecclesiastical law was applied to ecclesiastical tithes. However, certain, of the obligations imposed by the (once) ecclesiastical tithes continued to bind the proprietor, even though he were a layman. Thys in the case of church buildings the Council of Trent declared that patrons and all "qui fructus aliquos ex dictis ecclesiis provenientes percipiunt" were bound secondarily to defray the cost of repair (Sess. XXI, De ref., c. vii; see FABRICA ECCLESLE). When there is a doubt as to whether the tithes in quetion are ecclesiatical or lay, the reasonable presumption is that they are ecclesiastical.

219 FERRARIS, Bibl. canonica (Rome, 1885-99), s.v. Decimar; PERELS, Die kirchl. Zehnten im karoling. Reich (Berlin, 1908); PÖSCHL, bischofsgut u. mensa epicopalis, I (Berlin, 1908), 114 sqq.; STUTZ, Das karoling. Zehntgebo (Weimar, 1908).

220 JOHANNES BAPTIST SÄGMÜLLER

Lazarus

220 Lazarus (Gk. Lazaros, a contraction of Eleazaros—see II Mach., vi, 18—meaning in Hebrew "God hath helped"), the name of two persons in the N.T.; a character in one of Christ's parables, and the brother of Martha and Mary of Bethania.

221 I. Lazarus of the Parable

222 (1) The Story

223 The dramatic story of the rich man and the beggar (only in Luke, xvi, 19-31) is set forth by Christ in two striking scenes:

224 Their Condition Here: The rich man was clothed in purple and byssus (D.V. fine linen), and spent each day in gay carousing. The beggar had been cast helpless at the rich man's gate, and lay there all covered with sores; he yearned for the crumbs that fell from the rich man's table, but received none, and was left to the dogs.

225 Their Condition Hereafter: The early banquet is over; the heavenly banquet is begun. Lazarus partakes of the banquet in a place of honour (cf. John, xiii, 23). He reclines his head on Abraham's bosom. The rich man is now the outcast. He yearns for a drop of water. Lazarus is not allowed to leave the heavenly banquet and tend to the outcast.

226 (2) The Meaning

227 Catholic exegetes now commonly accept the story as a parable. It is also legendary that the sores of Lazarus were leprous. The purpose of the parable is to teach us the evil result of the unwise neglect of one's opportunities. Lazarus was rewarded, not because he was poor, but for his virtuous acceptance of poverty; the rich man was punished, not because he was rich, but for vicious neglect of the opportunities given him by his wealth.

228 II. Lazarus of the Miracle

229 This personage was the brother of Martha and Mary of Bethania; all three were beloved friends of Jesus (John, xi, 5). At the request of the two sisters Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead (John, xi, 41-44). Soon thereafter, the Saturday before Palm Sunday, Lazarus took part in the banquet which Simon the Leper gave to Jesus in Bethania (Matt., xxvi, 6-16; Mark, xiv, 3-11; John, xii, 1-11). Many of the Jews believed in Jesus because of Lazarus, whom the chief priests now sought to put to death. The Gospels tell us no more of Lazarus (see ST. LAZARUS OF BETHANY).

230 Walter Drum

Order of St. Lazarus of Jerusalem

223 The military order of St. Lazarus of Jerusalem originated in a leper hospital founded in the twelfth century by the crusaders of the Latin Kingdom. Without doubt there had been before this date leper hospitals in the East, of which the Knights of St. Lazarus claimed to be the continuation, in order to have the appearance of remote antiquity and to pass as the oldest of all orders. But this pretension is apocryphal. These Eastern leper hospitals followed the Rule of St. Basil, while that of Jerusalem adopted the hospital Rule of St. Augustine in use in the West. The Order of St. Lazarus was indeed purely an order of hospitallers from the beginning, as was that of St. John, but without encroaching on the field of the latter. Because of its special aim, it had quite a different organization. The inmates of St. John were merely visitors, and changed constantly; the lepers of St. Lazarus on the contrary were condemned to perpetual seclusion. In return they were regarded as brothers or sisters of the house which sheltered them, and they obeyed the common rule which united them with their religious guardians. In some leper hospitals of the Middle Ages even the master had to be chosen from among the lepers. It is not proved, though it has been asserted, that this was the case at Jerusalem.

224 The Middle Ages surrounded with a touching pity these the greatest of all unfortunates, these miselli, as they were called. From the time of the crusades, with the spread of leprosy, leper hospitals became very numerous throughout Europe, so that at the death of St. Louis there were eight hundred in France alone.

225 However, these houses did not form a congregation; each house was autonomous, and supported to a great extent by the lepers themselves, who were obliged when entering to bring with them their implements, and who at their death willed their goods to the institution if they had no children. Many of these houses bore the name of St. Lazarus, from which, however, no dependence whatever on St. Lazarus of Jerusalem is to be inferred. The most famous, St. Lazarus of Paris, depended solely and directly on the bishop of that city, and was a mere priory when it was given by the archbishop to the missionaries of St. Vincent de Paul, who have retained the name of Lazarists (1632).

226 The question remains, how and at what time the Order of St. Lazarus of Jerusalem became a military order. This is not know exactly; and, moreover, the historians of the order have done much to obscure the question by entangling it with gratuitous pretensions and suspicious documents.

227 The house at Jerusalem owed to the general interest devoted to the holy places in the Middle Ages a rapid and substantial growth in goods and privileges of every kind. It was endowed not only by the sovereigns of the Latin realm, but by all the states of Europe. Louis VII, on his return from the Second Crusade, gave it the Château of Broigny, near Orléans (1154). This example was followed by Henry II of England, and by Emperor Frederick II. This was the origin of the military commanderies whose contributions, called responsions, flowed into Jerusalem, swollen by the collections which the hospital was authorized to make in Europe.

228 The popes for their part were not sparing of their favours. Alexander IV recognized its existence under the Rule of St. Augustine (1255). Urban IV assured it the same immunities as were granted to the monastic orders (1262). Clement IV obliged the secular clergy to confine all lepers whatsoever, men or women, clerics or laymen, religious or secular, in the houses of this order (1265).

229 At the time these favours were granted, Jerusalem had fallen again into the hands of the Mussulmans. St. Lazarus, although still called "of Jerusalem", had been transferred to Acre, where it had been ceded territory by the Templars (1240), and where it received the confirmation of its privileges by Urban IV (1264).

230 It was at this time also that the Order of St. Lazarus of Jerusalem, following the example of the Order of St. John, armed combatants for the defence of the remaining possessions of the Christians in Asia. Their presence is mentioned without further detail at the Battle of Gaza against the Khwarizmians in 1244, and at the final siege of Acre in 1291.

231 As a result of this catastrophe the leper hospital of St. Lazarus of Jerusalem disappeared; however, its commanderies in Europe, together with their revenues, continued to exist, but hospitality was no longer practised. The order ceased to be an order of hospitallers and became purely military. The knights who resided in these commanderies had no tasks, and were veritable parasites on the Christian charitable foundations.

232 Things remained in this condition until the pontificate of Innocent VIII, who suppressed this useless order and transferred its possessions to the Knights of St. John (1490), which transfer was renewed by Pope Julius II (1505). But the Order of St. John never came into possession of this property except in Germany.

233 In France, Francis I, to whom the Concordat of Leo X (1519) had resigned the nomination to the greater number of ecclesiastical benefices, evaded the Bull of suppression by conferring the commanderies of St. Lazarus on Knights of the Order of St. John. The last named vainly claimed the possession of these goods. Their claim was rejected by the Parliament of Paris (1547).

234 Leo X himself disregarded the value of this Bull by re-establishing in favour of Charles V the priory of Capua, to which were attached the leper hospitallers of Sicily (1517).

235 Pius IV went further; he annulled the Bulls of his predecessors and restored its possessions to the order that he might give the mastership to a favourite, Giovanni de Castiglione (1565). But the latter did not succeed in securing the devolution of the commanderies in France. Pius V codified the statutes and privileges of the order, but reserved to himself the right to confirm the appointment of the grand master as well as of the beneficiaries (1567). He made an attempt to restore to the order its hospitaller character, by incorporating with it all the leper hospitals and other houses founded under the patronage of St Lazarus of the Lepers. But this tardy reform was rendered useless by the subsequent gradual disappearance of leprosy in Europe.

236 Finally, the grand mastership of the order having been rendered vacant in 1572 by the death of Castiglione, Pope Gregory XIII united it in perpetuity with the Crown of Savoy. The reigning duke, Philibert III, hastened to fuse it with the recently founded Savoyan Order of St. Maurice, and thenceforth the title of Grand Master of the Order of Sts. Maurice and Lazarus was hereditary in that house. The pope gave him authority over the vacant commanderies everywhere, except in the states of the King of Spain, which included the greater part of Italy. In England and Germany these commanderies had been suppressed by Protestantism. France remained, but it was refractory to the claims of the Duke of Savoy. Some years later King Henry IV, having founded with the approbation of Paul V (1609) the Order of Notre-Dame du Mont-Carmel, hastened in turn to unite to it the vacant possessions of St. Lazarus in France, and such is the origin of the title of "Knight of the Royal, Military, and Hospitaller Order of Our Lady of Mount Carmel and St. Lazarus of Jerusalem", which carried with it the enjoyment of a benefice, and which was conferred by the king for services rendered.

237 To return to the dukes of Savoy: Clement VIII granted them the right to exact from ecclesiastical benefices pensions to the sum of four hundred crowns for the benefit of knights of the order, dispensing them from celibacy on condition that they should observe the statutes of the order and consecrate their arms to the defence of the Faith. Besides their commanderies the order had two houses where the knights might live in common, one of which, at Turin, was to contribute to combats on land, while the other, at Nice, had to provide galleys to fight the Turks at sea. But when thus reduced to the states of the Duke of Savoy, the order merely vegetated until the French Revolution, which suppressed it. In 1816 the King of Sardinia, Victor Emmanuel I, re-established the titles of Knight and Commander of Sts. Maurice and Lazarus, as simple decorations, accessible without conditions of birth to both civilians and military men.

238 DE SIBERT, Histoire des Ordres royaux de Notre Dame de Mont-Carmel et de St-Lazare de J,rusalem (Paris, 1772); FERRAND, Pr,cis historique des Ordres de St-Lazare et de St-Maurice (Lyons, 1860). Documents: Charter of St. Lazarus of Jerusalem in Archives de l'Orient latin, II; Privilegia Ordinis S. Lazari (Rome, 1566); Provedimenti relativi all' Ordine dei SS. Maurizio e Lazaro (Turin, 1855).

239 Ch. Moeller

St. Lazarus of Bethany

226 Reputed first Bishop of Marseilles, died in the second half of the first century. According to a tradition, or rather a series of traditions combined at different epochs, the members of the family at Bethany, the friends of Christ, together with some holy women and others of His disciples, were put out to sea by the Jews hostile to Christianity in a vessel without sails, oars, or helm, and after a miraculous voyage landed in Provence at a place called today the Saintes-Maries. It is related that they separated there to go and preach the Gospel in different parts of the southeast of Gaul. Lazarus of whom alone we have to treat here, went to Marseilles, and, having converted a number of its inhabitants to Christianity, became their first pastor. During the first persecution under Nero he hid himself in a crypt, over which the celebrated Abbey of St.-Victor was constructed in the fifth century. In this same crypt he was interred, when he shed his blood for the faith. During the new persecution of Domitian he was cast into prison and beheaded in a spot which is believed to be identical with a cave beneath the prison Saint-Lazare. His body was later translated to Autun, and buried in the cathedral of that town. But the inhabitants of Marseilles claim to be in possession of his head which they still venerate. Like the other legends concerning the saints of the Palestinian group, this tradition, which was believed for several centuries and which still finds some advocates, has no solid foundation. It is in a writing, contained in an eleventh century manuscript, with some other documents relating to St. Magdalen of Vézelay, that we first read of Lazarus in connection with the voyage that brought Magdalen to Gaul. Before the middle of the eleventh century there does not seem to be the slightest trace of the tradition according to which the Palestinian saints came to Provence. At the beginning of the twelfth century, perhaps through a confusion of names, it was believed at Autun that the tomb of St. Lazarus was to be found in the cathedral dedicated to st. Nazarius. A search was made and remains were discovered, which were solemnly translated and were considered to be those of him whom Christ raised from the dead, but it was not thought necessary to inquire why they should be found in France.

227 The question, however, deserved to be examined with care, seeing that, according to a tradition of the Greek Church, the body of St. Lazarus had been brought to Constantinople, just as all the other saints of the Palestinian group were said to have died in the Orient, and to have been buried, translated, and honoured there. It is only in the thirteenth century that the belief that Lazarus had come to Gaul with his two sisters and had been Bishop of Marseilles spread in Provence. It is true that a letter is cited (its origin is uncertain), written in 1040 by Pope Benedict IX on the occasion of the consecration of the new church of St.-Victor in which Lazarus is mentioned. But in this text the pope speaks only of relics of St. Lazarus, merely calling him the saint who was raised again to life. He does not speak of him as having lived in Provence, or as having been Bishop of Marseilles. The most ancient Provencal text alluding to the episcopacy of St. Lazarus is a passage in the "Otia imperialia" of Gervase of Tillbury (1212). Thus the belief in his Provencal apostolate is of very late date, and its supporters must produce more ancient and reliable documentary evidence. In the crypt of St.-Victor at Marseilles an epitaph of the of the fifth century has been discovered, which informs us that a bishop named Lazarus was buried there. In the opinion of the most competent archfologists, however, this personage is Lazarus, Bishop of Aix, who was consecrated at Marseilles about 407, and who, having had to abandon his see in 411, passed some time in Palestine, whence he returned to end his days in Marseilles. It is more than likely that it is the name of this bishop and his return from Palestine, that gave rise to the legend of the coming of the Biblical Lazarus to Provence, and his apostolate in the city of Marseilles.

228 CHEVALIER, Gallia christ. noviss., II (Paris, 1899), 1-6; Analect. Bolland., VI (Brussels, 1887), 88-92; BOUCHE, Vindicœ fidei et pietatis Provinciœ pro cflitibus illius tutelaribus restituendis (Aix, 1644); DE CHANTELOUP, L'apttre de la Provence ou la vie du glorieux S. Lazare, premier ivjque de Marseille (Marseilles, 1864); FAILLON, Mon. inid. sur l'apostolat de Ste. Marie Madeleine en Provence et sur les autres apttres de cette contrie (Paris, 1848); DE LAUNOY, De commentitio Lazari et Maximini Magdalenœ et Marthœ in Provinciam appulsu dissertatio (Paris, 1641); DE MAZENOD, Preuves de la mission de S. Lazare ` Marseille in Annales de philos. Chrit., XIII (Paris, 1846), 338-50; TILLEMONT, Mem. pour servir ` l'hist. ecclis., II (Paris, 1694); 32-4; L. DUCHESNE, Fastes ipisc. de l'anc. Gaule, I (Paris, 1894), 324-5, 341-4; MORIN, S. Lazare et S. Maximin, donnies nouvelles sur plusieurs personnages de la tradition de Provence in Mim. de la Soc. des ant. de France, F, VI (Paris, 1897) 27-51.

229 Lion Clugnet

Diocese of Lead

229 (Leadensis).

230 The Diocese of Lead, which was established on 6 August, 1902, comprises all that part of the State of South Dakota (U.S.A.) west of the Missouri River-an area of 41,759 square miles. The residence of the bishop is at Hot Springs. The territory taken to form the diocese had previously belonged to the Vicariate Apostolic of Nebraska, and had in 1902 a Catholic population of about 6000, including the Catholic Indians of the Sioux Reservations. As first bishop, the Very Rev. John N. Stariha, Vicar-General of the Archdiocese of St. Paul, was chosen and consecrated in St. Paul, 28 October, 1902. He was born in the Province of Krain (Carniola), Austria, 12 May, 1845. Migrating to the United States he became affiliated to the Diocese of St. Paul, where for many years he was pastor of the Church of St. Francis de Sales. The opening of the Rosebud Reservation to settlers and the extension of railways across the state attracted many emigrants to South Dakota, and a number of new parishes were ebtablished, churches erected in these new towns, and missions and schools located among the Indians. In 1909, Bishop Stariha's ill health and age determined him to resign the see, and he returned to his old home in Austria on 1 May of that year. On 11 April, 1910, Pius X ratified the appointment of the Rev. Joseph F. Busch, of Excelsior, Minnesota, as bishop. The religious communities in the diocese include the Jesuit and Benedictine Fathers and the Benedictine Sisters and the Sisters of St. Francis.

231 Statistics (1909): priests 25 (regulars, 9); churches with resident priests, 18; missions with churches, 35 schools, 5; pupils, 1030; 1 orphan asylum, 24 inmates; Catholic population 11,000 whites and 6500 Indians. Catholic News (New Ywrk), files; Catholic Directory (Milwaukee, 1909).

232 Thomas F. Meehan

The League

232 I. the League of 1576

233 The discontent produced by the Peace of Beaulieu (6 May, 1576), which restored the government of Picardy to the Xrotetestant Prince de Condé and gave him Péronne to hold as a security, induced d'HumiËres, a Catholic who commanded the city of Péronne, to form a league of gentry, soldiers, and peasants of Picardy to keep Condé from taking possession of the city. D'HumiËres also appealed to all the princes, nobles and prelates of the kingdom, and to the allies of the nations neighbouring to France. This League of Péronne thus aspired to become international. From a religious point of view it aimed at supporting Catholicism in France politically at restoring the "ancient franchises and liberties" against the royal power. Its programme was spread throughout France by the efforts of Henri de Guise (see ), and Henry III, then on good terms with the Guises, declared himself its chief. Gregory XIII was apprised of the formation of the League by Jean David, an advocate of the Parliament of Paris, acting for the Guises, and he communicated the fact to Philip II. But when the Peace of Bergerac (17 September, 1577) between Henry III and the Protestants, curtailed the liberties accorded them by the Edict of Beaulieu, the king hastened to dissolve the League of Péronne and the other Catholic leagues formed after its example. This dissolution was the cause of rejoicing to a certain number of royalists, who held that "all leagues and associations in a monarchial state are matters of grave consequence, and that it is impossibie for sujects to band themselves together without prejudicing the royal superiority". The nobility had lacked unanimity, and the cities had been too lukewarm to maintain this first league.

234 II. the League of 1585

235 The death of the Duke of Anjou (10 June, 1584) having made Henry of Bourbon, the Protestant King of Navarre, heir presumptive to Henry III, a new league was formed among the aristocracy and the people. On the one hand, the Dukes of Guise, Mayenne, and Nevers and Baron de Senecey met at Nancy to renew the League, with the object of securing the recognition, as heir to the throne, of the Cardinal de Bourbon, who would extirpate heresy and receive the Council of Trent in France. Philip II, by the Treaty of Joinville (31 December, 1584), promised his concurrence, in the shape of a monthly subsidy of 50,000 crowns. At Paris, on the other hand, Charles Hotteman, Sieur de Rocheblond, "moved by the Spirit of God", Prévost, curé of Saint Séverin, Boucher, curé of Saint BenoÓt, and Launoy, a canon of Soissons, appealed to the middle classes of the cities to save Catholicism. A secret society was formed. Rocheblond and five other leaguers carried on a propaganda, gradually organizing a little army at Paris, and establishing relations with the Guises. The combination of these two movements - the aristocratic and the popular - resulted in the manifesto of 30 March, 1585, launched from Péronne by Guise and the princes amounting to a sort of declaration of war against Henry III. The whole story of the League has been told in the article . We shall here dwell upon only the following two points.

236 A. Relations between the Popes and the League

237 Gregory XIII approved of theLeague after 1584, but abstained from committing himself to any writing in its favour. Sixtus V wished the struggle against heresy in France to be led by the king himself; the religious zeal of the Leaguers pleased him, but he did not like the movement of political independence in relation to Henry III. Events, however, drove Sixtus V to take sides with the Leaguers. The Bull of 9 September, 1585, by which he declared Henry of Bourbon and the Prince of Condé as Protestants, to have forfeited the succession, provoked so much opposition from the Parliament, and so spirited a reply from Henry, that the League, in its turn, recognized the necessity of a counterstrokc. Louis d'Orléans, advocate and a leaguer, undertook the defence of the Bull in the "Avertissement des Catholiques Angais aux FranÁais Catholiques", an extremely violent manifesto against Henry of Bourbon. Madame le Montpensier, a sister of the Guises, boasted that she ruled the famous preachers of the League, the "Satire Ménippée" presently turned them to ridicule, while in their turn the Leaguers from the pulpits of Paris attacked not only Henry of Bourbon, but the acts, the morals, and the orthodoxy of of Henry III. Such preachers were Rose, Bishop of Senlis, Boucher and Prévost, the aforesaid curés - the latter of whom caused an immense picture to be displayed, representing the horrible sufferings inflicted upon Catholics by the English co-religionists of Henry of Bourbon. Other preachers were de Launay, a canon of Soissons, the learned Benedictine Génébrard, the controversialist Feuardent, the ascetic writer Pierre Crespet, and Guincestre, curé of Saint-Gervais, who, preaching at Saint-Barthélemy on New Year's Day, 1589, made all who heard him take an oath to spend the last penny they had and shed their last drop of blood to avenge thr assassination of Guise. By these excesses of the Leaguers against the monarchical principle, and by the murder of Henry III by Jacques Clément (1 August, 1589) Sixtus V was compelled to assume an altitude of extreme reserve towards the League. The nuncio Matteuzzi having thought it his duty to leave Venice because immediately after the assassination of Henry III the Senate had decided to send an ambassador to Henry of Bourbon, the pope sent him back to his post, expressing a hope that the Venetians might be able to persuade Henry of Bourbon to be reconciled with the Holy See. On 14 May, 1590, the papal legate Caetani blessed, saluting them as Machabees, the 1300 monks who, led by Rose, Bishop of Senlis, and Pelletier, Curé of Saint-Jacques, organized for the defence of Paris against Henry of Bourbon; but, on the other hand, the pope manifested great displeasure because the Sorbonne had declared, on 7 May, that, even "absolved of his crimes", Henry of Bourbon could not become King of France. The Leaguers in their enthusiasm had denied to the papal authority the right of eventually admitting Henry of Bourbon to the throne of France. They found new cause for indignation in the fact that Sixtus V had received the Duke of Luxembourg-Piney, the envoy of Henry's party; and Philip II while in Paris, caused a sermon to be preached against the pope.

238 But when, after the brief pontificate of Urban VII, Gregory XIV became pope (5 December, 1590) the League and Spain recovered their influence at Rome. Several Briefs dated in March, 1591, and two "monitoria" to the nuncio Landriano once more proclaimed the downfall of Henry of Bourbon. The prelates who sided with Henry, assembled at Chartres, in September, 1591, protested against the "monitoria" and appealed from them to the pope's maturer infomation. The gradual development of a third party weakened the League and hastened the approach of an understanding between Rome and Henry of Bourbon (see HENRY IV). Briefly, the Holy See felt a natural sympathy for the Catholic convictions in which the League originated; but, to the honour of Sixtus V, he would not, in the most tragic moments of his pontificate, compromise himself too far with a movement which flouted the authority of Henry III, the legitimate king; neither would he admit the maxim: "Culpam non pænam aufert absolutio peccati" (Absolution blots out the sin, but not its penalty), in virtue of which certain theologians of the League claimed that Henry IV, even if absolved by the pope, would still be incapable of succeeding to the French throne. By this wise policy, Sixtus prepared the way far in advance for the reconciliation which he hoped for, and which was to be realized in the absolution of Henry IV by Clement VIII.

239 B. Political Doctrines of the League

240 Charles Labitte has found it possible to write a book on "La Démocratie sous la Ligue". The religious rising of the people soon took shelter behind certain political theories which tended to the revival of medieval political liberties and the limitation of royal absolutism. In 1586 the advocate Le Breton, in a pamphlet for which he was hanged, called Henry III "one of the greatest hypocrites who ever lived", demanded an assembly of the States General from which the royal officers should be excluded, and proposed to restore all their franchises to the cities. Ideas of political autonomy were beginning to take definite shape. The League wished the clergy to recover those liberties which it possessed before the Concordat of Francis I, the nobility to regain the independence it enjoyed in the Middle Ages, and the cities to be restored to a certain degree of autonomy. After the assassination of Guise, a crime instigated by Henry III, sixty-six doctors of the Sorbonne declared that the king's subjects were freed from their oath of allegience and might lawfully take arms, collect money, and defend the Roman religion against the king: the name of Henrv III was erased from the Canon of the Mass and replaced by the "Catholic princes". Boucher, curé of Saint-BenoÓt, popularized this opinion of the Sorbonne in his book "De justa Henriei Tertii abdicatione", in which be maintained that Henry III, "as a perjurer, assassin, murderer, a sacrilegious person, patron of heresy, simoniac, magician, impious and damnable", could be deposed by the Church; that, as "a perfidious waster of the public treasure, a tyrant and enemy of his country", he could be deposed by the people. Boucher declared that a tyrant was a ferocious beast which men were justified at killing. It was under the influence of these theories that upon the assassination of Henry III by Jacques Clément (1 August, 1589), the mother of the Guises harangued the throng from the altar of the church of the Cordeliers, and glorified the deed of Clément. These exaggerated ideas served only to justify tyranny, and did not long influence the minds of men. Moreover, the "Declaration" of Henry IV against seditious preachers (September, 1595) and the steps taken at Rome by Cardinal d'Ossat, in 1601, put a stop to the political preachings which the League had brought into fashion. The memory of the excesses committed under the League was afterwards exploited by the 1egists of the French Crown to combat Roman doctrines and to defend royal absolutism and Gallicanism. But, considering the bases of the League doctrines, it is impossible not to accord them the highest importance in the history of political ideas. Power, they said, was derived from God through the people, and they opposed the false, absolutist, and Gallican doctrine of the Divine right and irresponsibility of kings, such as Louis XIV professed and practised; and they also bore witness to the perfect compatibility of the most rigorous Roman ideas with democratic and popular aspirations.

241 It has been possible to trace certain analogies between the doctrines of the League and Protestant brochures like Hotman's "Franco-Gallia" and the "VindiciÊ contra tyrannos" of Junius Brutus (Duplessis Mornay), published immediately after the Massacre of St. Bartholomew. Indeed, both Huguenots and Leaguers were then seeking to limit the royal power; but in the Huguenot projects of reform the tendency was to favour the aristocracy, the optimates; they would not allow the mob - the mediastinus quilibet of whom the "VindiciÊ" speak so contemptuously - any right of resistance against the king; the Leaguers, on the contrary appealed to the democracy. The Huguenots permitted no uprising of the mere private individual save with "God's special calling"; the Leaguers held that every man was called by God to the defence of the Church, and that all men were equal when there was question of repelling the heretic or the infidel. Hence, in his work, "Des progrËs de la révolution et de la guerre contre l'Eglise" Lamennais felt free to write (1829): "How deeply Catholicism has impressed souls with the sentiment of liberty was never more evident than in the days of the League."

242 See the bibliography of ; also LABITTE, De la démocratchez les prédicateurs de Ligue (Paris, 1841); WEILL, Les théories sur le pouvoir royal en France pendant les guerres du religion (Paris, 1891); TREUMANN, Die Monarchomachen; eins Darstellung der revolution"ren Staatslehren des XVI. Jahrurderts, 1573-1599 (Leipzig, 1885).

243 Georges Goyau

German (Catholic) League

235 Only three years before the League was established, Duke Maximilian of Bavaria (d. 1651), who was afterwards its leading spirit, declared against the formation of a confederacy of the Catholic states of the empire in Germany, proposed by the spiritual electors. Soon after, however, in 1607, he emphasized the need of such a confederacy, "in order that each may know how far he may rely on the others." There is indeed nothing more natural than the drawing together in times of discord of those who think alike. Besides, the Protestant "Union" was inaugurated in May, 1608.

236 Early in 1608 Duke Maximilian started negotiations with the spiritual electors and some of the Catholic states of the empire, with a view to the formation of a union of the Catholic states. On 5 May, 1608, there was a conference on this question in the Imperial Diet at Ratisbon, which amounted, however, only to an exchange of ideas. Two months later (5 July), we find the spiritual electors assembled at Andernach at the invitation of the Archbishop of Mainz. This assembly was really held to consider the question of the imperial succession, but the proposed League was also discussed, and a tendency was manifested in favour of the confederacy suggested by Maximilian. Opinions were even expressed as to the size of the confederate military forces to be raised. Maximilian, who took the most active part at the Andernach conference, afterwards sought among the neighbouring princes members for the proposed League. Salzburg showed disapproval; Würzburg's bishop was not much more encouraging, but the Bishops of Augsburg, Passau, and Ratisbon concurred. Until the end of January, 1609, however, the negotiations flagged. About this time Maximilian won over the Catholic states of Swabia to his project, and on 5 July the representatives of Augsburg, Constance, Passau, Ratisbon, and Würzburg assembled at Munich. Salzburg was not invited this time, and Eichstädt still hesitated. Here on 10 July, 1609, the participating states concluded an alliance "for the defence of the Catholic religion and peace within the Empire." The confederates might not make war on each other; their disputes must be decided either by arbitration within the confederacy, or by the laws of the Empire; should one member be attacked, the League must resort to arms, or, if prevented from doing this, must take legal steps. Duke Maximilian was to be the president of the confederacy, and the Bishops of Augsburg, Passau, and Würzburg his councillors. The League was to continue for nine years.

237 The foundation of the confederacy was at last laid but a substantial structure was certainly not erected at Munich. This was not the fault of Maximilian, but of the states, which, always cautious and dilatory could not be spurred to take decisive action. On 18 June, 1609, even before the Munich Diet, the Electors of Mainz, Cologne, and Trier had exchanged opinions through their envoys as to the personnel of the League and the size of the confederate army, for which they proposed 20,000 men. They had also considered the making of Maximilian president of the alliance, and on 30 August they announced their adhesion to the Munich agreement, provided that Maximilian accepted the Elector of Mainz as co-president. As the arch-chancellor of the Empire, the latter enjoyed great prestige, and was in a position to exercise great influence; consequently, his support could scarcely be termed anything less than essential to the League. Indeed, in conformity with his wishes, the emperor was informed of the foundation and aims of the confederacy. As to its precise object, the members themselves were not quite clear. Maximilian, therefore, urged the convocation of a general meeting of the confederates to remove all misunderstandings. The first was held on 10 Feb., 1610, at Würzburg. Except Austria and Salzburg, all the important Catholic states and a great number of the smaller ones sent representatives. The organization of the coalition, the raising of a confederate army, the apportionment of the contributions to the alliance, and the enlistment of foreign mercenaries, were the questions under discussion. The confederacy received the official name, Defensiv- oder Schirmvereinigung. Only after this can one really speak of a Catholic League. The foreign help on which they principally counted seemed already assured. The pope and the King of Spain, who had been informed by Maximilian of his plan through the medium of Zuniga, the Spanish ambassador at Prague, were both favourably disposed towards the undertaking.

238 But the success of the League depended primarily on the effective co-operation of the members themselves. This broke down when it came to the collection of contributions. In the case of very many of the members, their contribution was, in the words of Maximilian, nothing but a "poor prayer." Up to April, 1610 not a single member had paid his quota, although at that very moment, the dispute concerning the Jülich succession, and the threatening of the Rhenish principalities by the troops of the Union, urgently required a League ready for war. Disgusted with the indifference of the members, which narrowness of means on the part of a few could not excuse, Maximilian threatened to resign the presidentship. His threat at once achieved this, that Spain, which had made the giving of a subsidy dependent on Austria's enrolment in the League, waived this condition, and the pope promised a further contribution in 1611. The conduct of the Union in the Jülich disptute and the warlike operations of the Union army in Alsace, seemed to make a battle between League and Union inevitable. But the internal affairs of the League were to become still more critcal. In the year 1613 the exertions of Cardinal Klesl at an assembly of the confederates in Ratisbon (where the Imperial Diet was also sitting), against the wishes of Duke Maximilian but very much in accordance with the wishes of the Elector of Mainz, succeeded in bringing about the enrolment, of Austria in the League. The assembly now appointed no less than three war-directors: Duke Maximilian, and Archdukes Albert and Maximilian of Austria. The object of the League was now declared "eine christlich rechtmässige Defension." The division of leadership did not conduce to increasing the League's power, while, by Austria's accession, it became entangled in her difficulties, already very threatening in her hereditary domains.

239 Duke Maximilian, who attached great importance to the League's fitness for war, showed his disapproval of the Ratisbon resolutions by refusing to accept them and later resigned his post as president, when Archduke Maximilian, of Austria, the third director, protested against the inclusion of the Bishop of Augsburg, and the Provost of Ellwangen in the Bavarian Directory, and was supported in his protest by Mainz and Trier. On 27 May, 1617, he formed a separate league for nine years with Bamberg, Eichstädt, Würzburg, and the Provost of Ellwangen. But the position in Bohemia as in Lower and Upper Austria, gradually became so critical, that King Matthias at the end of 1618 strove hard with Mainz for the restoration of the League. A meeting of several of the eccliasiastical states met the emperor's wishes in that, at Oberwesel (Jan., 1619), they decided to reconstruct the League, but on its original basis. It was in future to have only two groups: the Rhenish under the presidency of Mainz, and the Oberland under Bavaria, the treasury and the military command were to be considered as separate. Maximilian might only lead the whole of the troops, when he had to appear in the Rhenish district. After Maximilian had made sure that Austria would not again claim the privilege of appointing a third director, he summoned the Oberland states to Munich, where on 31 May the Oberland group came again into life. The Rhenish group was already re-established at Oberwesel. The two groups bound themselves to render mutual help for six years.

240 The Kingdom of Bohemia, in a state of insurrection from 1618, deprived Ferdinand II of the Bohemian crown, and gave it to Elector Palatine Frederick V (26-27 Aug., 1619) Ferdinand's sole hope of recovering his lands now lay in drastic action. On the way to Frankfort on the day of the imperial election he had already consulted personally with Maximilian of Bavaria on the projected warlike preparations. After the election Ferdinand conferred with the spiritual electors at Frankfort concerning the support of the League. With the formation of a confederate army the serious activity of the League began. The critical time, which Maximilian's clear vision had foreseen, and for which, with characteristic energy, he had been long making provision, made him the undisputed leader of Catholic Germany. On 8 Oct., 1619, Ferdinand and Maximilian came to an agreement at Munich over the support of the League, and the separate support of Bavaria. The latter supplied 7000 men to the confederate army, whose strength was fixed at an assembly at Würzburg in Dec., 1619, as 21,000 infantry and 4000 cavalry.

241 In July, 1620, the League army totalled about 30,000 men, to which the Protestant Union could only oppose about 10,000. This superiority at once helped the League to a diplomatic victory over the Union, with which an agreement was come to, whereby, during the war in Austria and Bohemia, hostilities betwecn the parties of both alliances in Germany should cease. Bavaria and the League had thus their whole military forces free to support the emperor. On 3 July the arrangement had been made with the Union; on 24 July Tilly had already begun his march into Upper Austria. That there was no decisive battle till 8 November was due to the over-cautious and procrastinating imperial field-marshal, Buquoy. Even before Prague he was still averse to a battle. That one was fought was due to Maximilian and Tilly. With the victory of the combined confederate and imperial armies over the Bohemians at Prague the first stage of the League's activity during the Thirty Years War ended. Its subsequent history is closely involved in that of the Thirty Years War (q.v.). The strength of the League principally lay in Maximilian's personality and in the resources of his excellently administered country. But for Maximilian (q.v.) the League at the beginning of the Thirty Years War would probably have been just as disorganized a body as its opponent, the Union.

242 Briefe u. Atken zur Gesch. Des dreissigjahr. Krieges zur Zeit des vorwaltenden Einflusses der Wittelsbacher: vol. VII: Von der Abriese Erzh. Leopolds nach Julich bis zu den Werbungen Herzog Maxim. Von B. im M rz 1610, ed. STIEVE and revised by MAYR (Munich, 1905); vol VIII; Von den R stungen Herzog Maxim. Von B. bis zum Aufbruch der Passauer. ed. STIEVE and revised by MAYR (Munich, 1908); vol. IX: Vom Einfall des Passauer Kriegsvolks bis zum N rnburger Kurf stentag, ed. CHROUST (Munich, 1903); vol. X: Der Ausgang der Regierung Rudolfs II. u. die Anfange des Kaisers Matthias. ed. CHROUST (Munich, 1906); vol. XI: Der Reichstag von 1613, ed. CHROUST (Munich, 1909); BURGER, Ligapolitik des Mainzer Kurfursten Joh. Schweickhard v. Cronberg 1604-1613 in Wurzburger Studien etc., I; CORNELIUS, Zur. Gesch. Der Gr ndung der deutschen Liga (Munich, 1863); Gotz, Die Kriegskosten Bayerns u. der Ligast nde im dreissigjahr. Kriege in Forschungen zur Gesch. Bayerns, XII; GOTHEIN, Deutschland vor dem dreissigjahr. Kriege (Liepzig, 1908); JANSSEN-PASTOR, Gesch. Des deutschen Volkes seit dem Ausgange des Mittelalters, vol.V: Die kirchlichpol. Revolution u. ihre Bek mpfung seit der Verk ndigung der Konkordienformel 1530 bis zum Beginn der dreissigjahr. Krieges (15th and 16th improved ed., FREIBURG, 1902); RITTER, Deutsche Gesch. im Zeitalter der Gegenref. u. des dreissigj hr. Krieges (1555-1648), II (1586-1618) (Stuttgart, 1895). III (Stuttgart and Berlin, 1908); STIEVE, Kurfurst Maxim. I. Von B. in Abhandlungen, Vort ge u. Reden (Leipzig, 1900); IDEM, Das Contabuch der Deutschen Liga in Deutsche Zeitschr. fur Geschichtswissenschaft, X (1893); WOLF, Gesch. Maximilians I. u. seiner Zeit, II (Munich, 1807).

243 J. Kraft.

League of the Cross

238 A Catholic total abstinence confraternity founded in London in 1873 by Cardinal Manning to unite Catholics, both clergy and laity, in the warfare against intemperance, and thus improve religious, social, and domestic conditions, especially among the working classes. The original and chief centres of the league are London and Liverpool, and branches have been organized in the various cities of Great Britain and Ireland and in Australia. The fundamental rules of the league are:

239 that the pledge shall be of total abstinence, and taken without limit as to time;

240 that only Catholics can be members;

241 that all members shall live as good, practical Catholics;

242 that no one who is not a practical Catholic shall, as long as he fails to practise his religion, hold any office in the league.

243 The pope has granted several indulgences to the league for its members. A conference of the league is held in August. The Tablet (London) files; Catholic Directory (London, 1910).

244 Thomas F. Meehan

St. Leander of Seville

241 Bishop of that city, b. at Carthage about 534, of a Roman family established in that city; d. at Seville, 13 March, 600 or 601. Some historians claim that his father Severian was duke or governor of Carthage, but St. Isidore simply states that he was a citizen of that city. The family emigrated from Carthage about 554 and went to Seville. The eminent worth of the children of Severian would seem to indicate that they were reared in distinguished surroundings. Severian had three sons, Leander Isidore, and Fulgentius and one daughter, Florentina. St. Leander and St. Isidore both became bishops of Seville; St. Fulgentius, Bishop of Carthagena, and St. Florentina, a nun, who directed forty convents and one thousand nuns. It has been also believed, but wrongly, that Theodosia, another daughter of Severian, became the wife of the Visigothic king, Leovigild. Leander became at first a Benedictine monk, and then in 579 Bishop of Seville. In the meantime be founded a celebrated school, which soon became a centre of learning and orthodoxy. He assisted the Princess Ingunthis to convert her husband Hermenegild, the eldest son of Leovigild, and defended the convert against his father's cruel reprisals. In endeavoring to save his country fromn Arianism, Leander showed himself an orthodox Christian and a far-sighted patriot. Exiled by Leovigild, he withdrew to Byzantium from 579 to 582. It is possible, but not proved, that he sought to rouse the Emperor Tiberius to take up arms against the Arian king: in any case the attempt was without result. He profited, however, by his stay at Byzantium to compose important works against Arianism, and there became acquainted with the future Gregory the Great, then legate of Pelagius II at the Byzantine court. A close friensdship thenceforth united the two men, and the correspondence of St. Gregory with St. Leander remains one of the latter's greatest titles to honour. It is not known exactly when Leander returned from exile. Leovigild put to death his son Hermenegild in 585, and himself died in 589.

242 In this decisive hour for the future of Spain, Leander did most to ensure the religious unity, the fervent faith, and the broad culture on which was based its later greatness. He had a share in the conversion of Reccared, and never ceased to exercise over him a deep and beneficial influence. At the Third Council of Toledo, where Visigothic Spain abjured Arianism, Leander delivered the closing sermon. On his return from this council, Leander convened an important synod in his metropolitan city of Seville (Conc. Hisp., I), and never afterwards ceased his efforts to consolidate the work, in which his brother and successor St. Isidore was to follow him. Leander received the pallium in August, 599. There remmain unfortunately of this writer, superior to his brother Isidore, only two works: De institutione virginum et contemptu mundi, a monastic rule composed for his sister, and Homilia de triumpho ecclesiæ ob conversionem Gothorum (P.L., LXXII). St. Isidore wrote of his brother: "This man of suave eloquence and eminent talent shone as brightly by his virtues as by his doctrine. By his faith and zeal the Gothic people have been converted from Arianism to the Catholic faith" (De script. eccles., xxviii).

243 Acta, S.S., 13 March: MABILLON, Acta S.S. O. S. B., s c. I; AGUIRRE, Collectio max. conc. hisp., FLORES, Espa a Sagrada, IX; BOURRET, L cole chr tienne de S ville sous la monarchie des Visigoths (Paris, 1855); MONTALEMBERT, Les Moines de d Occident, II; GAMS, Die Kirchengesch. von Spanien, II (2 ed., 1874); G RRES, Leander, Bischof von Sevilla u. Metropolit der Kirchenprov. B tica in Zeitsch. fur wissenschaftl. Theol., III (1885).

244 Pierre Suau.

Diocese of Leavenworth

244 Diocese of Leavenworth (Leavenworthensis).

245 Suffragan to St. Louis. When established, 22 May, 1877, it comprised the State of Kansas, U. S. A., with the Right Rev. Louis Mary Fink, O.S.B. as its first bishop. At his request, ten years later the Holy See divided the diocese into three: Wichita, Concordia, and Leavenworth. Leavenworth was then restricted to the 43 counties lying east of Republic, Cloud, Ottawa, Saline McPherson, Harvey, Sedgwick and Sumner Counties. The diocese had an area of 28,687 sq. m., with a total population in 1890, of 901,536. Authorized by the Holy See, Bishop Fink on 29 May, 1891, took up his residence in Kansas City, Kans., and the diocese was named after this city for some years. Apostolic letters dated 1 July, 1897, further diminished the territory of the diocese in favour of Concordia and Wichita. It now includes only the Counties of Anderson, Osage, Pottawatomie, Shawnee Wabaunsee, Wyandotte, Jackson, Jefferson, Linn, Lyon, Marshall, Miami, Nemaha, Atchison, Brown, Coffey, Doniphan, Douglas, Franklin, Johnson, and Leavenworth; an area of 12,594 sq. miles.

246 The first missionary to the wild Indians of the plains, within the present borders of Kansas, was Father Juan de Padilla. He obtained the martyr's crown just fifty years after Columbus discovered the New World. The first permanent Indian missions in these parts were established by the Jesuit Fathers among the Potawatomies and Osages. The latter originally dwelt on both sides of the Missouri. They knew of Father Marquette and had implored Father Garvier to preach to them. Two Franciscan friars had been among them in 1745. Bishop Dubourg promised them missionaries in 1820. The Pottawatomies came from Michigan and Indiana. Some hundreds of them had been baptized by the Rev. S. T. Badin of Kentucky, the first priest ordained in the United States. In Indiana, Father Deseilles was succeeded among the Potawatomies by Father Petit, who accompanied them to the confines of their new reservation in the Indian Territory, which then included Kansas. The Indian converts were confirmed by Bishop P. Kenrick in 1843, and by Bishop Barron in 1845. An Indian priest of the Oklahoma Diocese is descended from the Pottawatomies and was born in Kansas. In 1845 by the zealous efforts of the Jesuit missionaries, Catholic prayer-books in the Pottawatomie dialect were given to the Indians. Manual training schools for girls and boys had been established some years previously. The latter were conducted by the Jesuits. Bishop Rosati wrote from Europe that Gregory XVI would be delighted to have a Sacred Heart school among the Indians. In the year 1841 the Religious of the Sacred Heart opened a school among the Pottawatomies under the leadership of Mother Philippine-Rose Duchesne. Manual training schools were established among the Osages in 1847. Here also the boys' school was under the conduct of the Jesuits; but the girls' school was in charge of the Sisters of Loretto.

247 Kansas was under the jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical superiors of Louisiana until St. Louis was made an episcopal see. The Vicariate Apostolic of the Indian Territory east of the Rocky Mountains included the present states of Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, that part of North and South Dakota west of the Missouri River, Wyoming, Montana, and a part of Colorado. It was placed under Rt. Rev. John B. Miège, S.J., who was appointed vicar Apostolic, and consecrated Bishop of Messenia, in St. Louis, 25 March, 1851. Accompanied by Father Paul Ponziglione, S.J., who was to devote himself for forty years to the Indians and early white settlers of the new vicariate, Bishop Miège arrived among the Pottawatomies on the Kansas River, where now stands St. Mary's College, in May of that year. The founder of the Pottawatomie mission of the Immaculate Conception, Father Christian Hoecken, S.J., while ascending the Missouri River with Father P.J. de Smedt, died of cholera, at the age of forty-three years (19 June, 1851), fifteen of which were passed among the Indians in the Missouri Valley.

248 Bishop Miège was born 18 September, 1815, at La Forêt, Upper Savoy, Italy. He studied classics and philosophy at the diocesan seminary of Moutiers where his elder brother Urban was a teacher for over forty years. He entered the Society of Jesus at Milan 23 Oct., 1836; was ordained priest 7 Sept. 1847, at Rome, where he was professor of Philosophy in the Roman College. Driven from Italy by the political troubles of the following year, he was sent at his own request to the Indian Missions in the United States. In 1849 he was assistant pastor of St. Charles's church at St. Charles, Missouri. In 1850 he was socius of the master of novices at Florissant. He also taught moral theology there. The vicariate subjected to his jurisdiction in 1851 consisted mostly of Indian missions. There were five churches, ten Indian Nations, and eight priests, with a Catholic population of almost 5000, of whom 3000 were Indians. He was an indefatigable missionary, traversing on horseback and by wagon for years the wild remote regions over which his people were scattered, visiting the Indian villages, forts, trading posts, and growing towns. In August, 1855, there were seven Catholic families in Leavenworth, and he moved his residence from the Pottawatomie mission, to this city for a permanent location to minister to the fast increasing tide of immigration that had turned to Kansas. In 1856 the Benedictines began a foundation at Donipfan, near Atchison, but a short time afterwards they established a priory and a college in the latter city. They were followed by the Carmelites in 1864. Father Theodore Heimann, a German, who later joined the Carmelite Fathers; Father J. H. Defouri, from Savoy; and Father Ambrose T. Butler, from Ireland were among the first secular priests to come to the assistance of Bishop Miège, who was represented at the second Plenary Council of Baltimore, and went to Rome in 1853. He assisted at provincial councils in St. Louis in 1855 and 1858. The bishop soon had a parochial school wherever there was a resident priest. He built a noble cathedral at Leavenworth. Before leaving for the (Ecumenical Council of the Vatican, he appointed the Very Rev. L. M. Fink, Prior of St. Benedict's, vicar-general in spiritualibus, and Father Michael J. Corbett, administrator in temporalibus. Nebraska, part of the Dakotas, Wyoming, and Montana) continued until May, 1859. The increase in the Kansas Territory, which extended west to the Rocky Mountains, was steady. Desiring to return to the ranks of the Society of Jesus, Bishop Miège petitioned to be allowed to resign his episcopal jurisdiction, and in 187d1 a coadjutor was given him in the Very Rev. Louis M. Fink, prior of the Benedictine monastery at Atchison, and who had as a priest worked on the missions in Pennsylvania, Kentucky, New Jersey, and Illinois. He was consecrated at Chicago 11 June, 1871, titular Bishop of Eucarpia.

249 Bishop Miège then went on a begging tour in aid of the vicariate and spent three years collecting in South America. His petition to be allowed to resign was granted in December, 1874, when he returned to his order, being assigned to the house of studies at Woodstock, Maryland. In 1877 he was sent to Detroit where he founded a college and remained untl 1880, when he was appointed spiritual director at Woodstock for three years. Here he died 21 July, 1884.

250 In 1874 Bishop Fink took charge of the vicariate on the resignation of Bishop Miège; and 22 May, 1877, it was established as the Diocese of Leavenworth, and his title was transferred to this see. He was born 12 July, 1834, at Triftersberg, Baveria, and emigrated in boyhood to the United States. He entered the Benedictine Order in September, 1852, and was ordained priest at St. Vincent's Abbey, Beatty, Pennsylvania, 27 May, 1857. When he assumed jurisdiction in 1874, there were within the boundaries of Kansas 65 priests, 88 churches, 3 colleges, 4 academies, 1 hospital, 1 orphan asylum, 13 parish schools with 1700 pupils; and communities of Benedictine, Jesuit, and Carmelite priests; of Religious of the Sacred Heart, of Sisters of St. Benedict, of Sisters of Charity, and of Sisters of Loretto; with a Catholic population of nearly 25,000. In 1887 there were in Kansas 137 priests, and 216 churches. The decrees of the diocesan synod are admirable. The two new dioceses of Wichita and Concordia took from the diocese over 69,000 sq. miles. The parochial schools were placed under the supervision of a diocesan board that selects textbooks, and examines teachers and pupils. He fostered the Association of the Holy Childhood, the sodalities of the Blessed Virgin, and the Holy Angels; established the Confraternity of the Holy Family throughout the diocese and acted as diocesan director of the League of the Sacred Heart. Bishop Fink took part in the Third Council of Baltimore, and sedulously endeavoured to enforce its decrees. He continued to promote the progress of the Church until his death, 17 March, 1904.

251 There were then 110 priests, 100 churches, 13 stations and chapels, 37 parochial schools, 4000 pupils, and 35,000 Catholics. On his demise the Very Rev. Thomas Moore, who had been vicar-general since 1899, was made Apostolic administrator.

252 The successor of Bishop Fink was the Very Rev. Thomas F. Lillis, Vicar-General of the Diocese of Kansas City, who was born at Lexington, Missouri, in 1862, and ordained priest in 1885. He was consecrated Bishop of Leavenworth, in Kansas City, 27 December, 1904. His episcopal administration of the Leavenworth Diocese was eminently successful. The growth of the Church under his jurisdiction was marked by the foundation of new congregations, and the building of churches and parochial schools. Catholic societies were strengthened and the diocesan statutes revised to enforce the decrees of the Third Plenary Council of Baltimeore under present conditions. He adopted practical means of enforcing the papal "Motu Proprio"' on Church music. In March, 1910, he was appointed coadjutor to the Bishop of Kansas City, Missouri, cum jure successionis.

253 Statistics

254 Orders of men: Benedictines, Carmelites, Franciscans, Jesuits. Women: Sisters of St. Benedict, Sisters of Charity, Sisters of St. Frances, Sisters of the Poor of St. Francis, Sisters of St. Joseph, Oblate Sisters of Providence (coloured), Ursuline Sisters, Felician Sisters, Franciscan Sisters, Sisters of the Precious Blood. Priests, 143 (regulars, 71); churches with resident priests 76, missions with churches 46, stations 7, chapels 8, brothers 71, sisters 160; diocesan seminary, 1, seminary for religious 1; colleges and academies for boys 2, students 750; academies for young ladies 3, pupils 325, parochial schools 39, pupils 5700; high schools 2; orphan asylums 2, inmates 130; young people under Catholic care 6900; hospitals, 4; Catholic population 56,000. The Ursuline academy at Paola with 30 sisters was founded from Louisville in 1895. Mt. St. Scholastica's convent, established in 1863 subject to a prioress, has one hundred and seventy-five professed sisters with schools in the Dioceses of Cibcirduam Davenport, Kansas City, Sioux City, and Leavenworth with 3680 pupils. They conduct an academy at Atchison. The Sisters of Charity have a mother-house at St. Mary's Academy at Leavenworth since 1858. There are over 500 Sisters conducting establishments in the Archdiocese of Santa Fé, and in the Dioceses of Denver, Great Falls, Helena, and Leavenworth, with 8000 patients yearly in hospitals, 525 orphans, and 6000 pupils. St. Margaret's Hospital, Kansas City, Kansas, in charge of Sisters of the Poor of St. Francis, has 3000 patients annually.

255 St. Benedict's Abbey, Atchison, founded over fifty years ago, has 1 abbot, 51 monks, 11 clerics, 13 brothers. The Benedictine Fathers conduct St. Benedict's College, a boarding school with 300 pupils. St. Mary's College, a boarding school with 450 pupils, conducted by the Jesuit Fathers is the development of the Mission School which the Jesuits established among the Pottawatomie Indians in 1841. There are churches for the Croatians, Slovaks, Slovenians, Poles, Bohemians, and Germans as well as for the English-speaking congregations. The majority of the Catholics in the diocese are Irish and Germans who came to America over fifty years ago, and their descendants. A goodly proportion of the clergy ordained during the past twenty-five years are natives of the state. Several of the clergy are still active, after more than a quarter of a century of pastoral duties. The Rt. Rev. Mgr Ant. Kuhls, ordained in 1863, retired to St. Margaret's Hospital after forty-five years of zealous work.

256 (See Duchesne, Philippine-Rose; Kansas.)

257 Defouri, Original Diaries and Letters of Jesuit Missionaries; Catholic Directory, 1851-1910; Clarke, Lives of the Deceased Bishops of the Catholic Church in the United States, III (New York, 1888), 611 sqq.; Reuss, Bio. Cycl. Of the Catholic Hierarchy in U. S. (Milwaukee, 1898); Western Watchman (St. Louis, Missouri), files.

258 J. A. Shorter.

Lebanon

247 Lebanon (Assyr. Labn nu; Heb. Lebanôn; Egypt. possibly, Ramunu; Gr. Libanos), modern Jebel Libnân, or "White Mountain" (Semitic root laban), so called from the snow which covers the highest peaks during almost the entire year, or from the limestone which glistens white in the distance.

248 The centre of the great mountain range of Central Syria, which stretches from N.N.E. to S.S.W. almost parallel with the sea for about 95 miles from 33°20' to 34°40' is separated in the south by the Qâsimiye from the Galilean hill-country; in the north, by the Nahr el-Keb r from Jebel el-Ansarieh. It consists of two parallel mountain chains of the same formation: the western, or Lebanon proper, called Jebel el-gharbi; the eastern, known as Jebel el-sharqi (the Antilibanus of the Greeks). The primeval mass was cleft asunder towards the end of the Tertiary formation (Pliocene), forming the northern part of the Jordan fissure, which extends southward to the Red Sea. Geologically there are four strata, which are easily distinguishable in the deeply rent ravines. The first stratum, consisting of a layer of limestone (Araya limestone), about 980 feet in thickness, is sparingly strewn with fossils (cidaris glandaria, corals and sponges), and belongs to the Cenoman, earliest of the Upper Jura. Above it lies a richly fossilized composite (Cephalopoda) of sandstone, from 650 to 1630 feet in thickness, and clay marl divided by layers of chalky deposit (Trigonia or Nubian sandstone) from the Cenoman. Basaltic masses of lava appear in the sandstone. Peat, iron ore, and traces of copper are also found, and fossilized resin in the coal schists. The third layer of Lebanon limestone (about 3580 feet thick) is characterized at the base by abundant oyster beds or by hippurite limestone (Cenoman-Turon). One peculiarity is the slate of Hakel, containing fossil fishes, found also in the marly limestone of Sâhil Alma. In Antilibanus (the Beqâ'a), and on the outer edges of Lebanon, a fourth stratum of Senonian (not over 330 feet in thickness) appears in flinty chalk and limestone.

249 The highest peaks of these mountains are in the Western chain. They rise in the Arz Libnân to a height of more than 9800 feet, as Dahr el-Qodib; Jebel Makmal; Dahr el-Dubab (Qarn Sauda), about 10,000 feet. Exact measurements are wanting. Towards the south the elevation is not so great: Jebel-el Muneitira, 9130; Jebel Sannin, 8500 feet. In Antilibanus the Tala` at Mûsa is 8710 feet in height; Hermon, 9300. Deposits due to glacier formations may be observed at the top, but no one has as yet reached the actual snow line. Between Lebanon and Antilibanus extends the table-land of Beqâ'a, 5 to 9 miles broad, about 70 miles long, never rising to any height, considered by many the true Coelig;lesyria. The plain of Lebanon (D.V. Libanus) mentioned in Jos., xi, 17, and xii, 7, is probably Merj 'Aiyun. The southern and central parts are very fertile to-day. Near Ba albek is the watershed (about 3800 feet) between south and north, between the Nahr el-`Asi (Orontes) and the Nahr el-Lîtâni (not the Leontes), which latter as Nahr el-Qâsimiye empties into the sea a little to the north of Tyre. The western slope of Lebanon has many springs and rivers which pierce the limestone after a partly subterranean course, e.g. the Nahr el-Kelb. From south to north we come in succession to the Nahr el-Zaherâni; Nahr el-'Awali; Nahr Dâmûr (Tamyras); Nahr Beirut (Magoras); Nahr el-Kelb (Lykus), at the mouth of which Egyptian, Assyrian, Greek, and Latin inscriptions are found; Nahr Ibrâhîm (Adonis), at whose source was Afga (Apheka), the celebrated temple of Venus with its lewd and bloody cult, destroyed by Constantine; finally the Nahr el-Joz, and Nahr Qadîsha. The eastern slope and the Antilibanus are less favoured. In the north and east of Antilibanus there is great scarcity of water. Towards the south there are a few tributaries of the Lîtâni, chiefly the celebrated Baradâ, the river of Damascus (with `Ain Fîje), the Abana of Holy Writ (IV Kings, v, 12). Hermon feeds the three sources of the Jordan.

250 The vicinity of the sea causes proportionate dampness and warmth on the western side. The mountains are frequented as summer resorts on account of their agreeable climate, In the Beqâ`a the winter is apt to be sharp. During severe winters the snow descends to the most outlying spurs of the Lebanon. Along the coast, frost is unusual. In October the rainy season ushers itself in with sudden and violent showers. From December until February there are, on an average, twelve rainy days. In May rain is infrequent. The effects of the rainstorms, which are frequently of tropical violence and accompanied by thunder and lightning, are seen in the excessive erosion of the valleys.

251 The natural bridges are also the result of erosion, for instance those of Âqûra and Jisr el-Hajar (with a span of about 130 feet; more than 65 over the Neba` el-Leben). In the western region, where water is plentiful, the flora is abundant and of great variety. In prehistoric times the entire range as far as the coast was covered with forests. According to the Old Testament and profane literature, the Lebanon was renowned for its abundance of wood. Cedar, pine, maple, linden, and oak made the possession of the mountains lucrative. Solomon and Hiram, Egyptian and Assyrian, profited by these resources. To-day, through senseless plunder and the progress of cultivation, Lebanon has been largely robbed of its ancient splendour. Cedar is found in but few places, although all the climatic conditions for a successful growth are at hand.

252 Large tracts are now used for cultivating plants; and olive, fig, and mulberry trees constitute the wealth of to-day. Pomegranate, peach, apricot (in Damascus and vicinity), almond trees, walnuts, quinces, and other varieties of fruit flourish. The grape ripens at an altitude of nearly 5000 feet. The cultivation of the vine has developed advantageously. Grain flourishes at an altitude of 6200 feet, but, is little cultivated. A number of sweet-scented shrubs deserve mention: myrtle, oleander, sage, lavender, etc., to which fragrant plants the Old Testament attributes part of the fame of Lebanon. On the west, in general, the flora of the Mediterranean is found, and, on the heights, Alpine flora. On the eastern slope, in northern Beqâ'a and in Antilibanus, with their dry, severe climate, the flora is that of the steppes.

253 The prehistoric fauna was very different from that of to-day; stag, deer, bison, the wild horse, wild boar, lynx, lion, bear, and wild goat inhabited the forests. As remotely as Assyrian and Babylonian times, Lebanon was celebrated as a royal hunting-ground. To-day the number of deer is greatly diminished; bears, wolves, and panthers are rare. Hyenas, jackals, and wild boars are more frequent. The birds are not as well represented. Songsters are rare. Wild doves rock ptarmigan, eagles, and hawks are more often found. Reptiles are fairly numerous. Serpents, often venomous, abound, and also lizards (chameleon, gecko).

254 Traces of human occupation are found, dating from prehistoric times. Not only from the mouth of the Qâsimiye to Tripolis, but also in the mountains and in Beq a, genuine neolithic and pal olithic remains have been discovered. Broken human bones suggest the cannibalism of the aborigines. In historic times the Amorrhites appeared, whilst in the period of the Israelite kings the Phoenicians exercised dominion over the Lebanon, and Solomon had buildings erected there (III Kings, v, 6 sqq.; ix, 19). Later the Ituræans occupied Lebanon, and in Christian times the Maronites. The bloody persecutions of 1860 resulted in some improvement in the condition of part of the country, chiefly through the interference of France. The independent province of Lebanon has a Christian governor named by the sultan and approved by the Powers. Beteddîn, near Der el-Qamar, is the seat of government.

255 The inhabitants in 1900 numbered about 400,000; the greater part are Catholic Maronites; about 8 per cent, Greek Uniats; 13 per cent, Orthodox Greeks; 12 per cent, Druzes; 4 per cent, Shiite Metawiles; 3 per cent, Sunnites. The spirit of travel has seized the Maronites, who seek profit in Egypt, the United States, or in Latin America, returning later to their mountains. Ecclesiastically, the Maronites are subject to a patriarch who lives in the monastery of Qannobin. Numerous convents, some of them wealthy, are scattered over the hills; they maintain schools and have set up printing-presses. Higher instruction is given chiefly by European priests, but those of native birth take an active part. The American Protestant missions have long since entered into competition. For the education of the girls, native teaching sisters (Mariamettes) arc employed jointly with Europeans.

256 In times of peace the Christian administration has obtained good results. Safety and order have been established, and a great deal has been done for commerce. The high road from Beirut to Damascus (about 70 miles) was built in 1862, and other roads later, e.g. that following the coast, that from Beirut to Jezzîn, from Jezzîn to Saida, etc. In 1895 the first railroad was opened from Beirut to Damascus (90 miles), which in Lebanon reaches an elevation of 4850 feet, and in Antilibanus 4570 feet. The branch line from Rayâq to Haleb was opened in 1906. Further plans are being considered, principally for a better connection with Beqâ`a.

257 THOMSON, The Land and the Book (London, 1886), sections on Lebanon and Damascus; BURTON AND DRAKE, Unexplored Syria, 2 vols. (London, 1872); PORTER, Five Years in Damascus, 2 vols. (London, 1855); BAEDECKER, Palestine and Syria (4th ed., Leipzig, 1906); POST, Flora of Syria, Palestine, and Sinai (Beirut, 1896); RITTER, Erdkunde von Asien, VIII (Berlin, 1855); FRAAS, Drei Monate im Libanon (Stuttgart, 1876); IDEM, Aus dem Orient (2nd ed., Stuttgart, 1878); DIENER, Libanon (Vienna, 1886); ZUMOFFEN, La Phoenicie avant les Phoeniciens (Beirut, 1900); CUINET, Syrie, Liban et Palestine (Paris, 1896-1902); ZUMOFFEN, L'âge de la Pierre en Phoenicie in Anthropos, III (1908), 431-55; BLANCKENHORN, Abriss der Geologie, Syriens, Altneuland (Berlin, 1905); IDEM, Ueber die Steinzeit und die Feuersteinpetrefakten in Syrien-Pal stina in Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, XXXVII (1905), 447-68.

258 A. Merk.

Lebedus

250 Titular see of Asia Minor, suffragan of Ephesus. It was on the coast, ninety stadia to the east of Cape Myonnesus, and 120 west of Colophon. According to Pausanius, the town was inhabited by Carians when the Ionians immigrated there under the guidance of Andræmon, a son of Codrus. Strabo, however, states it was colonized by Andropompus, and that it previously bore the name of Artis. It became a flourishing city by its commerce, and was famous for its mineral springs, but was nearly destroyed by Lysimachus, who transported the population to Ephesus. Under the Romans, however, it flourished anew, became the meeting place of the actors of all Ionia, and festivals were celebrated in honour of Dionysus. Its remains, of little interest, are seen near Hypsili Hissar, in the caza of Sivri Hissar, vilayet of Smyrna. Lebedus appears in "Notitiæ episcopatum" as an episcopal see, suffragan of Ephesus until the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Three bishops only are known: Cyriacus, who witnessed the Robber Council of Ephesus, 449; Julian, represented by his metropolitan at Chalcedon in 451; Theophanes or Thomas, who attended the Council of NicÊa, 787.

251 LEQUIEN, Oriens Christianus, I, 725; CHANDLER, Asia Minor, 125; SMITH, Dict. Greek and Roman Geog., s. v.

252 S. Pétridès.

Edmond-Frederic Le Blant

253 French archeologist and historian, born 12 August, 1818; died 5 July, 1897 at Paris. He studied law and having qualified to practice, he obtained in 1843 a situation in the customs under the Finance Board. This position assured his future and he was free to follow his scientific inclinations. During a voyage through Italy (1847) he visited the Kircher Museum, and his intercourse with G.B. de Rossi determined him to undertake in France the scientific work which the founder of Christian archeology had undertaken in Rome. As early as 1848 Le Blant was commissioned to collect the inscriptions of the earliest days of Christianity in Gaul, and like de Rossi, he made an investigation of manuscripts, printed books, museums, churches, and the Gallo-Roinan cemeteries. In 1856 appeared the first volume of his "Recueil des inscriptions chrétienne des Gaules antérieures au VIIIe siècle". The second volume of the work (Paris, 1865) obtained for its author his election as a member of the Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres. A third volume appeared in 1892 under the title of "Nouveau Recueil". In the course of his researches Le Blant did not overlook any questions raised by his documents. He wrote learned articles on the method of Christian epigraphy, on Christian art, on the origin, progress, popular beliefs, and moral influence of Christianity in ancient Gaul. When he resigned his post as sub-commissioner of the customs (1872) he continued to devote himself to his favourite studies.

254 He tried to gather into one "Corpus" the Christian sarcophagi of which so many have been preserved in the south of France. In 1878 he published in Paris his "Etudes sur les sarcophages chrétiens de la ville d'Arles", which was followed by a second work "Etudes sur les sarcophages chrétiens de la Gaule" (Paris, 1886). In the introduction he treats of the form, ornamentation, and iconography of these monuments; he dwells upon the relationship between the sarcophagi of Arles and those of Rome, and the difference between them and those of the south-west of France, in which he finds more distinct signs of local influence. His studies and his personal tastes led him to take an interest also in the history of the persecutions and the martyrs. In numerous writings he treats in particular of the judicial bases of the persecutions and the critical value of the Acts of the Martyrs. These studies were crowned by his fine work "Persécuteurs et Martyrs" (Paris, 1893), in which he displays his scientific knowledge of history and his deep Christian convictions. In 1883, Le Blant became director of the Ecole Française at Rome. As such, his name figures honourably between that of Geffroy and of Mgr. Duchesne. In addition to his works mentioned above we may mention his collaboration with Jacquemart in "Histoire artistique, industrielle et commerciale de la porcelaine" (Paris, 1862); "Manuel d'épigraphie chrétienne" (Paris, 1869); "Les Actes des martyrs, Supplément aux Acta sincera' de Dom Ruinart" (Paris, 1882).

255 R. Maere.

Charles Lebrun

256 French historical painter, born in Paris, 1619; died at the Gobelin tapestry works, 1690. This great designer, whose fertility was so wonderful, received his first instruction in art from his father, and at the age of eleven was placed in the studio of Vouet. There he attracted the notice of Poussin, and in 1642 accompanied him to Italy, remaining there four years. On his return, he was for a while at Lyons, and then settled down in Paris. His skill soon brought him before the notice of the eminent personages of his day, and he received an important commission from Fouquet, and painted a large picture for Queen Anne of Austria, in return gave him her portrait set in diamonds. Cardinal Mazarin introduced him to Louis XIV, and he speedily became a very popular person at court, and held almost unlimited sway over all artistic matters after the death of Le Sueur. He was intimately concerned in 1648 in the foundation of the Academy, and when the king, under the advice of Colbert, founded the Gobelin tapestry works in 1662, Lebrun was appointed director, and was styled "a person skilful and intelligent in the art of painting, to make designs for tapestry, sculpture, and other works, to see that they were correctly rendered, and to direct and overlook all the workmen employed". Lebrun was responsible for designing almost all the important cartoons for the early work of the Gobelin factory, but beyond that, he was responsible for decoration and for statues at Versailles, for a long series of allegorical paintings, and for decoration work at Sceaux, Versailles, and Marly. When Colbert died in 1683, Lebrun lost his great patron, and during the last few years of his life, he withdrew from court, and fell into a condition of melancholy which continued until the time of his death. He was a great scenic artist, inspired by grand ideas, a man of unceasing energy, with a fine colour sense, and good knowledge of decoration, but his work was somewhat heavy, and the influence he exercised over French art was not wholly to its advantage. In designing tapestry, his art was well employed, and he will be remembered more for his splendid designs for the Gobelin work than for his own paintings.

257 George Charles Williamson

St. Lebwin

259 (LEBUINUS or LIAFWIN).

260 Apostle of the Frisians and patron of Deventer, b. in England of Anglo-Saxon parents at an unknown date; d. at Deventer, Holland, about 770. Educated in a monastery and fired by the example of St. Boniface, St. Willibrord, and other great English missionaries, Lebwin resolved to dovote his life to the conversion of the Germans. After his ordination he proceeded to Utrecht, and was gladly welcomed by Gregory, third bishop of that place, who entrusted him with the mission of Overyssel on the borders of Westphalia, and gave him as a companion Marchelm (Marcellinus), a disciple of St. Willibrord. Hospitably received by a widow named Abachilda (Avaerhilt), he fearlessly preached the Gospel among the wild tribes of the district, and erected a little chapel at Wulpe (Wilpa) on the west bank of the Yasel. As the venerable personality and deep learning of the missionary quickly won numbers, even of the nobles, to the Faith it soon became necessary to build at Deventer on the east bank of the river a larger church, after which a residence for Lebwin was also erected. This state of undisturbed development of his little fold was not, however to continue. Lebwin's wonderful success excited great hostility among the pagans; ascribing his conversions to witchcraft, they formed an alliance with the predatory and anti-Christian Saxons, burned the church at Deventer, and dispersed the flock. Having with difficulty managed to escape, Lebwin determined to voice the claims of Christianity at the national assembly of the Saxons. To this the three estates of each gau sent twelve men as representatives, and with it the decision of all important matters rested. Setting out for Marclo near the Weser in Saxony, where the assembly was held, Lebwin was hospitably entertained by a noble named Folchert (Folkbert), apparently a Christian, who vainly strove to dissuade him from his purpose. Clad in priestly vestments and bearing the crucifix in one hand and the Gospels in the other, Lebwin appeared in the midst of the assembled Saxons, while they were engaged with their sacrifices to their false deities. Having boldly proclaimed the One True God, the Creator of all, he warned them that, if they obstinately adhered to their idolatry, "a bold, skilful, and mighty king would advance upon them like a raging torrent, destroy everything with fire and sword, bring want and banishment into their territories, send their wives and children into slavery, and make the remainder submit to the yoke of his domination." Enraged at these words, the Saxons demanded that this enemy of their religion and land should expiate his reckless offence by death, and they prepared to slay him with stakes torn from the thickets and sharpened, but he made his escape. An old nobleman, Buto, reminded the assembly that, while ambassadors from the Normans, Slavs, and Frisians had been always honourably received and dismissed in peace, they were now insulting and threatening with death the ambassador of the Highest God, of whose mightiness the present wonderful deliverance of His servant from instant death was sufficient evidence. Convinced by this speech, the Saxons promised henceforth to respect the rights of Christianity. On his return to Friesland, Lebwin rebuilt the church at Deventer, and found there his last resting-place. That he died before 776 is certain, since in that year the Saxons made a fresh inroad into the district and burnt the church, but, in spite of the most careful search for three days, were unable to discover the saint's body. St. Ludger (q.v.) rebuilt the church a few years later, and found the saint's remains. Lebwin is commemorated by the Church on 12 November.

261 The principal source for Lebwin's biography are; HUCBALD (918—76), Vita s. Lebuini in SURIUS VitÊ SS., VI, 277—86, and in abbreviated form In Mon. Germ. SS., II, 360—4: tr. in CRESSY Church History of Brittany XXIV, vii; RADBOD, Ecloga et Sermo (on Lebwin) in SURIUS, VI, 839; Altfrid, Vita Liutgeri in Mon. Germ. SS., II, 360 sqq. For further bibliography see GAMMACK in Dict. Christ. Biog., s. v. Lebuinus.

262 Thomas Kennedy

Emile-Paul-Constant-Ange Le Camus

262 Preacher, theologian, scripturist, Bishop of La Rochelle and Saintes, b. at Paraza, France, 24 August, 1839; d. at Malvisade, near Castelnaudary, France, 28 September, 1906. He made his preparatory studies at Carcassonne, and then entered the theological seminary of St-Sulpice at, Paris. In 1861 he went to Rome, where he received his doctorate in theology, and in the following year, 20 December, 1862, he was ordained priest at Carcassonne, France. He at once revealed remarkable oratorical powers, and in 1867 he was invited to preach the Lenten sermons at Avignon, for which he was made honorary canon. This same honour was again conferred upon him somewhat later by Mgr Las Cazes, Bishop of Constantine (Algeria), who also chose Le Camus as his theologian at the Vatican Council. In 1875 Le Camus was appointed assistant director of the Dominican school at Sorez, France, but soon after he became head of the new school of St. Francis de Sales, which he established at Castelnaudary. Here he laboured until 1887, when he resigned his position as director in order to devote himself exclusively to the study of the New Testament. To equip himself properly for this study, and especially to study the topography of the Holy Land, he made his first journey to the East in the following year (1888). This was followed by several other visits, and the results of his travels and studies were published at various times. While pursuing his Scriptural studies, Le Camus also found time to preach several ecclesiastical retreats at Lyons, Montpellier, Paris, and Rome. In 1897 he was elected theological canon of Carcassonne, and on 6 April, 1901, he received his appointment as Bishop of La Rochelle and Saintes. He was consecrated at Carcassonne, 2 July, 1901, by Cardinal Lecot. Even as bishop, Le Camus continued his work on the New Testament, and also published several letters and pamphlets on ecclesiastical topics. His more important works are: "La Vie de Notre Seigneur Jésus-Christ", 3 vols., 6th ed., 1901 (translated into English, German, and Italian); "Voyages aux Sept Eglises de l'Apocalypse"; "Notre Voyage aux Pays Bibliques", 3 vols., 1889—90; "L'Œuvre des Apôtres". 3 vols., 1905; "Les Enfants de Nazareth"; "Vraie et Fausse Exégèse"; "Lettre sur la Formation Ecclésiastique des Séminaristes"; "Lettre réglant la réorganization des études ecclésiastiques"; "Mémoire addressé à MM. les députés membres de la Commission des Congrégations ". Bulletin Trimestriel des Anciens Elèves de St-Sulpice, n. xliii (15 Nov., 1906). 450—54; New York Review, II. n. iii, 498; II, vi, 773—80.

263 F.X.E. Albert

Etienne Le Camus

265 French cardinal, b. at Paris, 1632; d. at Grenoble, 1707. Through the influence of his father, Nicolas le Camus, a state councillor, he was when still very young attached to the court as almoner of the king, and enjoyed the friendship of Bossuet. The Sorbonne made him doctor of theology at the age of eighteen. The fact of his consorting with such men as Benserade, Vivonne, and Bussy drew upon him the severity of Mazarin, and he was for a while exiled to Meaux. Recalled through the influence of Colbert, he retired in 1665 to La Trappe with de Rancé, and passed from his former levity to an asceticism that led him to Port-Royal. The publication of his letters by Ingold shows that Jansenism was with Le Camus more a matter of personal sympathy and spiritual discipline than of doctrinal tenets. Made against his will Bishop of Grenoble in 1671, he proved himself zealous almost to excess in reforming abuses in his diocese. In the affair of the "régale" he acted as intermediary between Rome and Versailles, and showed creditable courage before the omnipotent Louis XIV. Innocent XI, having made him cardinal instead of Harlay, presented by the king, he was not allowed till 1689 to go to Rome to receive the insignia of his dignity. Le Camus founded in the Diocese of Grenoble two seminaries and several charitable institutions. Besides a "Recueil d'ordonnances synodales" we have from him the "Défense de la Virginité perpétuelle de la Mère de Dieu" (Paris, 1680), and numerous letters published by Ingold.

266 BELLET, Histoire du Cardinal Le Camus (Paris 1886); SAINTE-BEUVE, Port-Royal, IV (Paris, 1901), 528; ST-SIMON, Mémoires (ed. HACHETTE), IV 59 to be corrected by LALOUETTE, Abrégé de la vie de M. le Cardinal Le Camus (Paris, 1720); INGOLD, Lettres du Card. Le Camus in Bulletin de l'Académie Delphinoise, 2nd series, I.

267 J.F. Sollier

Joseph Le Caron

268 One of the four pioneer missionaries of Canada and first missionary to the Hurons (q.v.), b. near Paris in 1586; d. in France, 29 March, 1632 He embraced the ecclesiastical state and was chaplain to the Duke of Orléans. When that prince died, Le Caron joined the Recollects and made his profession in 1611. On 24 April, 1615, he sailed from Honfleur, reached Canada on 25 May, and immediately wont to Sault St. Louis. After a short time he travelled to Quebec, provided himself with a portable altar service, returned to the Sault, and went into the land of the Hurons, being the first to visit their settlements and preach the Gospel. He stayed with them about a year, and was again among them in 1623. In 1616 he returned to France to look after the spiritual and material interests of the colony. The following spring saw him in Canada again, as provincial commissary. During the winters of 1618 and 1622 he evangelized the Montagnais of Tadousac. In 1625 he was once more in France, returned to Canada a year later, was elected superior of his order at Quebec, and filled this office until the capture of Quebec by the English in 1629, when he and his colleagues were sent back to France by the conquerors.

269 Le Caron was a saintly man, given to the practice of austerities, but gentle towards others. He died of the plague in the convent of Ste-Marguerite in France. We owe to him the first dictionary of the Huron language. The "Bibliotheca Universa Franciscana" of Jean de S. Antoine, II (Madrid, 1732), 243, says on the evidence of Arturus in his "Martyrologium Franciscanum" under date of 31 August, that Le Caron wrote also "Quærimonia Novæ Franciæ" (Complaint of New France).

270 Histoire chronol. de la province de St-Denis (Bibl. Nat., Paris); Mortuologe des Récollets de la province de St-Denis (late seveenteenth-century MS., in the archives of Quebec seminary); CHAMPLAIN (Euvres, ed. LAVARDIÈRE (6 vols., Quebec, 1870); SAGARD, Histoire du Canada, ed. TROSS (4 vols.. Paris, 1866); LECLERCQ, Premier Etablissment de la Foi dans la Nouvelle France (2 vols., Paris, 1691).

271 Odoric-M. Jouve.

Diocese of Lecce

271 (Liciensis).

272 Diocese; suffragan of Otranto. Lecce, the capital of a province in Terra d'Otranto in Apulia, seven and a half miles from the sea, is an industrial and commercial city (tobacco, grain, wine, oil, woven goods). Marble quarries are in the vicinity. Extensive ruins of megalithic structures in its territory prove that it was inhabited at a very remote period. It was known to the ancients as Lupiæ, and then had a port, enlarged by Hadrian and Marcus Aurelius. Near Lecce is the village of Rugge, the ancient Rudiæ, birthplace of Ennius. In the time of the Normans, Lecce became the seat of a countship, some of its counts being famous, notably Tancred (d. 1194), who contested with Henry VI the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, and Gautier de Brienne, cousin of Tancred. Under Charles V, to whom a triumphal arch was erected in the city, Lecce received new life, and the features of that epoch are retained to this day. For this reason Lecce is one of those cities that have preserved a characteristic and uniform style of architecture. Of the more ancient buildings there remains only the church of SS. Nicola and Cataldo, outside the city, in Romanesque style (1180). The cathedral of S. Oronzio (first built in 1114 by Goffredo d'Altavilla), in its present form, and the church of S. Domenico are of the seventeenth century, S. Croce of the sixteenth-all in baroque style. The cathedral tower is about 240 feet high, and serves yet as a lighthouse for ships plying between Otranto and Brindisi. Until the beginning of the nineteenth century there was a signal on its summit to give warning of pirate ships. The Palazzo della Intendenza, once the abbey of the Celestines, is noteworthy. Mention must also be made of the manufacture of tobacco in the ancient Dominican convent. The historian Scipione Ammirati and the painter Matteo da Lecce (sixteenth century) were natives of Lecce. The Christian religion, it is said, was first introduced by St. Orontius, a Pythagorean philosopher converted by St. Paul. St. Leucius is also venerated as bishop and martyr. But a bishop of Lecce is first mentioned in 1057, in the person of Teodoro Bonsecolo. Other bishops of note were Roberto Vultorico (1214), who restored the cathedral; Tommaso Ammirati (1429); Ugolino Martelli (1511), a linguist; Giambattista Castromediani (1544), who founded the hospital and other institutions for children and the poor; Luigi Pappacoda (1639), who rebuilt the cathedral, which contains his statue in marble; Antonio Pignatelli (1672), later Innocent XII, who founded the seminary of Lecce.

273 The diocese has 32 parishes with 100,000 souls, 8 religious houses of men and 16 of women, 10 schools for boys, and 6 for girls.

274 DE SIMONE, Lecce e i suoi dintorni (Lecce, 1874); CAPPELLETTI, Le Chiese d'Italia, XXI.

275 U. Benigni

François Leclerc du Tremblay

274 A Capuchin, better known as PÈRE JOSEPH, b. in Paris, 4 Nov., 1577; d. at Rueil, 18 Dec., 1638. Owing to the influence of his kinsman the Constable de Montmorency, he appeared at court at the age of eighteen with the title of Baron de Maffliers, and served in the armies of Henry IV against Spain. On 2 Feb., 1599 he became a Capuchin novice, he was provincial of the Capuchins of Touraine in Sept., 1613, and took part in 1616 in the negotiations of Loudun between Marie de Medicis and the malcontents led by the Prince de Condé. To the future Cardinal de Richelieu he furnished the opportunity of a conference with Condé, the first service rendered by Richelieu to Marie de Medicis and to the State. In this way Père Joseph appears at the opening of Richelieu's political career. The role of Père Joseph has recently been studied anew by Abbé Dedouvres and M. Fagniez. Their researches prove that Père Joseph remained true to the medieval idea of Christendom. He had visions of a crusade that would combine all Europe, and the purpose of his visit to Rome in 1616 was to discuss with Paul V the schemes of the Duke of Nevers, who was planning to unite against the Turks the Maniots of Morca and thc Slav populations of the Balkans, and with this enterprise in view, founded (1617) the Order of the Christian Militia. Père Joseph even wrote an epic poem on this subject, "La Turciade." But the conflict between the Habsburgs and the Bourbons, as well as the new prospects of the Mantuan succession open to Charles de Nevers caused the crusade scheme to fail. Père Joseph then became Richelieu's confidential political agent, hoping that, with the Bourbons victorious, and peace established in Europe, it would finally be possible to march against the Turks. His scheme was to weaken both the Protestants and the House of Austria, both of whom he considered enemies of the peace of Europe. He wished France to use the Protestants to weaken the House of Austria, and the House of Austria to weaken the Protestants.

275 Richelieu sent him to Rome in 1625, to negotiate regarding the rival claims of the Grisons and Spain in Valtellina. In 1630 he was sent to the Diet of Ratisbon to give quiet support to the opposition of the German princes to the claims of Emperor Ferdinand, and to strengthen the bonds of alliance between France and the Elector Maximilian of Bavaria, head of the Catholic League. On the morrow of the Diet of Ratisbon, Germany was divided between a powerless emperor and two parties, one Catholic, the other Protestant, both equally hostile to the empire. Père Joseph laboured to obtain the neutrality of the Duke of Bavaria and of the Catholic League in view of the invasion of Gustavus Adoiphus, protector of the Protestants; he even had hopes of forming an alliance between Maximilian and Gustavus Adolphus. After the death of Gustavus Adolphus war became inevitable between France and the Habsburgs. and it broke out in 1635. Henceforth instead of pressing on Richelieu his own broad political views, Père Joseph was content to support the makeshift policy imposed by circumstances on the cardinal. The desire for territorial expansion, which at that time governed French policy, was Richelieu's rather than Père Joseph s. The latter however, eagerly followed the progress of the French troops and, in the cardinal's name, kept up an active correspondence with the generals and ministers. Tradition represents the cardinal as bending over his dying friend and saying to him: "Père Joseph, Brisach is ours." As a matter of fact the taking of Brisach, which occurred on 17 Dec., 1638, could not have been known in Paris on the next morning, the date of the death of Père Joseph; but the tradition such as it is, symbolizes the close bond which patriotism created between these two men.

276 While the religious idea of a crusade inspired the secular policy of Père Joseph, intense sacerdotal and Apostolic zeal characterized him amid all his political preoccupations. At his suggestion d Orl ans-Longueville reformed the Benedictine Order at Fontevrault and founded the congregation of Our Lady of Calvary, for whose nuns he wrote many books of piety. He opposed, even more openly than Richelieu, Richer's Gallican doctrines. Père Joseph also founded Capuchin missions for the conversion of Protestants, in Poitou, Dauphiné, the Cevennes, Languedoc, Provence, and later in the East. The sending of Père Pacifique to Constantinople in 1624, with the title of "Prefect of Eastern Missions" was the beginning of vast spiritual conquests by the Capuchins in the Archipelago, the Greek peninsula, and Asia Minor. From Paris Père Joseph directed this work. and in 1633 there were ten Eastern missions. It was he alsp who, in 1633, sent Père Agathange of Vend me to found a mission in Egypt; this same father in 1637 attempted but in vain to establish a mission in Abyssinia; finally Père Joseph tried, but unsuccessfully, to establish a mission of French Capuchins in Morocco.

277 FAGNIEZ, Le P. Joseph et Richelieu (2 vols., Paris, 1894): DEDOUVRES. Le P. Joseph polémiste, ses premiers premiers écrits 1623-1626 (Paris, 1895); DEDOUVRES, Un précurseur de la B. Marguerite Marie. LePère Joseph et le Sacré Coeur (Angers, 1899).

278 Georges Goyau

Chrestien Leclercq

277 A Franciscan Récollet and one of the most zealous missionaries to the Micmac of Canada, also a distinguished historiographer of Nouvelle France. A Fleming by birth, he joined the province of the Récollets of St. Antoine, in Artois, and went to Canada in 1673; on 11 October of that year he was put in charge of the Micmac mission by Mgr de Laval. He learned the language of that tribe and devoted himself to its evangelization. His superiors sent him to France in 1680 on business connected with the Franciscan missions in Canada; he returned in the following spring with letters authorizing the foundation of a convent in Montreal, whither he went during the summer of 1681 to carry out this work. In the month of November he went back to the Micmac mission, where he passed in all twelve years of his life. In autumn 1686 he returned finally to France, where he filled various positions of authority in the Artois province of his order. The date of his death, like that of his birth, is unknown, but he was still living in 1698. After his return to France, he completed two works which he published at Paris in 1691. They are:

278 (1) "Premier établissement de la foy dans la Nouvelle-France", 2 vols. in l2mo. The first volume contains fourteen unnumbered leaves and 559 pages; the second 458 pages. This work is now very rare and commands a high price. It may be divided into three parts. The first contains the early history of Nouvelle-France, the introduction of Catholicism into that country, and describes the labours of the first missionaries in Canada, the Récollets. This part ends at the year 1629 on the taking of Quebec by the English. The second part, from 1632 till 1670 inclusive, continues the history of the colony, relates the spreading of the Faith among the native tribes through the devoted labours of the Jesuit Fathers, and tells of the return of the Récollets to Canada and their new foundation of the convent of Notre-Dame des Anges at Quebec. The third part gives one of the best accounts, and in certain matters the only account of the travels and discoveries of de La Salle, and ends with the victory of the French over the English at the siege of Quebec in 1690. The work has been criticized, Charlevoix complaining that Leclercq treats only of the religious affairs in which the Récollets took part, and even ascribing to Frontenac a share in the authorship of the work; but the authenticity of the documents on which the author relied for his information has never been impugned; and it remains an important source for the history of Canada and of the Catholic Church in North America. An English translation by John Gilmary Shea, was published at New York in 1881, containing an account of the author, portraits, map, views, and facsimile.

279 (2) "Nouvelle relation de la Gaspésie", 1 vol. in l2mo, also published at Paris, in 1691, by Aurov, contains four unnumbered leaves and 372 pages. This book describes the scenes of the Apostolic labours of the zealous author from 1675 till 1686. It relates the missionary efforts of Leclercq and some other Récollets around the Gulf of St. Lawrence, the Baie des Chaleurs, and in New Brunswick. But the author describes in particular the life, customs, and beliefs of the savages called by him by the general name of Gaspesians) who then inhabited these regions. It is an important work, though of mere local interest. From it we learn that Leclercq invented a system of writing by which he taught the Micmac Indians to read their own language. Very probably these hieroglyphics have been preserved, and are to be found in the Micmac writings which still exist. It has been translated into English by W.F. Ganong, with an account of the author and illustrations (1 vol., Edinburgh, 1910).

280 Archives of the Archbishopric of Quebec; LECLERCQ, Premier tablissement de la foy dans la Nouvelle France (Paris, 1691) IDEM, Nouvelle relation de la Gasp sie (Paris, 1601); HENNEPIN, Nouveau voyage, etc. (Utrecht, 1698) REVEILLAUD, Histoire chronologigue de la Nouvelle France (Paris, 1888).

281 Odoric-M. Jouve.

Lecoy de La Marche

280 (Richard-Albert).

281 French historian; b. at Nemours, 1839; d. at Paris, 1897. He left the Ecole des Chartes in 1861, and was appointed archivist of the Department of Haute Savoie. In 1864 he went to Paris as archivist in the historical section of the Archives Nationales; he was also, for many years, professor of French history at the Catholic Institute in Paris. Lecoy de La Marche was gifted with rare qualities as a writer and scholar, and what is still more remarkable, he never separated the research for and the diffusion of historical truth from the defence and propagation of religious truth. His masterpiece is his "Chaire française au moyen âge" (Paris, 1868), which was awarded a prize by the Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. It has served as a model for many books on this subject, but has remained to this day the standard work of its kind. It consists of three parts: "Les prédicateurs; les sermons; la société d'aprés les sermons". Part I begins with a summary of the history of preaching in the primitive Church, and in France previous to the eleventh century, and then gives an exhaustive history of the French preachers in the following centuries, especially the thirteenth. Part II deals with the audiences, the time and the place of preaching, and the various kinds of sermons. Part III, which is perhaps the most remarkable section of the book, is a study of French society in the Middle Ages as it appears in the light of the sermons. Kings, lords, bishops, priests, monks, burgesses, peasants, men and women, pass before our eves, with their characteristic traits and weaknesses. Lecoy de La Marche also published: "L'académie de France à Rome" (1874); "Le roi René, sa vie, son administration" (1873); "Anecdotes historiques, etc." (1876); "La Société au XIIIe siècle" (1880); "Saint Martin" (1881); "Les manuscrits et la miniature" (1884); "Relations politiques de la France et du royaume de Majorque" (1892), etc.

282 Revue des questions historiques (Paris, 1897).

283 Pierre Marique.

Claude Le Coz

283 French bishop, b. at Plouévez-Parzay (FinistËre), 1740; d. at Villevieux (Jura), 1813. Pupil, then professor, and finally principal of the CollËge de Quimper, he took the constitutional oath in 1791, was elected schismatic Bishop of Ille-et-Vilaine, and wrote in defence of his election-declared null and void by the pope-"Accord des vrais principes de la morale et de la raison sur la Constitution civile du clergé". Elected to the Legislative Assembly he showed courage and ability in defending against the majority Catholic colleges, the ecclesiastical costume, and even Christian marriage. His moderation drew upon him the severity of the Convention, and he spent fourteen months in the prison of Mont-Saint-Michel. Later, under the Directory, the vigour with which he opposed the substitution of the decadi for the Christian Sunday came near causing his deportation. Under the Concordat, Le Coz was one of the Constitutional bishops whom the force of circumstances compelled the Holy See to recognize, and he became Archbishop of Besaneon. There is a doubt as to the nature of his retractation: Bernier, the ecclesiastical diplomat who negotiated the rehabilitation of the jurors, thought it best, in order to avoid delay, not to make a clear mention of the mannerof retractation required by Pius VII; as a consequence, Le Coz denied ever having retracted, and the awkwardness of the situation was ended only by a personal interview between Le Coz and Pius VII, in which both were seen weeping but of which neither ever spoke. As schismatic Bishop of Ille-et-Vilaine, Le Coz failed in his endeavour to organize the new province of which he was the metropolitan; otherwise he proved a zealous administrator and even a charitable pastor. As Archbishop of BesanÁon he displayed some good qualities, but his sad antecedents, the doubt hanging over his conversion, and the presence in his archiepiscopal palace of too many ex-juror priests, detracted considerably from the effectiveness of his ministry. The strange mixture of truth and error, of good and evil in Le Coz's life, is partly explained by his intensely Gallican education, which caused him to adopt with apparent sincerity and to maintain with unconquerable obstinacy the most schismatic views. His Gallicanism, which made him so haughty toward the pope, found him almost cringing before the various political regimes which succeeded one another during his episcopate. In an age full of confusion, we should give some credit to Le Coz for sometimes having, even against the all-powerful Abbé Grégoire, defended the cause of religion in the "Annales de la Religion", in which he was an assiduous collaborator, and in his "Correspondance", part of which has been published by his biographer.

284 ROUSSEL, Le Coz, évÍque d'Ille-et-Vilaine (Paris, s.d.); IDEM, Correspondance de Le Coz (Paris, 1900); PISANI, Le Coz in Répertoire biographique de l'Episcopat Constitutionnel (Paris, 1907).

285 J.F. Sollier

Lectern

286 (Lecturn, Letturn, Lettern, from legere, to read).

287 Support for a book, reading-desk, or bookstand, a solid and permanent structure upon which the Sacred Books, which were generally large and heavy, were placed when used by the ministers of the altar in liturgical functions. In early days only one such structure was employed; later, two were erected, one at the northern wall of the choir, and another on the opposite side. From the former the sermon was delivered by the priest, and also by the bishop, unless he spoke from his cathedra; here decrees of synods were promulgated, censures and excommunications pronounced, the diptychs read, the Gospel chanted by the deacon, and all those parts of the liturgy were sung which belonged to the deacon's office. The other, somewhat longer but not so high, was divided into two compartments or stories—the higher, facing the altar, was used by the subdeacon when reading the Epistle; in the other, facing the nave, the other lessons were read. A third lectern was used in some churches for the sermon. Some of these were built of marble, others of wood, highly adorned with silver and gold, enamelled, and set with precious stones, covered with bronze plates and carvings in ivory. Besides those mentioned under Ambo, we find among the treasures of the Abbey of Saint-Riquier "lectoria tria ex marmore, argento et auro fabricata" (P.L., CLXXIV, 1257). One in the court of the church of St. Pantalaemon in Thessalonica is held to be the oldest. On its lower part is found in relief the Madonna and Child, seated on a throne and surrounded by shepherds and the three Magi, and on the superstructure are symbolic representations. The upper part of the lectern in S. Apollinare Nuovo at Ravenna is old and fairly complete. Another, well preserved and richly decorated, a donation of Henry II, is at Aachen. Movable lecterns were also made of wood, bronze, or polished brass. A bronze lectern inlaid with ivory, made about the middle of the twelfth century by Sugar, Abbot of St. Denis, was in the shape of an eagle whose outspread wings held the book. Eagle-shaped lecterns were also numerous in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries in England. Samples, but not going back later than the fifteenth century, are found at Aachen, Dusseldorf, St. Severin's at Cologne, etc. A lectern of neatly wrought iron, in the shape of an X, which can be folded, is in the Musee Cluny at Paris. The Carthusians of Dijon had a lectern which was a large column of copper, in Renaissance style, supporting a phoenix surrounded by the four animals of the Prophet Ezechiel. In some the figure of a deacon holds the book.

288 The Synods of Munster (1279), Liège (1287), and Cambrai (1300) prescribed that the Missal, enveloped in a linen cloth, should be laid on the altar. Towards the end of the thirteenth century a cushion came into use. The oldest notice of a stand for the Missal is found in an inventory of the cathedral of Angers of the year 1297 (Zeitschrift fur christliche Kunst, X, 175). All such lecterns were covered on festivals with rich cloths of silver and gold. At the present day lecterns are in use as Missal-stands and for the reading of the prophecies on Holy Saturday and Pentecost Saturday, for the chanting of the Passion, the singing of the "Exultet", and the reading of the lessons in choirs.

289 Duchesne, Christian Worship (London, 1904), 114, 169, 353; Rock, Church of Our Fathers, I (London, 1903), 106; Kraus, Geschichte der christlichen Kunst, II (Freiburg im Br., 1897), 482; Binterim, Denkwurdigkeiten, IV, i, 70

290 Francis Mershman

Lectionary

289 (Lectionarium or Legenda).

290 Lectionary is a term of somewhat vague significance, used with a good deal of latitude by liturgical writers. It must be rememered that in the early Middle Ages neither the Liturgy of the Mass, nor the Divine Office recited by monks and other ecclesiastics in choir, were to be found, as in the Missal and the Breviary of the present day, complete in one volume. Both for the Mass and for the Office a variety of books were used, for it was obviously a matter of convenience when books were both bulky and costly to produce that the prayers, e.g. which the priest had to say at the altar, should be contained in a different volume from the antiphons to be sung by the choir. The word lectionary, then, in its wider sense, is a term which may be correctly applied to any liturgical volume containing passages to be read aloud in the services of the Church. In this larger signification it would include all Scriptural books written continuously, in which readings were marked, such as the "Evangeliaria" (also often known as "Textus"), as well as books, known also as "Plenaria", containing both Epistles and Gospels combined, such as are commonly employed in a high Mass at the present day, and also those collections, either of extracts from the Fathers or of historical narrations about the martyrs and other saints, which were read aloud as lessons in the Divine Office. This wider signification is, however, perhaps the less usual, and in practice the term lectionary is more commonly used to denote one of two things: (1) the book containing the collection of Scriptural readings which are chanted by the deacon, subdeacon, or a lector during Mass; (2) any book from which the readings were taken which are read aloud in the Office of Matins, after each nocturn or group of psalms. With regard to these last the practice seems to have varied greatly. Sometimes collections were made containing just the extracts to be used in choir, such as we find them in a modern Breviary. Sometimes a large volume of patristic homilies (known also as sermonarium) or historical matter was employed, in which certain passages were marked to be used as lessons. This last custom seems more particularly to have obtained with regard to the short biographical accounts of martyrs and other saints, which in our modern Breviary form the lessons of the second nocturn. In this connection the word legenda in particular is of common occurrence. The Bollandist Poncelet is, consequently, inclined to draw a distinction between the "Legenda" and the ëLectionarium" (see Analecta Bollandiana, XXIX, 13). The "Legenda", also called "Passionarium" is a collection of narratives of variable length, in which are recounted the life, martyrdom, translation, or miracles of the saints. This usually forms a large volume, and the order of the pieces in the collection is commonly, though not necessarily, that of the calendar. A few such "LegendÊ" come down from quite the early Middle Ages. But the vast majority of those now preserved in our libraries belong to the eleventh, twelfth. and thirteenth centuries. The earliest, is the ëëCodex Velseri", MS. Lat. 3514, of the Royal Library at Munich, written probably before the year 700. When these books were used in choir during Office the reader either read certain definitely marked passages, indicated by markings of which our existing manuscripts constantly show traces, or, in the earlier periods especially, he read on until the abbot or priest who presided gave him the signal to stop. After the thirteenth century however, this type of book was much more rarely transcribed. It was replaced by what may conveniently be called for distinction's sake the "Lectionarium" par excellence, a book which consisted not of entire narratives, but only of extracts arranged according to feasts, and made expressly to be read in the Office. It may be added that about the same period the still more comprehensive liturgical book, known to us so familiarly as the Breviary (q.v.) also began to make its appearance. In the early centuries the Scriptural passages to be read at Mass, whether taken from the Gospels, the Epistles, or the Old Testament, were very commonly included in one book, often called a "Comes" or "Liber Comicus". But no constant or uniform practice was followed, for sometimes the Epistles and Lessons were read from a continuous text equipped with rubrics indicating the different days for which the passages were intended - this is the case with the famous "Epistolarium" of St. Victor of Capua in the sixth century; sometimes Lessons, Epistles, and Gospels were all transcribed in their proper order into one volume, as in the case of the Liber Comicus" of the Church of Toledo lately edited by Dom Morin, or of the Lectionnaire de Luxeuil, published by Mabillon in his "Liturgia Gallicana".

291 BAUDOT, Les Lectionnaires in Science of Religion (Paris, 1907), nos. 463, 464; SAUER in BUCHBERGER, Kirchliches Handlex., s.v. Lektionar; MORIN, Liber Comicus, introduction (Maredsous, 1893): and many articles of the same writer in Revue Bénédictine; PONCELET in Analecta Bollandiana, XXIX (Brussels, 1910), 1-48; BEISSEL, Entstehung der Perikopen des r-m. Messbuches (Freiburg im Br., 1907); RANKE, Das kirch. Perikopen System (Berlin, 1847); WORDSWORTH AND LITTLEHALES, Old Service Books of the English Church (London, 1904).

292 Herbert Thurston

Lector

292 A lector (reader) in the West is a clerk having the second of the four minor orders. In all Eastern Churches also, readers are ordained to a minor order preparatory to the diaconate. The primary reason for a special class of readers was the need of some persons sufficiently educated to be able to read the books in church, for the Christians continued the Jewish practice of reading the Sacred Books publicly. The first mention of a Christian liturgical reader is by Justin Martyr (d. about 165) in I Apol., lxvii, 3, 4. The homily known as "II Clem. ad Corinthios" also contains a reference to a lector, anaginoskon (xix, 1). The position of reader was honourable and dignified. It involved a higher standard of education than that of most offices. Although Justin says that the bishop preached the sermon, it appears that the reader himself often went on to expound what he had read. As the idea obtained that a special blessing and dedication should be given to everyone who performs an office for the Church, the reader too was instituted by prayers and some ceremony. Readers were blessed and set apart, as were the fossores who dug graves, the notarii who kept registers, and widows. All the group of rituals that depend on the "Apostolic Constitutions" contain the rite of ordaining readers. "Apost. Const.", vii, xxii, tells the bishop to ordain a reader by laying on his hand and saying a prayer, which is given. The derived documents however forbid an imposition of hands. ("Epitome Const. Ap.", xiii; Funk, "Didascalia", Paderborn, 1905, II, p. 82; see also the "Egyptian Church Order", V, ib., p. 105).

293 During the first centuries all the lessons in the liturgy, including the Epistle and Gospel, were read by the lector. Cornelius I (251-53) in a letter to Fabius of Antioch mentions that the Church of Rome has forty-two acolytes and fifty-two exorcists, readers and doorkeepers. (Denzinger, "Enchiridion", n. 45). In the fourth century in Africa the Church of Cirta had four priests, three deacons, four subdeacons, and seven readers. The account of the persecution ("Gesta apud Zenophilum" printed in the appendix to Optatus of Mileve in the Vienna edition of "Corp. Script. eccl. lat.", XXVI, 185-97) describes how the readers kept the sacred books which the magistrate demanded to be given up (p. 187). An old set of Western canons, ascribed (wrongly) to a supposed Council of Carthage in 398, but really of the sixth century, gives forms for all ordinations. Canon 8 is about our subject: "When a reader is ordained let the bishop speak about him (faciat de illo verbum) to the people, pointing out his faith and life and skill. After this, while the people look on, let him give him the book from which he is to read, saying to him: Receive this and be the spokesman (relator) of the word of God and you shall have, if you do your work faithfully and usefully, a part with those who have administered the word of God" (Denzinger, op. cit., n. 156). But gradually the lectorate lost all importance. The deacon obtained the office of reading the Gospel; in the West the Epistle became the privilege of the subdeacon. In the Eastern Churches this and other lessons are still supposed to be read by a lector, but everywhere his office (as all minor orders) may be supplied by a layman. The lector is still mentioned twice in the Roman Missal. In the rubrics at the beginning it is said that if Mass be sung without deacon and subdeacon a lector wearing a surplice may sing the Epistle in the usual place; but at the end he does not kiss the celebrant's hand (Ritus celebr. Missam", vi, 8). On Good Friday the morning service begins with a prophecy read by a lector at the place where the Epistle is usually read (first rubric on Good Friday).

294 Everywhere the order of reader has become merely a stepping-stone to major orders, and a memory of early days. In the Roman Rite in is the second minor order (Ostiarius, Lector, Exorcista, Acolythus). The minor orders are conferred during Mass after the first Lesson; but they may be given apart from Mass, on Sundays or doubles, in the morning. The lectorate involves no obligation of celibacy or of any other kind. The Byzantine Office will be found in the "Euchologion" (Euchologion to mega, Venetian 8th edition, 1898, pp. 186-87). The Armenians (Gregorian and Uniate) have adopted the Roman system of four minor orders exactly. Their rite of ordaining a reader also consists essentially in handing to him the book of the Epistles.

295 WIELAND, Die Genetische Entwickelung der sog. Ordines minores in den 3 ersten Jahrhunderten in Römische Quartalschrift, Suppl. no 7 (Rome, 1892); HARNACK, Über den Ursprung des Lectorats u. der anderen niederen Weihen in Texte u. Untersuchungen, II, 5.

296 Adrian Fortescue

Miecislas Halka Ledochowski

295 Count, cardinal, Archbishop of Gnesen-Posen, b. at Gorki near Sandomir in Russian Poland, 29 October, 1822; d. at Rome, 22 July, 1902. After studying at Radom and Warsaw, he entered the Accademia dei Nobili Ecclesiastici in Rome in 1842, and was ordained priest 13 July, 1845. He became domestic prelate of Pius IX in 1846, auditor of the papal nunciature at Lisbon in 1847, Apostolic delegate to Colombia and Chile in 1856, nuncio at Brussels and titular Archbishop of Thebes in 1861, and finally Archbishop of Gnesen-Posen in December, 1865. He was preconized on 8 January, 1866, and enthroned on 22 April of the same year. Being on friendly terms with the King of Prussia, he was sent to Versailles by Pius IX in November, 1870, to ask the services of Prussia for the re­establishment of the Pontifical States, and to offer the services of the pope as mediator between France and Germany, but his mission proved fruitless.

296 Shortly after the outbreak of the German Kulturkampf, the Prussian Government, without the knowledge or co­operation of Ledochowski, passed an ordinance that, after Easter, 1873, all religious instruction in Posen should be imparted in the German language only. It was but natural that the Polish people should object to such an unjust ordinance, especially since most of the children were either entirely ignorant of the German language or understood it only with difficulty. When the Government ignored the urgent request of the archbishop to revoke the ordinance, he issued a circular on 22 February, 1873, to the teachers of religion at the higher educational institutes, ordering them to use the vernacular in their religious instructions in the lower classes, but permitting the use of the German language in the higher classes, beginning with the secunda. Pius IX approved this act of the archbishop in a Brief dated 24 March, 1873. All the teachers of religion were obedient to their archbishop and, in consequence, the Government deprived them of their positions. Religion being thus no longer taught at many institutions, the archbishop erected private religious schools, but in an ordinance of 17 September, 1873, the Government forbade all pupils of the higher institutions to obtain religious instruction at those private schools. As all protests of the archbishop proved useless, he disregarded the unjust ordinances of the Government, and, after being fined repeatedly, he was finally ordered on 24 November, 1873, to present his resignation. The archbishop's answer was that no temporal court had the right to deprive him of an office which God had imposed upon him through His visible representative on earth. Before he was formally deposed, he was arrested between 3 and 4 o'clock in the morning of 3 February, 1874, and carried off to the dungeon of Ostrowo, because he refused to pay the repeated fines imposed upon him. While in prison, he was created cardinal by Pius IX on 13 March, 1874. The Prussian Government declared him deposed on 15 April, 1874. On 3 February, 1876, he was released from prison, but was ordered to leave Prussia. He continued to rule his diocese from Rome, and was sentenced to imprisonment for "arrogating episcopal rights" on three occasions, viz., 9 Feb. and 26 May, 1877, and 7 Nov., 1878. After being appointed secretary of papal Briefs in 1885 he voluntarily resigned his archdiocese in the interests of peace. In 1892 he became Prefect of the Propaganda, an office which he held until his death. An official reconciliation between the cardinal and the Prussian Government took place when Emperor William II visited Rome in 1893.

297 BRÜCK, Geschichte der katholischen Kirche in Deutschland im 19. Jahrhundert, IV (Mainz, 1901), 147-50 et alibi; HOGAN in The Irish Ecclesiastical Review, fourth series, XII (Dublin, 1902), 289-301.

298 Michael Ott.

Diocese of Leeds

298 (Loidis; Loidensis).

299 Diocese embracing the West Riding of Yorkshire, and that part of the city of York to the south of the River Ouse. Though one of the fourteen dioceses now comprised in the Province of Westminster, it was not erected at the time of the restoration of the English hierarchy by Pius IX in 1850. For in that year the Holy See, whilst anticipating and providing for its ultimate division, created for Yorkshire the See of Beverley, with jurisdiction over the entire county then known to the ecclesiastical authorities as the Yorkshire District. As that of Lancashire, this vicariate had been made in 1840 by Gregory XVI out of a portion of the original Northern District, first established by Innocent XI, in 1688.

300 Dr. John Briggs, President of St. Cuthbert's College, Durham (1832-36), and last vicar Apostolic of this extensive territory, which included seven counties of the North of England, and the isle of Man, was, in 1833, consecrated as Bishop of Trachis in partibus, and coadjutor of the Northern District, to which he succeeded in 1836. In 1839 he returned the number of Catholics within his vicariate as about 180,000, of whom only 13,000 were in Yorkshire. Having in 1840 been appointed to the Yorkshire District, Dr. Briggs, by a decree of Propaganda approved by Pius IX, 23 Sept., 1830, was translated from Trachis to Beverley, which see he resigned, 7 Nov., 1860. He died at York, 4 Jan., 1861. Eventually senior bishop of the restored hierarchy, his episcopate was one long, heroic struggle to provide schools and churches for an ever-growing destitute Catholic population-the outcome of many years of Irish immigration. So early as 1838, Bishop Briggs deplored that great numbers of his people were without pastors, without chapels, and without schools for their children; of whom, in 1845, he stated that, in Yorkshire alone, no less than 3000 were receiving no Catholic education whatsoever-a class, ten years later, known to have numbered, throughout England and Wales, 120,000.

301 Dr. Briggs was succeeded in the See of Beverley by Dr. Robert Cornthwaite, canon of Hexham and Newcastle, and formerly rector of the English College, Rome (1851-57). He was consecrated by Cardinal Wiseman, 10 Nov., 1861. Subsequently, Dr. Cornthwaite obtained from Rome a Brief, dated 20 Dec., 1878, though not published until 6 Feb., 1879, dividing the Diocese of Beverley into those of Leeds and Middlesbrough-that of Leeds lying, for the most part, to the south of a line running east and west through the County of Yorkshire, marked by the courses of the Humber, the Ouse, and the Ure, but embracing also a small portion of the county north of the Ouse included within the parliamentary division of the West Riding. Of the 152 clergy of Beverley (who in 1850 had numbered 69) 98 were transferred to Leeds; of its 123 churches and chapels (which twenty-nine years before were 61) Beverley surrendered to Leeds 85; whilst of its 141 schools (in 1850 in all 31) 105 were transferred to the larger of the two new dioceses, carrying with them more than four-fifths of the 15,677 children formerly in attendance within the Diocese of Beverley.

302 Dr. Cornthwaite having petitioned, the Holy See for assistance, he received as coadjutor Dr. William Gordon, a member of the Leeds Chapter, and afterwards his vicar-general, and rector of the diocesan seminary. The last priest ordained by Dr. Briggs in 1859, he was consecrated as Bishop of Arcadiopolis in partibus, and coadjutor of Leeds cum jure successionis, 24 Feb., 1890, to which see he succeeded upon the death of his predecessor, 16 June, 1890. His coadjutor, Dr. Joseph Robert Cowgill, was appointed fifteen years later cum jure succesionis. At that time financial agent of the diocese, and canon of the Chapter, he was consecrated as Bishop of Olenus in partibus, 30 Nov., 1905.

303 With an estimated Catholic population of about 106,000, mostly operatives, the Diocese of Leeds now contains 138 churches and chapels, served by 163 clergy, of whom 36 are members of religious orders and congregations. Of its 150 elementary and other schools, 70 are taught by religious. Among other memorials of Dr. Cornthwaite's episcopate, besides 39 churches and chapels, and its diocesan seminary at Leeds, the diocese possesses houses of the Little Sisters of the Poor, for the aged and infirm, at Sheffield and Leeds; industrial schools for boys and girls at Shibden and Sheffield; St. Mary's Orphanage for Girls and St. Vincent's Working Boys' Home, at Leeds; and, at Boston Spa, St. John's Institution for the Deaf and Dumb-one of the largest of its kind, and in efficiency second to none in the kingdom. During Dr. Gordon's government of the diocese, much-needed secondary schools for boys have been established at Leeds and Bradford; of these, St. Michael's College, Leeds, being erected 1908-1909 at a cost of upwards of £18,O00. Provision has also been made, during this period, for the higher education of girls at Sheffield, Leeds, and Bradford— the Leeds Centre and Teachers' Training College, under the care of the Sisters of Notre Dame (Namur), representing an outlay of about £15,000.

304 Among the 35 religious houses for women, within the Diocese of Leeds, special interest attaches to the seventeenth-century Bar Convent, of the Institute of Mary, in York, rich in Catholic associations and in relics of the English martyrs. Of the numerous churches more recently built, particular mention should be made of the cathedral, dedicated to St. Anne, and erected at Leeds, in 1902-04, from the designs of J.H. Eastwood, A.R.I.B.A., a small but unique example of "developed Gothic"; and, among the churches of earlier date architecturally remarkable, St. Mary's, Sheffield (1850) and St. Mary's, Leeds. (1857), are both fine examples of the Gothic revival of the last century. And with these may be associated St. Edward's, Clifford (1850), a small church in the Norman style, worthy of the ages of Faith, erected principally through the piety of descendants of the Venerable Ralph Grimston, martyred under Elizabeth at York, in 1598.

305 Diocesan Archives of Beverley and Leeds; BRADY, English Catholic Hierarchy (London. 1883): WAUGH, The Leeds Missions (London, 1904); LANE-FOX, Chronicles of a Wharfedale Parish (Fort Augustus, 1909).

306 N. Waugh

Camille Lefebvre

301 Apostle of the Acadians, b. at St. Philippe, P. Q., 1831; d. at St. Joseph, N. B., 1895. The son of sturdy French-Canadian peasants, he attended the village school and academy until he was seventeen, became a primary teacher for several half-yearly terms, prosecuted his study of Latin at St. Cyprien, and in 1852 entered the Congregation of the Holy Cross, at St. Laurent, near Montreal. Ordained priest in 1855, he served successively as curate at St. Eustache and St. Rose, professor at St. Laurent College, and missionary in the Diocese of St. Hyacinth, this last office coming to him as the natural result of his quite exceptional ability as a pulpit orator. His real life-work, however, began only in 1864, when, in accordance with an agreement between his religious superiors and Bishop Sweeney of St. John, he took charge of the principal Acadian parish, Memramcook, N. B., and forthwith began the foundation of St. Joseph's College. Half a century ago, the French Acadians of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island were admittedly an unimportant factor in the social life and polity of those provinces. From the time of the great expulsion in 1755, they had been constructively deprived of all means of instruction, in public, professional, or even commercial life; in consequence, an Acadian name rarely if ever became prominent. Unquestionably looked down upon by their English and non-Catholic neighbours as a race naturally inferior to Anglo-Saxons and Celts, they apparently acquiesced in the fate that doomed them to be mere hewers of wood and drawers of water. With the advent among them of Father Lefebvre and the establishment of St. Joseph's College, there dawned a new era, and in the brief space of three decades there was wrought a veritable transformation.

302 Thanks mainly to his initiative, his personal service, and the enthusiasm with which he imbued his fellow-workers in the college and the leaders of the people themselves, Father Lefebvre lived to see the practical servitude and inferiority in which he found the Acadians replaced by genuine equality and freedom. In ever-increasing numbers his students took prominent places in the business, educational, or professional world, gave themselves to the altar or pleaded at the bar, entered the provincial legislative assemblies and the federal parliament, and graced the bench of the Supreme Court. From 1864 to 1875 the Apostle of the Acadians encountered trials, reverses, and difficulties which nothing but indomitable energy, coupled with unwavering confidence in God, could have enabled him to survive. During these years, in addition to his duties as college president and pastor of Memramcook, he preached missions throughout Acadia, served several terms as Provincial of his Congregation, founded the Little Sisters of the Holy Family, and was honoured with the degree of Doctor of Divinity by Laval University and the title of Apostolic Missionary by Pius IX. His death occurred in January, 1895; and within two years St. Joseph's Alumni erected at Memramcook in his honour a handsome stone edifice, the Lefebvre Memorial Hall. After God, says his Acadian biographer, "he loved especially the Congregation of the Holy Cross and the Acadian people. He is perhaps the purest glory of the former; he is certainly the greatest benefactor of the latter."

303 POIRIER. Le PËre Lefebvre et l'Acadie (Montreal, 1898); SORIN, Circular Letters (Notre Dame, Ind., 1880); Album Souvenir (Montreal, 1894).

304 Arthur Barry O'Neill

Family of Lefèvre

304 Lefèvre, Family of.—-There were various members of the Lefèvre family engaged in tapestry weaving in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. We hear of one Lancelot Lefebvre as one of the masters of tapestry weaving in Brussels and in Antwerp in 1655; and in Italy, in 1630, we read of a certain Pierre le Fevre, a master tapestry worker, who was a native of Paris. It is not known whether these two men were connected one with the other, and of their personal history we know very little. Pierre died in 1669, leaving a son Philip, who was working in Florence in 1677. In 1647, Pierre was attracted by some offers made him on the part of Henry IV of France, and left Florence for Paris. There he received considerable emoluments, was styled Tapissier to the King, and provided with a workshop in the Garden of the Tuileries. He is known to have gone back to Florence in 1650, but to have returned to Paris five years later; he probably lived in Florence for about ten years, returning there for the last short period of his life. His son Jean, who came with him, does not appear to have ever quitted France, and he had the signal honor, on the establishment of the Gobelin factory, of directing with Jean Jans the high warp looms. Jans was a Flemish weaver, but had come to Paris to work in the royal buildings in 1654, and he had charge of the largest workshop of the new factory, giving employment to sixty-seven weavers, exclusive of apprentices. The second workshop, which was erected in the Garden of the Tuileries, was the one conducted by Jean Lefèvre, and he appears to have had full charge of it until 1770, and to have earned for the Government a very large sum of money. The fine tapestry entitled "The Toilet of a Princess", which was in the Spitzer collection, was the work of Jean Lefèvre, and three other pieces, representing Bacchanalia, bear his name on their selvedge. One of his most wonderful works was entitled "The Toilet of Flora", a sheet of tapestry now preserved at the Garde-meuble. Cardinal Mazarin possessed one of his hangings entitled "The History of St. Paul", and he was probably largely responsible for the two series entitled "The History of Louis XIV", and "The History of Alexander".

305 George Charles Williamson.

Jacques Le Fèvre

307 Le Fèvre, Jacques, a French theologian and controversialist, b. at Lisieux towards the middle of the seventeenth century; d. 1 July, 1716, at Paris. He became archdeacon of his native city and vicar-general of the Archbishopric of Bourges, and in 1674 received the doctorate in theology from the Sorbonne. His works are the following: "Entretiens d'Eudoxe et d' Euchariste sur les histoires de l'arianisme et des iconoclastes du P. Maimbourg" (Paris, 1674). The first of these dialogues was condemned and burned. "Motifs invincibles pour convaincre ceux de la religion prétendue réformée" (Paris, 1682), in which Le FËvre endeavours to show that there is fundamental agreement between Catholic and Protestant teachings, the differences being of slight importance and mostly verbal. These conciliatory views were attacked by Arnauld, and, in answer, Le FËvre wrote "Réplique a M. Arnauld pour la défense du livre des motifs invincibles" (1685). Amongst Le FËvre's other works are "Conférence avec un ministre touchant les causes de la separation des protestants" (Paris, 1685); "Instructions pour confirmer les nouveaux convertis dans la foi de 1'église" (Paris, 1686); "Recucil de tout ce qui s'est fait pour et contre les protestants en France" (Paris, 1686); "Lettres d'un docteur sur ce qui se passe dans les assemblées de la faculté de théologie de Paris" (Cologne, 1700). These letters were published anonymously when the work of the Jesuit Father Lecomte, "Mémoires sur la Chine", was referred to the faculty of theology. To Father Lallemant, who had defended his confrère in the "Journal historique des assemblées tenues en Sorbonne", Le Fèvre replied in his "Anti-journal historique . . ."; and he also produced "Animadversions sur l'histoire ecclésiastique du P. Noël Alexandre ", the first volume of which was printed at Rouen without date about 1680; it was seized and destroyed, and the other volumes were not published.

308 HURTER, Nomenclator; Nouvelle biographie générale, XXX (Paris, 1858), 344.

309 C. A. Dubray

Guy Lefèvre de la Boderie

310 French Orientalist and poet; b. near Falaise in Normandy, 9 August, 1541; d. in 1598 in the house in which he was born. At an early age he devoted himself to the study of Oriental languages, particularly Hebrew and Syriac. After much travelling in different provinces of France he settled down to uninterrupted study under the guidance of the Orientalist Guillaume Postel, who was a professor in the College de France. Guy was an earnest student and his scientific ardour was intensified by the religious enthusiasm of his character. He was convinced that deep study and full knowledge were the surest natural mainstays of faith. He felt, too, that if this was true generally, it was true in a very special way in regard to Biblical work. He became an Orientalist therefore, like many others, because he was an apologist. He selected Syriac and Aramaic generally as his special department that he might come nearer to the mind of Christ by the study of Christ's vernacular. His first published work of importance was a Latin version of the Syriac New Testament published in 1560. This work attracted much attention, and in 1568 Guy was invited by Arias Montanus to assist in the production of the Antwerp Polyglot. Guy accepted the invitation and proceeded to Antwerp with his brother Nicolas who was also an Orientalist.

311 The work assigned to Guy by Arias Montanus was the editing of the Syriac New Testament. He examined for this purpose a new Syriac MS. of the New Testament which Guillaume Postel had brought from the East. In 1572 appeared in the fifth volume of the Antwerp Polyglot Bible the result of Lefèvre's work, entitled "Novum Testamentum syriace, cum versione latin'". This work included the collated Syriac text and Lefèvre's previously published (and now amended) Latin version. This work was republished by Le Jay in 1645 in the Paris Polyglot. In 1572 Lefèvre published at Antwerp a short Syriac text which he had found accidentally thrown together with the Eastern Biblical MS. above mentioned. This text, furnished with a Latin translation, appeared under the title "D. Seven, Alexandrini, quondam patriarchÊ, de Ritibus baptismi et sacræ synaxis apud Syros Christianos receptis liber". Lefèvre tells us (Epistola dedicatoria, p. 4 f.) that he published this text to illustrate the agreement of the ancient Eastern Church with the Western in the important matter of sacramental ritual. To make the little text useful for beginners in Syriac Lefèvre vocalized the text and added at the foot of the page a vocalized transliteration in Hebrew characters. In the sixth volume of the Antwerp Polyglot appeared a further work by Lefèvre, "Grammatica chaldaica et Dictionarium Syro-Chaldaicum". In the same year 1572, Lefèvre published, also at Antwerp, a short introduction to Syriac, "Syriacæ linguæ prima elementa". This work has no scientific value: it is little more than an account of the names of the consonants and vowel signs with a few easy texts. On completing his work in Antwerp in 1572 Lefèvre returned to France where he soon obtained the post of secretary and interpreter to the Duke of Alençon. In this position he was brought into close contact with the somewhat radical thought of the period. His associates were men like Baïf, Dorat, Ronsard, Vauquelin de La Fresnaye etc.

312 But Lefèvre remained, in spite of all, a strong Catholic and a steady enemy of Protestantism. in 1584 he published a transliteration in Hebrew characters of the Syriac New Testament, "Novum J. Chr. Testamentum, syriace litteris hebraicis, cum versione latin' interlineari". In this work the Vulgate and Greek texts were printed at the foot of the page. But Lefèvre was not merely a philologist; he was also a poet. his poetic flights, however, were not high, and in his poetry, as in his Orientalia, the apologetic trend of his thought is clear, he was as his friend Vauquelin de La Fresnaye said of him poète tout chrestien. Among his more important poetic performances are: "L'Encyclie des secrets de l'Eternité" (Antwerp, 1571), an apology of Christianity; "La Galliade, ou de la révolution des arts et sciences" (Paris, 1578; 2nd ed. 1582). which celebrates the return to France of the banished sciences; "Hymnes ecclésiastiques" and "Cantiques spirituels et autres mélanges poétiques" (Paris, 1578-1582), many of which are translations from the Italian L'Harmonie du Monde" (Paris, 1582), a translation of Latin work. Lefèvre published in his last years an immense number of translations from Latin, Italian, Spanish etc., in verse and prose. Most of these translations are apologetic, and few of them are of any value. Lefèvre shows by the choice of his life-work that his thoughts were ahead of his time. Of his life, apart from his writings, we know next to nothing. It has been conjectured from some words of his in a poem addressed to Marguerite de France that he was an ecclesiastic; and it has been said that Pope Clement VIII wished to make him a cardinal. But Lefèvre would not allow himself to be led away in his last days from his books to the Roman Court. He died in the peaceful family mansion of La Boderie in 1598. An epitaph which he wrote for himself sums up his life work simply and well:

313 Tandisque j'ai vescu, j'ai toujours souhaitéNon d'amasser trésors, mais chercher Verité.

314 De la Ferrière-Percy, Les La Boderie (Paris, 1857); Nève, Guy Le Fèvre de La Boderie (Brussels, 1862); Niceron, Mémoires Vol. XXXVIII, 303—314; Coujet, Bibliothèque Française VI, XIII.

315 P. Boylan

Jacques Lefèvre d'Etaples

313 Frequently called "Faber Stapulensis."

314 A French philosopher, biblical and patristic scholar; b. at Etaples in Picardy, about 1455; d. at Nérac, 1536. He pursued his classical studies at the University of Paris, graduating as master of arts. In 1492 he made a journey to Italy. His protracted visits to Florence, Rome, and Venice were devoted chiefly to the study of the works of Aristotle. On his return to Paris he displayed considerable activity as professor in the college of Cardinal Lemoine. Among his disciples were the Protestant reformer Farel and the later bishops Briçonnet, Roussel, D'Arande, Poncher. In 1507 he was invited to the monastery of St. Germain-des-Prés near Paris, by the abbot Brinonnet. Here he resided till 1520, assiduously studying the Bible. The first-fruit of his labours was his "Psalterium Quintuplex, gallicum, romanum, hebraicum, vetus, conciliatum" (Paris, 1509). In 1517 and 1519 he published at Paris two critical essays on Mary Magdalen, "De Maria Magdalena" and "De tribus et unica Magdalena disceptatio secunda." In these writings he endeavoured to prove that Mary, sister of Lazarus, Mary Magdalen, and the penitent woman who anointed Christ's feet (Luke, vii, 37) were three distinct persons. This opinion, new at the time, gave rise to a violent controversy; refutations by Noël Bédier, syndic of the University of Paris, and John Fisher, the martyr-bishop of Rochester, appeared; they were followed by the condemnation by the Sorbonne in 1521. The preceding year, Lefèvre had left Paris for Meaux, where his friend, Briçonnet, now bishop of this city, was to appoint him his vicar-general in 1523. He continued his biblical studies, publishing the "Commentarii initiatorii in quartuor Evangelia" (Paris, 1522); a French translation of the New Testament (Paris, 1523) and of the Psalms (Paris, 1525); an explanation of the Sunday Epistles and Gospels (Meaux, 1525). As these works contained some erroneous views and revealed the author's sympathies for the doctrines of the so-called reformers, they again brought him into conflict with the Sorbonne. His commentary on the Gospels was condemned in 1523, and only the timely interposition of the king shielded him temporarily from further molestation. But during the captivity of Francis I, which followed the battle of Pavia (February, 1525), further proceedings were instituted against Lefèvre for his novel doctrines, and he sought safety in flight. After the king's release, he was recalled from exile and appointed librarian in the royal castle of Blois (1526). Here he worked at his translation of the Old Testament, which appeared at Antwerp in 1528. In 1531, he accompanied Marguerite, Queen of Navarre, to Nérac, where he spent the last years of his life. Lefèvre was a strong advocate of ecclesiastical reforms but did not deem a separation from the Catholic Church, of which he always remained a member, necessary for the attainment of this end. Among his non-biblical writings the following may be considered: "Theologia vivificans, Dionysii coelestis hierarchia, Ignatii XV epistolae, Polycarpi epistolai" (Paris, 1498); "Opera complura St. Hilarii episcopi" (Paris, 1510); "Liber trium virorum Hermae, Uguetini et Roberti triumque spiritualium virginum Hildegardis, Elizabethae et Mechtildis" (Paris, 1513).

315 Graf, Jacobus Faber Stapulensis in Zeitsch. für Hist. Theol. (1852), 3-86, 165-237; Barnaud, J. Lefèvre d'Etaples (Cahors, 1900); Proosdig, J. Lefèvre d'Etaples, voorganger van Calvijn (Leyden, 1906); Baird, The Rise of the Huguenots, I (New York, 1907), 67-98.

316 N.A. Weber

Legacies

316 (Latin Legata).

317 I. Definition

318 In its most restricted sense, by a pious legacy or bequest (legatum pium) is understood, the assigning, by a last will, of a particular thing forming part of an estate, to a church or an ecclesiastical institution. It differs from a testament in favour of pious works (testamentum ad pias causas) in this, that in a testament the favoured institution is made the true heir of the testator, continuing as it were his person. Moreover, a testament deals with the whole property, the patrimony of the testator. It results from this that a pious legacy or bequest need not necessarily be made the body of a will; it can be inserted in a codicil. A pious bequest differs likewise from a "donatio mortis causa", which is a contract, whereas thc bequest is made by a unilateral act. It is distinguished, finally, from a foundation, which can be made during life as well as by provision in a will, and which always imposes on the favoured establishment obligations, either perpetual or of fairly long duration. A legacy may be but is not necessarily a foundation.

319 II. Right of the Church to Receive Legacies

320 Natural law, no less than Divine, ordains that the will of the faithful, bequeathing part of their wealth to the Church should be respected (Instruction of Propaganda, 1807, in "Collectanea S.C. de P. F.", I, Rome, 1907, n. 689). The Church was established by God as a necessary and perfect society, since its object is to lead men to their last end, consequently, it can uphold its right to acquire all the means necessary to realize the object for which God instituted it. Being an external and visible society, it must be able to dispose of temporal goods for the needs of Divine service, the support of its ministers, the propagation of the Faith, the care of the poor, etc. Therefore, it may acquire these goods by all legitimate means, and among these means are included pious bequests or legacies. Natural right demands that the goods of parents dying intestate should pass to their children, and in many cases it is a duty for parents to leave part of their patrimony to their children; canon law recognizes and approves of this duty. But there is no serious reason for depriving parents of the right to dispose by will, for a pious purpose, of those goods that are at their free disposal as long as they are alive. While profitable to the Church, pious bequests are not less so to the donors "for the salvation of their souls", in the words of the usual testamentary formula of the Middle Ages (Fournier, "Les officialités au moyen 'ge", Paris, 1880, p. 87). The Council of Trent (Sess. XXVI, Decr. de Purgatorio) declares that pious foundations are a means of relieving the sufferings of purgatory. The First Provincial Council of Halifax applies to pious bequests those words of the Gospel: "Make unto you friends of the Mammon of iniquity; that when you shall fail, they may receive you into everlasting dwellings" (Luke xvi, 9; "Collectio Lacensis", III, Freiburg, 1875, 746). Pious bequests are a means by which generous souls can continue, after their decease, their good works, and provide for the future of the institutions that they have founded or enriched. Those who have omitted during life to fulfill the precept of charity can find therein a way of repairing their negligence ("First Provincial Council of Westminster", 1852, XXV, II; "Collectio Lacensis", III, 942). Those, finally, who, owing to daily cares and anxieties, found it impossible to be bountiful during life, may yet, if only at the hour of death, cooperate in the relief of the unfortunate, and assure their neighbour the spiritual advantages of Divine service.

321 III. History

322 The charity of the first Christians led them to despoil themselves while alive of their superfluous goods; consequently, mention is rarely made of pious legacies before the time of Constantine. After that emperor's conversion they became more prominent, especially after the law of the year 321 allowed churches to receive all kinds of legacies, and granted them the "factio testamenti passiva", i.e. the right of being made heirs (Theodosian Code, XVI, II, lit. iv). Authors are not agreed on the import of a law of Theodosius dated June, 390, forbidding deaconesses, who were widows and had children, to dispose of their goods in favour of churches or the poor (ibid. xxvii). Many authors consider it an important restriction of the right recognized by Constantine as belonging to the churches (Fourneret, "Les biens d'Eglise aprËs les édits de pacification; Ressources dont l'Eglise disposa pour reconstruire son patrimoine", Paris, 1902, p. 84). Others see in it only a means of protecting, against the abuse of maternal power, the rights of the children to the succession of their parents (Knecht, "System des Justinianischen Kirchenverm-gensrechtes", Stuttgart, 1905, 75-76). In any case, Emperor Marcian restored the right to the churches in 485 (Justinian Code, I, II, xiii). Among the Teutonic peoples, testamentary liberalities properly so-called seem to have been unknown, but they had an arrangement resembling the "donatio mortis causa" of the Romans, i.e., the "cessiones post obitum", donations which the donor bound himself not to retract, but which took effect only on his death.

323 In virtue of the Teutonic principle of the personality of law, the inhabitants whom the Teutons found settled in the old provinces of the empire they conquered could continue to follow the Roman law. In this way the power to bequeath to pious establishments was introduced among the Visigoths, Burgundians, and Bavarians, while in Gaul pious bequests were tolerated in fact before being authorized by law (Loening, "Geschichte des deutschen Kirchenrechts", II, Strasburg, 1878, 655). Several synods of the Frankish period even declare the validity of testaments, especially those of ecclesiastics, in which the formalities prescribed by the civil law had not been observed (Bondroit, "De capacitate possidendi EcclesiÊ Êtate merovingica", Louvain, 1900, 87 and 105). (See DONATIONS.)

324 The bishops retained in the Middle Ages the right of supervising the execution of pious bequests, which had been recognized by the Justinian Code (I, III, xlv). This right was even extended, and in several regions the ecclesiastical tribunal judged of the validity of wills and supervised their execution (Fournier, op. cit., 87; Friedberg, "De finium inter Ecclesiam et Civitatem regundorum judicio quid medii Êvi doctores statuerint", Leipzig, 1861, 124). It was in virtue of this right that Alexander III determined the conditions for the validity of wills in non-ecclesiastical matters (c. x., "De testamentis et ultimis voluntatibus", X; III, xxvi. See Wernz, "Jus Decretalium", III, Rome, 1901, 309). This same pope ordained, following the example of St. Gregory, that the ecclesiastical judge was to decide the validity of pious bequests not in accordance with the provisions of the Roman law but with the decrees of canon law (cc. iv, xi, "De testamentis et ultimis voluntatibus", X, III, xxvi).

325 The practice of pious bequests was so common in the Middle Ages that it seemed impobable that any person would have dispensed himself from it. This was the origin of the right of bishops in certain places, particularly in France and Southern Italy, to dispose, in favour of pious objects, of part of the goods of an intestate deceased person (Fournier, op. cit., 89). The generosity of the faithful built and endowed those wonders of art, the monasteries and churches as well as the many charitable institutions that were the glory of the medieval Church, and that the official charity of the State has succeeded neither in rivalling nor in replacing. It was not until the close of the medieval period that the civil power began to restrict the acquisition of property by religious mortmain. In modern times, even in Catholic countries, wills were withdrawn from the judicial authority of the Church, and the civil power finally deprived the latter of the right to adjudicate even on testamentary questions relating to pious bequests.

326 IV. Actual Canonical Legislation

327 The Church reserves to itself, even now, an exclusive authority in the matter of pious wills and legacies; it has its own legislation, the Roman law modified on several points by canon law, and its ecclesiastical tribunals to examine the questions connected therewith.

328 (1) Besides persons who by natural law or in virtue of the enactments of Roman law are incapable of making a will, the Church refuses to accept the pious bequests of usurers (c. ii, De usuris, in VI°, V, 5), of heretics and their accomplices (c. xiii, De hereticis, X, V, 7), and of those who are guilty of attacks on the cardinals (c. v, De pœnis, in VI°, V, 9). In practice, the Church refuses at the present time, to accept the bequests of sinners who die impenitent, and especially of usurers, in order not to be enriched by their ill-gotten goods (Santi, "PrÊlectiones juris canonici", III, Rome, 1898, 224-25). Religious who make solemn vows of profession are permitted to make wills only during the two months preceding their solemn profession; other religious must conform to the rules of their congregation. The rules (normœ) drawn up by the Congregation of Bishops and Regulars for the approbation of institutes bound by simple vows (Rome, 1901) forbid the making of wills after religious profession without the permission of the Holy See or, in case of urgency, without the authorization of the bishop or the superiors (Art.. 120 and 122. See Vermeersch, "De religiosis", I, Bruges, 1902, 148).

329 (2) It is not alone bequests made to churches that enjoy the prerogatives established by canon law, but also those made to monasteries, religious houses, and all institutions, whether purely religious or of a charitable character subject to the direction of religious authorities. However, certain religious orders, either because they practise poverty in a stricter manner, or in virtue of their constitution, have only a restricted right to acquire property by legacy or will (Santi, op. cit., III, 238-9; Wernz, op. cit., III, 322).

330 (3) The heirs of the testator are obliged to execute pious bequests, even if they have not been made in accordance with the formalities prescribed under penalty of nullity by the civil law, provided canon law considers them to have been made validly. The State has an incontestable right to prescribe the formalities requisite for the validity of wills in all matters falling within its jurisdiction, but pious legacies and bequests for pious purposes are under the exclusive control of the Church. This principle was clearly enunciated by Alexander III in the decretal "Relatum" (c. xi, De testamentis et ultimis voluntatibus, X, III, xxvi). It is true this decretal was addressed to the judges of Velletri, a town in the Papal States, but its force cannot be restricted solely to the territory under the temporal power of the pope, and the insertion of the decretal in the "Corpus Juris", or general law of the Church, deprives the objection of all force. It has been urged that a contrary custom had abrogated this canonical enactment, and that, moreover, only natural equity and the favour shown by the Church to pious bequests have caused pious legacies made with a neglect of solemn formalities to be considered valid. The constant practice of the Holy See proves that this argument is not conclusive. On 10 January, 1901, the Sacred Penitentiaria declared that, as a general rule, it considers valid and binding in conscience pious bequests which the civil law declares void on account of the omission of extrinsic formalities prescribed by the civil law. Nevertheless, in such a case the ecclesiastical authorities are generally disposed to come to terms with the heirs ("Acta SanctiÊ Sedis", XXXIV, Rome, 1902, 384). (See, in the same sense, the decrees of the S. C. C. "in caus. Arimin.", 13 September, 1854; "in caus. Hortana", 29 February, 1855; and reply of the Penitentiaria, 23 June, 1844.)

331 According to the common opinion of theologians, for a pious bequest to be obligatory in conscience it suffices that the wish of the testator be well established, e.g. by a holograph or a writing merely signed by the testator, by a verbal declaration made to the heir himself or before two witnesses (a single testimony other than that of the heir would be insufficient). If it be urged that the testator has revoked his bequest, the fact must be proved The Congregation of the Council decided, 16 March, 1900, that a writing containing erasures, which is only a draft of a will, is not a sufficient proof that the testator wished to revoke a previous will ("Acta SanctÊ Sedis", XXXII, Rome, 1900-01, 202). The contrary opinion is now held only by a few authorities (CarriËre, "De contractibus", n. 586, Louvain, 1846; D'Annibale, "Summula theologiÊ moralis", II n 339, Rome, 1892; Boudinhon in "Le Canoniste contemporain", XXIV, Paris, 1901, 734). By Roman law, if a testator knowingly bequeathes a thing not in his possession, it was equivalent to ordering the heir to purchase the thing for the legatee or, if that were impossible, to give him its value. A decree of Gregory I seems to overrule this decision (c. v. De testamentis et ultimis voluntatibus, X, III, xxvi). But it may be replied that this decree, while admitting the principle of the Roman law, intended only to declare that natural equity will often dispense the heir from carrying out the wish of the testator in the matter (Santi, op. cit., III, 242—245). This provision of Roman law being not generally known in our day, it is lawful to presume that the testator made a mistake, and that the bequest is therefore void.

332 (4) The Church approved the provision of the Roman law prohibiting the testator from disposing of the "pars legitima" which the laws ordered to be preserved to the heirs, this being conformable to natural law. Although in our modern codes the "pars legitima" is greater than it was in the Roman law, it may he presumed that the Church recognizes the ruling of our codes in the matter. All bequests exceeding the amount which the civil law allows to be disposed of freely by the testator may therefore be reduced. The provisions of the Corpus Juris (cc. xiv, xv, xx, De testamentis et ultimis voluntatibus, X, III, xxvi) granting the bishop the "portio canonica"-i.e. the quarter of all pious bequests not affected by the testator to a definite purpose-are no longer in force. (5) The bishop can compel the heirs or the executors to fulfil the last wishes of the deceased in the matter of pious bequests (c. ii, v, xix, "De testamentis et ultimis voluntatibus", X, III, xxvi; Council of Trent, Sess. xxii, "De reformatione", c. viii). He is also the judge of the first instance in testamentary cases submittcd to ecclesiastical tribunals. In virtue of this he has the right to interpret the terms of the will, but any change properly so called of the wishes of the deceased is reserved we think, to the Holy See, which can make such change only for grave reasons (c. ii, "De religiosis domibus III, 11, in "Clem."). The Council of Trent (Sess, XXII, De reformatione, c. vi) recognizes in bishops only the right of executing a change in the will made by the pope; this, however, does not prevent a bishop from applying to another object, a legacy left for a definite purpose which can no longer be executed in accordance with the wish of the testator. Propaganda grants vicars Apostolic the right of making changes in the will of a testator, in countries where communication with Rome is very difficult, and in cases where it is impossible to carry out the testator's wish; but it obliges them in each case to obtain a subsequent approval of their act by the Holy See (Instruction of 1807, in "Collectanea", I, n. 689). The Constitution "Romanos pontifices" of 8 May, 1881, lays down certain rules concerning the interpretation of the terms of a last will (" Acta et decreta concilii plenarii Baltimorensis III ", Baltimore, 1886, 46, 225— 227).

333 V. Wills of Ecclesiastics

334 While canon law has never forbidden ecclesiastics to dispose freely of their own private property, it has always maintained the principle that the superfluous revenues derived from church property ought to he devoted to religious or charitable purposes. If they have not been so disposed of during his lifetime by the person who was in receipt of them, after his death they should be distributed either as canonical legislation enacts or as a pious bequest. During the first centuries of the Church, when bishops alone had the administration of ecclesiastical property, measures were taken by the ecclesiastical authorities to prevent its dissipation by the heirs of the bishops. Justinian forbade bishops to dispose of the goods acquired by them after their promotion to the episcopacy, excepting, of course, their own patrimonial estate (NovellÊ, CXXXI, c. xiii). The Third Council of Carthage (397) had already legislated in a similar sense with regard to ecelesiastics (Bruns, "Canones apostolorum et conciliorum veterum selecti", I, Berlin, 1839, 134). Moreover, the Theodosian Code assigned to the Church the goods of clerics dying intestate, and not leaving children or relatives (V, III, lib. i). These regulations were confirmed by the popes and the councils (see Decretum Gratiani, II, c. Xii, q. 5, "An liceat clericis testamenta conficere"). But, as early as the sixth century, we learn from the decrees of councils that abuses had already crept in: ecclesiastics and even bishops were attempting to seize ecclesiastical property on the death of their confrËres (Decret. Gratian, loc. cit., q. 2); later, it was the turn of the laity; emperors, princes, lawyers, and patrons claimed a right to the spoils (Jus spolii or exuviarum).

335 To remedy this state of affairs, the reforming popes of the eleventh and twelfth centuries forced the emperors to renounce explicitly their right to the spoils, and the Third Council of Lateran (1179) as well as Alexander III made certain enactments regarding the estates of ecelesiastics; the latter were free to dispose of their own patrimony, the "peculium patrimoniale" as canonists call it, i. e., all goods which ecclesiastics acquired by inheritance, will, or any kind of contract soever, but independently of the ecclesiastical character. They might dispose likewise of the "peculium industriale" or "quasi patrimioniale", i.e. the property acquired by their own personal activity. To this was likened the "peculium parsimoniale", or that portion of the revenues coming from ecclesiastical benefices, which the beneficiary might reasonably have spent on himself, but which he economized (Santi, op. cit., III, 210). But he was forbidden to dispose of the "peculium beneficiale", the superfluous revenue of the benefices he held, and which he did not distribute in good works during his life. In principle this was to pass to the church in which the ecclesiastic held the benefice. However, Alexander III does not blame the custom, where it exists, of bequeathing some part of this "peculium" to the poor, or to ecclesiastical institutions, or even, as a reward for services rendered, to persons, whether relatives or not, who have been in the service of the deceased cleric (cc. vii, viii, ix, xii, De testamentis et ultimis voluntatibus, X,III, xxvi).

336 It does not follow, of course, that the law was observed; the "spolium" remained customary among ecelesiastics, especially abbots of monasteries, chapters, and bishops (c. xl, "De electione in VI°, 6; c. ix, "De officio ordinarii" in VI°, I, 16 c i De excessibus prÊlatorum in Clem. V, vi) The popes themselves saw in it a means of increasing their revenues. As early as the fourteenth century they reserved to the Holy See that portion of the property of ecclesiastics which the latter could not dispose of freely, with certain exceptions. These fiscal measures reached their highest limits during the Western Schism. They met with vigorous opposition in France, where the kings refused to admit the right of the pope, and also in the councils of the fifteenth century. Nevertheless the popes maintained their claims for a long time (see the Constitution of Pius IV "Grave nobis", 26 May, 1560 in "Bullarum amplissima collectio", ed. Cocquelines, IV, ii, I8; that of Pius V "Romani pontificis providentia", 30 August, 1587, Ibidem, 394; and of Gregory XIII, ëOfficii", 21 January, 1577, Ibidem, IV, iii, 330). On 19 June, 1817, Pius VIII declared that Propaganda was entitled to all revenue of the "spolium" (Collectanea, I, n. 724). On the other hand, even when the legislation of Alexander III was introduced, it was not always enforced in the same way; in some places the ecclesiasties could dispose of their "peculium beneficiale" in favour of pious purposes; in others they were granted full testamentary liberty, provided they made a legacy in favour of pious objects, or else paid a certain sum to the bishop who allowed them to make the will. These practices, together with the difficulty of distinguishing, in the inheritance of an ecclesiastic, the amount of the "patrimonium beneficiale", eventually left ecclesiastics testamentary freedom.

337 However, the canonical legislation is yet substantially unchanged; ecclesiastics are even now obliged to bequeath for pious purposes the superfluous part of the revenues from their benefices which they have not distributed during their life. This principle, recalled by the Council of Trent (Sess. XXV, De reformatione, c. i), is reasserted in most provincial councils of the nineteenth century. It is commonly admitted that it imposes no obligation of justice, but merely one based on ecclesiastical precept (Santi, op. cit., III, 211; Wernz, op. cit., III, 210—11). This obligation does not exist in countries where there are no benefices, or where benefices strictly so called are notoriously insufficient for the support of the clergy who enjoy them. Under these circumstances, pious bequests are earnestly recommended to ecclesiastics, but they are never obligatory in conscience. For the special rules regulating the wills of cardinals, see Santi, op. cit., III, 227—34. The obligations imposed on ecclesiastics, needless to say, are binding on their heirs in case they die intestate. Sometimes this matter is decided by local custom. The Provincial Councils of Vienna (1858) and of Prague (1860) decree that the estate of an ecclesiastic deceased intestate is to be divided into three parts: one for the Church, one for the poor, and the third for the relatives of the deceased. If the deceased was not possessed of any ecclesiastical benefices, only one-third of the estate is subject to the above rule, and that is to be distributed among the needy, but should the heirs of the deceased belong to that class, said portion may be given to them.

338 See the commentaries of the canonists on the Third Book of the Decretals, titles xxv, xxvi, and xxvii; SCHMALZGRUEBER, Jus canonicum universum, III, ii (Rome, 1844), 462-607; REIFFENSTUEL, Jus canonicum universum, IV (Paris, 1867), 362—567; SANTI, Prœlectiones juris cononici, III (Rome, 1897), 209—247; WERNZ, Jus decretalium, III (Rome, 1901), 199—218, 306—327; SŸGMÐLLER, Lehrbuch des katholischen Kirchenrechts (Freiburg, 1904), 764, 787—92; THOMASSINUS, Vetus et nova ecclesiœ disciplina, pt. III, bk. II (Paris, 1691), cc. xxxviii—lvii; WAGNER, Dissertatio de testamento ad pias causas (Leipzig, 1735); THOMAS, Das kanonische Testament (Leipzig, 1897); WOLFF VON GLANVELL, Die letzwillige Verf¸gungen nach gemeinem Kirchlichen Rechte (Paderborn, 1900); FŠNELON, Les fondations et les établissements ecclésiastiques (Paris, 1902); SCHMIDT, Thesaurus juris ecclesiastici, IV (Heidelberg, 1727), 382—440; SENTIS, De jure testamentorum a clericis secularibus ordinandorum (Bonn, 1862); EISENBERG, Das Spolienrecht am Nachlass der Geistlichen (Marburg, 1886); HOLLWECK, Das Testament der Geistlichen nach kirclichen und burgerlichen Recht (Mainz, 1901); SAMARAN, La jurisprudence pontificale en matiËre de drot de dépouille (jus spolii) dans la seconde moitié du XIVe siËcle in Mélanges d'archéologie et d'histoire (Ecole franÁaise de Rome) XXII, (Paris, 1902), 141 sq.

339 A. van Hove

Legate

319 (Lat. legare, to send).

320 Legate, in its broad signification, means that person who is sent by another for some representative office. In the ecclesiastical sense it means one whom the pope sends to sovereigns or governments or only to the members of the episcopate and faithful of a country, as his representative, to treat of church matters or even on a mission of honour. Hence the legate differs from the delegate, taking this term in a strictly juridical sense, since the delegate is one to whom the pope entrusts an affair or many affairs to be treated through delegated jurisdiction and often in questions of litigation, whereas the legate goes with ordinary jurisdiction over a whole country or nation. The canon law treats of delegates of the Holy See, delegati Sedis Apostolicæ (Decret., lib. I, tit. xxix), and in this sense even bishops, in certain cases determined by the Council of Trent (Sess. V, cap. i, De Ref., etc.), may act as delegates of the Holy See. Nevertheless, as will be seen later, according to the present discipline of the Church, a delegate, inasmuch as he is sent to represent the Holy See in some particular country, really fills the office of a legate. Since the jurisdiction of a legate is ordinary, he does not cease to be legate even at the death of the pope who appointed him, and even if he arrived at his post after the death of that pope.

321 The pope, by virtue of his primacy of jurisdiction, has the right to send legates to provide for the unity of Faith and for ecclesiastical discipline, and to choose them at will. Though self-evident, this authority of the pope has been contested from a very early period. Gregory VII (1073-85) reproved the claims of those who wished to have only Romans as legates and not representatives from other countries. Paschal II (1099-1118), in a letter to Henry I of England, grievously deplores the vexations inflicted on the pontifical. legate, and maintains the right of the pope to send such representatives. John XXII (1316-34) declares unreasonable and contrary to the authority of the pope the refusal to admit a papal legate without the approval of the sovereign. And there are not wanting writers who denied, some wholly, others in part, such a right on the part of the pope, e.g. Marc' Antonio de Dominis, Richer, Febronius, Eybel, and others. This erroneous claim was upheld in the eighteenth century by four archbishops of Germany, those of Mainz, Trier, Cologne, and Salzburg, to whom Pius VI made the famous reply of 14 November, 1789, in which we read that one of the rights of primacy of St. Peter is that "By virtue of his Apostolic prerogative, while providing for the care of all the lambs and the sheep confided to him, the Roman Pontiff discharges his Apostolic duty also by delegating ecclesiastics for a time or permanently as may seem best, to go into distant places where he cannot go and to take his place and exercise such jurisdiction as he himself, if present, would exercise." Worthy of attention also are the diplomatical note of Cardinal Consalvi to the Spanish Government (9 January, 1802), which treats of the character of the Apostolic nuncio, and the letter of Cardinal Jacobii (15 April, 1885) to the same Government. The Vatican Council, in stating the true doctrine concerning the primacy of the pope (Sess. IV, cap. iii), condemned implicitly the said errors. The Constitution "Apostolicæ Sedis", moreover, contains (no. 5) an excommunication reserved speciali modo to the pope against those who harm, expel, or unlawfully detain legates or nuncios.

322 Historical Development and Division

323 The popes have made use of this right from the earliest ages of the Church. The first example was the sending by Sylvester I of legates to the Council of NicÊa (325); afterwards those sent to the Council of Sardica (345); and those sent by Zosimus I to Africa (418), to settle certain ecclesiastical matters. In the fourth century we find the first example of a papal representative sent in an official character, i.e. the apocrisiarius (q.v.), or responsalis. According to Hincmar of Reims, the apocrisiarius dates back to. the time of Constantine, but according to De Marca (De Ord. Palatii, cap. xiii), the office dates from the Council of Colchis (451). From the letters of Gregory I, himself an apocrisiarius, and from a letter of Leo I to Julianus of Cos, whom he appointed apocrisiarius, can be deduced the powers of this officer and his duties, i.e. to look after the observance of ecclesiastical discipline, to resist the spread of heresy, and to defend the rights of the pope. For three centuries such a papal intermediary existed at the Byzantine Court. During the Iconoclast troubles of the eighth century this office disappeared, but was temporarily revived in the West when the empire was restored by Leo III (795-816). Finally, however, the necessity and frequency of extraordinary legations,the weakening and later division of the empire among the successors of Charlemagne, rendered useless and almost impossible the presence of Apostolic legates at the Frankish court.

324 Legati Nati

325 Almost contemporaneously with the apocrisiarius, the popes established in the fourth century another class of legates, of a purely ecclesiastical character, known eventually as legati nati, or perpetual legates. They may be regarded as originating from the "Apostolic vicars" established by Popes Damasus I (366-84) and Siricius (384-99). To provide more expeditiously for ecclesiastical discipline and to facilitate the dispatch of ecclesiastical affairs the aforesaid popes deemed it opportune to attach to certain sees (and first to Thessalonica) the title and duties of Apostolic vicar. The same title and duties were conferred by later popes on other sees. The prelates who successively occupied those sees came to be known as legati nati, inasmuch as by their election to the said sees they became ipso facto Apostolic legates, that office being attached to the see itself. In the course of time legati nati became very numerous; in France those of Arles (545), Sens (876), Lyons (1097); in Spain those of Tarragona (517), Seville (520), Toledo (1088); in Germany those of Trier (969), Salzburg (973); in Italy that of Pisa; in England that of Canterbury, etc. In the beginning the faculties of legati nati were very ample, namely, the right of visiting the dioceses of the province, of examining the status of candidates for bishoprics, of consecrating the metroipolitan, etc.; eventually, however, these faculties were much lessened, and in the eleventh century the legati nati practically ceased to exist. In our day the sees to which was annexed such privilege have no longer any extraordinary jurisdiction, though some enjoy an honorary distinction; the Archbishop of Salzburg, for example, may wear the cardinalatial purple, even in Rome.

326 Legati Missi

327 The ecclesiastical conditions of the tenth and eleventh centuries were responsible for the cessation of the office of legati nati. Ecclesiastical life was then in many ways and places ill-regulated, and ecclesiastical discipline very lax; the legati nati proved incapable of remedying these evils, either because some times times their own conduct was not exemplary or because they were negligent in the discharge of their duties. The Holy See was obliged to combat these abuses by choosing and sending into various countries persons who could be depended upon to secure the desired results (Luxardo, "Das päpstliche Vordekretalen-Gesandschaftsrecht", 1878). Thus came into existence the legati missi, or special envoys. Later all those whom the Holy See sent on a special mission were called legati missi, even those who were to preside at some solemn ceremony, e.g. a royal baptism or marriage; those appointed to meet anemperor or a sovereign visiting Rome, etc. This title was also given to those who were chosen to rule some provinces of the Pontifical States, e.g. the legate of Bologna, of Urbino, etc.

328 Legati a Latere

329 About the same time another form of legation was established, which became and is the highest, i.e. the legati a latere. The legate a latere is always a cardinal, and this name arises from the fact that a cardinal, being a member of the senate of the pope, is considered as an intimate, one attached to the very side of the Roman Pontiff. Other authorities derive this title from the custom of receiving the insignia and the office in the presence, or at the side, of the pope. Such legates are sent on missions of the greatest importance, e.g. the legate a latere sent to France by Pius VII, in the person of Cardinal Giovanni Battista Caprara, to execute the famous Concordat of 1801. The last legate a latere was also sent to France in 1856, in the person of Cardinal Patrizi, to baptize the Prince Imperial. The "Diario di Roma" of that year gives all the particulars of the proclamation of the appointment in a consistory of 27 August, and of the ceremonies which accompanied the departure of the legate. The same Cardinal Patrizi on that occasion was deputed to present the Golden Rose to the Empress Eugénie. The powers of the legate a latere are of the most ample character, both in matters of litigation and favours. He journeys with an imposing suite; immediately after leaving Rome the cross is borne before him, and in his presence not even patriarchs have the right that their cross should precede them; bishops cannot give episcopal blessings without his consent. According to the present usage, however, a cardinal sent on a mission does not always bear the title of legate a latere, as in the case of a cardinal sent by the pope to represent him at some religious gathering, like the Eucharistic Congresses of Westminster, Cologne, and Montreal. The Decretals and the Council of Trent clearly defined the powers of legates missi and legates a latere. Since the latter were sent only for very important matters, the custom of sending legati missi became more frequent.

330 Nuncios

331 In the thirteenth century legati missi came to be known as nuncios, by which name they are yet called. After the Council of Trent nuncios were established permanently in various countries. Besides an ecclesiastical mission, they have also a diplomatic character, having been from their origin accredited to courts or governments. Their jurisdiction is ordinary, but it is customary at present to grant them special faculties, according to the needs of the country to which they are sent; such faculties are conveyed in a special Brief. They are also given credential letters to be presented to the ruler of the country, and particular instructions in writing. The nuncios are usually titular archbishops; occasionally, however, bishops or archbishops of residential sees are appointed to the office. Some nuncios are of the first and some of the second class, the only difference between them being that, at the end of their mission, those of the first class are usually promoted to the cardinalate. Vienna, Madrid, and Lisbon have nuncios of the first class. Paris was also of this class, but, on account of the rupture of diplomatic relations between France and the Vatican which took place in 1907, it has at present no representative of the Holy See. Bavaria, Belgium, and Brazil have nuncios of the second class. There is no specified period for the duration of the term of a nuncio's office; it depends on circumstances and the will of the pope.

332 Internuncios

333 According to the present discipline, there are also internuncios, who in the order of pontifical diplomacy follow immediately after nuncios. These also are frequently titular archbishops, always have a diplomatic character, and are sent to governments of less importance. They are equivalent to ministers of the second class, have the same faculties as nuncios, and are furnished with similar credentials and instructions. At present there are internuncios in Holland, Argentina, and Chile. In Holland, however, because of the exclusion of the Holy See from the Peace Conference of 1899, the internuncio, Monsignor Tarnassi, was recalled, and now there is only a papal chargé d'affaires. The internuncio of Holland is also accredited to the Grand Duchy of Luxemburg.

334 Apostolic Delegates and Envoys Extraordinary

335 Actually there are also papal representatives known as Apostolic delegates and envoys extraordinary. Apostolic delegates, strictly speaking, are always ecclesiastical in character, and are usually sent by the Congregation of Propaganda to missionary countries. However, the pontifical secretariate of state is accustomed to send Apostolic delegates purely ecclesiastical in character to countries which have not diplomatic relations with the Holy See; at the same time when sending an Apostolic delegate to a country which has diplomatic relations with the Holy See there is added the title of envoy extraordinary, by which title he is accredited to the Government. Such are the Apostolic delegates and envoys extraordinary to South America, e.g. to Colombia, Peru, Bolivia, Ecuador, Costa Rica, etc. Other Apostolic delegates, purely ecclesiastical in character, are those sent to the United States of America, Canada, Mexico, Philippines, Cuba, and Porto Rico. The Apostolic delegation to the United States deserves special mention. First, on account of its importance it is practically equivalent to a nunciature of the first class, as may be inferred from the Encyclical of 6 January, 1895, addressed by Leo XIII to the archbishops and bishops of the United States, which declares:

336 > When the Council of Baltimore had concluded its labours, the duty still remained of putting, so to speak, a proper and becoming crown upon the work. This we perceived could scarcely be done in a more fitting manner than through the due establishment by the Apostolic See of an American legation. Accordingly, as you are well aware, we have done this. By this action, as we have elsewhere intimated, we wished, first of all, to certify that in our judgment and affection America occupied the same place and rights as other states, however powerful and imperial.

337 Moreover, from the beginning all the incumbents of this office have been elevated to the cardinalate. Second, the Apostolic delegation to the United States has the power to decide appeals by definitive sentence; in other words it is a tribunal of third instance, and from its decision there is regularly no appeal to the Holy See. This power, although granted from the beginning, has been recently confirmed by a declaration of the Consistorial Congregation to an inquiry of the Apostolic delegate at Washington, as to whether the original papal grant of authority was to be continued, in view of the transfer of the United States from the jurisdiction of Propaganda to the common law of the Church (Sapienti Consilio, 4 November, 1908). The said reply, given 8 May, 1909, establishes once for all that the parties are free to appeal from a sentence of a diocesan or metropolitan curia directly to Rome or to the delegation, but, an appeal once made to the delegation, the sentence pronounced by the delegate is to be considered definitive.

338 The Delegation of the United States was established by Leo XIII, 24 January, 1893. The first delegate was Monsignor Francesco Satolli, who in 1892 had been selected to represent the Holy See in the United States at the World's Fair in Chicago, as papal commissioner. He was born at Marsciano, Archdiocese of Perugia, Italy, in 1839; d. at Rome, 8 Jan., 1910. Acknowledged as one of the leading theologians of the day, he was appointed by Leo XIII a professor in the most famous theological schools of Rome, the Propaganda college and Roman seminary. He was later made president of the Academy of Noble Ecelesiastics in Rome (1886), and titular Archbishop of Lepanto (1888); promoted to the cardinalate 29 November, 1896, he received the biretta in February, 1896, at the cathedral of Baltimore, from Cardinal Gibbons. Cardinal Satolli was succeeded 27 Aug., 1896, by Monsignor Sebastian Martinelli, an Augustinian. Born in August, 1848, he entered the Augustinian Order in 1863 and was ordained priest in 1874. He occupied many prominent positions in his order, and was elected prior general for the second term in 1895. While in Nice he was appointed Apostolic Delegate to the United States and created Archbishop of Ephesus in August, 1996. He was made cardinal 15 April, 1901, and received the biretta 9 May of that year, in the cathedral of Baltimore, from Cardinal Gibbons. The present Apostolic delegate (1909), Monsignor Diomede Falconio, a Franciscan, succeeded Cardinal Martinelli 30 September, 1902, and took possession on 21 November, 1902. he was born 20 September, 1842, at Pescocostanzo in the Abruzzi, Italy, and entered the Franciscan Order 2 September, 1860. On the completion of his studies he was sent as missionary to the United States to the mother-house of the Franciscans at Alleghany, New York, and was ordained priest by Bishop Timon of Buffalo, 4 January, 1S66. After filling several important positions, he was sent, November, 1871, to Newfoundland, as rector of the cathedral, and secretary and chancellor to the bishop. He left Harbor Grace in 1882, and in 1883 returned to Italy. In 1889 he was chosen procurator-general of his order, and in July, 1892, was preconized titular Bishop of Lacedonia. A few years later, he was promoted to the archiepiscopal See of Acerenza and Matera in Southern Italy. Monsignor Falconio was appointed first permanent Apostolic Delegate to Canada, 3 August, 1899, and on 30 September, 1902 was nominated Apostolic Delegate to the United States.

339 The Holy See is also accustomed, according to circumstances, to send so-called Apostolic vicars, who may be either bishops or prelates or simply members of religious communities. Such representatives have always an ecclesiastical mission only, and are sent to examine the status of a diocese or seminaries, or some religious body.

340 To nunciatures and Apostolic delegations is attached a staff composed of an auditor and a secretary. They are nominated by the Holy See, and are either of the first or second class. Sometimes the Holy See sends also to nunciatures a counsellor and an attaché. In the absence of nuncio or delegate the auditor takes his place with the title of chargé d'affaires.

341 Among the envoys of the Holy See should be mentioned also the Apostolic ablegate and the bearer of the Golden Rose. The Apostolic ablegate is generally a Roman prelate or private chamberlain, sent to bear the cardinal's biretta to a new cardinal who is absent from the residence of the pope. He is accompanied by a member of the Noble Guard, who carries the zucchetto, and by a private secretary. The ceremony of conferring the biretta is performed either by the head of the State, if in diplomatic relation with the Holy See, or by the highest ecclesiastical dignitary in the country. The bearer of the Golden Rose is appointed to carry the Golden Rose (blessed by the pope on LÊtare Sunday of each year) to sovereigns or to distinguished individuals or to some famous church. In 1895 this office was established permanently.

342 Right of Precedence of the Representatives of the Holy See

343 The question of precedence among the various diplomatic representatives to foreign countries was treated at the Congress of Vienna in 1815, and it was decided that it always appertains to the representatives of the Holy See. Hence nuncios are by right and in fact deans of the diplomatic body. Some objections were afterwards made, especially by England and Sweden, as to the precedence of Apostolic delegates and internuncios, these not being mentioned in the Congress of Vienna; however, it ended in their practical recognition as included in the decision of said congress.

344 SOURCES.—Decret. Grat., dist. xxi, c. xi, xxxvi, C. II, q. vi; Compl. I. 1. I, t. xxii, dc off. legati.; II, I, t. xiii; see also Decret. Gregor., IX; and Liber Sextus, I. t. xv; Conc. Trid. Sess. XXII, cap. vii, De Ref.; and SEss. XXIV, cap. xx, De Ref.; Pius VI, Responsio ad Metropolitanos Mogunt., Trev., Colon., et Salisburg.(14 Nov., 1789); Pius IX, Const. Apost. Sed., no. 5; Acta SS., XVII, 861.

345 Authors.-Commentators on the Corpus Juris at this title; ZECH, Hier. Eccles., XXV, De Leg. et Nunt.; PHILLIPS, Kirchenrecht, I, n. 30; DE LA TORRE, De auctoritate . . . legatorum a latere; FERRARIS, s. v. Legatus; BOUIX, De Curia Romana, 579 sqq.; see also THOMASSIN, VeTus et Nova Eecles. discipline, I, 1.II, cvii sqq.; and DE LUISE, De jure pabl. seu diplom. Ecci.Cath.: AUDISIO, Idea stor. e rag. della Diplom. Eccles.; WERNZ, Jus Decr., II; GIOBBIO, Lezioni di Diplom. Eccles., I: PINCHETTISANMARCHI, Guida Diplom. Eecles., II (Rome, 1908); TAUNTON, The Law of the Church (St. Louis, 1906), s.v.

346 B. Cerretti.

Literary or Profane Legends

322 In the period of national origins history and legend are inextricably mingled. In the course of oral transmission historic narrative necessarily becomes more or less legendary. Details are emphasized or exaggerated, actions ascribed to different motives, facts are forgotten or suppressed, chronological and geographical data confused, and traits and motifs from older tales are added. Gradually this tradition, passing from mouth to mouth, takes on a more definite shape and a more distinct outline, and finally it passes into literature and receives a permanent and fixed form. We are seldom able to give a clear and connected account of the origin and development of a saga or legend. In most cases the literary sources on which we depend for our knowledge are of comparatively late date, and even the earliest of them present the legend in an advanced phase of evolution. Of preceding phases we can form an opinion only through a critical analysis and comparison of the sources. In this process of reconstruction much must be left to conjecture; uncertainty necessarily prevails, and difference of opinion is unavoidable.

323 We shall treat here of the following legends:

324 Germanic Heroic Saga

325 Legends of Charlemagne

326 Roland

327 Geneviève (Genovefa) of Brabant

328 Arthur (Artus)

329 Tristan and Isolde

330 Lohengrin, the Knight of the Swan

331 Tannhauser

332 Robert the Devil

333 The Wandering Jew

334 The Flying Dutchman

335 William Tell

336 Faust

337 Germanic Heroic Saga

338 A brief notice of this vast subject must suffice. The Euhemeristic method of interpretation, which attempts to explain the sagas on a purely historical basis, is now generally discredited. A blending of mythic and historic elements is now conceded to be a necessary process in all saga-formation. But the view, until recently generally accepted, which interprets the mythical traits as due to the personification and symbolization of natural phenomena, has been criticized on good grounds. No doubt, nature symbolism plays a large rôle in mythology proper, but it seems to have little, if anything, to do with the development of the primitive hero-tales. Their roots seem to lie rather in fairy-lore. Thus in the greatest and oldest of Germanic heroic sagas, that of Siegfried, the nucleus is apparently a primitive Low German tale of greed and murder and cruel vengeance, amplified by motifs like those of the dragon-fight and the Sleeping Beauty. Siegfried, who owns a treasure, is murdered by his covetous brother-in-law Hagen. Grimhild (Kriemhild), Siegfried's widow, marries another king, who actuated by greed, murders Hagen. Grimhild in revenge murders her second husband. This seems to be the bare outline of the old tale which was combined with a new historic saga, traceable to the destruction of the Burgundians by the Huns in 437, and the sudden death of the great Hunnish leader, Attila, after his marriage to a German princess, Ildico (i.e. Hilde), in 452. Now, when the two sagas were fused, Ildico was conceived as a Burgundian princess who slew Attila in revenge for the destruction of her kin. Sweeping changes in the action and the motives of the story were a necessary consequence of this fusion. The Norse version ("Edda", "Volsungasaga") and the German version of the "Nibelungenlied" both tell of Grimhild's revenge. But in the former she kills her husband, the slayer of her brother, as in the older form of the legend; in the latter version she kills her brothers, in revenge for the murder of her husband (see GERMANY, sub-title Literature, III).

339 While Siegfried is a mythical figure, Dietrich of Bern is historic. He is the famous East-Gothic king, Theodoric, who ruled over Italy (493-526). Dietrich and Bern are the German forms of Theodoric and Verona. The heroic figure of the king became the centre of the great mass of Gothic tradition, and a whole cycle of sagas gathered about his name. Many local legends were drawn into this cycle. The basic historic facts were completely distorted in process of legendary formation, and when the great Dietrich saga appeared in literature, in the Old High German "Hildebrandslied", in numerous Middle High German epics (see GERMANY, sub-title Literature, III), and the" Thidrekssaga" (which, though written in Norse about 1250, is based on Low German tradition), little that is historical remained.

340 Myth and history are also combined in the Beowulf saga, which forms the subject of the oldest English epic. Beowulf, a prince of the Geátas, comes to help the Danish king, Hrothgar, against Grendel, a fiendish monster, who had ravaged the Danish realm. In two mighty combats he slays Grendel and Grendel's mother. Returning, he becomes king of his people, over whom he rules happily for fifty years. Once more the aged hero goes forth, to battle with a fire-breathing dragon that devastates the land. He kills the monster, but dies of injuries sustained in the fight. It is generally believed that the Beowulf saga is of Scandinavian origin. But whether the epic arose in Scandinavia or in England is a question that has not been decided.

341 Legends of Charlemagne

342 It was inevitable that Charlemagne should become the hero of romance and legend. His actual exploits were magnified and additional ones were invented or transferred to him from other popular heroes, especially Frankish kings of the same name, like Charles Martel and Charles the Bald. The formation of legend relating to Charlemagne began even during the lifetime of the great ruler. In the book of the so-called Monachus Sangallensis, which was written after 883 on the basis of oral tradition, he appears already as a legendary figure. Among the stories there related are those of the Iron Charles entering Pavia, where the Langobardian King Desiderius, and Otker the Frank await his coming, and the latter swoons at the sight of the mailed emperor; or of the giant Eishere who, in battle against the Slays, spears seven to nine heathens like frogs on the point of his lance; of the ruthless slaughter of all those captured Saxons whose stature exceeded the measure of the emperor's sword. Unlike the heroic sagas, the Charlemagne legends from their very inception show an ecclesiastical tinge. In this connexion we may recall the canonization of Charles by the antipope Paschal III in 1165, which, of course, never possessed validity.

343 When the Franks lost their Germanic character their hero became identified with the French nationality. Stories connected with his name were more or less current in various parts of Germany. It was said that he did not die but resided in the Odenberg, Hessia, or the Untersberg (near Salzburg), whence he would reappear to bring back the empire to glory. His justice also was proverbial, as is attested by the story, told in German chronicles, of the serpent ringing the bell that Charles had set up before his palace for all those having a grievance to bring to his attention. But he never became prominent in German literature, whereas in France he became the very centre of the national heroic épopées. His legendary deeds and those of his paladins were celebrated in numerous epics or "Chansons de Geste" ("Chanson de Roland", "Pèlerinage", "Aspremont", "Fierabras", "Ogier", Renaud de Montauban", etc.). At first these poems were only loosely connected; later on attempts were made at cyclic unification, resulting in such compilations as the "Charlemagne" of Girard d'Amiens (c. 1300), the German "Karimeinet", the Norwegian "Karlamagnússaga" and the Italian prose romance "Reali di Francia" of Andrea de' Magnabotti. Much legendary material is also found in chronicles, like those of the above-mentioned monk of St. Gall, of the monk of Saintonge, of Alberic de Trois Fontaines (c. 1250), of Philippe Mousket (c. 1241), and the German chronicle of Enenkel.

344 What is related of Charlemagne in these sources is a medley of fact and fiction. The story of his parents, Pepin the Short and Bertha (in "Berte aux grands pieds"), is the familiar theme of virtue slandered but in the end vindicated. To escape the persecutions of his bastard brothers, Charles takes refuge in Toledo with the heathen king Galafre, whose daughter Galienne he marries, after he has punished his wicked brothers and regained his father's kingdom ("Charlemagne", "Karlmeinet", "Karleto", "Cronica general"). Possibly this reflects historical events from the period of Charles Martel, who was of illegitimate birth and experienced difficulties in his accession to he throne. At any rate, Pepin and Bertha are historic personages. Wholly fabulous, however, is the story of the pilgrimage undertaken by the emperor and his peers to the Holy Land, whence they bring back the Passion relics, which were deposited in the Church of St. Denis. Probably the legend arose in connexion with these relics, which were actually presented by the Patriarch of Jerusalem about 800.

345 In the poems and romances that deal with the wars of Charlemagne in Spain [(778) "Chanson de Roland"] and Italy [(773) "Ogler", "Fierabras", "Aspremont"] the principal rôle is assigned not to Charles, but to his paladins (Roland, Olivier, Turpin) or vassals (sons of Aimon, Ogier). The Saxon wars have left little trace in French poetry [Bodel's "Saisnes" (c. 1200), and an older "Guitalin", known only from the Norse version in the "Karlamagnússaga"]. In Germany their memory is preserved by many a legend concerning the heroic Widukind (Wittekind). In French versions the conversion of the Saxon chieftain is represented as insincere and of short duration, in German legend, on the contrary, it is glorified by miracle. While Widukind in the disguise of a beggar attends the Easter celebration in the Frankish camp, he sees the image of the Christ-Child at the moment of the elevation of the Host during Mass and his conversion is the result (Grimm, "Deutsche Sagen", 448). In a narrative of the life of the Empress Mathilde (974) Widukind is made to fight in single combat with Charles, and on being defeated turns Christian. The French version also knows of this combat, but here Guiteclin is killed. The name of Frankfort (the ford of the Franks) is explained by a German legend which relates how the hard-pressed Franks were saved by a hind that showed them a place where they could cross the River Main in safety (Grimm, op. cit., 449).

346 In the older French epics, devoted to the glorification of royalty, Charlemagne is represented as the incarnation of majesty, valour, and justice, the champion of God's Church against the infidel. In the later epics, the so-called feudal épopée ("Ogier", "Renaud de Montauban", "Doon de Mayence", etc.), which reflect the historic struggles of the monarchy with turbulent vassals, the great emperor appears in quite a different light, as a vindictive tyrant and unjust oppressor. Nor does he appear to advantage in the vanous legends that tell of his love affairs, among which is the well-known German legend of his attachment to a dead woman due to the magic power of a jewel hidden in her mouth. This legend was localized at Aachen. A courtier who had gained possession of the talisman dropped it in a hot spring. Henceforth the emperor felt an irresistible love for this spot and caused Aachen to be built there.

347 Through French mediation the Carlovingian romances came to other nations. In England, Caxton published "The Lyfe of Charles the Grete" (1485) and "The four sonnes of Aymon" (1486). Lord Berners translated "Huon of Bordeaux" in 1534. In Germany the "Rolandslied" of Konrad der Pfaffe the poem of Stricker (thirteenth century), the "karlmeinet" (fourteenth century), and the chap-books of the fifteenth century, in Scandinavia the "Karlamagnússaga" (c. 1300), in the Netherlands numerous translations like "Carel ende Elegast" show the spread of the Charlemagne legend. In Italy it was especially favoured. There it inspired the Franco-Italian epics and the bulky romance of Magnabotti, and culminated in the famous chivalric epics of Boiardo and Ariosto.

348 Roland

349 Of the paladins, usually twelve in number, with whom legend surrounds Charlemagne, the most famous is Roland, whose heroic death forms the theme of the "Chanson de Roland" (c. 1080). This poem relates how the rear-guard of the Frankish army, returning from a victorious campaign against the Saracens in Spain, is treacherously surprised by the enemy at Roncevaux, and how Roland, Olivier, and Turpin, after incredible deeds of valour, are slain before the emperor arrives to bring help. The events narrated here have a historical basis; the battle of Roncevaux (Roncesvalles) actually took place on 15 August, 778. According to Einhard (Vita Caroli Magni, IX) the Frankish rear-guard was cut to pieces by Basque marauders, among the slain being Hruodlandus, prefect of the March of Brittany. In the poem the defeat is laid to the treason of Ganelon; the vengeance which the emperor exacts from the enemy and the punishment of the traitor are vividly narrated. The legend represents Roland as Charlemagne's nephew, the son of the emperor's sister Bertha and of Duke Milo; of Aglant. The story of their romantic love, their quarrel with the emperor, and their ultimate reconciliation to him figures prominently in Italian versions ("Reali di Francia"). Roland is a paragon of knightly virtue. Quite young he distinguishes himself in wars against the Saracens in Italy ("Aspremont") and the Saxons, in both campaigns saving his uncle from threatened disaster.

350 In Italian literature Roland becomes the chief hero of the chivalric épopée represented at its best by Pulci's "Morgante maggiore" (1482), Boiarde's "Orlando innamorato" (1486), and Ariosto's "Orlando Furioso" (1516). In Spain the tradition underwent a complete change; the defeat of the Franks was regarded as a Spanish victory, and the real hero of Roncevaux is the national champion, Bernalde del Carprio, Roland's opponent. The German poem of Konrad der Pfaffe has been mentioned above.

351 Geneviève (Genovefa) of Brabant

352 This legend may be discussed in connexion with the Carlovingian cycle, inasmuch as the events therein related are usually assigned to the eighth century, to the period of the wars of Charles Martel against the Saracens. It has for its theme the familiar story of persecuted innocence, and is therefore closely akin to the legends of Griseldis, Hildegard, Hirlanda of Brittany, and other heroines of suffering. According to the usual version, Geneviève is the wife of the Count Palatine Siegfried, residing in the region of Trier. When he is called away on an expedition against the infidels, he entrusts his wife and castle to the care of his major-domo Golo. Inflamed with sinful passion, Golo makes advances to the countess, and on being repulsed, falsely accuses her to her absent lord of adultery. The count sends word to put his wife and her new-born son to death, and Golo bids two servants execute this command. But moved by pity they let her go, and she takes refuge in a cave in the Ardennes together with her child, who is miraculously suckled by a roe. At the end of six years Count Siegfried, who has in the meantime repented of his rash deed, is led to this cave while pursuing the roe, and a happy reunion is the result. Golo dies a traitor's death, his limbs being torn asunder by four oxen. The legend adds that a chapel was built and dedicated to Our Lady at the very spot where the cave was. It is the Chapel of Frauenkirchen, near Laach, and there Geneviève is said to be buried.

353 The origin of the legend is wholly unknown. The oldest versions are found in manuscript dating from the fifteenth century, most of them hailing from Laach. An account was written in 1472 by Matthias Emichius (Emmich) a Carmelite friar, later auxiliary Bishop of Mainz. The learned antiquarian Marquard Freher appended a version of the legend drawn from a Laach manuscript to his "Origines Palatinæ" (1613). The legend is told in connexion with the foundation of the chapel of Frauenkirchen. In all these versions the time of action is that of a Bishop Hildulf of Trier. But no such bishop is known. Nor is it possible to identify Geneviève with any historic personage. As for Siegfried, there were several counts of that name, but nothing is known of them to permit of an identification. An historical basis for the legend has not been found. The arguments for a mythical origin are futile. So the opinion has been advanced (by Seuffert) that the legend is the fabrication of a monk from the monastery of Laach, and dates from the fourteenth century.

354 The fame of the story is due to the work of the French Jesuit René de Cerisiers. His book, entitled "L'Innocence reconnue ou Vie de Sainte Geneviève de Brabant", won immediate popularity. The oldest datable edition is from 1638. Two years later this story, together with those of Jeanne d'Arc and Hirlanda, was reprinted in "Les trois états de l'innocence affligée", etc. In Cerisiers' version the legend has been considerably amplified; its pious character is emphasized, especially through the copious introduction of miracles. Here also the child receives the Biblical name Benoni (i.e. son of my sorrow, Gen., xxxv, 18) whence the "Schmerzenreich" of the German version. Reference to Charles Martel fixed the eighth century as the time of action.

355 Cerisiers' work inspired a number of Dutch and German books on the legend, in all of which the material is treated with more or less freedom. The authors of the first two German versions are Jesuits; these versions were followed by the "Auserlesenes History-Buch" (Dillingen, 1687) of Father Martin of Cochem (d. 1712), a Capuchin friar. Here the story of St. Geneviève is given among a number of pious legends, and it was this version that made the legend popular in Germany, where it became the subject of chap-books. Some of these books base their account on Dutch versions, the first of which had appeared in 1645. In these Protestant influence is unmistakable; the miracles, already curtailed in the German version, are here completely expunged. Of English versions we have at least two, one of which "The Triumphant Lady, or the Crowned Innocence" (London, 1654) is by Sir W. Lower.

356 Arthur (Artus)

357 A famous legendary King of the Britons, and the central figure of a great medieval cycle of romance. His court is represented as a model court for the cultivation of every knightly virtue. He himself presides over the famous Round Table, about which is assembled a band of chosen knights. The adventures of these knights form the subject-matter of the numerous romances of the Arthurian cycle.

358 The history of the origin and development of the Arthurian legend is not clear. The very existence of Arthur has been doubted, and attempts have been made to reduce him to a myth. But it is now well known that he was an historic figure, a British chieftain of the end of the fifth and the beginning of the sixth century A.D., who championed the cause of the native Britons against the foreign invaders, especially the Angles and Saxons.

359 The oldest British chronicler of Wales, Gildas, in his "De Excidio Britanniæ" (c. 540) knows of the great victory of the Britons at Mount Badon, but makes no mention of Arthur. The first record of him is found in the "Historia Brittonum" (written 796), ascribed to Nennius. There he appears already as a legendary figure, the champion of an oppressed people against the cruel invaders, whom he defeats in twelve great battles, the last being fought at Mons Badonis. So by the end of the eighth century the legend of a great champion was already current among the Celtic population of the British Isles and Brittany and this legend was further developed and amplified by the addition of new legendary traits.

360 It received its literary form in the "Historia regum Brittanniæ", a Latin chronicle, written between 1118 and 1135 by the Welsh monk Godfrey (Galfridus, Gruffydd) of Monmouth. This work, purporting to give a history of the British kings from the mythical Brutus to Cadwallo (689), is a curious medley of fact and fable. The exploits related of Arthur are wholly fabulous. His father is Uther Pendragon (Uther dragon-head), his mother Igerna, wife of the Duke of Cornwall. Merlin the Wizard by a trick has effected their union. Arthur becomes ruler at the age of fifteen and at once enters upon his career of victory by defeating the Saxons. He marries Guanhumara (Gwenhwyvar Ginevra, Guinevere) and establishes a court the fame of which spreads far and wide. In a series of wars he conquers Scotland, Ireland, Norway, and Gaul. Finally he makes war against Rome, but, though victorious, is compelled to turn back to protect his wife and kingdom from the treacherous designs of his nephew Mordred. In the battle of Camlan (Cambula) the latter is killed, but Arthur, too, is mortally wounded and mysteriously removed to the Isle of Avalon, whence he will reappear (so other chronicles relate), some day to restore his people to power.

361 It is not known with certainty what sources Godfrey used. Probably he drew his information from Welsh chronicles, as well as from oral tradition preserved by Breton story-tellers. Much, also, is his own invention. The work won immediate favour, and became the basis of several other rhymed chronicles, such as the "Brut" of Wace (or Gace) written about 1157, and that of Layamon (c. 1200), the first English work in which the legend of Arthur appears. In Godfrey's history mention is made of Arthur's court as far-famed, but the first explicit reference to the Round Table is found in Wace's "Brut". From this reference it is perfectly clear that this legendary institution was already well known in Brittany when Wace wrote. At a later period, when the Grail legend was fused with that of Arthur, the Round Table was identified with the Grail table instituted by Joseph of Arimathea, and was then said to have been founded by Uther Pendragon at the suggestion of Merlin (so in the Grail romance of Robert de Boron).

362 Towards the end of the twelfth century the Arthurian legend makes its appearance in French literature in the epics of Chrestien de Troyes. How this material, the matière de Bretagne, was transmitted, is one of the most difficult and disputed questions in connexion with the history of medieval French literature. It is admitted that Godfrey and the chroniclers cannot have been the only sources; the subject matter of the romances is too varied for that, and points to the influence of popular tradition. Moreover, the material has been entirely transformed under the influence of the ideals of knight-errantry and courtly love. These deeds dominated all the Arthurian romances, and gave them their immense vogue with the polite society of the Middle Ages. Arthur plays but a passive rôle in them; the chief stress falls on the adventures of the Knights of the Table Round. Of these Gawain (Gwalchmai, Gauvain) already figured prominently in the history of Godfrey, where he is called Walgannus. Perceval, the Peredur of Welsh folk-tales and of Godfrey, has become especially famous as the hero of the quest of the Holy Grail. Originally his legend, like that of the Grail, was wholly independent of that of Arthur. Other famous legendary heroes like Lancelot and Tristram were also joined to the company of the Table Round, and their legends likewise incorporated into that of Arthur. So the great cycle of Arthurian romances gradually came into existence.

363 Though French mediation these romances spread through Europe. In Germany they inspired the courtly epics (see GERMANY, sub-title Literature, III). They also came to Italy, Spain, and Norway. In England Sir Thomas Malory gathered them and used them for his famous prose romance "Morte Arthure" (finished 1470, printed by Caxton, 1485). To Malory the legend of Arthur owes its popularity in England. Its influence is felt in Spenser's "Faerie Queene", and Milton, as is well known, thought of writing an English Arthuriad. In modern times Tennyson has revived the legend in his "Idylls of the King".

364 Tristan and Isolde

365 Among the knights of Arthur appears also Tristan (Tristram), whose love for Isolde and its tragic end are the subject of some of the most famous romances in literature. Here, too, we have an originally independent legend of Celtic origin, but elaborated by French poets into a love romance. The names Tristan and Mark point to Celtic heroic saga as the root of the story — Drust or Drustan as a name of Pictish kings can be traced as far back as the eighth century. The name of Morholt is probably Germanic; so is Isold (i.e. Iswalda) or Iselt (i.e. Ishilt). These Germanic elements date from the period of Viking rule in Dublin during the ninth and tenth centuries. The legend, no doubt, took shape in Britain and then wandered to Brittany, experiencing in the course of its development various modifications. New motifs, like that of the love potion, the story of the vicarious wooing, the trick whereby Isolde successfully undergoes the ordeal, were added. They are familiar from story-literature. Other motifs, such as the ship with black sails, are clearly traceable to antique romance, in this case to the Theseus legend. By the middle of the twelfth century a full-fledged Tristan romance existed, but the literary versions that we possess are of a later date. It is known that Chrestien de Troyes wrote a poem about Mark and Isolde, but it is lost. The French versions extant are those of Bérol a Breton jongleur, or glee-man, and of Thomas, an Anglo-Norman trouvère, who wrote between 1160 and 1170. Bérol's version, the date of which is a matter of dispute, is the basis of the German "Tristan" of Eilhard von Oberg, while Gottfried von Strassburg followed Thomas. Both versions agree for the main traits of the legend, however much they differ in detail.

366 Lohengrin, the Knight of the Swan

367 In Wolfram's Parzival", where a brief outline of the story of Lohengrin is given at the close, the legend appears as a part of the Grail cycle, and therefore also of the Arthurian cycle. But originally it was wholly independent of both. In the oldest literary versions, the French poems of the "Chevalier au cygne" (the earliest dates from the beginning of the thirteenth century), the tale of the Knight of the Swan is connected with Godfrey of Bouillon, and the French poems themselves are part of an epic cycle dealing with the Crusades. How this connexion came about is not known. But it was certainly well known by the end of the twelfth century, as is proved by an allusion to it in the history of the Crusades written by Bishop William of Tyre (d. about 1184). The purpose was evidently to glorify the House of Bouillon by ascribing to it a supernatural origin. The story as given in the French poems is as follows: before Emperor Otto holding court at Nymwegen the Duchess of Bouillon pleads for justice against the Saxon Duke Renier, who has made grave charges against her. She cannot find a champion to prove her innocence in single combat, when suddenly an unknown knight appears in a skiff drawn by a swan. He defeats her opponent and marries her daughter Beatris. But he imposes the condition that his wife must never ask his name or lineage. When, after seven years of wedded life, she breaks this command, the unknown knight leaves her. A daughter named Ida has resulted from this union. She marries Count Eustache of Boulogne and becomes the mother of Godfrey of Bouillon.

368 The kernel of this legend seems to be an old genealogical myth, such as that told of Scyld in "Beowulf". A mysterious stranger arrives in a rudderless ship among a people becomes their ruler and the ancestor of the reigning house. When his time is fulfilled, he departs as mysteriously as he has come. Such a myth was current among Germanic tribes inhabiting the sea-coast. Possibly the mysterious stranger originally was a solar deity and the swan a symbol of the cloud. The story was designed to show the divine descent of the ruling house. Its origin, whether Celtic or Germanic, is in dispute. The theme of the Lohengrin legend, the union between a supernatural being and a mortal, is of frequent recurrence in mythology and folk-lore.

369 With the tale of the swan-knight was combined an old Germanic fairy tale of some children changed into swans by the evil arts of a wicked stepmother. Only the little girl escapes and becomes the means of rescuing her brothers. this story is familiar to readers of Grimm's fairy tales. In the French poems on this subject, the children are the offspring of a union between a king and a fairy, and the king's mother plays the villain's part. Their transformation into swans is the result of their being deprived of the necklaces which they had when they were born. When these are restored they regain their human form, all but one, who has lost his necklace. He remains a swan and henceforth draws the skiff of his brother, who is therefore called the knight of the swan. It is clear that this story was added to account for the mysterious origin of the hero. Its earliest literary record occurs in the Latin romance "Dolopathos", a collection of stories, mostly of Oriental origin written by Jean de Hauteseille (Johannes de Alta Silva) at the beginning of the thirteenth century. Here the characters are as yet unnamed. In the French poem known as "Elioxe" (end of twelfth century) the hero is a king named Lothair, the fairy is called Elioxe (Eliouse). In the versions of the "Chevalier au cygne" the king's name is Oriant, his wife is called Beatris, his mother Matabrune.

370 Through French mediation the legend passed into other lands. In England we have the poem of the "Chevalere Assigne" and the prose romance of "Helyas, Knight of the Swan" (edited by Thoms in "Early English Prose Romances"). In Spain the legend was incorporated in the "Gran Conquista de Ultramar" (xlvii sq.). There are also versions in Italy and Iceland. Of special interest is the development of the legend in Germany.

371 In the French versions the swan-knight is called Helias (Elie). In Konrad von Würzburg's epic "Der Schwanritter" (c. 1260) he remains unnamed. The lady in distress is the Duchess of Brabant, the emperor is Charlemagne. The swan-knight is not the ancestor of Godfrey of Bouillon, but of the dukes of Cleves. Konrad's version is based on an unknown French source. So is the brief outline given by Wolfram at the close of his "Parzival". There the legend is connected with that of the Grail in that the hero is the son of Parzival, the Grail-king. Here also he is called Loherangrin (i.e. Loherenc Garin, Garin the Lotharingian). The duchess is Elsa of Brabant. Whether these changes in names are Wolfram's own, or whether they were in his French source cannot be decided. On the basis of Wolfram's outline, but amplified and expanded by the introduction of wholly extraneous matter, arose between 12S3 and 1290 the bulky German epic "Lohengrin", the work, it seems, of two different authors, but unknown. The Lohengrin story is here a mere episode of the legendary minstrel contest held at the Wartburg castle and is put into the mouth of Wolfram himself. The accuser is here Count Friedrich Telramund, the emperor is Henry I the Fowler, and a Duchess of Cleves instigates Elsa to put the forbidden question. We see that in German versions Cleves figures in the legend; in fact, in some chronicles the scene of action is laid there (see Grimm, "Deutsche Sagen", 4th ed., ed. Steig, Berlin, 1905, no. 535), and the date given is 711. Fantastic continuations are found in the poem called "Der jüngere Titurel" (c. 1260) and in the bulky versified narrative of Ulrich Füetrer "Buch der Abenteue" (written c. 1490). According to the account there given, Lohengrin sallies forth a second time, and comes to Lyzabori (Luxemburg) where he marries the Princess Belaye. An attempt is made on his life by her jealous relatives, and, though it is repulsed, Lohengrin succumbs to a wound received in the struggle. His wife dies of grief.

372 Tannhauser

373 This legend, as related in German folk-songs of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, and their variants in Low German, Dutch, and Danish, is as follows: Tannhauser, a minstrel knight, enters the mountain of Venus, a sort of subterranean paradise where the heathen goddess holds her voluptuous court, and for a year he revels in its unholy pleasures. Then a longing seizes upon him to return to earth, and when, through the aid of Mary, whom he invokes, his wish is realized, he hastens to Rome to implore pardon for his sin from Pope Urban IV. This the pope refuses to grant; Tannhäuser cannot be saved any more than the staff in the pontiff's hand can put forth fresh leaves. In despair the knight returns to the mountain of Venus and is not seen again. Soon after, the staff bursts into blossom and now messengers are sent to seek the knight, but too late.

374 No doubt we have here a tale of originally heathen character, subsequently Christianized. Its theme is the familiar story of the seduction of a human being by an elf or fairy. But all the delights of the fairy-realm cannot make him forget his earthly home, for which he longs. His desire is granted, but he is not happy, and in the end returns to the fairy-land. This motif is a commonplace in folk-lore literature. In the German legend the seductive fairy is identified with the ancient goddess of love, and the story is given a distinctly religious colour through the introduction of the pilgrimage of the repentant sinner to Rome. The motif of the withered staff bursting into blossom has also many parallels in sacred legend, and is evidently a later addition. How the legend came to assume the form outlined above can only be surmised. Of the poems that we possess on the subject none dates further back than the middle of the fifteenth century. The famous Volkslied that gives the above version is from the sixteenth century. A passage in Hermann von Sachsenheim's poem, "Die Mörin" proves that the legend, with its essential traits, was already known in 1453 when the poem was written. There Tannhäuser is referred to as the husband of Dame Venus. Now the historical Tannhäuser was a Minnesinger of the thirteenth century, who seems to have led a roving life, in the course of which he experienced many changes of fortune. His checquered career is reflected in his poems, which exhibit a strange mingling of dissolute boasting and pious sentiment. In one poem ascribed to him, repentance is expressed for foolish and sinful living, and this poem is supposed to be responsible for his appearing in the legend in the rôle of the penitent knight. But this is purely conjectural. As a matter of fact, the only connexion between the legendary and historical Tannhäuser is the identity of name.

375 It is noteworthy that a legend strikingly similar to that of Tannhäuser is attached in Italy to the Monte della Sibilla near Norcia. It is related at length by Antoine de La Sale in his "Salade", written between 1438 and 1442. He visited the sibyl's cave in 1420, and heard the story from the people of the neighbouring region. A still earlier reference to the legend is found in the famous romance "Guerino il meschino" of Andrea dei Magnabotti (1391). The Italian version knows that the cavalier entering the cave is a German, but does not mention his name; the queen of the subterranean paradise is the Sibyl of ancient prophetic fame, transformed into the goddess of pleasure. In view of these parallels which antedate the appearance of the legend in German literature, Gaston Paris disputes the German origin of the Tannhäuser legend, and regards Italy as its home. Its ultimate source he finds in Celtic folk-lore. But this cannot be proved, since the earlier history of the legend is not attested by any extant literary monuments either in Italy or in Germany. It is to be noted that in the German version there is a distinct tone of hostility to the papacy, wholly lacking in the Italian variants. In fact the miracle of the blossoming staff is a pointed reproof of the pope's harshness. This can readily be explained if the legend developed in Germany, where antipapal feeling was strong after the days of the Hohenstaufens. The dominant idea of the legend is the glorification of God's infinite mercy to sinners. But this ideal is set forth in a spirit most unfriendly to the Church. The attitude ascribed to the pope by the Volkslied is wholly contrary to Catholic doctrine.

376 Robert the Devil

377 God's boundless grace to sinners is also the theme of this legend as presented in French romances. Robert is the devil's own child, for his mother, despairing of heaven's aid in order to obtain a son, has addressed herself to the devil. From the moment of his birth the boy shows his vicious instincts, which urge him, when grown to manhood, to a career of monstrous crime. At last the horror which he inspires everywhere causes him to reflect, and, having found out the awful secret of his birth, he hastens to Rome to confess to the pope. He undergoes the most rigorous penance, living in the disguise of a fool at the emperor's court in Rome. Three times he delivers the city from the assault of the Saracens, but, refusing all reward, he ends his life as a pious hermit. According to another version he marries the emperor's daughter, whose love he has won in his humble disguise, and succeeds to the throne.

378 The oldest known account of this legend is a Latin prose narrative by a Dominican friar, Etienne de Bourbon (c. 1250). Then it appears in a French metrical romance of the thirteenth century, also in a dit of somewhat later date, and in a miracle play of the fourteenth century. A French prose version was also prefixed to the old "Croniques de Normandie" (probably of the thirteenth century). But the legend owes its popularity to the story-books, of which the earliest known appeared at Lyons in 1496, and again at Paris in 1497, under the title "La vie du terrible Robert le dyable". Since the sixteenth century the legend was often printed together with that of Richard sans Peur; it was published in completely recast form in 1769 under the title "Histoire de Robert le Diable, duc de Normandie, et de Richard Sans Peur, son fils."

379 From France the legend spread to Spain, where it was very popular. In England the subject was treated in the metrical romance, "Sir Gowther", the work of an unknown minstrel of the fifteenth century. An English translation from the French chap-book was made by Wynkyn de Worde, Caxton's assistant, and published without date under the title "Robert deuyll" (reprinted in Thoms, "Early English Prose Romances", London and New York, 1907). Another version, not based on the preceding, was given by Thomas Lodge in his book on "Robin the Divell" (London, 1591). In the Netherlands the romance of Robrecht den Duyvel was put on the index of forbidden books by the Bishop of Antwerp (1621). In Germany the legend never attained much of a vogue; not until the nineteenth century did it pass into the Volksbücher, being introduced by Görres (q. v.). It was treated in epic form by Victor von Strauss (1854), in dramatic form by Raupach (1835). Meyerbeer's opera "Robert le Diable" (1831) enjoyed great favour for a time. The libretto, written by Scribe and Delavigne, has little in common with the legend except the name of the hero.

380 The Wandering Jew

381 This legend has been widely popular ever since its first appearance in a German chap-book of 1602. There it is told as follows: When Jesus bore his Cross to Calvary, he passed the house of a cobbler, Ahasuerus by name, who had been one of the rabble to shout, "Crucify him." Sinking beneath his burden, Jesus stopped to rest at the threshold of the cobbler, but was driven away with the words; "Go where thou belongest." Thereupon Our Lord gazed sternly at Ahasuerus and said: "I will stand here and rest, but thou shalt go on until the last day." And since then the Jew has been roaming restlessly over the earth.

382 The first literary record of such a doomed wanderer is found in the "Flores Historiarum", a chronicle of Roger of Wendover, a monk of St. Albans (d. 1237). The account there given was incorporated with some slight amplifications into the "Historia Major" of Matthew Paris (d. 1259). The story is told on the authority of an Armenian bishop who visited England in 1228 and had personally known the doomed man. According to this version, Cartaphilus, a doorkeeper at Pilate's mansion, saw Jesus as he was led forth to be crucified and struck him contemptuously, crying at the same time: "Go Jesus, go faster, why dost thou linger?" Whereupon Jesus replied: "I go, but thou shalt wait till I come." And so the offender has not been able to die, but still waits for the coming of Christ. He is leading a quiet, saintly life. Whenever he reaches the age of a hundred years he is miraculously restored to the age of thirty. Since his conversion to Christianity his name is Joseph. A similar version, also on the authority of the Armenian bishop, is given by the Flemish chronicler, Philippe Mousket, Bishop of Tournai (about 1243). No doubt, this version is the basis for the story given in the chap-books.

383 Now the legend is surely not the invention of the Armenian bishop, as has been sometimes claimed. It was well known in Italy during the thirteenth century and must have existed long before that. According to the astrologer Guido Bonatti, who is mentioned by Dante (Inf., xx, 118), the wanderer passed through Forli in 1267. Philip of Novara, a famous jurist, in his "Livre de Forme de Plait" (c. 1250), refers to a certain Jehan Boute Dieu as one proverbially long-lived. Now Philip resided for a long time in Jerusalem and Cyprus; this, together with the fact that the account in the English chronicles also localizes Cartaphilus in Armenia, seems to point to an Oriental origin for the legend. Probably it was part of a local cycle that sprang up in Jerusalem in connexion with the Passion, and was brought to Europe by crusaders or pilgrims. A legend of a surviving witness of the Crucifixion, who is represented as the victim of a curse, was certainly current in Jerusalem, and is repeatedly referred to in accounts of travels to the Holy Land. The name of the accursed wanderer is generally given as Joannes Buttadeus, in Italian as Bottadio, which evidently means "God-smiter". An old Italian legend knows of a similar punishment inflicted on the soldier who struck Christ before the High Priest (John, xviii, 22), and later on this soldier was identified with Malchus whose ear was cut off by Peter. This legend was furthermore confused, it seems, with one current about St. John, to whom tradition ascribed immortality on the basis of a passage in John, xxi, 20 sqq. The names Johannes and Cartaphilus (karta philos "much beloved"), given to the wanderer, lend some colour to this theory.

384 But, whatever its origin, the legend owes its fame and popularity to the above-mentioned German chap-book, which appeared anonymously in 1602 under the title: "Kurtze Beschreibung und Erzehlung von einem Juden mit Namen Ahasverus", etc. There the story is related on the authority of a Lutheran clergyman, Paulus von Eitzen (d. 1598), who claimed to have met the Jew in person in Hamburg in 1542, and to have heard the story from Ahasuerus himself. In a later edition of 1603, "Wunderbarlicher Bericht von Einem Juden Ahasver", etc., where the anonymous author assumes the pen-name of Chrysostomus Dudulæus Westphalus, the meeting is assigned to the year 1547, and in an appendix the fate of the Jew is made the subject of an exhortation to the Christian reader.

385 The legend at once sprang into popular favour, and numerous editions followed. From Germany it spread to Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands, and especially to France, where it has enjoyed a great vogue up to the present. The best-known French version is the "Histoire admirable d'un Juif Errant" dating from the seventeenth century. Here a tragic touch is added by the recital of the dangers which the Jew courts in the vain hope of ending his misery in death. Stories of the actual appearance of the Jew also began to be common, many of them, no doubt, traceable to impostors who played the rôle with success. Of such a one we have a well authenticated record from Italy in 1415.

386 Various names are given to the Wandering Jew in different countries. The English chronicles call him Cartaphilus. The Italian form is Bottadio and this corresponds to Boudedeo in Brittany and Bedeus in Saxon Transylvania. In Belgium he is known as Isaac Laquedem, probably a name of Hebrew origin. In Spain his name has undergone the significant change to Juan Espera-en-Dios (John Trust-in-God). Why the German version calls him Ahasverus is not clear. This name is familiar from the Old Testament (Esther, i, 1) as the surname of a Persian monarch (written Assuerus in Catholic versions). It is to be noted that the original wanderer was not necessarily a Jew; Cartaphilus, the door-keeper in Pilate's mansion, must have been a Roman.

387 The Flying Dutchman

388 The theme of the doomed Wanderer recurs in this legend of the sea. The superstitious belief in a spectre ship is widespread among mariners. But the legend springing from this belief never attained a fixed form; the versions given of it vary considerably. The most common version as current among Dutch sailors relates how a captain by the name of Vanderdecken or Vanderstraaten from the Terneuse district, while on a voyage to India, is delayed off the Cape of Good Hope by a calm or a storm. In his rage he swears a blasphemous oath to double the Cape, if he were to sail until the Judgment Day. Offended, God took him at his word, and he is doomed to sail the seas forever, an omen of ill-luck to all mariners by whom his spectre-ship is sighted.

389 The legend does not appear in literature before the nineteenth century. It was made familiar to American readers by Washington Irving's tale "The Stormship", an episode in his "Bracebridge Hall" (1822). But it became widely known through Heine, who probably took it from oral tradition, and related it in his "Reisebilder aus Norderney" (1826) and again in "Memoiren des Herrn von Schnabelewopski" (in his "Salon", 1834). Heine mentions neither names nor places, and in the second version the setting of the story is undignified, if not vulgar. Nevertheless the legend was given a much deeper import through the introduction of the motif of redemption. Every seven years the Dutchman may land and look for a woman whose self-sacrificing love will lift the curse. At length he finds a maiden who pledges him her love, but at the last moment he refuses her generous sacrifice, reveals himself to her and leaves. She heroically insists on keeping her promise and casts herself into the sea. This noble act of self-sacrifice removes the curse; the Dutchman and his ship sink beneath the waves.

390 William Tell

391 The story of Tell, connected with the origin of the Swiss Confederation, until comparatively recent times passed for history, but its fabulous character is now universally recognized. Tell, a yeoman of Uri, famed for his skill with the cross-bow, having refused to salute the hat, the symbol of Austrian sovereignty which Gessler, the most notoriously cruel of the Austrian governors, had caused to be placed on a pole at Altdorf, is brought before the governor and ordered to show his skill by shooting an apple on the head of his son. He successfully performs the feat and on being asked to explain why he had taken two arrows from his quiver, avows that had he injured the child he would have pierced the governor. He is put on board a ship to be transported to Küssnacht, but a storm coming up, he escapes, and eventually liberates his country. This in brief is the legend. As early as 1607 its truth was questioned on the ground that not the slightest documentary proof of Tell's existence could be found. Swiss patriotism, however, for a long time silenced scepticism, until the work of scholars of the nineteenth century separated fact from fiction and consigned Tell's exploit to the realm of fable.

392 Faust

393 The origin and development of this famous legend is tolerably clear. Its hero is an actual personage, a man who lived in Germany during the sixteenth century. To be sure, many of the exploits related of him are so manifestly fabulous that some scholars have doubted his very existence and have regarded the legend as purely mythical. But against this view we are able to adduce the explicit testimony of a number of contemporaries: Trithemius of Sponheim, Mutianus Rufus, Johann Gast, Agrippa von Nettesheim, and others, who claim to have known Faust either in person or by reputation. They all agree in representing him as a charlatan, who went about the country under assumed high-sounding names, boasting of his skill in fortune-telling and magic, and preying on the credulity and superstitious ignorance of the people. Philip Begardi, a physician of Worms, author of an "Index Sanitatis" (1539), knew a number of persons duped by the swindler. He mentions Faust as a man who was well known, but of whom nothing had been heard lately. Melanchthon (as reported by Manlius, 1590) and Johann Weyer (d. 1588) tell us that Faust was born in Kundlingen (i.e. Knittlingen) in Würtemberg and studied magic at Cracow; also that he came to a violent end, being found dead one morning with a twisted neck.

394 The boasting of Faust did not seem so absurd in an age when the belief in demonology and magic was universal. What more natural than that his supernatural powers should be ascribed to the aid of the Devil? Stories about men in league with the Evil One had been current since early Christian times. Zoroaster, Virgil, Apollonius, Albertus Magnus, Popes Sylvester II and Paul II were some of the eminent men of whom such tales were related. Of especial significance in this connexion are the legends of Cyprian of Antioch and Theophilus of Adana, in which we meet with the type of the wicked magician, who, to gratify ambition or to accomplish some unholy purpose, sells his soul to the Devil. So, when Faust met with a sudden and violent death under mysterious circumstances, rumour had it that the Devil had carried him off, and thus arose the story of his compact with Satan. Now the tales that were current concerning former sorcerers who had entered into such an unholy partnership were repeated concerning Faust and gradually the obscure charlatan became the arch-magician, around whose name gathered a mass of fable and tradition dealing with black art. So the Faust legend gradually took shape. Its first appearance in literature dates from 1587, when the first Faust book appeared anonymously at Frankfort-on-the-Main under the title "Historia von D. Johann Fausten dem weitbeschreyten Zauberer und Schwartzkunstler". In a preface the publisher, whose name was Johann Spies, tells us that he obtained the manuscript from "a good friend in Speyer". According to the version of this book, Faust studies theology at Wittenberg, but, being of a "foolish and arrogant" turn of mind, and desirous of searching "into all things in heaven and earth", he resorts to magic and evokes the Devil. A demon, who is called Mephistopheles, appears, and a compact is made whereby for a stated term (later on fixed at twenty-four years) he agrees to be Faust's servant, in return for which the latter pledges his soul to the Devil. This compact is sealed with Faust's blood. For a time the sorcerer lives in power and splendour, performing strange deeds and experiencing marvellous adventures. But at the end of the stated term the Devil claims his prey. A strange tumult is heard at night, and the next morning Faust's mangled corpse is found on a heap of refuse.

395 The book itself is totally devoid of literary merit. Its purpose is purely didactic; the magician's awful fate is held up as a solemn warning to all who might be tempted to resort to black art. The fundamental idea of the story is the wickedness of striving for forbidden knowledge by sinful means. The anonymous author, who, judging from the general tone of the book, was probably a Lutheran pastor, emphatically disapproves of the spirit of free inquiry that characterizes the period following the great discoveries and the Reformation. Of subsequent editions, that of Widmnann (1599) seems to have been the chief source of later versions. Here the anti-Catholic tendency, unmistakable in the first edition, is still further emphasized. Faust's downfall is directly attributed to the cult of the Catholic Church. There are besides a number of changes, usually with a didactic purpose and to the detriment of the literary quality of the book. A lengthy commentary is also added. A new edition of Widmaun's version was given by Pfitzer in 1674, and an abbreviated edition was brought out about 1725, by one who calls himself a "man of Christian sentiments". But the popularity of the legend was due not so much to the chap-books as to the crude dramatic performances given by bands of strolling players. In these performances English actors played an important part. On the basis of an English translation of the German chap-book Christopher Marlowe wrote his well known drama of Faustus (first performed in 1595), and this play was performed in Germany by English actors. Of the German Faust plays we have but scanty knowledge. As we know them from the eighteenth century, they were coarse farces in which buffoonery and sensationalism were relied on for success. Such plays disappeared from the literary stage when French classicism prevailed. But the Faust play survived as a puppet-show given by showmen at fairs to amuse the young and uncritical, and such a show inspired the young Goethe with the idea of writing his famous masterpiece. Already Lessing had called attention to the dramatic possibilities of the subject, and tried his hand at a Faust drama of which he had sketched a scene (cited in the seventeenth "Literaturbrief", 1759).

396 The old Faust legend as presented in the chap-books and the plays is essentially a tragedy of sin and damnation, a characteristic product of the age of the Reformation. In older legends of great sinners like Robert the Devil, the efficacy of penitence was proclaimed, the saving power of the Church was emphasized. With the Reformation this was changed. The rigid Lutheran orthodox theology denied the redeeming powers of the ancient Church and this harsh spirit is reflected in the legend. The sinner who leagues with the Devil was irrevocably damned. Goethe, the enlightened humanitarian, disagreed with this conception. For him Faust was not a presumptuous sensualist, but a titanic striver after truth, a representative of humanity's noblest aspirations, and, whatever his sins and errors might be, in the end he was to be saved. In Goethe's "Faust" (see GERMANY, loc. cit. supra) the legend has received its classic form.

397 GERMANIC HEROIC SAGA: On the subject in general consult SYMONS, Germanische Heldensage in PAUL, Grundriss der Germanischen Philologie (2nd ed., Strasburg, 1900), III, 606 sqq.; see also JIRICZEK, Die deutsche Heldensage (3rd ed., Leipzig, 1906). For the Nibelungen saga consult BOER, Untersuchungen über den Ursprung und die Entwickelung der Nibelungensage (Halle, 1907). The presentation of the genesis of the legend given above is based on this work. For the Dietrich saga see particularly JIRICZEK, Deutsche Heldensagen (Strasburg, 1898). For the Beowuif saga see SYMONS, op. cit., 644-651, where bibliography is given.

398 LEGENDS OF CHARLEMAGNE: PARIS, Histoire poétique do Charlemagne (Paris, 1865; 2nd ed., 1905); LÉON GAUTIER, Les Epopées françaises, III (2nd ed., Paris, 1888-1897); GRÖBER in Grundriss der romanischen Philologie, II (Strasburg, 1902), 1, 461-469; 538-552; BECKER, Grundriss der altfranzösischen Literatur, I (Heidelberg, 1907), 62-92. Many of the legends, particularly those current in Germany, are found in GRIMM , Deutsche Sagen (4th ed., Berlin, 1905), nos. 22, 26-28, 437-454. See also KÖGEL, Geschichte der deutschen Litteratur, I (Strasburg, 1894), pt. II, 220-230.

399 ROLAND: PARIS, op. cit., 259-285, 406-414, 415; see also his essay Roncevaux in Légendes du moyen âge (Paris, 1903), 1-63.

400 GENEVIÈVE OF BRABANT: SAUERBORN, Geschichte der Pfalzgräfin Genovefa und der Kapelle Frauenkirchen (Ratisbon, 1856); SEUFFERT, Die Legende von der Pfalzgräfin Genovefa (Würzburg, 1877); GOLZ, Pfalzgräfin Genovefa in der deutschen Dichtung (Leipzig, 1897).

401 KING ARTHUR: Consult the bibliography appended to the article on the Holy Grail. Many of the works there cited treat also of the Arthurian legend. See also ZIMMER, Nennius vindicatus (Berlin, 1893); RHYS, Studies in the Arthurian Legend (Oxford, 1891); NEWELL, King Arthur and the Table Round (Boston, 1897). On the question of the origin of the "matière de Bretagne" see VORETZSCH, Einführung in das Studium der altfranzösischen Literatur (Halle, 1905), 339-352, where the literature of the subject is given in full. Useful also for the later literature is MACCALLUM, Tennyson's Idylls of the King and Arthurian Story from the Sixteenth Century (Glasgow, 1894).

402 TRISTAN AND ISOLDE: For the content of the legend and its bibliography see the article on GOTTFRIED VON STRASSBURG.

403 LOHENGRIN: GOLTHER in Romanische Forschungen (1890), V, 103-136; TODD, preface to La Naissance du Chevalier au Cygne in Publication of the Modern Language Association of America, IV Baltimore, 1889); MUNCKER, Die Dichtung des Lohengrin von Richard Wagner und ihre Quellen in Beilage zur Allgemeinen Zeitung (1891), no. 148; PANZER, Lohengrinstudien (Halle, 1894); BLÖTE in Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie, XXI (1897), 176 sq.; IDEM in Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum, XLII (1898), 1 sq.

404 TANNHÄUSER: GRÄSSE, Der Tannhäuser und ewige Jude (Dresden, 1861); von SCHLEINITZ, Wagner's Tannhäuser und Sängerkrieg auf der Wartburg (Meran, 1891), especially 127-178; GOLTHER, Geschichte der Tannhäuser-Sage und Dichtung in Bayreuther Taschenkalender (1891), 829 sq.; SCHMIDT, Tannhäuser in Sage und Dichtung in Nord und Süd (Nov., 1892); SÖDERHJELM, Antoine de La Sale et la légende de Tannhäuser in Memoires de la société néo-Philologique à Helsingfors. II (1897), 101-167; PARIS, Lépendes du Moyen Age (Paris 1903), 111-145; REUSCHEL, Die Tannhäusersage in Neue Jahrbücher für das Klassische Altertum, Geschichte und deutsche Literatur, XIII (Leipzig, 1904), 653-667.

405 ROBERT THE DEVIL: Du MÉRIL, La légende de Robert le Diable in Etudes sur quelques points d'archéologie et d'histoire littéraire (1862), 272-317; introduction to BREUL, Sir Gowther (Oppeln, 1886). In this book a complete bibliography is given. See also the introduction to LÖSETH'S edition of Robert le Diable (Paris, 1903).

406 THE WANDERING JEW: GRÄSSE, Der Tannhäuser und der ewige Jude (Dresden, 1861); CONWAY, The Wandering Jew (London and New York, 1881); SCHOEBEL, La Légende du Juif-Errant (Paris, 1877); MORPURGO, L'Ebreo Errante in Italia (Florence, 1890); PARIS, Le Juif Errant in Légendes du Moyen Age (Paris, 1903), 149-186; 187-221; the most exhaustive discussion of the legend is the Work of NEUBAUR, Die Sage vom ewigen Juden (2nd ed., Leipzig, 1893). For a history of the legend in literature see KAPSTEIN, Ahasverus in der Weltpoesie (Berlin, 1906).

407 THE FLYING DUTCHMAN: GRASSE, op. cit., 122, note 32; see also the essays of PASQUÉ in Nord und Süd (1884), and of GOLTHER in Bühne und Welt (1901), III, 866 sq.

408 WILLIAM TELL: RILLIET, Les Origines de la Confédération Suisse, Histoire et Légende (2nd ed., Geneva, 1869); ROCHHOLZ, Tell und Gessler in Sage und Geschichte (Heilbronn, 1877); GISLER, Die Tellfrage (Berne, 1895); DANDLIKER, Geschichte der Schweiz, I (4th ed., Zurich, 1900), 426-454, contains a full bibliography; see also the introduction to PALMER'S edition of SCHILLER'S Tell (New York, 1900) 34-43.

409 FAUST: For a fairly Complete bibliography of the immense literature of the subject down to 1884 consult ENGEL, Zusammenstellung der Faust-Schriften vom 16. Jahrhundert bis mitte 1884 (Oldenburg, 1885); see also FISCHER, Goethes Faust in Goethe-Schriften (Heidelberg, 1901), I; SCHMIDT, Faust und das 16. Jahrhundert in Charakteristiken (2nd ed., Berlin, 1902), I 1-36; WITKOWSKI, Der historische Faust in Deutsche Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft, VII (Freiburg im Br. and Liepzig, 1897), 298-350 (here all the literary testimonials concerning the historical Faust are adduced and discussed). Consult also the introduction to THOMAS, Goethe's Faust (Boston, 1899).

410 Arthur F.J. Remy

Legends of the Saints

325 Under the term legend the modern concept would include every untrue tale. But it is not so very long since its meaning has been extended thus far, nor is such a definition historically justifiable. That which was understood by the word legend, at the time when the concept arose, included both truth and fiction (considered from the standpoint of modern historical criticism). And this is what the numerous friends of the legend among the German poets, since the days of the Romantic School, understand by the term. The legenda included facts which were historically genuine, as well as narrative which we now class as unhistorical legend. The term is a creation of the Middle Ages, and has its source in the reading of the prayers used in Divine service. Since the days of the martyrs, the Church recalled to mind her famous dead in the prayers of the Mass and in the Office, by commemorating the names noted in the martyrologies and making mention of incidents in their lives and martyrdom. When the lectio became a matter of precept, the reading matter in the office for the day became in a precise sense legenda (that which must be read). After the thirteenth century the word legenda was regarded as the equivalent of vita and passio, and, in the fifteenth century, the liber lectionarius is comprised under what is known as "legend". Thus, historically considered, legend is the story of the saints. As by this time it had unfortunately happened that the stories of the saints were supplemented and embellished by the people according to their primitive theological conceptions and inclinations, the legend became to a large extent fiction. The age of the Reformation received the legend in this form. On account of the importance which the saints possessed even among Protestants, especially as the instruments of Divine grace, the legends have remained in use to this day, particularly in sermons. The edition of the "Vitæ Patrum", which Georg Major published at Wittenberg in 1544 by Luther's orders, closely follows Athanasius, Rufinus, and Jerome, rejecting merely the obvious fantasies and aberrations, such as, for example, were to be seen in the "Vita s. Barbaræ", the "Legenda Aurea" of the thirteenth century, or in the "Vita s. Simeonis Stylitæ" of Pseudo-Antonius. But the opposition to the ancient Church became intensified, and led to the Reformers' breach with the saints. Simultaneously, the legends of the saints disappear from Protestantism, and it is only in the nineteenth century, after the brief appearance of Romanticism, that they again find entrance into official Protestantism in connexion with the attempts of Ferdinand Piper (d. 1899 at Berlin) to revive the popular calendars.

326 In the usage of the Catholic Church and of the people, the legend plays the same part to-day as in the Middle Ages. Here also science has taught that distinctions are to be made. Thus it was felt that not all the legends we possess were of equal value, and especially that the editions of the lives of the saints were entirely unsatisfactory. It was the Jesuit Heribert Rosweyde of Utrecht who, at the beginning of the seventeenth century, undertook to remedy matters by referring to the most ancient texts, and by pointing out how the tales developed. Rosweyde wished merely to correct the old collections; his idea was to treat the martyrologies, beginning with the most ancient, from the philological standpoint. But his scheme was forthwith taken up by his order, and after his death (1629) was carried out on a large scale, with an eye also to sectarian opponents, who might learn from the lives of the saints the continuity of Catholic teaching and Catholic life. Thus there came into existence the "Acta Sanctorum" of the Bollandists (q. v.). This monumental work has become the foundation of all investigation in hagiography and legend.

327 In their present state of development, we would do well to keep these two departments separate. The meaning of the word legend has indeed been practically transformed; the Roman Breviary officially designates the lesson for the day as lectio, and the Church now recognizes the legend rather as a popular story, since the populace are always more impressed by the extraordinary and the grotesque. The legend has thus come to be regarded merely as a fictitious religious tale. Nothing therefore stands in the way of a distinction, which besides is indispensable to those who desire clearness in hagiography. Hagiography is to-day the province of the historian, who must, even more carefully in the history of the saints than in other historical questions, test the value of the sources of the reports. Only thus will it be possible to arrive at the fundamental question of all hagiography, the question of miracles in history. Are matters, which the modern man is inclined to take as legend, authentically vouched for, or are they met with only in doubtful sources? The belief in miracles, considered as such, does not affect the historian. He has only to gather the original authorities together and to say: This is what happened, so far as historical science can determine. If this presentation of the facts be correct, then no objection can be raised against the results. We have now an abundance of hagiographic memorials which are just as truly history as any other memorials. Reports of miracles which partake of a vague and general character we may and must exclude from this category — e.g., when St. Gregory the Great, in a letter to St. Augustine, makes mention of the miracles which followed on Augustine's zealous activity in England: "Scio quod omnipotens Deus per dilectionem tuam in gente, quam eligi voluit, magna miracula ostendit" ("I know that Almighty God by His love for thee has shown forth great miracles among the people, whom he wished to be saved" — "Gregorii Registrum", XI, ep. xxxvi). We possess hagiographic reports on the best possible authority in numerous legal documents and official registers concerning depositions under oath. Such vouchers, however, cannot in the nature of the case be applicable to the entire life of a saint, but only to individual occurrences, and, for the most part, not to occurrences in the saint's lifetime, but to those which took place at his shrine. The miracles of healing at the shrine of Bishop Willehad at Bremen (d. about 790) in 860, the miracles of Bernard in the "Liber Miraculorum" of 1146-47, the cures at the grave of Bishop Bruno of Würzburg (d. 1045) in 1202-03, are related in a manner open to no objection.

328 Concerning the miraculous occurrences at the grave of St. Peter Parenzo at Orvieto (d. 1199) — an exhaustive list cannot be attempted here; we quote but a few examples — of St. Bertrand of Aquilcia (d. 1350), of St. Helena of Udina (1458), of St. James Philippi of Faenza (1483), of St. Hypolistus of Atripalda (1637-46), of St. Juventius in Casa Dei (at Rouen, 1667-74), we have documentary accounts (Acta SS., May, V, 98-9; June, I, 791 sqq.; April, III, 255; May, VI, 166 sqq.; 1 May, appendix, VII, 528; June, I, 45 sqq.). In addition to these records we possess an imposing array of reports of eyewitnesses in every century, lucid Acts of martyrs, relations like that of the monk Cuthbert on the death of the Venerable Bede (735), of Willebald of Mainz on the life of Boniface the Great, the history of the holy virgin Oda (d. 1158) at Gutehoffnung near Bingen, the life of Cardinal Nicholas Albergati of Bologna (d. 1443). Whoever gives fair consideration to all these facts must come to a double conclusion:

329 (1) that the extraordinary does not necessarily appertain to the life of the saint; and

330 (2) that in every case these signs and wonders are not unworthy of the saint, e.g. cures, apparitions, prophecies, visions, transfigurations, stigmata, pleasant odour, incorruption.

331 But the historian ought likewise to remember that (leaving the stigmata, an essentially Christian manifestation, out of the question) all these phenomena were also known to antiquity. Ancient Greece exhibits stone monuments and inscriptions which bear witness to cures and apparitions in the ancient mythology. History tells of Aristeas of Proconnesus, Hermotimus of Clazomenæ, Epimenides of Crete, that they were ascetics and thereby became ecstatic, even to the degree of the soul leaving the body, remaining far removed from it, and being able to appear in other places. Nor is it essential that medieval mysticism be something different from the ancient hieromania; in both cases the presumption is the same as regards the faculties of the soul.

332 History, therefore, knows of miracles, and the nature of the historical miracle itself leads us to the distinction between history and legend. If the authentic reports are held to be trustworthy, and within the bounds of physical and psychical experience, and the unauthentic reports repel us owing to their fantastic embellishments, then we will be justified in claiming that the surplus of these latter narratives over the authentic reports is untrue, and is legend in the modern sense of the word. The establishment of this distinction is, therefore, entirely a matter of historical method. But, since mistrust of the historical work may lead to the suspicion that the estimation of the value of the sources has been influenced by the subject matter of the miracle, the proof must be carried a step farther, and the origin of the superfluous matter demonstrated. hence arises as our next task, to indicate;

333 (1) the contents and

334 (2) the sources of legends.

335 Manifold as the varieties of legends now seem to be, there are fundamentally not so very many different notions utilized. The legend considers the saint as a kind of lord of the elements, who commands the water, rain, fire, mountain, and rock; he changes, enlarges, or diminishes objects; flies through the air; delivers from dungeon and gallows; takes part in battles, and even in martyrdom is invulnerable; animals, the wildest and the most timid, serve him (e.g. the stories of the bear as a beast of burden; the ring in the fish; the frogs becoming silent, etc.); his birth is glorified by a miracle; a voice, or letters, from Heaven proclaim his identity; bells ring of themselves; the heavenly ones enter into personal intercourse with him (betrothal of Mary); he speaks with the dead and beholds heaven, hell, and purgatory; forces the Devil to release people from compacts; he is victorious over dragons; etc. Of all this the authentic Christian narratives know nothing. But whence then does this world of fantastic concepts arise? A glance at the pre-Christian religious narratives will dispel every doubt. All these stories are anticipated by the Greek chroniclers, writers of myths, collectors of strange tales, neo-Platonism, and neo-Pythagorism. One need only refer to the Hellados periegesis of Pausanias, or glance through the codices collected by Photius in his "Bibliotheca", to recognize what great importance was attached to the reports of miracles in antiquity by both the educated and uneducated. The legend makes its appearance wherever the common people endeavoured to form theological concepts, and in its main features it is everywhere the same. Like the myth (the explanatory fable of nature) and the doctrinal fable, it has its independent religious and hortatory importance. The legend claims to show the auxiliary power of the supernatural, and thus indicate to the people a "saviour" in every need. The worshipper of divinity, the hero-worshipper, is assured of the supernatural protection to which he has established a claim. With the old mythologies and genealogies of gods, of which they serve after a certain fashion as corroborative evidence, these tales may be regarded as the theology of the people. The guiding thoughts are in every case taken from life; they deal with the fulfilment of the simple wishes and expectations likely to arise in the minds of men whose lives were spent in contest with the forces and laws of nature. Hellenism had already recognized this characteristic of the religious fable, and would thus have been obliged to free itself from it in the course of time, had not the competition with Christianity forced the champions of the ancient polytheism to seek again in the ancient fables incidents to set against the miraculous power of Christ. ln this way popular illusions found their way from Hellenism to Christianity, whose struggles in the first three centuries certainly produced an abundance of heroes. The genuine Acts of the martyrs (cf., for example, R. Knopf, "Ausgewählte Märtyreracten", Tübingen, 1901; Ruinart, "Acta Martyrum sincera", Paris, 1689, no longer sufficient for scientific research) have in them no popular miracles. After the persecutions, however, when, with the lapse of time, there was no longer any standard by which to measure the unexampled heroism of the martyrs, it became easy to transfer to the Christian martyrs the conceptions which the ancients held concerning their heroes. This transference was promoted by the numerous cases in which Christian saints became the successors of local deities, and Christian worship supplanted the ancient local worship. This explains the great number of similarities between gods and saints. For the often maintained metamorphosis of gods into saints no proof is to be found. The earliest Catholics of whom legends are told are therefore the martyrs. And from them the conceptions are then transferred to the confessors, as, after the days of persecution, the scene of the contest for salvation was changed from the rack and the amphitheatre to the human soul.

336 But how was the transference of legends to Christianity consummated? The fact that the Talmud also uses the same ideas, with variations, proves that the guiding thoughts of men during the period of the first spread of Christianity ran in general on parallel lines. There is no doubt, therefore, that these Christian legends are to be traced to a common oral tradition, which was unconsciously transferred from one subject of a legend to another. For the hypothesis of this literary transference, no proofs can be given. If St. Augustine (De cura pro mortuis gerenda, xii) and also St. Gregory the Great (Dialogues, IV, xxxvi) relate of a man, who died by an error of the Angel of Death and was again restored to life, the same story which is already given by Lucian in his "Philopseudes", such an example at once shows that the literary style was not the model, but that the oral relation was. Augustine and Gregory received the story of the occurrence from those who claimed to have seen it. To such an extent had certain imaginary conceptions become the common property of the people that they repeated themselves as auto-suggestions and dreams. There are ideas of so pronounced a peculiarity that they can be invented only once, and their successive reappearances in new surroundings must, therefore, be due to oral transmission. Such is the characteristic tale of the impostor, who concealed the money he owed in a hollow stick, gave this stick to the creditor to hold, and then swore that he had given back the money; this tale is found in Conon the Grammarian (at Rome in Cæsar's time), in the Haggada of the Talmud (Nedarim, 25a), and in the Christian legends of the thirteenth century in Vincent of Beauvais. The leading ideas of the legends were transferred individually, and appeared later in literary form in the most varied combinations. Not till the sixth century may the literary type of martyr be considered as perfected, and we are subsequently able to verify the literary associations of ideas. This Catholic type had indeed had models in the distant past. The pre-Christian religious narrative had already worked up the old motives into romances, and, starting from this example, there arose in Gnostic circles after the second century the apocryphal accounts of the lives of the Apostles, indicating dogmatic prepossessions. The Church combatted these stories, but the opposition of centuries — the Decree of Gelasius in 496 is well-known — was unable to prevent the genuine narratives from becoming infected, and the ideals of the common people from obtaining preponderance over historical facts. The place of origin and of dissemination of these mere legends was the East. With the termination of the sixth century the taste for them was transplanted to the West also owing to the active intercourse between Syria and Gaul. Even Gregory of Tours (d. 594) was acquainted with the apocryphal lives of the Apostles. At the beginning of the seventh century we already find related in Gaul (in the "Passio Tergeminorum" of Warnahar of Langres), as an incident in the local history of Langres, a story of martyrdom originating in Cappadocia.

337 The seventh century sees the literary form of legend domiciled in the West. Bede's "Martyrology" and Aldhelm of Malmesbury (d. 709) indicate a wide knowledge of this foreign literature. Ireland and England eagerly follow in the new direction. In the western part of the continent the taste changes according to the times. Rough times require more abundant consolations; thus the legends of the "saviour" make their appearance in the Merovingian seventh century up to the middle of the eighth; others in the time of the perils from the Northmen, of the religious wars, and the Crusades, and especially towards the end of the Middle Ages with its social calamities. During the millenarian tenth century, the era of the Cluniacs and mysticism make the biographies of the saints subjective. The twelfth century brings with the new religious orders the contemplative legends of Mary. The thirteenth sees the development of the cities and the citizens, hand in hand with which goes the popularization of the legend by means of collections compiled for the purposes of sermons, vit sanctorum, exempla, or merely to give entertainment (Vincent of Beauvais, Cæsarius of Heisterbach, James of Vitry, Thomas of Chantimpré, "Legenda Aurea"); in this century also arise the legends of Mary and, in connexion with the new feast of Corpus Christi (1264), a strong interest in tales of miracles relating to the Host. Indeed it was in the very nature of the case that the new legend should appear otherwise than the old. Transubstantiation is something specifically Christian. Still, we find only variations of the old concepts of transformation and apparitions, as in the innumerable stories which now circulated of visible incarnation of the Divine Child or of the Crucified One, or of the monstrance being suspended in the air. But the continuity of the concepts is quite evident in the case of the legend of Mary. If Mary considers herself as betrothed to the priest who serves her, the meaning of this is not far to seek; but nevertheless Callimachus (third century B. C.) had also treated this idea in a legend of Artemis, and Antoninus Liberalis and the Talmud have variations of it. And if, in this legend of Mary, the Blessed Virgin put a ring on the hand of her betrothed under quite characteristic circumstances, that is nothing else than the Roman local legend of the betrothal of Venus, as it has been preserved by William of Malmesbury and the "Deutsche Kaiserchronik" of the twelfth century.

338 Therefore:

339 (1) the original reports of martyrdoms and lives do not present what is called "legend";

340 (2) legends repeat the conceptions found in the pre-Christian religious tales.

341 From this it follows that we have a right to identify the pre-and post-Christian popular religious tales; the legend is not Christian, only Christianized. But where then lie its ultimate sources? In many cases it has obviously the same origin as the myth, when it refers the incomprehensible to religious heroes. Antiquity traced back sources, whose natural elements it did not understand, to the heroes; such was also the case with many legends of the saints, although others should rather be regarded as outgrowths of the genuine history of the saints. Etymology also has often led to the promotion of legends; thus, Christopher becomes the actual Christ-carrier. Again, there must be taken into consideration the inexhaustible imagination of the common people; merely because the people expected help, or punishment, in certain situations, the fulfilment of such expectations was soon related. And, finally, general axioms of experience (as in Pantschatantra) or, in the case of the Talmud and Christianity, merely sentences and figures of speech from the holy Scripture are clothed in the garb of narrative.

342 DELEHAYE, Les légendes hagiographiques (Brussels, 1905), tr. CRAWFORD, Legends of the Saints (London and New York, 1908); GÜNTER, Legenden-Studien (Cologne, 1906); IDEM, Die christl. Legende des Abendlandes (Heidelberg, 1910).

343 HEINRICH GÜNTER.

Diocese of Leghorn

328 Leghorn, (Diocese of) (Liburnensis), suffragan of Pisa. Leghorn (Ital. Livorno), in Tuscany, is the capital of the smallest of the provinces of Italy. The city is situated on marshy ground, and is in consequence intersected by many canals, hence it has been called "Little Venice". A larger canal puts it in communication with Pisa. It has two ports, the old, or Medici, port, and the new port constructed in 1854. In former times Leghorn was the most important port in the Grand Duchy of Tuscany; even now it is outranked only by Genoa and Naples.

329 Among its numerous teaching establishments are a naval academy, and an observatory erected in 1881. The public library is important, and the prehistoric museum contains many Etruscan and Roman antiquities. The town likewise possesses a gallery of paintings, and its archives have an historical interest. Among the more important industries are shipbuilding, ironworks, and trade in alabaster and coral. The cathedral dates from the sixteenth century; there are also churches belonging to the Greek, the Maronite, and the Armenian Rites. The Synagogue (1603) is second only to that at Amsterdam. The royal palace was erected by Cosimo I. Of note also are the Torre del Marzocco, now used as a signal station, and the Torre della Meloria, near which, in 1241, the Pisans surprised and defeated the Genoese fleet on its way to Rome with the French bishops who were going to the council summoned against Frederick II.

330 Among the ancients Leghorn was known as Portus Liburni, and was of small importance until the sixteenth century. It belonged to the Pisans, and was captured from them by the Genoese. In 1421 the Florentines bought it for 100,000 florins, and thus Leghorn came to be the main outlet for Florentine commerce, to the detriment of Pisa, which from that time began to wane. The Medici family took great interest in the prosperity of this stronghold; Alessandro de' Medici built the old fortress; Cosmo I, under the supervision of Vasari, built a breakwater and a new canal. But the real author of its greatness was Ferdinand I, who called Leghorn "his mistress". To increase its population he showered his favours on it and on those who went to live there, and made it a town of refuge for men from every nation, so that there flocked to it not only outlaws from all over Italy, but even Greeks, Jews, and Moors driven out of Spain. Exiled English Catholics found a home there. Cosmo II erected a monument to Ferdinand, the work of Giovanni dell' Opera. Owing to the bombardment (by the English in 1651, and by the French in 1671) of the Dutch fleet stationed in the harbour, Ferdinand II caused Leghorn to be declared a neutral port by international treaty (1691). This neutrality was violated for the first time in 1796 by Bonaparte, whose idea of a "Continental blockade" did immense damage to the commerce of the town. In 1848 Leghorn was the hotbed of the Tuscan revolution.

331 The episcopal see was created by Pius VII in 1806. Its first bishop was Filippo Canucci. The diocese has 32 parishes with 170,000 souls. The number of religious houses for men is 9, and for women, 12. It has 3 educational institutions for boys, and 7 for girls.

332 REPETTI, Dizionario Geografico ecc. della Toscana (Florence, 1835); TARGIONI-TOZZETTI AND BORSI, Liburni civitas (Leghorn, 1906).

333 U. Benigni

Legio

331 Titular see of Palestina Secunda, suffragan of Scythopolis. It figures for the first time in a Latin episcopal notitia, dating probably from the eleventh century, where it is given under the name of Legionum, between the Bishoprics of Diocæsarea and Capitolias (Tobler and Molinier, "Itinera Hierosolymitana", I, Geneva, 1880, 343). If, however, we consult the Greek "Notitiæ Episcopatuum", of which the Latin is only a translation, we find in that place, not Legio, but Maximianopolis (" Byzant. Zeitschr.", I, Leipzig, 1892, 253, 256). The See of Legio is, therefore, identical with Maximianopolis; in the Middle Ages both cities were identified, being near neighbours, though really distinct places in the same see. Legio is now Ledjun, well known in the Bible and in history under the name of Mageddo.

332 S. VAILHÉ

Oliver Legipont

334 Benedictine, bibliographer, born at Soiron, Limburg, 2 Dec., 1698; died at Trier, 16 Jan., 1758. Having received his early education from the Franciscans at Verviers he proceeded for higher studies to Cologne, where he entered the abbey of Great St. Martin, received the priesthood on 22 May, 1723, and the degree of Licentiate in 1728, His life was practically a succession of journeys to the numerous libraries, which he was commissioned to examine and put in order. Though zealous in the sacred ministry, he had little opportunity of exercising it; nor did he devote much time to teaching, though he was instrumental in promoting the higher studies in his order by the erection of a Benedictine college in the University of Heidelberg. Most of his writings remain unedited, but among the printed works his edition of Magnoald Ziegelbauer's "Historia rei litterariæ ord. Sti. Benedicti" (1754-), "Monasticum Moguntiacum" (Prague, 1746), "Dissertationes philologico-bibliographicæ" (Nuremberg, 1747), "Itinerarium peregrinationis nobilis" (Augsburg, 1751; the same also in Spanish, Valencia, 1759) have lasting value.

335 Allg. Deutsch. Biog., XVIII. 123.

336 Benedict Zimmerman.

Legists

337 Teachers of civil or Roman law, who, besides expounding sources, explaining terms, elucidating texts, summarizing the contents of chapters, etc., illustrated by cases, real or imaginary, the numerous questions and distinctions arising out of the "Corpus Juris" enactments of the ancient Roman code. From the twelfth century, when a fresh impulse was given to legal researches, the terms legist and decretist — the latter applied, in the narrower sense, to the interpreter of ecclesiastical law and commentator on the canonical texts — have been carefully distinguished.

338 P. J. MacAuley.

Legitimation

340 (Lat. legitimatio).

341 The canonical term for the act by which the irregularity contracted by being born out of lawful wedlock is removed (see IRREGULARITY). Legitimation consequently presupposes illegitimacy. It is to be noted that all children born of marriage are presumed in canon law to be legitimate. This holds, not only for valid marriages, but also for such as are commonly reputed to be valid, though really invalid, provided such marriages were entered into, by at least one of the parties, in good faith. A marriage of this latter kind is called a putative marriage. If both parties to such marriage were in bad faith, the children would be held legitimate in the external forum, as this bad faith would not be manifest. In case both contractors were in good faith, the children would be legitimate, even if the marriage were afterwards declared to be null. Presumption of legitimacy is always in favour of the children born of a person in wedlock, unless evident proof be given that physical reasons make the paternity of the husband impossible, such as absence, impotence, etc.; and even a sworn confession of wrongdoing on the part of either reputed parent will not otherwise affect the legitimacy of the children. Infants born before the usual time of gestation or after it, as, for example, at the beginning of the seventh month after the marriage ceremony, or at the completion of the tenth month after the death of the husband, are held to be legitimate. When marriage is entered into by two parties who suspect there is an impediment but make no inquiry into the truth, and it afterwards be made plain that such obstacle to validity did exist, their offspring is illegitimate, because affected ignorance is equivalent to knowledge. If, however, the doubt arise after the consummation of the marriage, children conceived before a sentence of invalidity is rendered have the standing of legitimate children.

342 Illegitimate offspring are designated by various names in canon law, according to the circumstances attending their procreation: they are called natural (naturales) children, if born of unmarried persons between whom there could have been a legitimate marriage at the time either of the conception or the birth of their offspring; if born of a prostitute, illegitimate children are called manzeres; if of a woman who is neither a prostitute nor a concubine, they are designated bastardi; those who are sprung from parents, who either at the time of conception or of birth could not have entered into matrimony, are termed spurii; if, however, valid marriage would be impossible both at the time of the conception and of the birth of the children, the latter are said to be born ex damnnato coitu; when one parent is married, the illegitimate children are called nothi; if both are wedded, adulterini; if the parents were related by collateral consanguinity or affinity, incestuosi; if related in the direct line of ascent or descent, nefarii. Illegitimate natural children are legitimated by a valid or putative marriage subsequently contracted between their parents, even if that marriage be not consummated. Hence such a marriage could be contracted even by a dying person. But this privilege is extended only to those between whose parents a legitimate marriage would be possible either at the time of birth or conception, or, at least, at some intermediate time, not to those whose parents, during that whole period, would be bound by a diriment impediment. The legitimation of children does not depend on the will of their parents, and takes place even when the latter are unwilling, or even when the marriage has been celebrated after other marriages contracted during the interim. This legitimation extends to natural children who are already dead and consequently to their living descendants. An infant thus legitimated is held equal to legitimate children in all respects as to sacred orders and as to ecclesiastical dignities, except the cardinalate. This last exception was made by Sixtus V (3 Dec., 1586). It is not required that mention of such legitimation be made either in public documents or nuptial banns. Such legitimation is termed plenior in canon law to distinguish it from the plena legitimation which is granted by papal rescript, and from the plenissima which follows on the radical validation of a marriage (sanatio in radice). Illegitimate children who are not naturales cannot be legitimated by a subsequent marriage of their parents. This privilege may however be granted them by dispensation from the pope.

343 The sovereign pontiff has the power of legitimating all children born out of wedlock and thus making them capable of hereditary succession, and of receiving sacred orders, honours, dignities, and ecclesiastical benefices. A legitimation by a civil law does not remove the canonical irregularity, as laymen have no ecclesiastical jurisdiction. By common canon law, it is forbidden to ordain illegitimate persons, unless they be lawfully dispensed or be professed in a religious order. In the latter case, however, they are not capable of receiving prelacies, unless a special rescript be conceded. For major orders, dignities, and canonries in a cathedral church, the pope alone can dispense; the power of the bishop extends only to minor orders and simple benefices. If an episcopal see be vacant, the cathedral chapter has the same power as the bishop. Legitimation for Sacred orders carries with it the dispensation to obtain a benefice, but not that for minor orders, unless it be expressly stated. A son born lawfully to one who afterwards receives Sacred orders cannot immediately succeed to the paternal benefice; if unlawfully begotten, he may not succeed at all. A father, however, may succeed his lawful son in a benefice without any dispensation, because there is then no question of hereditary succession. Canon law and the Roman civil law are not in accord in the matter of legitimation, as the latter restricts the privilege to children born of concubinage, whose parents afterwards married. The church law, as we have seen, extends to all illegitimate children the benefit of possible legitimation. The laws of England and those of many states of the American Union do not recognize legitimation of children as following upon a subsequent marriage.

344 FERRARIS, Bibliotheca Canonica, s. v. Filius and Lcgitimatio (Rome, 1886); TAUNTON, The Law of the Church, s. v. Illegitimate Children (London, 1906); AICHNER, Compendium Juris Ecclesiastici (Brixen, 1895); LAURENTIUS, Institutiones juris ecciesiastici (Freiburg, 1903).

345 W. Fanning

Charles Le Gobien

343 French Jesuit and founder of the famous collection of "Lettres édifiantes et curieuses", one of the most important sources of information for the history of Catholic missions, b. at St­Malo, Brittany, 25 November, 1671; d. at Paris, 5 March, 1708. He entered the Society of Jesus on 25 November, 1671. As professor of philosophy and especially while procurator of the FrancO-Chinese mission, he sought in a series of admirable papers to awaken the interest of the cultivated classes in the great work of Christianizaing Eastern Asia. In 1697 appeared at Paris his "Lettres sur les progréz de la religion à la Chine". Apropos of the violent literary feud then in progress concerning the so-called "Chinese Rites", he published among other things "Histoire de l'édit de l'empereur de la Chine en faveur de la religion chrétienne avec un éclaircissement sur les honneurs que les Chinois rendent à Confucius et aux morts" (Paris, 1698); and in the year 1700: "Lettre à un Docteur de la Faculté de Paris sur les propositions déférées en Sorbonne par M. Prioux". Under the same date there appeared in Paris the "Histoire des Isles Mariannes nouvellement converties à la religion chrétienne". The second part, translated into Spanish by J. Delgado, is found in the latter's "Historia General de Filipinas" (Manila, 1892). In 1702 Père Le Gobien published "Lettres de quelques missionnaires de la Compagnie de Jésus, écrites de la Chine et des Indes Orientales"; this was the beginning of the collection soon to become celebrated under the title of "Lettres édifiantes et curieuses écrites des missions étrangéres par quelques missionnaires de la Compagnie de Jésus". The first eight series were by Pére le Gobien, the latter ones by Fathers Du Halde, Patouillet, Geoffroy, and Maréchal. The collection was printed in thirty-six vols. duodecimo (Paris, 1703-76), and reissued in 1780-81 by Fathers Yves, de Querbeux, and Brotier in twenty-six vols. duodecimo, unfortunately omitting the valuable prefaces. New editions appeared in 1819, 1829-32, and 1838-43. One abridgment in four vols. octavo, was entitled "Panthéon Littéraire", by L. Aimé Martin (1834- 43). A partial English translation came out in London in 1714. The publication incited the Austrian Jesuit Stöcklein to undertake his "Neuer Welt Bott" (about 1720), at first considered merely a translation, but soon an independent and particularly valuable collection (five vols., folio in forty parts) substantially completing the "Lettres Edifiantes" (see Kath. Missionen, 1904-05).

344 SOMMERVOGEL, Bibl. de la Comp. de Jésus, s. v. Gobien; DE GUILHERMY, Ménologe de la Comp. de Jésus, I (Paris, 1892), 324; Nouv. biogr. gén., XXX (Paris, 1883), 403; FELLER, Dict. hist., IV, 82.

345 A. Huonder

Louis Legrand

346 French theologian and noted doctor of the Sorbonne, b. in Burgundy at Lusigny-sur-Ouche, 12 June, 1711, d. at Issy (Paris), 21 July, 1780. After studying philosophy and theology at St. Sulpice, Paris, he taught philosophy at Clermont, 1733-1736, resumed his studies at Paris, where he entered the Society of St. Sulpice in 1739 and obtained the licentiate in 1740, professed theology at Cambrai, 1740-1743, was superior of the seminary of Autun, 1743-1745, and having been recalled to Paris received the doctorate in theology from the Sorbonne in 1746. Henceforth he remained at the seminary of St. Sulpice in various employments. Appointed director of studies in 1767 he exercised in this capacity a great influence over the brightest young ecclesiastics of France, who were preparing to take their degrees at the Sorbonne. As a doctor of the Sorbonne he was called upon to take a prominent part in framing the' decisions and censures of the theological faculty; in that time of intense opposition to Christian dogma no question of importance was decided by the Sorbonne, it is said, without consulting M. Legrand. It was he who wrote the condemnation of Jean-Jacques Rousseau's "Emile", which has been accounted a remarkable analysis and refutation of that celebrated work, "learned, exact, well thought out, deep, and singularly clear" (reprinted in Migne's "Theologiæ Cursus Completus", II, col. 1111-1248). Unfortunately, Legrand's condemnation is forgotten or little read, while the genius of Rousseau has made "Emile" immortal. Legrand also drafted the censures of Marmontel's "Bélisaire" and Père Berruver's "Histoire du Peuple de Dieu", which, like the censure of "Emile", were regarded by divines as model expositions of theological knowledge and clear thinking. He helped to avert a censure from Buffon's "Epoques de la Nature", in consideration of the author's retraction. Legrand's moderation and kindliness gained the esteem and good will of both Buffon and Marmontel. Nearly all the writings of Legrand, most of which, however, are his only in part, have had the honour of being selected by Migne in his "Theologiæ Cursus Completus". The most important are: "Prælectiones Theologicæ de Deo ac divinis attributis", a work by La Fosse based on Tournély's treatise, re-edited by Legrand who added about 400 pages of additional matter. It is still considered sidered a very solid and valuable treatise; reprinted in Migne. VII. "Tractatus de Incarnatione Verbi Divini" (in Migne, IX), also based on Tournély; a work of high value. Parts of his "Tractatus de Ecciesia" have been reproduced by Migne in his "Scripturæ Sacræ Cursus Completus", IV. Legrand left a posthumous treatise, "De Existentia Dei" (Paris, 1812), which, though unfinished, is considered "equally remarkable for the depth of its doctrine and the clearness of its arguments".

347 BERTAND, Histoire littéraire de la Compagnie de St-Sulpice, I (Paris, 1900). gives the complete list of Legrand's writings; MONTAIGNE, Notice prefixed to the above mentioned treatise De Existentia Dei (Paris, 1812).

348 John F. Fenlon

Ven. Louise de Marillac Le Gras

349 Foundress of the Sisters of Charity of St. Vincent de Paul, born at Paris, 12 August, 1591, daughter of Louis de Marillac, Lord of Ferri res, and Marguerite Le Camus; died there, 15 March, 1660. Her mother having died soon after the birth of Louise, the education of the latter devolved upon her father, a man of blameless life. In her earlier years she was confided to the care of her aunt, a religious at Poissy. Afterwards she studied under a preceptress, devoting much time to the cultivation of the arts. Her father's serious disposition was reflected in the daughter's taste for philosophy and kindred subjects. When about sixteen years old, Louise developed a strong desire to enter the Capuchinesses (Daughter of the Passion). Her spiritual director dissuaded her, however, and her father having died, it became necessary to decide her vocation. Interpreting her director's advice, she accepted the hand of Antoine Le Gras, a young secretary under Maria de' Medici. A son was born of this marriage on 13 October, 1613, and to his education Mlle Le Gras devoted herself during the years of his childhood. Of works of charity she never wearied. In 1619 she became acquainted with St. Francis de Sales, who was then in Paris, and Mgr. Le Campus, Bishop of Belley, became her spiritual adviser. Troubled by the thought that she had rejected a call to the religious state, she vowed in 1623 not remarry should her husband die before her.

350 M. Le Gras died on 21 December, 1625, after a long illness. In the meantime his wife had made the acquaintance of a priest known as M. Vincent (St. Vincent de Paul), who had been appointed superior of the Visitation Monastery by St. Francis of Sales. She placed herself under his direction, probably early in 1625. His influence led her to associate herself with his work among the poor of Paris, and especially in the extension of the Confrérie de la Charité, an association which he had founded for the relief of the sick poor. It was this labour which decided her life's work, the founding of the Sisters of Charity. The history of the evolution of this institute, which Mlle Le Gras plays so prominent a part, has been given elsewhere (see Charity, Sister of); it suffices here to say that, with formal ecclesiastical and state recognition, Mlle Le Gras' life-work received its assurance of success. Her death occurred in 1660, a few month before the death of St. Vincent, with whose labours she had been so closely united. The process of her beatification has been inaugurated at Rome.

351 Joseph S. Glass.

Arthur-Marie Le Hir

352 Biblical scholar and Orientalist; b. at Morlaix (Finisterre), in the Diocese of Quimper, France, 5 Dec., 1811; d. at Paris, 13 Jan., 1868. Entering the seminary of St. Sulpice, Paris, in 1833, he joincd the Sulpicians after ordination, and was appointed professor of theology. He was then made professor of Sacred Scripture and also of Hebrew, to which branches he had been thoroughly formed by Gamier, a scholar, says Renan, "who had a very solid knowledge of languages and the most complete knowledge of exegesis of any Catholic in France" (Souvenirs d'enfance et de jeunesse, 269). Le Hir continued in this teaching till his death, about thirty years later, and through his own work and that of his pupil, Renan, he influenced powerfully the revival of Biblical and Oriental studies in France. Renan regarded him as the best Hebrew and Syriac scholar of France in his generation, and one, moreover, who was thoroughly versed in Biblical science, including the current German works thereon, whose theories he exposed and strongly combatted. Some lay to his uncompromising attitude the defection of Renan, which was so harmful to religion in France. He was as eminent in sanctity and modesty as in science, and no doubt this contributed to the extraordinary impression he left upon his intimates, which his writings (partly because they are chiefly posthumous) fail to produce. Most students of his books would hesitate about accepting Renan's judgment, that he "was certainly the most remarkable man in the French clergy of our day" (op. cit., 273). Le Hir published only a few articles, which, along with others, were collected, after his death, in the two volumes entitled "Etudes Bibliques", Paris, 1869. This work shows him at his best, in the range and solidity of his acquirements, and in the breadth of his views. His other writings, all posthumous, and not left by him ready for the press, are studies in the translation and exegesis of certain Biblical works: "Le Livre de Job" (Paris, 1873); "Les Psaumes" (Paris, 1876); "Les trois Grands ProphËtes Isaie Jérémie, Ezéchiel" (Paris, 1876); "Le Cantique des Cantiques" (Paris, 1888).

353 BERTRAND, Bibliothèque Sulpicienne, II (Paris, 1900), with a lengthy description of Le Hir's writings and references to articles concerning him cf. IDEM in VIG., Dict. de la Bible s. v.; RENAN, Souvenirs d'en d enfance et de jeunesse (Paris, 1883)221, 269, 274, 288; IDEM in Journal Asiatique, XIJ (Paris, 1568), 19; JULES SIMON Quatre Portraits (Paris, 1896), containing the reminscences --evidently mistaken-- of a pretended judgment of Renan upon Le Hir, totally at variance with that given in the Souvenirs and Journal Asiatique.

354 John F. Fenlon

Abbey of Lehnin

355 Founded in 1180 by Otto II, Margrave of Brandenburg, for Cistercian monks. Situated about eight miles to the south-east of Brandenburg, its church was a fine example of Romanesque architecture. It is not of great importance in history save for the famous "Vaticinium Lehninense", supposed to have been written in the thirteenth or fourteenth century by a monk named Hermann. Manuscripts of the prophecy, which was first printed in 1722. exist in Berlin, Dresden, Breslau, and G-ttingen. It begins by lamenting the end of the Ascanian line of the margraves of Brandenburg, with the death of Henry the Younger in 1319, and gives a faithful portraiture of several of the margraves till it comes to deal with Frederick William I. Here the writer leaves the region of safety and ceases to make any portraiture of the people about whom he is prophesying. Frederick III, who became first King of Prussia in 1701, he makes suffer a terrible loss, and he sends Frederick William II to end his days in a monastery. He makes Frederick the Great die at sea, and ends the House of Hohenzollern with Frederick William III. A Catholic ruler, who re-establishes Lehnin as a monastery (it had been secularized at the Reformation), is also made to restore the union of the Empire. The work is anti-Prussian, but the real author cannot be discovered. The first to unmask the fraud was Pastor Weiss, who proved in his "Vaticinium Germanicum" (Berlin, 1746) that the pseudo-prophecy was really written between 1688 and 1700. Even after the detection of its true character, attempts were made to use it in anti-Prussian polemics. Its last appearance was in 1848.

356 Z÷CKLER in Realencyk. f¸r prot. Theol., s.v. Lehninsche Weissagung; KAMPERS, Lehninsche Weissagung ¸ber das Haus Hohenzollern (Ratisbon, 1897).

357 R. Urban Butler.

The System of Leibniz

358 I. Life of Leibniz

359 Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz was born at Leipzig on 21 June (1 July), 1646. In 1661 he entered the University of Leipzig as a student of philosophy and law, and in 1666 obtained the degree of Doctor of Law at Altdorf. The following year he met the diplomat Baron von Boineburg, at whose suggestion he entered the diplomatic service of the Elector of Mainz. The years 1672 to 1676 he spent as diplomatic representative of Mainz at the Court of Louis XIV. During this time he paid a visit to London and made the acquaintance of the most learned English mathematicians, scientists, and theologians of the day. While at Paris he became acquainted with prominent representatives of Catholicism, and began to interest himself in the questions which were in dispute between Catholics and Protestants. In 1676 he accepted the position of librarian, archivist, and court councillor to the Duke of Brunswick. The remaining years of his life were spent at Hanover, with the exception of a brief interval in which he journeyed to Rome and to Vienna for the purpose of examining documents relating to the history of the House of Brunswick. He died at Hanover on 14 Nov., 1716.

360 As a mathematician Leibniz claims with Newton the distinction of having invented (in 1675) differential calculus. As a scientist he appreciated and encharged the use of observation and experiment: "I prefer," he said, "a Leeuwenhoek who tells me what he sees to a Cartesian who tells me what he thinks." As a historian he emphasized the importance of the study of documents and archives. As a philologist he laid stress on the value of the comparative study of languages, and made some contributions to the history of German. As a philosopher he is undoubtedly the foremost German thinker of the eighteenth century, Kant being generally reckoned among nineteenth-century philosophers. Finally, as a student of statecraft he realized the importance of freedom of conscience and made persistent, well-meant, though unsuccessful efforts to reconcile Catholics and Protestants.

361 II. Leibniz and Catholicism

362 When Leibniz became librarian and archivist of the House of Brunswick in 1676, the Duke of Brunswick was Johann Friedrich, a recent convert to Catholicism. Almost immediately Leibniz began to exert himself in the cause of reconciliation between Catholics and Protestants. At Paris he had come to know many prominent Jesuits and Oratorians, and now he began his celebrated correspondence with Bossuet. With the sanction of the duke and the approval, not only of the vicar Apostolic, but of Innocent XI, the project to find a basis of agreement between Protestants and Catholics in Hanover was inaugurated. Leibniz soon took the place of Molanus, president of the Hanoverian Consistory, as the representative of the Protestant claims. He tried to reconcile the Catholic principle of authority with the Protestant principle of free enquiry. He favoured a species of syncretic Christianity first proposed at the University of Helmstadt, which adopted for its creed an eclectic formula made up of the dogmas supposed to have been held by the primitive Church. Finally he drew up a statement of Catholic doctrine, entitled "Systema Theologicum", which he tells us met the approval not only of Bishop Spinola of Wiener-Neustadt, who conducted, so to speak, the case for the Catholics, but also of "the Pope, the Cardinals, the General of the Jesuits, the Master of the Sacred Palace and others." The negotiations were continued even after the death of Duke Johann Friedrich in 1679. Leibniz, it should be understood, was actuated as much by patriotic motives as he was by religious considerations. He saw clearly that one of the greatest sources of weakness in the German States was the lack of religious unity and the absence of the spirit of toleration. Indeed, the role he played was that of a diplomat rather than that of a theologian. However, his correspondence with Bossuet and Pelisson and his acquaintance with many prominent Catholics produced a real change in his attitude towards the Church, and, although he adopted for his own creed a kind of eclectic rationalistic Christianity, he ceased in 1696 to frequent Protestant services. The causes of the failure of his negotiations have been variously summed up by different historians. One thing seems clear: Louis XIV, who, through Bossuet, professed his approval of Leibniz's project, had very potent political reasons for placing obstacles in the way of Leibniz's irenic efforts. Leibniz, it should be added, met with little success in his other plan of conciliation, namely, his scheme for the union of Protestants among themselves.

363 III. Leibniz and Learned Societies

364 In 1700 Leibniz, through the munificence of his royal pupil Princess Sophie Charlotte, wife of Frederick the First of Prussia, founded the Society (afterwards called the Academy) of Sciences of Berlin, and was appointed its first president. In 1711, and again in 1712 and 1716 he was accorded an interview with Peter the Great, and suggested the formation of a similar society at St. Petersburg. In 1689, during his visit to Rome, he was elected a member of the pontifical Accademia Fisico-Mattematica .

365 IV. Leibniz's Works

366 Since the discovery in 1903 of fifteen thousand letters and unedited fragments of Leibniz's works at Hanover, the learned world has come to realize the full force of a saying of Leibniz himself: "He who knows me by my published works alone does not know me at all" (Qui me non nisi editis novit, non novit). The works published during his lifetime or immediately after his death are, for the most part, treatises on particular portions of his philosophy. None of them gives an adequate account of his system in its entirety. The most important are

367 "Disputatio metaphysica de principio individui,"

368 "La monadologie ","Essais de théodicée", and

369 "Nouveaux essais sur l'entendement humain," a reply, chapter by chapter, to Locke's "Essay".

370 Of Leibniz's treatises on religious topics the most important are:

371 "Dialogus de religione rustici", a fragment, dated Paris, 1673, and treating of predestination;

372 "Dialogue effectif sur la liberté de l'homme, et sur l'origine du mal," dated 1695, and treating of the same topic;

373 "Letters" to Arnauld and others on transubstantiation,

374 Letters, tracts, opuscula, etc., of an irenic character, e. g. "Variae definitiones ecclesiae" "De persona Christi", "Appendix, de resurrectione corporum", "De cultu sanctorum", letters to Pelisson, Bossuet, Mme de Brinon, etc.

375 contributions to mystical theology, e.g. "Von der wahren Theologia Mystica", "Dialogues" on the psychology of mysticism.

376 V. Leibniz's Philosophy

377 As a philosopher Leibniz exhibited that many-sidedness which characterized his mental activity in general. His sympathies were broad, his convictions were eclectic, and his aim was not so much that of the synthetic thinker who would found a new system of philosophy, as that of a philosophic diplomatist who would reconcile all existing systems by demonstrating their essential harmony. Consequently, his starting-point is very different from that of Descartes. Descartes believed that his first duty was to doubt all the conclusions of all his predecessors; Leibniz was of the opinion that his duty was to show how near all his predecessors had come to the truth. Descartes was convinced, or at least assumed the conviction, that all the philosophers who went before him were in error, because they appeared to be involved in inextricable contradictions- Leibniz was equally well convinced that all the great systems agree fundamentally, and that their unanimity on essentials is a fair indication that they are in the right. Leibniz therefore resolved, not to isolate himself from the philosophical, scientific, and literary efforts of his predecessors and contemporaries, but, on the contrary, to utilize everything that the human mind had up to his time achieved, to discover agreement where discord and contradiction semed to reign, and thus to establish a permanent peace among contending schools. Even thinkers so widely separated as Plato and Democritus, Aristotle and Descartes, the Scholastics and modern physicists, hold certain doctrines in common, and Leibniz makes it the business of his philosophy to single out those doctrines, explain the manifold bearings of each, remove apparent contradictions, and so accomplish a diplomatic triumph where others had like Descartes, but made confusion worse confounded. The philosophy, to which Leibniz thus ascribed irenics as one of its chief aims, is a partial idealism. Its principal tenets are:

378 The doctrine of monads,

379 pre-established harmony,

380 the law of continuity, and

381 optimism.

382 (1) The Doctrine of Monads

383 Like Descartes and Spinoza, Leibniz attaches great importance to the notion of substance. But, while they define substance as independent existence, he defines substance in terms of independent action. The notion of substance as essentially inert (see OCCASIONALISM) is fundamentally erroneous. Substance is essentially active: to be is to act. Now, since the independence of substance is an independence in regard to action, not in regard to existence, there is no reason for maintaining, as Descartes and Spinoza maintained, that substance is one. Substance is, indeed, essentially individual, because it is a centre of independent action but it is no less essentially manifold, since actions are many and varied. The independent, manifold centres of activity are called monads. The monad has been compared to the atom, and is, indeed, like it in many respects. Like the atom, it is simple (devoid of parts), indivisible, and indestructible. However, the indivisibility of the atom is not absolute but only relative to our power of analysing it chemically, while the indivisibility of the monad is absolute, the monad being a metaphysical point, a centre of force, incapable of being analysed or separated in any way. Again, according to the Atomists, all atoms are alike: according to Leibniz no two monads can be exactly alike. Finally, the most important difference between the atom and the monad is this: the atom is material, and performs only material functions; the monad is immaterial and, in so far as it represents other monads, functions in an immaterial manner. The monads therefore, of which all substances are composed, and which are, in reality, the only substances existing, are more like souls than bodies. Indeed, Leibniz does not hesitate to call them souls and to draw the obvious inference that all nature is animated (panpsychism).

384 The immateriality of the monad consists in its power of representation. Each monad is a microcosm, or universe in miniature. It is, rather, a mirror of the entire universe, because it is in relation with all other monads, and to that extent reflects them all, so that an all-seeing eye looking at one monad could see reflected in it all the rest of creation. Of course, this representation is different in different kinds of monads. The uncreated monad, God, mirrors all things clearly and adequately. The created monad which is the human soul-the "queen-monad"-represents consciously but not with perfect clearness. And, according as we descend the scale from man to the lowest mineral substance, the region of clear representation diminishes and the region of obscure representation increases. The extent of clear representation in the monad is an index of its immateriality. Every monad, except the uncreated monad, is, therefore partly material and partly immaterial. The material element in the monad corresponds to the passivity of materia prima, and the immaterial element to the activity of the forma substantialis. Thus, Leibniz imagined, the Scholastic doctrine of matter and form is reconciled with modern science. At the same time, he imagined, the doctrine of monads embodies what is true in the atomism of Democritus and does not exclude what is true in Plato's immaterialism.

385 The universe, therefore, as Leibniz represented it, is made up of an infinite number of indivisible monads which rise in a scale of ascending immaterialism from the lowest particle of mineral dust up to the highest created intellect. The lowest monad has only a most imperfect glimmering of immateriality, and the highest has still some remnant of materiality attached to it. In this way the doctrine of monads strives to reconcile materiaiism and idealism by teaching that everything created is partly material and partly immaterial. For matter is not separated from spirit by an abrupt difference, such as Descartes imagined to exist between body and mind. Neither are the functions of the immaterial generically different from the functions of material substance. The mineral, which attracts and is attracted, has an incipient or inchoate power of perception; the plant, which in so many different ways adapts itself to its environment, is in a sense aware of its surroundings, though not conscious of them. The animal by its power of sensation rises by imperceptible steps above the mentality of the Plant and between the highest or most "intelligent" anii mals and the lowest savages there is no very violent break in the continuity of the development of mental power. All this Leibniz maintains without any thought, apparently, of genetic dependence of man on animal, animal on plant, or plant on mineral. He has no theory of descent or ascent. He merely records the absence of "breaks" in the plan of continuity, as it presents itself to his mind. He is not concerned with the problem of origins, but rather with the Cartesian problem of the alleged antithesis between mind and matter. How to bridge the imaginary chasm between mind which thinks, and matter which is extended, was the problem to which all the philosophers of the eighteenth century addressed themselves. Spinoza merged mind and matter in the one infinite substance; the materialists merged mind in matter; the immaterialists merged matter in mind; Hume denied the terms of the problem, when he reasoned away both matter and mind and left only appearances. Leibniz, diplomat and peacemaker, toned matter up and toned mind down until they gave forth what he considered unison. Or, if we are to go back to the original figure of speech, he spanned the chasm by his definition of substance as action. Representation is action; representation is a function of so-called material things as well as of those which are generally called immaterial. Representation, rising from the most rudimentary "little perception" (petite perception) in the mineral up to "apperception" in the human soul, is the bond of substantial continuity, the bridge that joins together the two kinds of substances, matter and mind which Descartes so inconsiderately separated. There is no doubt that Leibniz was conscious of this aim of his philosophy. His opposition to "immoderate Cartesianism" was openly acknowledged in his philosophical treatises as well as in his lectures. He looked upon Spinoza's conclusions as being the logical outcome of Descartes's erroneous definition of substance. "Spinoza", he wrote, "simply said out loud what Descartes was thinking, but did not dare to express". But while he had in view the refutation of extreme Cartesianism, he must have intended also by means of his doctrine of monads to stem the current of materialism which had set in in England and was soon to sweep before it in France many of the ideas which he cherished.

386 (2) The Doctrine of Pre-established Harmony

387 "Every present state of a simple substance is a natural consequence of its preceding state, in such a way that its present is always the cause of its future" ("Monadologie," thesis xxii). "The soul follows its own laws, and the body has its laws. They are fitted to each other in virtue of the pre-established harmony among all substances, since they are all representations of one and the same universe" (op. cit., thesis lxxviii) . From Descartes's doctrine that matter is essentially inert, Malebranche (q. v.) had drawn the conclusion that material substances cannot be true causes, but only occasions of the effects produced by God (Occasionalism). Leibniz wished to avoid this conclusion. At the same time, he had reduced all the activity of the monad to immanent activity. That is he had defined substance as action, and explained that the essential action of substance is representation He saw clearly, then, that there can be no interaction among monads. The monad, he said, has "no windows" through which the activity of other monads can enter it. The only recourse left him is to maintain that each monad unfolds its own activity, pursues, as it were, its career of representation independently of other monads. This would make each monad a monarch. If, however, there were no control of the activities of the monad, the world would be a chaos, not the cosmos that it is. We must, therefore, conceive that God at the beginning of creation so arranged things that the changes in one monad correspond perfectly to those in the other monads which belong to its system. In the case of the soul and body, for instance, neither has a real influence on the other: but, just as two clocks may be so perfectly constructed and so accurately adjusted that, though independent of each other, they keep exactly the same time, so it is arranged that the monads of the body put forth their activity in such a way that to each physical activity of the monads of the body there corresponds a psychical activity of the monad of the soul. This is the famous doctrine of pre-established harmony. "According to this system", says Leibniz, "bodies act as if (to suppose the impossible) there were no souls at all, and souls act as if there were no bodies, and yet both body and soul act as if the one were influencing the other" (op. cit., thesis lxxxii). Thus the monad is not really a monarch, but a subject of God's Kingdom, which is the universe, "the true city of God".

388 If we take this doctrine literally, and deny all influence of one monad on another, we are forced at once to ask: How, then, is it possible for the monad to represent, if it is not acted upon? Leibniz's answer would be that he denied to the monad all communication from without, he affirmed that the monad has no windows on the outside, but he did not deny that in the heart of the monad is a door that opens on the Infinite and from that side it is in communication with all other monads. Here Leibniz passes over the problem from metaphysics to mysticism. If harmony is unity in diversity, the unity in the pre-established harmony is not so much a unity of source, as a unity of final destiny. All things "co-operate" in the universe not only because God is the Source from whom they all spring, but still more so because God is the End towards which they are all tending, and the Perfection which they are all striving to attain.

389 (3) Law of Continuity

390 From the description of the monads given above, it is clear that all kinds and conditions of created things shade off by gradual differences, the lower appearing to be merely an inferior degree of the higher. There are no "breaks" in the continuity of nature, no "gaps" between mineral plant, animal, and man. The counter-view is the law of indiscernibles. There can be no meaningless duplication in nature. No two monads can be exactly alike. No two objects, no two events can be entirely similar, for, if they were, they would not, Leibniz thinks, be two but one. The application of these principles led Leibniz to adopt the view that, while every thing differs from every other thing, there are no true opposites. Rest, for instance, may be considered as infinitely minute motion; the fluid is a solid with a lower degree of solidity, animals are men with infinitely small reason, and so forth The application to the theory of the differential calculus is obvious.

391 (4) Optimism

392 In the center of the vast harmonious system of monads which we call the universe is God, the original, infinite monad. His power, His wisdom, His goodness are infinite. When, therefore, He created the system of monads, He created them as good as they could possibly be, and established among them the best possible kind of harmony. The world, therefore, is the best possible world, and the supreme law of finite being is the lex melioris. The Will of God must realize what His understanding recognizes as more perfect. Leibniz represents the possible monads as present for all eternity in the mind of God — in them was the impulse towards actualization — and the more perfect the possible monad the more strongly did it possess this impulse. There went on, therefore, so to speak, a competition before the throne of God, in which the best monads conquered, and, as God could not but see that they were the best, He could not but will their realization. Behind the lex melioris is therefore, a more fundamental law, the law of sufficient reason, which is that "things or events are real when there is a sufficient reason for their existence." This is a fundamental law of thought, as well as a primary law of being.

393 The four doctrines here outlined may be said to sum up Leibniz's metaphysical teaching. They find their principal application in his psychology and his theodicy.

394 (5) Psychology

395 In the "Nouveaux Essais," which were written in refutation of Locke's "Essay", Leibniz develops his doctrines regarding the human soul and the origin and nature of knowledge. The power of representation, which is common to all monads, makes its first appearance in souls as perception. Perception, when it reaches the level of consciousness, becomes apperception. The Cartesians "have fallen into a serious error in that they treat as non-existent those perceptions of which we are not conscious." Perception is found in all monads; in those monads which we call souls there is apperception, but there is a large subconscious region of souls in which there are perceptions. Perceptions are the source of apperceptions. They are the source also of volitions, because impulse, or appetite, is nothing but the tendency of one perception towards another. From perception, therefore, which is found in everything, up to intelligence and volition, which are peculiar to man there are imperceptibly small grades of differentiation.

396 Whence, then, come our ideas? The question is already answered in Leibniz's general principles. Since intelligence is only a differentiation of that immanent action which all monads possess, our ideas must be the result of the self-activity of the monad called the human soul. The soul has "no doors or windows" towards the side facing the external world. No ideas can come from that direction. All our ideas are innate. The Aristotelian maxim, "there is nothing in the intellect that was not previously in the senses," must be amended by the addition of the phrase, "except the intellect itself". The intellect is the source as well as the subject of all our ideas. These ideas, however subjective their origin, have objective value, because, by virtue of the harmony pre-established from the beginning of the universe, the evolution of the psychic monad from virtual to actual knowledge is paralleled by the evolution in the outside world of the physical monad from virtual to actual activity.

397 Leibniz has no difficulty in establishing the immateriality of the soul. All monads are immaterial or rather, partly immaterial and partly material. The human soul is no exception- its "immateriality" is not absolute, but only relative, in the sense that in it the region of clear representation is so much greater than the region of obscure representation that the latter is practically a negligible quantity. Similarly, the immortality of the human soul is not absolutely speaking, a unique privilege. All monads are immortal. Each monad being an independent self-active, source of action, neither dependent on other monads nor influenced by them, it can continue acting without interference forever. The human soul is peculiar in this, that its consciousness (apperception) enables it to realize this independence, and therefore the soul's consciousness of its immortality is what makes human immortality to be different from every other immortality.

398 (6) Theodicy

399 The work entitled "Théodicée", a treatise on natural theology, was intended as a refutation of the Encyclopeedist, Bayle, who had tried to show that reason and faith are incompatible. In it Leibniz takes up:

400 the existence of God

401 the problem of evil, and

402 the question of optimism.

403 Existence of God

404 Leibniz, true to his eclectic temperament, admits the validity of all the various arguments for the existence of God. He adduces the argument from the contingency of finite being, recasts the ontological argument used by Descartes (see GOD), and adds the argument from the nature of the necessity of our ideas. The third of these arguments is really Platonic in its origin. Its validity depends on the fact that our ideas are necessary, not merely in a hypothetical, but in an absolute and categorical sense, and on the further contention that a necessity of that kind cannot be explained unless we grant that an absolutely necessary Being exists.

405 (b) Problem of Evil

406 This problem is discussed at length in the "Théodicée" and in many of Leibniz's letters. The law of continuity requires that there be no abrupt differences among monads. God, therefore, although He wished to create the best possible world, and did, in fact, create the best world that was in se possible, could not create monads which were all perfect, each in its own kind. He was under no necessity of His own Nature, but He was obliged, as it were, by the terms of the problem, to lead up to perfection by passing through various degrees of imperfection. Leibniz distinguishes metaphysical evil, which is mere finiteness, or imperfection in general, physical evil, which is suffering, and moral evil, which is sin. God permits these to exist, since the nature of the universe demands variety and gradation, but He reduces them to the minimum, and makes them to serve a higher purpose, the beauty and harmony of creation as a whole. Leibniz faces resolutely the problem of reconciling the existence of evil with the goodness and omnipotence of God. He reminds us that we see only a part of God's creation, that part, namely, which is nearest to ourselves, and, for that reason, makes the largest demand on our sympathy. We should learn he says, to look beyond our own immediate environment, to observe the larger and more perfect world above us. Where our sympathies are involved, we should not allow the prevalence of evil to overpower our feelings, but should exercise our faith and our love of God, where we can view God's works more impersonally, we should realize that evil and imperfection are always and everywhere made to serve the purpose of harmony, symmetry, and beauty.

407 (c) Optimism

408 Leibniz is, therefore, an optimist, both because he maintains as a general metaphysical principle that the world which exists is the best possible world, and because in his discussion of the problem of evil he tries to trace out principles that will "justify the ways of God to man" in a manner compatible with God's goodness. It had become the fashion among materialists and freethinkers to draw an over-gloomy picture of the universe as a place of pain, suffering, and sin, and to ask triumphantly: "How can a good God, if He is omnipotent, permit such a state of things?" Leibniz's answer, though not entirely original, is correct. Evil should be considered in relation not to the parts of reality, but to reality as a whole. Many evils are "in other respects" good. And, when, in the final resort, we cannot see a definite rational solution of a perplexing problem, we should fall back on faith, which, especially in regard to the problem of evil, aids reason.

409 (7) Leibniz's Ethics

410 We have seen that, although the monad is by definition independent, and, therefore, a monarch in its own realm, vet, by virtue of preestablished harmony the multitude of monads which make up the universe are organized into a kingdom of spirits, of which God is the Supreme Ruler, a city of God, governed by Divine Providence, or, more correctly still, a family, of which God is the Father. Now, there is "a harmony between the physical realm of nature and the moral realm of grace" (" Monadologie ", thesis lxxxviii); monads making progress along natural lines towards perfection are progressing at the same time along moral lines towards happiness. The essential perfection of a monad is, of course, perfect distinctness of representation. The more the human soul progresses in distinctness of ideas, the more insight it obtains into the connection of all things and the harmony of the whole universe. From this realization springs the impulse to love others, that is to seek the happiness of others as well as one's own. The road to happiness is, therefore through an increase of theoretical insight into tie universe and through an increase in love which naturally follows an increase of knowledge. The moral man, while he thus promotes his own happiness by seeking the happiness of others, fulfils at the same time the Will of God. Goodness and piety are, therefore, identical.

411 VII. Influence of Leibniz

412 Through his controversy with Clarke concerning the nature of space and the existence of atoms, and also on account of the rivalry between himself and Newton in respect to the discovery of the calculus, Leibniz came to be well known to the learned world in England at the end of the seventeenth century and the beginning of the eighteenth. His residence in Paris brought him into contact with the great men of the court of Louis XIV, as well as with almost all the writers of that age who were distinguished either in the world of science or in that of theology. It was, however, in his own country that he became best known as a philosopher. The multiplicity of his interests and the variety of the tasks he set himself to accomplish were unfavourable to the systematic development of his philosophical doctrines. It was due to the efforts of his follower Christian Wolff (1679-1754), who reduced his teachings to more compact form, that he exerted the influence which he did on the movement known as the German Illumination. In point of fact, until Kant began the public exposition of his critical philosophy, Leibniz was the dominant mind in the world of philosophy in Germany. And his influence was, on the whole, salutary. It is true that his philosophy is unreal. His fundamental conception, that of substance, is more worthy of a poet and a mystic than of a philosopher and a scientist — nevertheless, like Plato, he is to be judged by the loftiness of his speculations, not by his lack of scientific precision. He did his share in stemming the tide of materialism, and helped to preserve spiritual and aesthetic ideals until such time as they could be treated constructively, as they were by the greatest thinkers in the nineteenth century.

413 William Turner

Ven. Richard Leigh

361 English martyr, born in Cambridgeshire about 1561; died at Tyburn, 30 August, 1588. Ordained priest at Rome in February, 1586-7, he came on the mission the same year, was arrested in London, and banished. Returning he was committed to the Tower in June 1588, and was condemned at the Old Bailey for being a priest. With him suffered four laymen and a lady, all of whom have been declared "Venerable". Edward Shelley of Warminghurst, Sussex, and East Smithfield, London (son of Edward Shelley, of Warminghurst, a Master of the Household of the sovereign, and the settlor in "Shelley's case", and Joan, daughter of Paul Eden, of Penshurst, Kent), aged 50 or 60, who was already in the Clink for his religion in April, 1584 was condemned for keeping a book called "My Lord Leicester's Commonwealth" and for having assisted the Venerable William Dean (q. v.). He was apparently uncle by marriage to Benjamin Norton, afterwards one of the seven vicars of Dr. Richard Smith. Richard Martin, of Shropshire, was condemned for being in the company of the Ven. Robert Morton and paying sixpence for his supper. Richard Lloyd, better known as Flower (alias Fludd, alias Graye), a native of the Diocese of Bangor (Wales), aged about 21, younger brother of Father Owen Lloyd was condemned for entertaining a priest named William Horner, alias Forrest. John Roche (alias Neele), an Irish serving-man, and Margaret Ward, gentlewoman of Cheshire, were condemned for having assisted a priest named William Watson to escape from Bridewell.

362 John B. Wainewright.

Leipzig

364 Chief town in the Kingdom of Saxony, situated at the junction of the Pleisse, Parthe, and Weisse Elster. In 1905 it contained 503,672 inhabitants, of whom 22,864 were Catholics; the population to-day numbers about 545,000. The meaning of the word Leipzig, which is probably of Slavonic origin, is still uncertain. The latest investigations have proved beyond doubt that the region about Leipzig was originally occupied by the Teutons. With the migration of the nations, the Slavs settled there, but in the ninth century, the Germans succeeded in re-establishing themselves. In 922 King Henry I conquered the Daleminzians, and laid out the fortified town of Meissen. Other strongholds were subsequently founded in the vicinity. The first mention of Leipzig is to be found in the chronicle of Bishop Thietmar of Merseburg (1009-18). Another German colony grew up beside this stronghold, to which Margrave Otto of Meissen gave a charter (about 1160), the so-called Stadtbrief of Leipzig. According to this charter Leipzig was given the Magdeburg code of laws, and at the same time an important plan of extension was decided upon.

365 The expansion of the German people was followed everywhere by the growth of Christianity. Leipzig belonged to the Diocese of Merseburg. The oldest church was Peterskapelle, the larger Nikoläikirche was built later. Of this, parts are still extant in the present church of that name. The Thomaskloster, the first monastery, was founded in the reign of Margrave Dietrich (1197-1221); both the Nikoläiskirche and the Peterskapelle were made subordinate to this monastery, which was governed by the Augustinian Canons. By purchase and through foundations the monastery, whose prior was freely elected by the friars, gradually became possessed of considerable real estate and valuable tithes. A school, the oldest in Saxony, was soon founded in connexion with the monastery. Three other convents were founded in the town after the Thomaskloster; first that of the Cistercian Sisters mentioned between 1220 and 1230, which found a great benefactor in Margrave Heinrich (1230-88); then the monastery of the Dominican fathers, founded about 1229 and consecrated in 1240 in the presence of the Archbishop of Magdeburg and the bishops of Merseburg, Naumburg, and Meissen; and lastly the monastery of the Franciscans, which existed at least as early as 1253. Including these four convent churches, Leipzig thus possessed six churches in the Middle Ages; to these were added the Katharinenkapelle (1240), the Marienkapelle (about 1262), and the chapels belonging to the townhall and the castle (fifteenth century). The oldest hospital in the town was that founded together and in connexion with the Thomaskloster in 1213; its management was transferred from the convent to the town in 1439. St John's hospital, erected at the end of the thirteenth century, was originaly devoted to the care of lepers.

366 From the latter part of the twelfth century Leipzig was looked upon as the most important military station between the Saale and the Mulde. The Messen or annual fairs added greatly to the prosperity of the town; at first they were held in the Spring (Jubilatemesse) and Autumn (Michaelismesse), but after 1458 they were also held at Christmas or the New Year. In 1419 Leipzig obtained from Pope Martin V privileges on account of her fair, and received in 1515 a papal market privilege. The fame and importance of the city was greatly increased by still another event, namely the foundation of the university in 1449 by the students and professors who had seceded from Prague on account of the tyrannical actions of the Czech-Hussite faction. The foundation was confirmed by Pope Alexander V in 1409. Towards the latter part of the Middle Agest the state of the Church had changed for the worse. The convents were becoming more worldly; in 1445 the Bishop of Merseburg found it necessary to attempt a reform of the Thomaskloster, but met with no success. The remedial measures tried by Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa in 1451 brought about no permanent improvement. The preaching activity of St. John Capistran in 1455 was more successful, at least among members of his own order (the Franciscans), but the Cistercian Sisters in Leipzig did everything in their power to impede a reform. Later on there was a division in both the Dominican and Franciscan orders, which led to mutual opposition, some contending for a more rigorous and some for a laxer interpretation of the rule. The relations between the town council and the townspeople on the one side and the clerics, more particularly the regulars, on the other, became strained in the fifteenth century. The situation was further aggravated by the quarrel between the secular clergy and the monasteries. Small wonder, therefore, that Luther's reform movement soon found adherents in Leipzig.

367 Another connexion which the city had with the new movement was that Tetzel was a citizen, and also that Luther's Theses of 1517 were printed there. The celebrated Disputation between Luther and Karlstadt on one side and Eck on the other also took place in Leipzig; this was held under the most brilliant auspices, and lasted from 27 June until 15 July, 1519. Although both sides claimed the victory, Luther's adherents increased so greatly that neither the Bishop of Meissen nor the university dared announce in Leipzig before 1521 the Bull of excommunication against Luther, which Eck had brought from Rome. Among the many scholars of the town who energetically opposed the new movement by word and writing, particular mention must be made of the Dominican Petrus Sylvius, Professor Dungersheim of the university, the Franciscan Augustin Alfeld, Hieronymus Emser, and later Cochlæus. The Reformation made no headway in Saxony and Leipzig as long as Duke George lived; he even commanded four hundred adherents of the new teaching to leave the town in 1552, and forbade the people of Leipzig to attend the University of Wittenberg. After his death in 1539 the Reformation was introduced, and in 1543 all the convents were suppressed, their lands sold, the buildings mostly torn down, and Catholic public worship abolished. Besides the Disputation, there is another important event of the Reformation period connected with the town of Leipzig: the so-called Leipzig Interim (see ).

368 In connexion with the political history of the town there are many events which deserve special mention. The town suffered greatly during the Thirty Years War. In 1631 Tilly appeared before it with his army and captured it, but was defeated at Breitenfeld by Gustavus Adolphus on 17 September. Leipzig was besieged seven times and was captured six; from 1642 until 1560 it was in the possession of the Swedes; in 1706 it had to pay heavy tribute to Charles XII. Even more oppressive were the burdens of war imposed on the town by the Prussians during the Second Silesian War in 1745 and during the Seven Years War. In consequence its trade and industries were ruined for years. In the Napoleonic Wars Leipzig was occupied by the French Marshal Davoust in 1806 after the Battle of Jena and Auerstädt; in 1809 it was pillaged by the Duke of Brunswick; and it was only after the battle of Leipzig (16-18 October, 1813) that the town was freed from heavy taxation and oppression. Half a million men fought in this mammoth battle, by which Germany was liberated from Napoleon's yoke. After Saxony's accession to the German Customs' Union in the year 1834, the town received a new impetus. While in 1834 it only numbered 45,000 inhabitants, it had 107,000 in 1871, 149,000 in 1880, 455,000 in 1900, and at the present time (1910) has 545,000.

369 After the Reformation was accomplished, Catholicism became wholly extinct; at least there is no mention of any Catholic parish until about 1710. Only during the time of the fair Franciscans came from Halberstadt to Leipzig to say Mass. No mention is made of where the services were held. In 1710 the Catholics received permission to celebrate Mass openly, and Elector Frederick Augustus I, who became a Catholic in order to be King of Poland, gave up the chapel of the Pleissenburg to them, where on 3 June, 1710, Mass was again said. The parish was in charge of the Jesuits, at first two fathers, but after 1743 there were three. As chaplains of the elector, or king, they received from the court in Dresden their salaries and rent allowance. The Catholic school also found a place in the Pleissenburg. When in 1738 the chapel became too small for the faithful, the elector gave funds to replace it by a larger one. The fathers did not confine their activity to Leipzig alone, but extended it as far as Merseburg, Chemnitz, Naumburg, Wittenburg, etc.; and from 1749 they were also entrusted with the spiritual care of the prisoners. After the suppression of the Society of Jesus, the fathers remained as secular priests. The priests, who subsequently laboured in Leipzig, came for the most part from Austria, particularly Bohemia. When in the nineteenth century, the chapel of the Pleissenburg became dilapidated, and had to be given up, the town council placed the Matthäikirche at certain hours at the disposal of the Catholics. The necessary means for the building of a new church had been partly collected by the zealous efforts of the chief pastor of the Saxon Catholics in those days, Bishop and Apostolic Vicar Franz Laurens Mauermann. In 1845 the foundation stone of the first Catholic church was laid, and in 1847 it was consecrated by the new bishop, Joseph Dittrich. As the town developed, the Catholic congregation also grew; their esteemed pastor Franz Stolle built the rectory in 1871, founded the Societies of St. Vincent and St. Elizabeth with their homes, the reading association, etc. In 1892 the corner-stone of the second Catholic church was laid in Leipzig-Reudnitz; in 1907 the Marienkirche in Leipzig-Plagwitz-Lindenau, and in 1888 a new large Catholic school was built, in addition to which chapels and schools have been established in the newly incorporated suburbs.

370 At the present time Leipzig has three Catholic parish churches and two chapels; a Stammschule comprising a public school and a high school; three branch schools; three institutions belonging to the Grey Sisters of St. Elizabeth, who have charge of St. Vincent's establishment (institution for the care of the sick, boarding school, and public kitchen), St. Joseph's Home (institution for the care of the sick and surgical clinic), and St. Elizabeth's Home (home for single persons and servants). Among the well-developed Catholic institutions worthy of mention are the Society of St. Vincent and also of St. Elizabeth, the Apprentices' Club, the Club for Catholic Business Men, the Association of Catholic Teachers, two students' corporations, the Workingmen's Guild, the Marienverein, the Catholic Casino, the Borromean Society, and others.

371 Urkundenbuch der Stadt Leipzig in Codex diplomaticus Saxoniæ regiæ, div. II, vols. VIII-X, XVI-XVIII; WUSTMANN, Aus Leipziger Vergangenheit (Leipzig, 1885 and 1898); IDEM, Quellen zur Gesch. L.'s (2 vols., Leipzig, 1889-95); IDEM, L. durch drei Jahrh. (Leipzig, 1891); IDEM, Gesch. der Stadt L., I (Leipzig, 1905); SEIFERT, Die Reformation in L. (Leipzig, 1883); BUCHWALD, Reformationsgesch. der Stadt L. (1900); L. u. seine Bauten (Leipzig, 1892); GURLITT, Beschreibende Darstellung der älteren Bau- u. Kunstdenkmäler des Königsreichs Sachsen, parts xvii, xviii (Dresden, 1896); L. im Jahre 1904 (Leipzig, 1904), for St. Louis Exhibition; WOERL, L. im Universitäts-Jubiläums-Jahr 1909 (Leipzig, 1909); Schriften des Vereins für die Gesch. L.'s, I-XIII (Leipzig, 1873-1909). For information concerning the Catholic position in Leipzig see Einst u. Jetzt. Festschrift zum fünfzigjährigen Jubiläums der Pfarrkirche SS. Trinitatis (Leipzig, 1887); DEUTSCHMANN, Handweiser für d. kathol. Pfarrbezirk L. (Leipzig, 1902); Benno-Kalendar (Dresden, 1850-).

372 Joseph Lins

University of Leipzig

367 The University of Leipzig in Saxony is, next to Heidelberg, the oldest university in the German Empire. It was established when the German students under the leadership of Johannes of M¸nsterberg, who had been deposed as rector by King Wenceslaus, left Prague in May, 1409, and went to Leipzig. The cause of this withdrawal was national disorders provoked in Bohemia by John Hus. At Leipzig Friedrich and Wilhelm, Landgraves of Thuringia and Margraves of Meissen, founded a studium generale, the Bull for the foundation being issued by Pope Alexander V at Pisa, 9 September. 1409. The charter was signed on 2 December of the same year, and the first rector was Johannes of M¸nsterberg. In the first semester 369 students matriculated. The Bishop of Merseburg was appointed chancellor. At the opening of the sixteenth century Leipzig was, like Cologne, a stronghold of scholasticism and a large part of the "EpistolÊ virorum obscurorum", written in Erfurt near by, refers to it. The university, especially the theological faculty, remained true to the Church at the beginning of the Reformation, while Wittenberg, founded in 1502, was a starting-point for Luther's doctrine. During the period of religious dissension the University of Leipzig declined greatly. Through the efforts of its rector, Kaspar Borner, the university obtained from Duke Maurice of Saxony an annual grant of 2000 gold gulden. In 1543 it was housed in the Paulinum, a secularized Dominican monastery. In 1559 the amendment of the statutes by the rector, Joachim Camerarius, was completed. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries the university suffered considerably from wars, epidemics, and the billeting of soldiers. It remained, however, especially in the eighteenth century, a centre of scholarly and literary activity, well-known representatives of which were Johann Christian Gottsched and Christian F¸rchtegott Gellert.

368 In 1768 Prince Joseph Alexander Jablonowsk founded a learned society for history, mathematics, physics, and economics, which is still in existence. The LinnÊan Society for the Advancement of the Natural Sciences was founded in 1789, and in 1824 was united with the Society for Physical Research. In 1812 the university dropped its Protestant ecclesiastical character; and in 1830 received a new constitution. A decree of King Anthony of Saxony abolished the old division of professors and students into "nations" and entrusted the administration of the university to the rector and the four faculties. By a ministerial decree of 1851, the body of the ordinary professors form the university assembly; they elect the rector and a member of the Lower House of the Saxon Diet, and have the bestowal of the benefices belonging to the university. Besides this assembly there is a smaller body, the senate, composed of the rector, the pro-rector, the four deans, and twelve representatives elected by the faculties. In 1836 a new university building named the Augusteum, in honour of Frederick Augustus, first King of Saxony, was opened; in 1871 an auditorium called the Bornerianum, in honour of the rector Kaspar Borner, was added to the Augusteum. In the summer of 1897 there was opened a new building, erected from the plans of Arved Rossbach, on the site of the original university. From old and new donations the university has a large endowment in land and funds, over which the Saxon Government has the right of supervision and administration. In 1909 its property amounted to thirty-one million marks. The basis of the university library consists of the valuable collections taken from the suppressed Saxon monasteries; it contains about 600,000 volumes and 6500 manuscripts. At the instance of the rector of that period, Dukes Maurice and Augustus of Saxony founded, 22 April, 1544, a refectory (mensa communis) for needy students, where meals could be obtained either without cost, or at moderate prices. At the present day from two to three hundred students share in this privilege.

369 Among the distinguished scholars may be mentioned: in the evangelical theological faculty, Tischendorf, Luthardt, and the ecclesiastical historian, Hauck; in the faculty of law, von W"chter, and Windscheid; the Germanic scholar Wilhelm Albrecht, and his pupil von Gerber, later Minister of Worship and Education in Saxony; the historians of German jurisprudence, Stobbe and Sohm, and the authorities on criminal law, Binding and Wach. More than one fifth of all the law students of Germany in the years 1875-85 took a part of their course at Leipzig. At the Present date the law faculty of Leipzig ranks third in Germany, after Berlin and Munich. In the medical faculty, Benno Schmidt, Trendelenburg, and K-lliker have especially aided in the advancement of surgery; in anatomy, Bock and His; in pathoogical anatomy, Birch-Hirschfeld and Marchand; physics and physiology, Ludwig; in the philosophical faculty, Weber, the founder of psychophysics Volkelt, writer on Êsthetics; the philosopher Gustav Theodore Fechner, and Wilhelm Wundt, the founder of the widely known institute for experimental psychology. Pedagogics developed at Leipzig into an independent science, and, when a pedagogical seminary was founded by Ziller in 1861, the study acquired a still greater importance. In the ë department of classical philology should be mentioned the names of Hermann, Ritschl, Ribbeck, and the archÊologist Overbeek; in Germanic philology, Haupt and Zarncke; in comparative philology, Brugmann; in the languages of Eastern Asia, Conradi; in the science of history, Mommsen and Lamprecht, who of late years has been known far beyond the circle of specialists in his department. In political economy, Roscher was the founder of the historical school; also Bucher, who is well known for his investigations into the relations of the State to trade and manufacture, and applied statistics. The matriculated students at Leipzig number nearly 5000.

370 FRIEDBERG, Die Univ. Leipzig in Vergangenheit und Gegenwart (Leipzig, 1898); Leipziger Kalender. Illustriertes Jahrbuch und Chronik (Leipzig, 1909); EULENBURG, Die Entwicklung der Universit"t Leipzig in den letzten hundert Jahren (Leipzig, 1909); STIEDA, Die Universit"t Leipzig in ihrem tausendsten Semester (Leipzig, 1909); Festschrift zur Feier des 500 j"hrigen Bestehens der Universit"t Leipzig, issued by the rector and senate: I, KERN. Die Leipziger Theologishe Fakult"t in f¸nf Jahrhunderten; II, FRIEDBERG, Die Leipziger Juristenfakult"t, ihre Doktoren und ihr Heim; III, Die Institute der medizinischen Fak ult"t en der Universit"t Leipzig; IV, Die Institute und Seminare der philosophischen Fakult"t an der Universit"t Leipzig; part I, Die philologische und die philosophisch-historische Sektion; part II, Die mat them atisch-naturwissenschaftliche Sektion (Leipzig, 1909); LIEBMANN, Festgabe der deutschen, Juristenzeitung zum 600 j"hrigen Jubil"um der Universit"t Leipzig (Berlin, 1909).

371 Karl Hoeber

Diocese of Leitmeritz

370 (LITOMERICENSIS), in Austria, embraces the northern part of the Kingdom of Bohemia (see map accompanying AUSTRIA-HUNGARY).

371 I. History

372 After the introduction of Christianity under Charlemagne and Louis the German, the present Diocese of Leitmeritz formed part of the Diocese of Ratisbon. Before the end of the tenth century the Christian religion was so widespread that Emperor Otto I founded the first Bohemian diocese (Prague) in 973, which included all Bohemia. The first church in Leitmeritz, dedicated to St. Wenceslaus, was built in 925, while in 1057 Duke Spitihnew built St. Stephen's church and founded a collegiate chapter. In time numerous monasteries were built; in 1384 the city, with its suburbs, possessed thirteen churches and chapels, and, besides numerous religious, twenty secular priests engaged in the cure of souls. The Hussite Wars put an end to this flourishing ecclesiastical organization. In 1421 Ziska appeared before Leitmeritz, which was spared only on condition of accepting the Hussite religion. The collegiate church alone, despoiled of its possessions, held firm to the old rite of Communion under one kind. Hussitism was the forerunner of Protestantism, which found the ground already prepared on account of the long religious wars, the decline of learning among ecclesiastics, the lack of priests, and the insubordination of the nobles, who had become rich and powerful through the wealth and possessions of the Church. At first the nobility accepted the teaching of Luther, and in many cities the transition from Ultraquism to Lutheranism soon followed. Through the priest Gallus Cahera, a disciple of Luther, Leitmeritz was also won over to Protestantism. The Thirty Years War brought a reaction. By the victorious campaign of the emperor in Bohemia the revolutionary nobles were overthrown, the cities lost their privileges, and the people emigrated or again became Catholics. For the better administration of the large Archdiocese of Prague, the bishop of that time, Count Ernst Adalbert von Harrach, a nephew of Wallenstein, divided its territory, and created the dioceses of Königgrätz and Leitmeritz as its suffragans.

373 In 1655 the then provost of the collegiate chapter of Leitmeritz, Baron Max Rudolf von Schleinitz, was named first Bishop of Leitmeritz (1655-75). He built the cathedral to replace the small collegiate church, organized the diocese, and expended his whole fortune on the improvement of his see. His successor, Count Jaroslaus Franz Ignaz von Sternberg (1676-1709), finished the cathedral and erected the episcopal curia (1694-1701). The fourth bishop, Johann Adam, Count Wratislaus von Mitrowitz (1721-33), appears to have administered also the Archdiocese of Prague. In the Seven Years War, during the administration of Duke Moritz Adolf of Sachsen-Zeitz (1733-59), who built the seminary, the diocese had much to suffer from the Prussians. His successor, Count Emanuel Ernst von Waldstein (1760-89), made little opposition to the efforts of the Government to spread through the diocese the ideas of Febronius; the convents of the Jesuits, Augustinians, Servites, etc. were confiscated, many churches closed as superfluous, and all brotherhoods disbanded. In 1784 the territory of the diocese was increased by two districts. The next bishop, Ferdinand Kindermann, Ritter von Schulstein (1790- 1801), had before his appointment to the bishopric won deserved fame as a reformer and organizer of the whole educational system of Bohemia; as bishop he continued to direct education in his diocese, built the cathedral parochial school, and erected an institute for the education of girls at Leitmeritz. The eighth bishop, Wenzel Leopold Chlumchansky, Ritter von Prestawlk and Chlumchan (1802-15), a true father of the poor, built the ecclesiastical seminary in 1805. Joseph Franz Hurdalek (1815- 1823) was obliged to resign. Vincent Eduard Milde (1823-32) became Archbishop of Vienna. Augustin Bartholomäus Hille (1832-65) opened in 1851 the school for boys and a normal college. He was succeeded by Augustin Paul Wahala (1866-77), in whose time originated in Warnsdorf the sect of the Old Catholics; Anton Ludwig Frind (1879-81), the learned author of the "Ecclesiastical History of Bohemia"; and Emmanuel Johann Schöbel (1882-1909), to whom the diocese is indebted for many churches and for the introduction of popular missions; and Joseph Gross (consecrated 23 May, 1910).

374 II. Statistics

375 In 1909 the diocese numbered 28 vicariates, 2 provostships, 3 archdeaneries, 37 deaneries, 392 parishes, 7 Exposituren (substantially independent filial churches), 343 stations, chaplaincies, and curacies, 26 other benefices, 628 churches, 397 public chapels, 756 secular priests engaged in the cure of souls, 87 other secular priests, 140 religious priests, 1,598,900 Catholics, 33,560 Protestants, 10,400 Old Catholics, and 18,300 Jews. The Church in this diocese has much to contend with. For centuries two different races (German and Czech), and two different beliefs (Catholic and Protestant), have existed side by side, and national and religious disputes are of frequent occurrence. The Los-von-Rom movement, having its origin in Germany, sought in the Diocese of Leitmeritz, situated on the borders, a vantage ground for the propagation of its ideas, and as a result thousands of Catholics drifted away from the Church. Another difficulty is the lack of priests, over a hundred vacancies existing in the parishes. The language spoken in twenty of the vicariates is German, in six Czech, and in two is mixed. More than a third of the priests are Czech. There are 309 German parishes, 95 Czech, and the rest mixed. The cathedral chapter possesses a provost, a dean, five capitulary, and six honorary canons. The clergy are trained in the episcopal seminary and in the theological training school at Leitmeritz. The Catholic intermediate schools of the diocese are the private gymnasium of the Jesuits at Mariaschein, which is at the same time the diocesan school for boys, and five seminaries, of which two are in Reichenberg and one each at Leitmeritz, Teplitz-Schönau, and Jungbunzlau. In the public primary and secondary schools the Church has very little opportunity to impart religious instruction. For girls, however, there are several institutions for instruction and training conducted by sisters: 8 boarding schools, 10 primary schools, 2 secondary schools, and 20 advanced and industrial schools.

376 The following orders have foundations in the diocese (1909): Cistercians at Ossegg, 1 abbey (founded in 1293), with an extensive library and gallery of paintings; the fathers teach in the Gymnasium of Komotau; Jesuits, 1 college in Mariaschein; Piarists; Redemptorists; Dominicans; Augustinians; Reformed Franciscans; Minorites; Capuchins; Order of Malta; Crosier Fathers; Premonstratensians; the Congregation of the Sacred Heart. In 1909 the female orders and congregations in the diocese had 68 foundations, with 654 sisters, 93 novices, and 15 postulants: Congregation of St. Elizabeth, 1; Ursulines, 1; Borromeans, 23; Sisters of the Cross, 22; Poor School Sisters of Our Lady, 5; Daughters of Divine Charity, 2; Poor Handmaids of Jesus Christ, 4; Franciscan Sisters, 3; Sisters of Charity of St. Vincent de Paul, 5; and Sisters of Christian Charity, 1 foundation. Among the charitable institutions of the diocese under religious management are 20 orphan asylums, 7 asylums for children, 14 kindergartens, 1 reformatory, and 20 infant asylums; the diocese conducts also its own institute for the deaf and dumb at Leitmeritz. Of the many associations, the following are worthy of mention: Cäcilienverein (Association of St. Cecilia), the Apostleship of Prayer, the Marian Confraternities, the Catholic Teachers' Association, the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, the Gesellenvereine, the Catholic People's Unions (60), and others. There are 55 shrines and places of pilgrimage in the diocese, the most pouular being Mariaschein, Böhmisch-Kamenitz, Ossegg, Philippsdorf, and Krieschitz. The principal church of the diocese is the cathedral, built in 1671 in Renaissance style. The most ancient is St. Clement's in Levy-Hradec. Among others, the beautiful churches of Melnik. Nimburg, Aussig and Saaz, the chief churches of their respective deaneries, and the town church of Brüx date from Gothic times, and the cathedral, the collegiate church of Ossegg, and the pilgrimage church of Mariaschein from the Renaissance period. The churches of Eichwald, Philippsdorf, St. Vincent in Reichenberg, the church of St. Elizabeth in Teplitz-Schönau, and others, were built in the nineteenth century.

377 BRETFELD, Umriss einer kurzen Gesch. des Leitmeritzer Bistums (Vienna, 1811); FRIND, Die Kirchengesch. Böhmens im allgemeinen und in ihrer besonderen Beziehung auf die jetzige Leitmeritzer Diöcese (4 vols., Prague, 1864-78); SEIFERT, Die Leitmeritzer Diöcese nach ihren geschichtl., kirchl. u. topograph. Beziehungen (Saaz, 1899); ENDLER, Das soziale Wirken der kathol. Kirche in Oesterreich, XI: Die Diöcese Leitmeritz (Vienna, 1903); Directorium divini officii et catalogus universi cleri diœcesani Litomericensis (Leitmeritz, 1910).

378 Joseph Lins.

Jean Lejeune

373 Born at Poligny in 1592; died at Limoges, 19 Aug., 1672; member of the Oratory of Jesus, founded by de Berulle in 1611. He was distinguished by the sanctity of his life, but his reputation mainly depends upon his renown as a preacher. The energy with which he conducted his apostolate, gained for him the name of "The Missionary of the Oratory" and the blindness which overtook him at the age or thirty-five, the further appellation of "The Blind Father". He was the son of a lawyer at Dole, of a family, which during the previous century had attained to a high position in the magistracy and was renowned for the piety and virtue of its members. Owing to the early loss of his father, his education devolved upon his mother who devoted herself to his spiritual advancement. Having studied theology at the University of Dole, he fell under the influence of Berulle and entered the Oratory in 1614. He was appointed director of the seminary at Langres but soon manifested his vocation to mission work among the poor, and henceforward all his effort was directed to this. His life was unmarked by any external event except the loss of sight which occurred in 1627, while he was preaching the Lenten course at Rouen, but this caused no cessation in his apostolic work. The bishops employed him in preaching the Lent and Advent courses and the Government in the conversion of Protestants. He avoided the custom of treating controversial matter in the pulpit and confined himself to the exposition of fundamental truths. It was a novel idea of his to introduce after his discourses an abridgement of Christian doctrine. He also held conferences for the instruction of the clergy in his methods and was recommended by Massillon to young ecclesiastics for their imitation. The French Oratory was suspected of Jansenism, and he was himself criticized on the ground that his preaching led to unsatisfactory results. In 1600 he appealed for advice to Arnauld, who ascribed these results to the laxity of imprudent confessors under the influence of casuistry, and dissuaded him from the design of abandoning his mission work. His sermons in twelve volumes were published at Toulouse, Paris, and Rouen before his death, and a Latin translation at Mainz in 1667. There is an edition published at Lyons in 1826, but the latest and best edition is that of Peltier in ten volumes issued in 1889. Four volumes of extracts also appeared at Avignon in 1825 under title of "Pensées du P. Lejeune".

374 CLOYSEAULT, Recueil des Vies de queques pretres de l'Oratoire; PERRAUD, L'Oratoire de France (Paris, 1866), RENOUX, Vie du P. Lejeune (Paris, 1875); TABARAUD, Vie du P. Lejeune (Limoges, 1830), and Life in Vol. XII of Lyons edition of sermons.

375 Henry Tristram

Jacques Lelong

376 A French bibliographer, b. at Paris, 19 April, 1665 d. there, 13 Aug., 1721. As a boy of ten, he entered the Order of the Knights of St. John of Malta, and after a very brief and unhappy sojourn in Malta, made his studies at Paris. He left the Order of the Knights and entered the Oratory in 1686. He then taught at the college of Juilly in the Diocese of Meaux, where he was ordained priest in 1689, and was later librarian at the seminary of Notre-Dame des Vertus in Aubervilliers near Paris. He was transferred in 1699 to the Oratory of St-Honore at Paris, and remained there as librarian till his death twenty-two years later. The title of the first work which brought him fame indicates its contents fairly completely: "Bibliotheca Sacra in binos Syllabos distincta quae (I) omnes sive Textus sacri sive Versionum ejusdem quavis lingua expressarum Editiones, necnon praestantiores MSS Codices cum notis historicis et criticis, (II) omnia eorum opera quovis idiomate conscripta, qui hucusque in s. Scripturam quidpiam ediderunt et grammaticas et Lexica linguarum praesertim orientalium, quae ad illustrandas Sacras paginas aliquid adjumenti conferre possunt, continet" (2 vols. 8vo, Paris, 1709; Vigouroux, contradicting other authorities, says 1702; 2nd ed., 1709); edited by Boerner with additions chiefly of German works (Antwerp, 1709), folio edition by the author (Paris, 1719); edited after the author's death with many additions and corrections by Lelong and by his confrere, Desmolets, who prefixed the life from which we draw our facts (2 vols. fol. Paris, 1723). The last and best edition is by Andrew Gottlieb Masch (6 vols., 4to, Halle, 1775-83). The work is still valuable as a bibliography of the printed Bible in its various editions, and of the earty modern literature concerning them. Lelong also wrote a "Discours historique sur les principales editions des Bibles polyglottes" (Paris, 1713). His other work, which shows his variety of tastes and has proved very useful to students of French history, is entitled "Bibliothèque historique de la France, contenant le catalogue des ouvrages imprimés et manuscrits qui traitent de l'histoire ce royaume, ou qui y ont rapport, avec des notes critqiues et historiques" (Paris, 1719).

377 DESMOLETS, notice seems to be the only source. See also INGOLD, Essai de bibliographie oratorienne (Paris, 1880-2), 82.

378 John F. Fenlon

Louis-Joseph Le Loutre

379 A missionary to the Micmac Indians and Vicar-General of Acadia under the Bishop of Quebec, b. in France about 1690: d. there about 1770. He was a conspicuous figure in Nova Scotia in the middle of the eighteenth centuary, and his portrait as drawn by some writers lends colour to the charge that history is often a conspiracy against truth. Anxious to justify the memorable deportation of the Acadians in 1755, partisan annalists and chroniclers of the period represent Le Loutre as the evil genius and tyrant of the Acadians, the sworn enemy of the English, and a pastor who threatened with excommunication and with massacre by his Indians all who favoured measures of reconciliation with the English Government. Better accredited historians, however, such as Haliburton, acknowledge that this picture of the abbé is more caricature than portrait. The truth appears to be that Le Loutre was a typical French missionary of forceful character and initiative, with a natural desire, so long as the matter was in dispute, to hold the Acadians to their allegiance to France; that he showed himself more than once an excellent friend of individual Englishmen in their time of need; and that his accompanying the Micmacs on several expeditions against the English, expeditions which he had done his best to prevent, was for the sole purpose of restraining the cruelty and vengeance of his Indian flock. A letter sent in 1757 by the Bishop of Quebec to the Abbé of l'Isle-Dieu proclaims Le Loutre to have been "irreproachable in every respect, both in the functions of his sacred ministry and in the part he took in the temporal affairs of the colony". Captured by the English while on the way to France, Le Loutre was held prisoner by them for some years in the Isle of Jersey; on his release he returned to France, where a few years later he died.

380 HALIBURTON, History of Nova Scotia (Halifax, 1862); RICHARD, Acadia (1894); BOURGEOIS, Histoire du Canada (Montreal, 1903).

381 Arthur Barry O'Neill

Diocese of Le Mans

382 Diocese of Le Mans (Cenomanensis).

383 Comprises the entire Department of Sarthe. Prior to the Revolution it included 636 parishes and was one of the most extensive dioceses of France; at the time of the Concordat of 1801, it lost some parishes in Vendomois and Normandy and acquired some in Anjou. The Diocese of Le Mans embraced 665 communes from then up to the year 1855, when the Department of Mayenne was detached from it to form the Diocese of Laval. The origin of the Diocese of Le Mans has given rise to very complicated discussions among scholars, based on the value of the "Gesta domni Aldrici," and of the "Actus Pontificum Cenomannis in urbe degentium," both compiled during the episcopate of Aldric (832-857). The "Gesta" relate that Aldric had the bodies of Saints Julianus, Turibius, Pavatius, Romanus, Liborius, and Hadoindus, first bishops of Mans, brought to his cathedral; the Acts make St. Julianus one of the seventy-two disciples of Christ and state that he arrived at Le Mans with two companions: Turibius, who became bishop under Antoninus (138-161), and Pavatius who was bishop under Maximinus (235-238) and under Aurelian (270-275), in which event, Pavatius would have lived over two hundred years. Liborius, successor of Pavatius, would have been the contemporary of Valentinian (364-375). These chronological absurdities of the Acts have led Msgr Duchesne to conclude that the first Bishop of Le Mans whose episcopate can be dated with certainty is Victurius, who attended the Councils of Angers and of Tours, in 453 and 461, and to whom Gregory of Tours alludes as "a venerable confessor." Turibius who, according to the Acts, was the successor of Julianus, was, on the contrary, successor to Victurius and occupied the see from 490 to 496.

384 Among the subsequent bishops of Le Mans are mentioned the following saints: Principius (497-511), Innocentius (532-43), Domnolus (560-81), Bertechramnus or Bertram (587-623), founder of the Abbey of Notre-Dame de la Couture, Hadoindus (623-54), Berecharius or Beraire (655-70), and Aldric (832-57). If we admit the theory according to which the False Decretals were compiled at Le Mans by the author of the "Actus pontificum," then Aldric must have used these false documents as a weapon against the institution of the chorepiscopi and also against the pretensions of the Breton usurper Nomenoe to the ecclesiastical province of Tours. It was Aldric who had the relics of St. Liborius conveyed to Paderborn. Other bishops were: Blessed Geoffroy de Loudun (1234-55), whom Gregory IX made papal legate for the entire Kingdom of France, and who, in 1254, consecrated the cathedral of Le Mans and founded the superb monastery of Notre-Dame du Pare d'Orques, where he was interred and where miracles were wrought at his tomb; and Martin Berruyer (1452-67), who left a memoir written in defence of Joan of Arc. From 1468 to 1519 the See of Le Mans was occupied by prelates of the House of Luxembourg, and from 1519 to 1537 by their cousin, Louis de Bourbon. Jean, Cardinal du Bellay, Dean of the Sacred College, was bishop from 1546 to 1556; and Bouvier, the theologian from 1834 to 1854.

385 During the episcopate of St. Berecharius (655-70) the body of St. Scholastica was brought from the monastery of Fleury to Le Mans; the monastery erected to shelter the remains of the saint was destroyed by the Northmen in the second half of the ninth century. A portion of her relics was brought in 874 by the Empress Richilda to the monastery of Juvigny les Dames. The remaining portion was conveyed to the interior of the citadel and placed in the apse of the collegiate church of St. Pierre la Cour, which served the counts of Maine as a domestic chapel. The fire that destroyed Le Mans, 3 September, 1134, also consumed the shrine of St. Scholastica, and only a few calcined bones were left. On 11 July, 1464, a confraternity was erected in honour of St. Scholastica, and on 23 November, 1876, she was officially proclaimed patroness of Le Mans. The Jesuit college of La Flèche, founded in 1603 by Henry IV, enjoyed a great reputation for a century and a half, and Marshal de Guébriant, Descartes, Father Mersenne, Prince Eugene of Savoy, and Séguier were all numbered among its students. The Dominican convent of Le Mans, begun about 1219, in fact during the lifetime of St. Dominic, was eminently prosperous, thanks to the benefactions of John of Troeren, an English lord; the theologian Nicolas Coeffeteau, who died in 1623, was one of its glories, prior to becoming Bishop of Marseilles. The Revolution swept away this convent.

386 The diocese honours in a special manner as saints: Peregrinus, Marcoratus, and Viventianus, martyrs; Hilary of Oizé, nephew of St. Hilary of Poitiers (in the fifth century); Bommer, Almirus, Leonard, and Ulphace, hermits; Gault, Front, and Brice, solitaries and previously monks of Micy; Fraimbault, hermit, founder of a small monastery in the valley of Gabrone; Calais, hermit and founder of the monastery of Anisole, from whom the town of Saint-Calais took its name; Laumer, successor to St. Calais; Guingalois or Guénolé, founder of the monastery of Landevenec in Brittany, whose relics are venerated at Château du Loir; all in the sixth century: Rigomer, monk at Souligné, and Ténestine, his penitent, both of whom were acquitted before Childebert, through the miracle of Palaiseau, of accusations made against them (d. about 560); Longis, solitary, and Onofletta, his penitent; Siviard, Abbot of Anisole and author of the life of St. Calais (d. 681); the Irish St. Cérota, and her mistress Osmana, daughter of a king of Ireland, died a solitary near St-Brieuc, in the seventh century; Ménélé, and Savinian (d. about 720), natives of Précigné, who repaired to Auvergne to found the Abbey of Ménat, on the ruins of the hermitage where St. Calais had formerly lived; there is also a particular devotion in Le Mans to Blessed Ralph de La Fustaye, monk (twelfth century), disciple of Blessed Robert d'Arbrissel and founder of the Abbey of St. Sulpice, in the forest of Nid de Merle in the Diocese of Rennes. The celebrated Abbot de Rance made his novitiate at the Abbey of Persaigne in the Diocese of Le Mans. Also there may be mentioned as natives of the diocese, Urbain Grandier, the celebrated curé of Loudun, burned to death for sorcery in 1634; and Mersenne, the Minim (d. 1648), philosopher and mathematician and friend of Descartes and Pascal. The cathedral of St. Julian of Mans, rebuilt towards the year 1100, exhibits specimens of all styles of architecture up to the fifteenth century, its thirteenth-century choir being one of the most remarkable in France. The church of Notre-Dame de la Couture dates from the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries. The Abbey of Solesmes, founded by Geoffroy de Sablé in 993 and completed in 1095, has a thirteenth-century which is a veritable museum of sculptures of the end of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Its "Entombment of Christ," in terra cotta, is famous; the Magdalen in the group, already celebrated even in the fifteenth century for its beauty attracted the attention of Richelieu, who thought of having it brought to Paris. Several sculptures depicting scenes in the life of the Blessed Virgin form a series unique in France.

387 Pilgrimages to Notre-Dame de Toutes Aides at Saint-Remy du Plein, Notre-Dame de La Faigne at Pontvallain, and Notre-Dame des Bois at La Suze, date back to primitive times. The chapel of Notre Dame de Torcé, erected in the sixth century, has been much frequented by pilgrims since the eleventh century. Besides these places of pilgrimage may be mentioned those of Notre-Dame de Labit at Domfront, and of Notre-Dame du Chene at Vion, near Sablé, which can be traced to 1494. It was established in the place where in former times Urban II had preached the crusade.

388 Prior to the application of the Associations law of 1901 there were in the Diocese of Le Mans, Capuchins, Jesuits, and the monks of Solesmes, where, through the efforts of Dom Guéranger, a Benedictine house of the Congregation of France was founded in 1833. Several congregations of women originated in the diocese: the nuns of Notre-Dame de l'Avé at La Flèche, a teaching order, founded in 1622; the Sisters of the Visitation Sainte Marie, at Le Mans, a contemplative order founded in 1634; the Sisters of St. Joseph at La Flèche, a nursing order, founded in 1636; the Sisters of Charity of Providence, devoted to teaching and hospital work, founded in 1806 by Abbé Dujarié, the mother-house being at Ruillé-sur-Loir; the Sisters of the Child Jesus, teachers and nurses, founded in 1835, with their mother-house at Le Mans; the Marianite Sisters of the Holy Cross, founded in 1841 with their mother-house at Le Mans and important educational institutions in New York and Louisiana; the Benedictine nuns of the Congregation of France known as the Benedictines of St. Cecilia, founded at Solesmes in 1867 by Dom Guéranger and Mother Cecilia. At the close of the nineteenth century the following institutions in the diocese were under the direction of religious: 3 infants' asylums, 39 infants' schools, 1 boys' orphanage, 10 girls' orphanages, 3 industrial schools, 2 houses of shelter, 2 reformatories, 32 hospitals or hospices, 12 private hospitals and retreats, 1 asylum for idiots, 1 asylum for the blind, 1 asylum for insane women and 8 homes for the aged. In 1905 (the last year of the concordatory regime), the Diocese of Le Mans had a population of 422,699, with 38 parishes, 350 chapels of ease, and 111 curacies subventioned by the State.

389 Gallia christiana (Nova, 1856), XIV, 338-432; instrumenta, 99-142; LOTTIN AND CAUVIN, Cartularium insignis ecclesiae cenomanencis, quod dicitur liber albus capituli (Le Mans, 1869); Gesta Aldrici, ed. CHARLES AND FROGER (Mamers, 1889); DUCHESNE, Fastes episcopaux, II (Paris, 1900), 309, 340; HAVET, (Euvres, I (Paris, 1900), 275-317; BUSSON AND LEDRU, Actus pontificum Cenomannis in urbe degentium (Le Mans, 1901); DE BROUSILLON, Cartulaire de l'eveche — 936-1790 (Le Mans, 1900); CHAMBOIS, Repertoire historique et biographique du diocese du Mans (Le Mans, 1896); LEDRU, La cathedrale Saint-Julien du Mans, ses eveques, son architecture, son mobilier (Mamers, 1900): LAUDE, Recherches sur les pelerinages manceaux (Le Mans, 1899); HEURTEBIZE AND TRIGER, Sainte Scholastique, patronne de la ville du Mans (Solesmes, 1897); COSNARD, Histoire du couvent des freres precheurs du Mans (Le Mans, 1879); Cartulaire des abbayes de Saint-Pierre de La Couture et de Saint-Pierre de Solesmes, published by the Benedictines of Solesmes (Le Mans, 1881); DE LA TREMBLAYE, Solesmes, les sculptures de l'eglise abbatiale, 1496-1553 (Solesmes, 1892); DE ROCHEMONTEIX, Un college de jesuites au 17 et 18 Siecles: le college Henri IV de la Fleche, 4 vols. (Le Mans, 1989); CHEVALIER, Topo-bibliographie, pp. 1832-33.

390 Georges Goyau

Lemberg

385 Seat of a Latin, a Uniat Ruthenian, and a Uniat Armenian archbishopric. The city is called Lwow in Polish, Leopol in latinized Polish, Löwenburg in German, Lwihohrod in Ruthenian. It was founded in 1259 by the Ruthenian King Daniel for his son Leo, Prince of Halicz, and took its name from that prince. Destroyed by the Tatars in 1261, it was rebuilt in 1270 on the same spot by Prince Leo, as is recorded by the inscription on one of its gates: "Dux Leo mihi fundamenta jecit, posteri nomen dedere Leontopolis" (Duke Leo laid my foundations, posterity gave me the name of Leontopolis). In 1340 Casimir the Great, King of Poland, took possession of it, built two new castles, attracted German colonists to it, and gave it a charter modelled on that of Magdeburg. In 1372 Louis of Hungary entrusted the administration of the city to Wladislaw, Prince of Oppeln; in 1387 it was given as dowry to the Princess Hedwig, by whose marriage with Jagellon it became a possession of the Polish Crown. Lemberg was thenceforward the recognized capital of the Russian territories dependent on Poland (i. e. Red Russia), which preserved their autonomy undiminished until 1433. The city was one of the great entrepôts of European commerce with the East, which, after the taking of Constantinople by the Turks, followed for the most part the overland route. Lemberg was besieged many times — by the Lithuanians in 1350, the Wallachians in 1498, the Turks in 1524 and 1672, and the Cossacks in 1648 and 1655. Charles XII of Sweden took and plundered it in 1704. By the first partition of Poland it was assigned to Austria in 1772; finally, in 1848, it revolted and was bombarded.

386 Lemberg is situated in a deep and narrow valley on the Pelter, a tributary of the Bug; the capital of the Austrian Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria, it contains — including its many and populous suburbs — about 160,000 inhabitants, of whom 45,000 are Jews. Of the convents which, in the seventeenth century, gained for it the name of "City of Monks", some still exist. Emperor Joseph II reduced the number of its churches from seventy-two to about twenty; some of them are very noteworthy — e. g. the Latin cathedral, built in the Gothic style in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries; the Ruthenian Catholic cathedral, built in 1740-9 in the neo-Italian style; the church of the Bernardines, with the tomb of St. John of Dukla, Patron of Lemberg; the Dominican, the Jesuit, the Wallachian, and other churches. The national Ossolinski Institute possesses a library of the highest value for the study of Polish literature and local history, containing more than 100,000 volumes and 4000 manuscripts. The university, founded in 1660 by Casimir of Poland, suffered especially from the withdrawal of the Jesuits and the political changes which culminated in Galicia becoming an Austrian province. It was restored in 1784, though with curtailed privileges and a much restricted staff, by Joseph II, who desired to keep the Polish youth from going to Vilna or Warsaw. Reduced in 1807 to the rank of a lyceum, the university was once more established with some measure of its former autonomy in 1816. It now numbers about 200 professors and tutors, with 1900 students, 300 of whom attend the faculty of Catholic theology. The city also possesses a large number of educational establishments for boys and girls, besides many benevolent institutions.

387 Latin Archbishopric

388 The Latin Bishopric of Halicz, in which that of Lemberg originated, appears to have been established no earlier than the year 1361. On 8 April, 1363, Urban V wrote to the Bishop of Gnesen to insist that King Casimir III of Poland should build a cathedral in the city of Lemberg, which he had recently taken from the Russian schismatics. Nevertheless, letters of Gregory XI, dated 13 February, 1375, mention only the metropolitan See of Halicz, and the Bishoprics of Przemysl, Chelm, and Vladimir, sufficient evidence that that of Lemberg was not yet established. On 3 March, 1375, the question is raised of transferring the See of Halicz to Lemberg, a transfer which was effected only in December, 1414, by John XXIII. In 1501 Bishop Andreas Rosza was given the administration of Przemysl, but was transferred in 1503 to the See of Gnesen; his successor, Bernardine Wilczek (1503-40), rebuilt the cathedral, which had been destroyed by fire. Many of the subsequent bishops were famous; such were Stanislaus Grochovski (1634-45), a writer of religious poetry, and Nicholas Poplavski (1709-11), an ecclesiastical writer. A great many synods were held here from the sixteenth to the eighteenth centuries. Upon the opening of the Estates (or Diet) of Galicia, 13 February, 1817, Archbishop Skarbel Ankvicz obtained the title of Primate of the Kingdoms of Galicia and Lodomeria, which title has been accorded since 1849 to the Ruthenian Catholic metropolitan. The Latin archdiocese has two suffragan bishoprics: Przemysl and Tarnov. It numbers 920,000 faithful, 36,000 Protestants, and 550,000 Jews. There are 249 parishes, 579 secular and 290 regular priests — Dominicans, Franciscans, Capuchins, Jesuits, Carmelites, etc. There are also a great many religious women engaged in teaching and works of mercy. The seminary numbers 60 students.

389 Uniat Ruthenian Archbishopric

390 After the conversion of the Ruthenians in this region to Christianity, the Bishopric of Halicz, suffragan to Kiev, was established for their benefit between 1152 and 1180. Halicz had been made a metropolitan see in 1345 by John Calecas, Patriarch of Constantinople, but in 1347 it was again placed under the jurisdiction of Kiev, at the request of the Grand Duke Simeon of Moscow. Its metropolitan rank was restored to Halicz only after the Polish occupation of the province about 1371; it had four suffragans: Kulm, Przemysl, Turof, and Vladimir. In 1414 King Ladislaus, for some unknown reason, transferred the Latin See of Halicz to Leopol, and suppressed the Ruthenian metropolitan See of Halicz. The see was subsequently administered by vicars of the Metropolitan of Kiev until 28 October, 1539, when it was restored as a simple bishopric. Macarius Tuczapsti, the titular, next year changed his residence to Lemberg and took the combined titles of Halicz and Lemberg, which his successors have borne, adding those of Kamenets and Podolia, when their jurisdiction extended so far. With the establishment of the Jesuits in this county began the reform of the extremely ignorant schismatic clergy, who gradually turned towards Rome. In 1597 the Bishop of Lemberg, the celebrated Gideon Balaban, brought his diocese back to Catholicism, but afterwards, through his ambition, he relapsed into schism, and with him nearly all his subjects. A council held at Lemberg in October, 1629, laboured in vain for the conversion of the diocese, and it was not until the end of the seventeenth century that Bishop Joseph Czumlanski embraced the cause of union, secretly at first in 1677, and then openly in 1700. After Joseph came Barlaam Czeptyski (1710-5) and Athanasius Czeptyski (1715-46), who, being promoted to the metropolitan See of Kiev, retained that of Lemberg with it. This example was followed by Leo Louis Czeptyski (1749-79), when he became metropolitan in 1762.

391 Under Peter Bielanski (1779-98) the Diocese of Lemberg, to which were united those of Halicz and Kamenets, fortunately became the possession of Austria, whose government took in hand the education of the clergy, who were poor and so ignorant as hardly to know their own rite.Maria Theresa had students sent to the seminary established at Vienna for the Hungarian Uniats. Joseph II turned the Dominican convent into a seminary for Ruthenians, adding to it the church and the garden, and soon the Ruthenian students had places reserved for them in the theological faculty of the city. On 22 February, 1807, Pius VII, by the Bull "In universalis ecclesiæ regimine", withdrew Lemberg from the metropolitan jurisdiction of Kiev and made it a metropolitan see, with Kulm and Przemysl as suffragans. The Diocese of Kulm was dependent on Lemberg until 1837, when it was made immediately subject to the Holy See until its suppression by Russia. In its place another suffragan diocese, that of Stanislaov, was given to Lemberg in 1856. The Emperor of Austria obtained from Rome the right to nominate the metropolitan and his suffragans, while the metropolitan was authorized to confirm their nomination and to consecrate them, as had formerly been granted to the Metropolitan of Kiev by Clement VIII. The Habsburg monarchy has seriously taken up the task of developing education among the clergy, and of putting them upon the same footing as the Latin clergy by giving them the same political rights, and lastly of teaching the Ruthenian language in schools — a point as to which the Poles had previously cared little. Between the Poles and Ruthenians, indeed, there has always existed a certain hostility, which, during the nineteenth century, resulted in violent controversies, and eventually, in 1862, necessitated the intervention of the Holy See. In addition, the young Ruthenian clergy, with their exaggerated ideas of their rite and nationality, have accentuated their peculiarities and fostered the spirit of schism together with an excessive affection for Russia. Thus, they have shown an inclination to return to the primitive Græco-Slavic Rite, and to suppress the modifications which in former times had been — wrongly perhaps — introduced into the Liturgy, but which, in the minds of the people, have now become to a certain extent identified with Catholicism. Hence continual religious troubles have arisen, and indeed numerous defections. The reform of the Basilian monks inaugurated by Leo XIII has in part remedied these fatal tendencies, which, however, are still the chief danger threatening the Uniat Catholics of this archdiocese.

392 The Ruthenian archdiocese comprises the districts of Lemberg, Stryj, Brzezany, Zloczow, and Tarnopol, and numbers 1,400,000 faithful. There are 881 priests — 21 religious, 25 celibate seculars, 148 widowers, and 687 married. There is a chapter of 10 canons and a diocesan consistory of 23 members. The archdiocese is divided into 30 deaconeries and 752 parishes. There are 749 churches with, and 500 without, resident priests, and 36 chapels. The seminary, which counts 248 students, is intended also for the service of the other two Galician dioceses, Przemysl and Stanislaov; 108 of these students belong to the Archdiocese of Lemberg, while the other clerics are educated at Vienna and in the Ruthenian seminary at Rome. The Basilian monks have 3 houses with 23 religious; the Basilian nuns, 2 houses with 68 religious; the Servants of the Blessed Virgin Mary (founded in 1892), 6 houses with 39 religious.

393 Uniat Armenian Archbishopric

394 As early as 1062 there were Armenians settled at Kiev, in consequence of the various invasions and persecutions of Tatars, Turks, and Greeks. Thence these exiles migrated to Lemberg, Kamenets, and Lutzk. The Catholic archdiocese was founded in 1365, upon the union of the titular, Gregory, with Rome; the cathedral was built two years later. From 1492 to 1516 the see remained vacant, after which it was occupied by schismatics until 24 October, 1630, when Nicholas Toroszewicz took the oath of fidelity to Urban VIII. Since then the succession of archbishops has been regular (Gams,( "Series epis. Ecclesiæ cath.", 351; suppl., lxxxiii; Petit in Vacant, "Dict. de théol. cath.", I, 1916). In 1635 the Armenian Metropolitan of Lemberg obtained from Rome the two suffragan Bishoprics of Kamenets-Podolski and Mohileff, which had been taken from him when they passed under Russian domination. In 1808 his jurisdiction was restricted to the territory of Galicia and Bukovina. Even the Armenian Catholics of Transylvania, numbering 10,000, have been unable to obtain a bishop of their own rite or to become subject to the Armenian Archbishop of Lemberg, and they are obliged to submit to the authority of the Latin bishops. Until the nineteenth century the popes had the direct nomination to this archbishopric, and the kings of Poland only granted the exequatur. By a Brief of 20 September, 1819, Pius VII conceded to the new sovereign, the Emperor of Austria, the choice of an archbishop from three candidates presented by the Armenian clergy of Lemberg. The present archdiocese numbers 4000 faithful, 20 priests, 9 churches, 13 chapels, and 10 parishes. There is no seminary, the clergy being prepared in the Latin seminary. There are two houses for the education of poor orphans. Besides the Catholic, there are about 800 schismatic Armenians.

395 NEHER in Kirchenlex., s. v.; LEQUIEN, Oriens Christ., I., 1283; EUBEL, Hierarchia cath. medii ævi, I (Münster, 1898), 308; II, 194; GAMS, Series episcoporum Eccl. cath. (Ratisbon), 351; supplem., lxxxiii; Missiones catholicæ (Rome, 1907), 760, 790; HARASIEVICZ, Annales Ecclesiæ ruthenæ (Lemberg, 1862); MARKOVITCH, Gli Slavi ed i Papi, I (Agram), 166-73.

396 S. VAILHÉ

Henry Lemcke

388 Missionary in the United States, b. at Rhena, Mecklenburg, 27 July, 1796; d. at Carrolltown, Pennsylvania, 29 November, 1882. From a Protestant preacher he became a Catholic on 21 April, 1824, and was ordained priest by Bishop Sailer at Ratisbon on 11 April, 1826. In 1834 he came as missionary to the United States and after being stationed a short time at Holy Trinity Church, Philadelphia, he was sent as assistant to the aged and infirm Prince Gallitzin at Loretto, Pennsylvania. He took up his residence in the neighbouring town of Ebensburg, from where he attended to a portion of Father Gallitzin's district, about fifty miles in extent. In 1836 he bought some land on which two years later he laid out a town which, in honour of the first Catholic Bishop in the United States, he called Carrolltown. He succeeded the deceased Father Gallitzin as pastor of Loretto in 1840. Father Lemcke was instrumental in bringing to the United States the first Benedictines, under the leadership of Father Boniface Wimmer, the future Archabbot of St. Vincent's, in Pennsylvania. Father Lemcke himself joined the new Benedictine community in 1852. In 1855 he went as missionary to Kansas, and prepared the way for the foundation of St. Benedict's Abbey at Atchison. From 1861 to 1877 he was stationed at Elizabeth, New Jersey, the remainder of his life he spent at Carrolltown. He is the author of a life of Prince Gallitzin: "Leben und Wirken des Prinzen Demetrius Augustin von Gallitzin" (Münster, 1861).

389 Michael Ott

François Le Mercier

391 One of the early missionaries of New France, b. at Paris, 4 October, 1604; d. in the island of Martinique, 12 June, 1690. He entered the Society of Jesus at Paris, 19 October, 1620. He taught in succession all the classes of grammar and humanities in the Jesuit college of the capital, and after completing his own philosophical and theological studies, was sent to Canada, where he arrived 20 July 1635, and with Father Pierre Pijart set out for the Huron country the third day after landing at Quebec, reaching his destination on 13 August. He devoted himself to the work of the Huron mission for fifteen years uninterruptedly, save for a brief absence at Quebec on business of the mission during the summer months of 1639. He received the Huron name of Chaüosé, but years after when among the Onondagas he went by the Iroquois name Teharonhiagannra. Father Jean de Brébeuf, an exacting judge of what was required of an Apostolic labourer, wrote his panegyric in two words when he described him as "a perfect missioner". While in Huronia he was stationed from 1635 to 1637 at Ihonatiria, from 1637 to 1639 at Ossossané, from 1639 to 1640 at Ste-Marie I, again at Ossossane until 1642, at Ste-Marie I until 1649, and finally at Ste-Marie II, on St. Joseph's Island, from 16 June, 1649. He left Huronia only after the laying waste of the country by the Iroquois, and the complete abandonment of the mission, subsequent to their inroads, on 10 June, 1650.

392 On his return to Quebec he was engaged in the ministry there and at Three Rivers until 1653, when he was appointed rector of the college and superior of the whole Canada mission a post he occupied until 1656. But while yet in office, on 11 May of the latter year, not willing to expose the lives of others to perils he was not ready to face, he named Father Jerome Lalemant vice-superior, so as to be himself free to head a tentative missionary expedition, fraught with danger, to the Onondagas. While on his way to this fierce Iroquois nation he wrote from Montreal on 6 June, 1656, to his provincial in France a letter setting forth vividly the difficulties of the undertaking (see "Relation, 1657", Quebec ed., 50-54). on I June, 1657, he was back at Quebec, but started to return on 27 June. He could not have proceeded far when he was recalled, for the "Jesuits' Journal" mentions his saying the Christmas midnight Mass for the Hurons at the Quebec hospital. From 1659 to 1660, though in charge of the parish with Father Dablon, he had also to attend the outlying mission at Beaupre. He was formally named assistant parish priest, 21 October, 1660, by Mgr de Petrée, the first Bishop of Quebec, who had arrived in June of the previous year. On 6 August, 1665, for the second time, he was promoted to the office of rector and superior of the whole Canada Mission, and continued to act as such until replaced by Father Dahlon on 12 July, 1671, Le Mercier becoming procurator et primarius in convictu, or, in modern parlance, "bursar and vice-president" of the Jesuit college at Quebec. Father Le Mercier was recalled from Canada and was deputed by the general of the order as visitor of the French missions in South America and in the Antilles, in 1673. By 12 December of the same year he was already acting in that capacity in Cayenne. For ten years he acquited himself of his onerous duties to the satisfaction of all, and died at Martinique at an advanced age with a widespread reputation for sanctity of life.

393 We are indebted to Le Mercier for the compiling of nine of the annual "Relations", 1653, 1654, 1655, and 1665 to 1670 inclusively, besides the two written by him on the Huron mission, those of the years 1637 and 1638.

394 (MARTIN), Jesuit Relations (Quebec ed., 1858); THWAITES, Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents; LAVERDIERE AND CASGRAIN, Journal des Jesuits (Quebec, 1871); Manuscrit Catalogues of the Society, and MARTIN, Catalogue Raisonne des Relations, both in St. Mary's Coll. Archives, Montreal.

395 A. E. Jones.

Jacques Lemercier

394 Born at Pontoise, about 1585; died at Paris, 1654. Lemercier shares with Mansart and Le Muet the glory of representing French architecture most brilliantly under Louis XIII and Richelieu. He was likewise a sculptor and engraver. He imitated in a measure the strong but somewhat prosaic style of Salamon de Brosse. The French Renaissance had at that time already reached its last stage, but it still retained an important heritage from the days of Lescot. Lemercier was in Italy presumably from 1607 to 1613, and, while in Rome, probably engraved a model of St. Peter's. As early as 1618 he appears as royal architect with a salary of 1200 livres. In 1639 he became chief architect, in which capacity, having the supervision of all the royal building enterprises, he fell into a disagreeable dispute with the cultivated Poussin about the decorations in the Louvre. In general, he is considered a well-meaning, discreet character. Living entirely for his art, he thought very little of his profit, and, in spite of the great works which he executed it was found necessary after his death to sell his entire large library to cover his debts. He was highly extolled as the exponent of the classic tendencies of Palladio. Richelieu, in particular, entrusted him with a series of important works. As yet Lescot's plan for the Louvre had been scarcely half finished. The cardinal, an enthusiastic patron of architecture, placed Lemercier at the head of this undertaking in 1624. In carrying on the work begun by Lescot, Lemercier subordinated himself to the latter's style and design, but he followed his own ideas in his more substantial plan and in quadrupling the building area, each of the four sides having a pavilion at its centre. In this manner he built the northern half of the west side - the celebrated Pavilion de l'Horloge - and the western part of the north side. It is, however, an exaggerated opinion to regard the Pavilion de l'Horloge as the best example of French architecture.

395 After 1627, in Richelieu's personal service, Lemercier built the Château de Richelieu in Poitou and the parish church of the same town, in which he displayed his talents to splendid advantage. The castle was worthy of a king. In addition, he began the Palais-Cardinal at Paris in 1629, which, after its donation to the king, was known as the Palais Royal. He was likewise entrusted with the subsequent extension of this building, of which there remains at present only an interior wing. It is wanting in lightness and proportlon in the disposal of its masses. The master earned great and well-merited renown by his work on the Sorbonne which was begun at the same time. The college and the church are both his work. The latter is noteworthy for its domical shape in the style of the Italian Renaissance (like Val-de-Grâce and the Invalides of the two Mansarts). In France, contrary to the Italian custom, the exterior dome was made of wood, which was less monumental, though about the same in appearance. Lemercier inaugurated this economical method in his claustral dome over the Pavilion de l'Horloge. The dome presents a harmonious effect. It is a complete hemisphere, with four small cupolas in the Greek cross above the two orders of columns on the façade. The interior also makes a better effect than Mansart's dome of the Invalides, and was formerly intended to be beautifully decorated. The square intersection is surrounded by cylindrical vaults and a semicircular choir apse. The north side consists of a portico in classic style. The whole may be considered one of the finest buildings of that time.

396 Lemercier produced a similar result with his work on the abbey church of Val-de-Grâce, which he took up as the successor of Father Mansart. The latter had refused to execute an order requiring a change in the design, whereupon the principal part as far as the entablature appears to have been carried on by Lemercier and finished by other masters. The foundation of the church and royal abbey was determined upon at the birth of Louis XIV, and Louis himself, when six years of age (1645), laid the cornerstone. Here too the different orders of columns harmonize beautifully with the principal dome and the four smaller domes and their tambour. The front view is truly magnificent. In the details of execution a noble taste as well as great care, is evident. In 1635 Richelieu once again claimed the services of Lernercier for work on the Château de Rueil, near Paris, which he had acquired at that time. The artist's great patron was buried in the church of the Sorbonne in 1642. Lemercier continued to enjoy the favour of the court and the public. In 1645 he received as first of the royal architects a salary of 3000 livres. His last work was the plan of the church of St. Roch in Paris. He completed only the choir and part of the nave. A few unimportant earlier works, which are not unanimosly ascribed to Lemercier, also may be mentioned. In 1630 he built the choir of the church of the Oratorians in Paris after the design of Clément Métezeau, who had laid the cornerstone in 1621. The façade belongs to a later period. He also erected the Hotels de Liancourt and de La Rochefoucauld. Also ascribed to him are the Hotel de Longuevllle and the Château Silly, or Chilly, of Marshal d'Effiat. A hunting seat of Louis XIII, wlth splendid pleasure grounds, was a remarkable Versailles in miniature, forecasting the celebrated pleasure palace of a later period. The statue of Henry IV with the sarcophagus in the Lateran is a fine piece of plastic work

397 Jacques Lemercier had a younger brother François, who in 1636 represented him for a time in the capacity of architect. His two sons Jacques and François received a pension from the state to enable them to study Architecture. The Lemerciers of Pontoise were indeed one of those gifted families in which several members had a vocation for the same branch of art. The two celebrated churches of St. Maclou at Pontoise and St. Eustache in Paris have been traced to one Pierre Lemercier, who at Pontoise was succeeded immediately by Nicholas Lemercier and more remotely by a connection by marriage, Charles David. But the glorious church of St. Eustache was a greater source of renown for the family. According to Geymüller, whose opinion is hardly to be disputed, Pierre Lemercier's entire share in St. Maclou consisted in the somewhat unusual dome tower, and further inferences concerning St. Eustache would be without foundation.

398 TROU, Recherches historiques, archeologiques et biographiques sur la ville de Pontoise (Pontoise, 1841); BERTY, Les grands architects francais (Paris, 1860); LANCE, Dict. des architects (Paris, 1873); GRYMULLER in Handbuch der Architeckur von Drum etc. II, vi (Stuttgart, 1901), 2; GURLITT, Gesch. des Barockstils (Stuttgart, 1887).

399 G. Gietmann

Thomas de Lemos

397 Spanish theologian and controversialist, b. at Rivadavia, Spain, 1555, d. at Rome 23 Aug., 1629. At an early age he entered the Order of St. Dominic in his native town; he obtained, in 1590 the lectorate in theology and was at the same time appointed regent of studies in the convent of St. Paul at Valladolid. In 1594 he was assigned to the chair of theology in the university of that city. The intellectual atmosphere of the time was troubled, theological discussion was rife. The controversy aroused in 1588 by the publication of Molina's work "Concordia liberi arbitrii cum gratiae donis", between the Dominicans and Jesuits, had reached a heated and turbulent stage not only at Valladolid but also at Salamanca, Cordova, Saragossa, and other cities of Spain. The almost daily disputations both public and private, showed a tendency to drift away from the hitherto universally accepted teaching of Augustine and Thomas Aquinas. In 1600 Lemos was chosen to represent his province in the public defence of selected theses before the general chapter of his order held at Naples. The propositions embraced the doctrine of St. Thomas and his school on grace and free-will. In his defence Lemos proved himself a disputant of the highest order. His familiarity with the works of St. Augustine on the question under discussion was such that the slightest deviation from them, either in content or in diction, would not pass him uncorrected; and that he was no less familiar with the writings of St. Thomas is evident from his own words: nec nos in Hispania aliis armis nisi armis S. Thomae incaepimus hanc doctrinam impugnare" (Acta Congreg., disp. ii, col. 176). His ability and success prompted the general of his order to send him to Rome to assist his confrere, Father Alvarez, in defending the teaching of his order against the Molinists before the Congregatio de Auxiliis established by Clement VIII to settle the controversy.

398 Upon his arrival he was given first place in the defence, which he held till the termination of the Congregation (26 Feb., 1606). For four years, in forty-seven public conferences, in the presence of Clement VIII and Paul V, he defended the teaching of St. Thomas with extraordinary skill against five no less able adversaries, the élite of the great Jesuit theologians of the time. Referring to this event he himself writes: "Fuit ista Congregatio celebris, de qua multi mirati sunt, quod tot ac tantis, ubi fecerunt summum proelium patres Societatis, sic ex tempore fuisset responsum. Sed gratia Dei sum id quod sum" (Acta Congreg,, 1231). At the conclusion of the commission, Pope Paul V and Philip III of Spain offered him a bishopric, but he declined the honour, preferring to remain in Rome in the convent Sopra Minerva to devote himself to literary work. Three years before his death he became totally blind. During his lifetime he published nothing. The work which has given him a permanent and prominent place in the history of theology appeared about fifty years after his death, the "Panoplia gratia seu de rationalis creaturae in finem supernaturalem gratuita divina suavipotente ordinatione, ductu, mediis, liberoque progressu, dissertationes theologicae" (Liège, 1676). The "Acta omnia Congregatioum et disputationum, quae coram SS. Clemente VIII et Panlo V Summis Pontificibus sunt celebratae in causa et controversia illa magna de auxiliis divinae gratiae" (Louvain, 1702) appeared nearly a hundred years after his death. While he is the author of a large number of works, these are the only ones which have thus far been published.

399 QUETIF-ECHARD, SS. Ord. Praed. II, 461; TOURON, Hist. des hommes illust. de l'ordre de S. Dom., HURTER. Nomenclator; SERRY, Hist. Congreationis de auxiliis, passim.

400 Joseph Schroeder

Le Moyne

400 The name of one of the most illustrious families of the New World, whose deeds adorn the pages of Canadian history.

401 Charles Le Moyne

402 Founder of the family, b. of Pierre Le Moyne and Judith Duchesne at Dieppe on 1 August, 1626; d. at Ville-Marie (Montreal), 1683. On reaching Canada in 1641, he spent four years in the Huron country, and then settled at Ville-Marie, his knowledge of the Indian languages rendering him useful as an interpreter, and his valour contributing to defend the colony. He often fought single-handed against Iroquois marauders. This unusual bravery encouraged the settlers to cultivate the soil. In 1653 he negotiated a peace which lasted five years. He married Catherine Primot in 1654. Surprised by a party of Iroquois in 1665, he was preparing to sell his life dearly, when he tripped and was captured. Awed by his valour and fearing reprisals, his captors did not torture, but soon released him. He accompanied Courcelles and Tracy against the Five Nations and shared their success. In recognition of his services Louis XIV ennobled him with the title of Sieur de Longueuil. He served as interpreter to Courcelles and the Governors of Montreal and Three Rivers during a visit to the Iroquois country, and was rewarded by Intendant Talon with a vast concession on the St. Lawrence, reaching from Varennes to Laprairie, henceforth named the Longueuil fief. He was the father of fourteen children, seven of whom honoured Canada by their prowess, three dying in battle and four becoming governors of cities or provinces. Of his sons, surnamed for their bravery the "Machabees of New France", the two most renowned are treated in separate articles (see IBERVILLE, PIERRE LE MOYNE, SIEUR D'; BIENVILLE, JEAN-BAPTITE LE MOYNE, SIEUR DE); each of the five others deserves here a short notice.

403 Charles Le Moyne

404 The eldest son of the preceding, b. at Ville-Marie, 10 Dec., 1656; d. in 1729. After serving in France, he returned to Canada with the rank of lieutenant, and, at the age of twenty-seven, was appointed major of Montreal by Governor de la Barre. He married Elizabeth Souart. In 1700 he received for his services an additional grant of land and promotion to the rank of baron. He won fame in battle against the Iroquois and in the defence of Quebec (1690). The cross of St. Louis was awarded him, and he was successively governor of Three Rivers and Montreal. In 1711 preceded by the religious standard embroidered by Jeanne Leber, he marched to Chambly against the invading army, which retreated on hearing of the wreck of Walker's fleet.

405 Jacques Le Moyne

406 Sieur de Sainte-Hélène, b. at Ville-Marie, 16 April, 1669; d. at Quebec, 1690. A soldier from early youth, he trained for warfare his illustrious brother, d'Iberville. During Phipps's siege of Quebec, Ste-Hélène with 200 volunteers repulsed a troop of 1300 men commanded by Major Whalley, who had attempted to cross River St. Charles. Mortally wounded in this encounter, Ste-Hélène died shortly after, mourned by the whole colony for his courtesy and valour. The Iroquois of Onondaga sent a wampum collar as a token of sympathy, and released two captives to honour his memory.

407 Paul Le Moyne

408 Sieur de Marlcourt, b. 15 Dec., 1663; d. on 21 March, 1704. He accompanied d'Iberville to Hudson's Bay, and amply shared his success, particularly in boarding and capturing with only two canoes a large English cruiser. In 1690 he aided Ste-Hélène in defeating Whalley. Frontenac having undertaken a decisive campaign against the Iroquois, Maricourt forced them to surrender. Skilful diplomat as well as intrepid warrior, he was chosen to negotiate peace. His success was due to the affection and esteem of the Iroquois for his uprightness, which moderated their dread of his bravery. They had begged him to act as their protector and mediator. In 1691 he married M. Madeleine Dupont de Neuville.

409 François Le Moyne

410 Sieur de Bienville I, b. 1666; d. 1691. After several valourous exploits, he was shot in an encounter with a party of Onneyouts at Repentigny while assailing the window of a house where they had taken refuge.

411 Joseph Le Moyne

412 Sieur de Serigny, b. 22 July, 1668; d. at Rochefort, France, in 1704. A worthy emulator of d'Iberville, he commanded the vessels sent from France to enable his brother to take possession of Hudson's Bay. In that expedition, as well as in Florida and Louisiana, he displayed great valour. With his brothers he drove the Spaniards from Pensa-cola, after which he fortified Mobile and expelled the Spaniards from Ile Dauphin. He was promoted captain in 1720, and in 1722 became Governor of Rochefort, France, where he died in 1734. He had married M Elisabeth Heron.

413 Louis Le Moyne

414 Sieur de Châteauguay I, b. 4 Jan., 1676, d. 1694. He fought under d'lberville at Hudson's Bay, assisting when only a boy at the capture of Fort Monsipi. In the years following he so often defeated the English that they were at last reduced to Fort Nelson (Bourbon), their most important post. This stronghold was likewise captured after a long and difficult attack, during which Châteauguay was killed at the age of eighteen.

415 Charles Le Moyne

416 Second baron de Longueuil, b. at Longueuil, 18 Oct., 1687: d. on 17 Jan., 1755. He entered the army quite young, and, after having served in France, was appointed major of Montreal (1733), and received the cross of St. Louis (1734). As Governor of Montreal (1749) he administered the colony after Jonquière's death. He saved from suppression the General Hospital of Venerable Madame d'Youville, maliciously threatened with destruction. He married Catherine Charlotte de Gray in 1720.

417 Paul-Joseph Le Moyne

418 Born 1701; died at Port-Louis France, in 1778. Inheriting the military spirit of his ancestors, he joined the army at the age of seventeen, and served as lieutenant in Normandy. He was successively commander of Fort Frontenac, Governor of Detroit, of Three Rivers, and finally commander of the citadel of Quebec. He fought under Vaudreuil, Montcalm, and Lévis, and won the cross of St. Louis. After the Conquest, he returned to France, where he died at Port-Louis in 1778. He married (1728) Geneviève Joybert de Soulanges.

419 Joseph-Dominique-Emmanuel Le Moyne

420 Second son of preceding, b. at Soulanges on 2 April, 1738. He began his military career at the age of twelve. After serving as captain and major under the French régime, he later served under the British flag after the change of domination, bravely defending Fort St. John in 1755 against the American invaders. He was successively appointed inspector general of militia (1777), colonel of the Royal Canadians (1796), and legislative councillor. He died in 1807.

421 DANIEL, Histoire des grandes familles francaises du Canada (Montreal, 1867); FAILLON, Histoire de la colonie francaise en Canada (Ville-Marie, 1865); MARMETTE, Les Machabees de la Nouvelle France (Quebec, 1882); Documents inedites (Montreal, 1890); JODOIN, Histoire de Longueuil (Montreal, 1889).

422 Lionel Lindsay

Simon Le Moyne

403 A Jesuit missionary, b. at Beauvais, 1604; d. in 1665 at Cap de la Madeleine, near Three Rivers. He joined the Society in 1622, and reached Canada in 1638. He worked on the Huron mission with Chaumonot, Bressani, and the future martyrs. Second to Chaumonot alone in his mastery of the Huron-Iroquois language, he was unequalled in the knowledge of the character of the Indians their customs and traditions, even the artifices of their savage eloquence and diplomacy. The ascendancy he thereby enjoyed made him a desirable ambassador on all delicate and arduous occasions. He was the first European to penetrate among the Onondagas, where his eloquence and acquaintance with their traditions won their admiration. They begged for a missionary to teach them about the Great Spirit (1654). His second mission was to the fierce Mohawks, the murderers of Father Jogues, jealous of the favour shown to the Onondagas. They received him well, and he journeyed to Manhattan or New Amsterdam, where the governor, Peter Stuyvesant, treated him courteously. When a fresh outburst of Mohawk jealousy threatened to disturb the peace, Le Moyne again volunteered to pacify them, visiting Ossernenon a second and third time, and, though outwardly honoured, he frequently faced death. When after two years of warfare against the French and their allies the Cayuga Iroquois sued for peace in Montreal, and craved for a "black gown", Le Moyne went to test their sincerity (1661). This was his fifth embassy and during it he was seized, tortured, and even condemned to death. He was always ready for martyrdom. He owed his preservation to the chief Garakontié, whom Bishop Laval had baptized. He consoled the Indians and French captives, many of whom owed hirn their release. When the regular missions were established he longed to return to the Onondagas, but death overtook him at Cap de la Madeleine. Garakontié eloquently eulogized his undaunted courage and eminent virtues.

404 ROCHEMONTEIX, Les Jesuites et la Nouvelle France (Paris, 1896); CAMPBELL, Pioneer Priests of North America (New York, 1908).

405 Lionel Lindsay

Pierre-Charles L'Enfant

406 Engineer, b. in France, August, 1755; d. near Bladensburg, Maryland, U.S.A., 4 June, 1833. He was educated as an engineer and joined Lafayette as a volunteer to help the revolted American colonists in 1777. Appointed a captain of engineers on 18 Feb., 1778, and brevet major on 2 May, 1783, in Washington's army, he did valiant service during the Revolutionary War. At its close he remodelled the old City Hall in New York for the meeting of the First Congress, and later arranged the Federal Hall in Philadelphia. When the site for the Federal city was finally adopted, he spent much of his time during the year 1791 considering a plan for the new city, which he finally drew up with the title: "Plan of the City, intended for the Permanent Seat of the Government of the United States. Projected agreeable to the direction of the President of the United States in pursuance of an act of Congress passed the sixteenth day of July, MDCCXC, establishing the Permanent Seat on the bank of the Potomac". L'Enfant had a quick temper and an overbearing disposition, and, as he quarrelled with his superiors before his plans could be carried out, President Washington dismissed him from the service on 1 March, 1792. He refused an appropriation offered him for his work on the plan for the Capitol, and also the appointment of professor of engineering at the Military Academy, West Point. During the War of 1812 with England he set to work constructing fortifications near Washington, but again quarrelled with his superior officers, and through pique left the service. He haunted the doors of Congress for years with applications for recompense for his work that were never heeded. Poor and forgotten he spent the rest of his days at the home of his friend, William Dudley Digges, near Bladensburg, Maryland, and his body was buried there. In April, 1909, in accordance with an Act of Congress, the remains of Major L'Enfant were removed from his grace in Maryland, and, after lying in state for a short time in the Capitol at Washington, were reinterred in the National Cemetery at Arlington with the ceremonies of the Church and the military honours due to his rank in the Continental Army.

407 VARNUM, The Seat of Government of the U.S. (Washington, 1854); American Cath. Hist. Researches (Philadelphia, January 1907); MEEHAN in America (New York, 1 May, 1909); Encycl. Am. Biog., s.v.

408 Thomas F. Meehan

Adam Franz Lennig

409 Theologian, b. 3 Dec., 1803, at Mainz; d. there, 22 Nov., 1866. He studied at Bouchsal under the private tutorship of the ex-Jesuit Laurentius Doller, and afterwards at the bishop's gymnasium at Mainz. Being too young for ordination, he went to Paris to study Oriental languages under Sylvestre de Sacy, then to Rome for a higher course in theology. Here he was ordained priest, 22 Sept., 1827, and then taught for a year at Mainz. Lennig was a strenuous defender of the rights of the Church, and when on 30 January, 1830, the Hessian Government - which for quite a time had been trying to interfere in church matters - passed thirty-nine articles on ecclesiastical administration, he sent them to Rome. Rome sent back a protest, but, since the bishops remained silent, and since Bishop Burg of Mainz even defended the articles, Lennig left for Bonn, and attended the lectures of Sailer, Windischmann, and Klee. In June 1832, he accepted the pastorate of Gaulsheim, declining to take the chair of theology and exegesis at Mainz. In 1839 he was made pastor at Seligenstadt. Bishop Kaiser of Mainz in 1845 promoted him to the cathedral chapter. In March, 1848, he established the "Pius verein", which did much good among the Catholics of Germany. He organized the first meeting of Catholic societies and of Catholics in general, held at Mainz, October, 1848. In the same month he was present at the meeting of the German bishops at W¸rzburg, acting as representative of his bishop who was ill. About this time he founded at great expense the "Mainzer Journal". After the death of Bishop Kaiser (30 Dec., 1848), troubles arose about the choice of a successor. Lennig was acknowledged by all as a leader of true Christian spirit and suffered much abuse from the Liberals. In 1852 he was made vicar-general by Bishop von Ketteler, and in 1856 dean of the chapter. He zealously assisted his bishop in bringing the Capuchins and Jesuits into the diocese. In 1854 he was in Rome at the definition of the Immaculate Conception, and later visited Rome twice. In 1859 he wrote a protest against the spoliation of the Holy See, and had it signed by 20,000 Catholics He was undoubtedly one of the most influential and zealous German priests of his day. Lennig published in 1849 his "Panegyric on Bishop Kaiser", and in 1862 his "Funeral Oration on the Archduchess Mathilde of Hesse". His meditations on the Passion and on the Our Father and Hail Mary were published 1867 and 1869 by his nephew, Chr. Moufang.

410 BRÐCK, Adam Franz Lennig, etc. (Mainz, 1870): Allg. Deutsche Biogr., XVIII, 261: Katholik, 1867, I, 257; PFÐLF, Bischof von Ketteler (Mainz, 1899). passim; MAY, Gesch. der Generalversamml. der Kath. Deutschl. (Cologne, 1904), 22, 26, 33.

411 Francis Mershman

Charles Lenormant

412 French archÊologist, b. in Paris, 1 June, 1802; d. at Athens, 24 November, 1859. After pursuing his studies at the Lycée Charlemagne and the Lycée Napoléon, he took up law, but a visit to Italy and Sicily (1822-23) made him an enthusiastic archÊologist. In 1825 he was named sub-inspector of fine arts and a few months later married Amelia Syvoct, niece and adopted daughter of the celebrated Mme Récamier. He visited Italy, Belgium, Holland, and accompanied Champollion to Egypt, where he devoted himself to the study of architectural works. Later he travelled through Greece as assistant director of the archÊological department of the Morea scientific commission. On his return he was appointed curator of the works of art in the Although the chair was that of modern history, he lectured chiefly on ancient history, more especially on the origins of Greek civilization. In 1836 he was appinted curator of printed books in the Royal Library, and in 1839 was elected member of the Academy. In 1840 he was made curator of the Cabinet of Medals. Guizot, who became minister of foreign affairs in 1841, sent him on a mission to Greece. On returning from this second visit to the East he continued his lectures at the Sorbonne, and made a particular study of Christian civilization in its sources. This study made of him a true Christian, and from that time his lectures bore the impress of his deep Catholic belief. He gave voice to his convictions in his "Questions historiques" (Paris, 1845), in his work on the "Associations religieuses dans Ia société chrétienne" (Paris, 1866), and in many serious articles in the "Correspondant". His writings greatly influenced the much discussed question of freedom of teaching (liberté d'enseignement). In 1846, the students, in retaliation for the suppression of M. Quinet's chair, copelled Lenormant to give up his professorship; he was then given the editorship of the "Correspondant" which be resigned in 1855. In 1848 he was named director of the commission of historical monuments, and in 1849 an almost unanimous vote of the members of the Academy appointed him to the chair of archÊology in the Collège de France. From that time he devoted himself entirely to the teaching of Egyptian archÊology. He died while on an expedition undertaken for the sake of initiating his son into the knowiedge of the monuments of antiquity.

413 Many articles from the pen of Lenormant appeared in the" Annales de l'Institut Arcéologique de Rome", the "Mémoiresde l'Académie des Inscriptions", the "Revue de Numismatique", and the "Correspondant". His chief independently published works are: "Les Artistes contemporains" (Paris, 1833, 2 vols.); "Introduction l'histoire de l'Asie occidentale" (Paris, 1838); "Musée des Antiquités égyptiennes" (Paris, 1842); "Questions historiques" (Paris, 1845), besides two valuable collections, "Trésor de numismatique et de glyptique"(Paris, 1834--50) (in collaboration with Paul Delaroche and Henriquel Dupont) and "Elite des monuments céramographiques" (1844--58) (with De Witte).

414 DE WITTE, Annuaire de l'Académie de Belgique (Brussels, 1861). 129-86; Mémoires de l'Institut de France, XXXI, (Paris), p. 547--608.

415 F. Mayence.

François Lenormant

415 Archæologist; son of Charles Lenormant, b. at Paris, 17 January, 1837; d. there, 9 December, 1883. His father personally supervised his education and exercised great influence over his mind and studies. He gave early proofs of classical scholarship, by publishing, when only fourteen, an article in the "Revue archéologique": "Lettre â M. Hase sur des tablettes grecques trouvées â Memphis". In 1857 he was awarded the numismatic prize by the Academy of Inscriptions for a remarkable essay published in the "Revue numismatique": "Essai sur La classification des monnaies des Lagides ". While pursuing his classical studies, he attended the lectures of the faculty of law and in 1857 received his degree as licentiate. In 1858 he visited Italy and in 1859 accompanied his father to the East. The latter having died during the journey FranÁois returned to France with the body, but set out soon again for Greece. He conducted important excavations at Eleusis and as a result published several essays, notably: "Recherches archéologiques â Eleusis" (Paris, 1862). While thus engaged he heard of the massacre of Christians by the Druses and immediately ceasing his researches sailed for Syria to go to the rescue of the victims of Moslem fanaticism. When the French expedition reached Syria, he felt free to return to Eleusis. In 1862 he was appointed sub-librarian of the Institut de France. In 1865 and 1866 he travelled again through the East, and shortly after this, summarized his studies in a "Manuel d'histoire ancienne de l'Orient jusqu'aux guerres Médiques" (Paris 1868), a very popular work. In 1869 he visited Egypt and familiarized himself with Egyptian antiquities; he published numerous essays on the cuneiform texts and on the language spoken in Babylon and Nineveh. During the siege of Paris, 1870, he took part in several engagements. Two years later, his "Essai de commentaire des fragments cosmogoniques de Bérose" (Paris, 1872) was published.

416 In 1874 Lenormant succeeded Beulé as professor of archÊology at the BibliothËque Nationale, and delivered brilliant lectures on Greek and Eastern antiquities. With de Witte, a Belgian archÊologist, he founded in 1875 the "Gazette archéologique" for the publication of unknown monuments and miscellaneous archÊological studies. In this review he published many articles on ancient monuments of every description and origin. From 1879 to 1883 he visited Southern Italy several times, and as a result of his travels published a work on Lucania and Apulia. In 1880 he produced the first volume of "Origines de l'histoire d'aprËs la Bible et les traditions des peuples orientaux" (3 vols., Paris, 1880-83), a work that attained wide publicity. The writer thought it impossible to maintain a unity of composition in the books of the Pentateuch. He held that there were certain traces of "two distinct original documents; the Elohistic and the Jehovistic which served as a basis for the final compiler of the first four books of the Pentateuch, and he is satisfied with establishing between them a certain concordance, leaving untouched their original redaction". The first chapters of Genesis, according to him, are a "book of origins" and represent the story of Israel as told from generation to generation since the time of the Patriarchs; in all fundamental facts this narrative tallied with the sacred books of the Euphrates and the Tigris. For him, inspiration lies in the absolutely new spirit which animates the narrative, though in composition it is quite similar to the stories of neighbouring tribes. Four years after the death of the author this book was put on the Index (19 December, 1887). Quite probably Lenormant would have submitted, since in his introduction he asserts his attachment to the Catholic Faith and his devotion to the Church. He died from the after effects of a disease contracted during one of his visits to Southern Italy. In 1881 he had been made a member of the Academy of Inscriptions and Belles-Lettres.

417 Lenormant wrote many works. Aside from those referred to above, must be mentioned: "Sur l'origine chrétienne des inscriptions sinaÔtiques" in "Journal Asiatique", XIII (Paris, 1859), fifth series; Histoire des Massacres de Syrie en 1860" (Paris, 1861); La Révolution en GrËce" (Paris, 1862); "Essai sur l'organisation politique et économique de La monnaie dans l'antiquité" (Paris, 1863) ; "Chefs-d'æuvres de l'art antique" (Paris. 1867-1868) in 7 vols.;" Histoire du peuple juif" (Paris, 1869); "Le déluge et l'épopée babylonnienne" (Paris, 1873); "Les premiËres civilisations" (Paris, 1873-2 vols.); "La langue primitive de Chaldée et les idiomes touraniens" (Paris, 1875): "La monnaie dans l'antiquité" (Paris, 1878-1879); "A travers l'Apulie et la Lucanie"(Paris, 1883): "La GenËse traduite d'aprËs l'hébreu, avec distinction des éléments constitutifs du texte, suivi dëun essai de restitution des textes dont s'est servi le dernier rédacteur" (Paris, 1884).

418 LE HIR, FranÁois Lenormant, étude biogrophique (Lyons,1884); VAN DEN GHEYN, F. Lenormant (Brussels 1884);BABELON, Adrien de Longpérier, FranÁois Lenormant, Ernest Muret, trois nécrologies (Berlin, 1885); DE WITTE in Annuaire de l'Académie de Belgique (1887), 247-291.

419 F. Mayence.

Denis-Nicolas Le Nourry

418 Denis-Nicolas Le Nourry, of the Congregation of St-Maur, ecclesiastical writer, b. at Dieppe in Normandy, 18 Feb., 1647; d. at the Abbey of St-Germain in Paris, 24 March, 1724. He received his first education from the priests of the Oratory at his native place; then entered the Benedictine Order at Jumieges, 8 July, 1665. After completing his theological studies and being ordained to the priesthood, he was sent to Rouen, where, in the Abbey of Bonnenouvelle, he assisted John Garet in publishing the writings of Cassiodorus (1679). For this work he wrote the preface and the life of the author. In the edition of the works of St. Ambrose he aided Jean du Chesne and Julien Bellaise at Rouen, and later Jacques du Frische at Paris, where he spent the last forty years of his life. His greatest work is the "Apparatus ad bibliothecam maximam veterum patrum et antiquorum scriptorum", published at Paris in two volumes (1703 and 1715) as an aid to the study of the Lyons collection of the Fathers. In extensive dissertations he gives the biography of each writer; the occasion, design, scope, and genuineness of every writing; a history of the time in which the author lived; its dogmatical and moral tendency, and its struggles against heathenism or heresies. The work was well received. In 1710 he edited the "Liber ad Donatum confessorem de mortibus persecutorum", and in a special dissertation tries hard to prove that the book was written by Lucius Caecilius and not by Lactantius. Besides these he edited the "Epitome institutionum divinarum" of Lactantius, the "Expositum de die paschae et mensis" of Hilarianus, and a fragment "De origine generis humani".

419 TASSIN, Histoire litt. de la cong. de Saint-Maur (Paris, 1770), 436: HURTER, Nomenclator, II (Innsbruck, 1893), 1117: Tubinger Quartalscchrift (1834), 15; Dux in Kirchenlez., s. v.; NICERON, Memoires, I (Paris, 1727-38), 275-8.

420 Francis Mershman

Lent

421 Origin of the word

422 The Teutonic word Lent, which we employ to denote the forty days' fast preceding Easter, originally meant no more than the spring season. Still it has been used from the Anglo-Saxon period to translate the more significant Latin term (French carê, Italian quaresima, Spanish cuaresma), meaning the "forty days", or more literally the "fortieth day". This in turn imitated the Greek name for Lent, tessarakoste (fortieth), a word formed on the analogy of Pentecost (pentekoste), which last was in use for the Jewish festival before New Testament times. This etymology, as we shall see, is of some little importance in explaining the early developments of the Easter fast.

423 Origin of the custom

424 Some of the Fathers as early as the fifth century supported the view that this forty days' fast was of Apostolic institution. For example, St. Leo (d. 461) exhorts his hearers to abstain that they may "fulfill with their fasts the Apostolic institution of the forty days" - ut apostolica institutio quadraginta dierum jejuniis impleatur (P.L., LIV, 633), and the historian Socrates (d. 433) and St. Jerome (d. 420) use similar language (P.G., LXVII, 633; P.L., XXII, 475).

425 But the best modern scholars are almost unanimous in rejecting this view, for in the existing remains of the first three centuries we find both considerable diversity of practice regarding the fast before Easter and also a gradual process of development in the matter of its duration. The passage of primary importance is one quoted by Eusebius (Hist. Eccl., V, xxiv) from a letter of St. Irenaeus to Pope Victor in connection with the Easter controversy. There Irenaeus says that there is not only a controversy about the time of keeping Easter but also regarding the preliminary fast. "For", he continues, "some think they ought to fast for one day, others for two days, and others even for several, while others reckon forty hours both of day and night to their fast". He also urges that this variety of usage is of ancient date, which implies that there could have been no Apostolic tradition on the subject. Rufinus, who translated Eusebius into Latin towards the close of the fourth century, seems so to have punctuated this passage as to make Irenaeus say that some people fasted for forty days. Formerly some difference of opinion existed as to the proper reading, but modern criticism (e.g., in the edition of Schwartz commissioned by the Berlin Academy) pronounces strongly in favor of the text translated above. We may then fairly conclude that Irenaeus about the year 190 knew nothing of any Easter fast of forty days.

426 The same inference must be drawn from the language of Tertullian only a few years later. When writing as a Montanist, he contrasts the very slender term of fasting observed by the Catholics (i.e., "the days on which the bridegroom was taken away", probably meaning the Friday and Saturday of Holy Week) with the longer but still restricted period of a fortnight which was kept by the Montanists. No doubt he was referring to fasting of a very strict kind (xerophagiæ - dry fasts), but there is no indication in his works, though he wrote an entire treatise "De Jejunio", and often touches upon the subject elsewhere, that he was acquainted with any period of forty days consecrated to more or less continuous fasting (see Tertullian, "De Jejun.", ii and xiv; cf. "de Orat.", xviii; etc.).

427 And there is the same silence observable in all the pre-Nicene Fathers, though many had occasion to mention such an Apostolic institution if it had existed. We may note for example that there is no mention of Lent in St. Dionysius of Alexandria (ed. Feltoe, 94 sqq.) or in the "Didascalia", which Funk attributes to about the year 250; yet both speak diffusely of the paschal fast.

428 Further, there seems much to suggest that the Church in the Apostolic Age designed to commemorate the Resurrection of Christ, not by an annual, but by a weekly celebration (see "the Month", April 1910, 337 sqq.). If this be so, the Sunday liturgy constituted the weekly memorial of the Resurrection, and the Friday fast that of the Death of Christ. Such a theory offers a natural explanation of the wide divergence which we find existing in the latter part of the second century regarding both the proper time for keeping Easter, and also the manner of the paschal fast. Christians were at one regarding the weekly observance of the Sunday and the Friday, which was primitive, but the annual Easter festival was something superimposed by a process of natural development, and it was largely influenced by the conditions locally existing in the different Churches of the East and West. Moreover, with the Easter festival there seems also to have established itself a preliminary fast, not as yet anywhere exceeding a week in duration, but very severe in character, which commemorated the Passion, or more generally, "the days on which the bridegroom was taken away".

429 Be this as it may, we find in the early years of the fourth century the first mention of the term tessarakoste. It occurs in the fifth canon of the Council of Nicea (A.D. 325), where there is only question of the proper time for celebrating a synod, and it is conceivable that it may refer not to a period but to a definite festival, e.g., the Feast of the Ascension, or the Purification, which Ætheria calls quadragesimæ de Epiphania. But we have to remember that the older word, pentekoste (Pentecost) from meaning the fiftieth day, had come to denote the whole of the period (which we should call Paschal Time) between Easter Sunday and Whit-Sunday (cf. Tertullian, "De Idololatria", xiv, - "pentecosten implere non poterunt"). In any case it is certain from the "Festal Letters" of St. Athanasius that in 331 the saint enjoined upon his flock a period of forty days of fasting preliminary to, but not inclusive of, the stricter fast of Holy Week, and secondly that in 339 the same Father, after having traveled to Rome and over the greater part of Europe, wrote in the strongest terms to urge this observance upon the people of Alexandria as one that was universally practiced, "to the end that while all the world is fasting, we who are in Egypt should not become a laughing-stock as the only people who do not fast but take our pleasure in those days". Although Funk formerly maintained that a Lent of forty days was not known in the West before the time of St. Ambrose, this is evidence which cannot be set aside.

430 Duration of the Fast

431 In determining this period of forty days the example of Moses, Elias, and Christ must have exercised a predominant influence, but it is also possible that the fact was borne in mind that Christ lay forty hours in the tomb. On the other hand just as Pentecost (the fifty days) was a period during which Christians were joyous and prayed standing, though they were not always engaged in such prayer, so the Quadragesima (the forty days) was originally a period marked by fasting, but not necessarily a period in which the faithful fasted every day. Still, this principle was differently understood in different localities, and great divergences of practice were the result. In Rome, in the fifth century, Lent lasted six weeks, but according to the historian Socrates there were only three weeks of actual fasting, exclusive even then of the Saturday and Sunday and if Duchesne's view may be trusted, these weeks were not continuous, but were the first, the fourth, and sixth of the series, being connected with the ordinations (Christian Worship, 243). Possibly, however, these three weeks had to do with the "scrutinies" preparatory to Baptism, for by some authorities (e.g., A.J. Maclean in his "Recent Discoveries") the duty of fasting along with the candidate for baptism is put forward as the chief influence at work in the development of the forty days. But throughout the Orient generally, with some few exceptions, the same arrangement prevailed as St. Athanasius's "Festal Letters" show us to have obtained in Alexandria, namely, the six weeks of Lent were only preparatory to a fast of exceptional severity maintained during Holy Week. This is enjoined by the "Apostolic Constitutions" (V, xiii), and presupposed by St. Chrysostom (Hom. xxx in Gen., I). But the number forty, having once established itself, produced other modifications. It seemed to many necessary that there should not only be fasting during the forty days but forty actual fasting days. Thus we find Ætheria in her "Peregrinatio" speaking of a Lent of eight weeks in all observed at Jerusalem, which, remembering that both the Saturday and Sunday of ordinary weeks were exempt, gives five times eight, i.e., forty days for fasting. On the other hand, in many localities people were content to observe no more than a six weeks' period, sometimes, as at Milan, fasting only five days in the week after the oriental fashion (Ambrose, "De Elia et Jejunio", 10). In the time of Gregory the Great (590-604) there were apparently at Rome six weeks of six days each, making thirty-six fast days in all, which St. Gregory, who is followed therein by many medieval writers, describes as the spiritual tithing of the year, thirty-six days being approximately the tenth part of three hundred and sixty-five. At a later date the wish to realize the exact number of forty days led to the practice of beginning Lent upon our present Ash Wednesday, but the Church of Milan, even to this day adheres to the more primitive arrangement, which still betrays itself in the Roman Missal when the priest in the Secret of the Mass on the first Sunday of Lent speaks of "sacrificium quadragesimalis initii", the sacrifice of the opening of Lent.

432 Nature of the fast

433 Neither was there originally less divergence regarding the nature of the fast. For example, the historian Socrates (Hist. Eccl., V, 22) tells of the practice of the fifth century: "Some abstain from every sort of creature that has life, while others of all the living creatures eat of fish only. Others eat birds as well as fish, because, according to the Mosaic account of the Creation, they too sprang from the water; others abstain from fruit covered by a hard shell and from eggs. Some eat dry bread only, others not even that; others again when they have fasted to the ninth hour (three o'clock) partake of various kinds of food". Amid this diversity some inclined to the extreme limits of rigor. Epiphanius, Palladius, and the author of the "Life of St. Melania the Younger" seem to contemplate a state of things in which ordinary Christians were expected to pass twenty-four hours or more without food of any kind, especially during Holy Week, while the more austere actually subsisted during part or the whole of Lent upon one or two meals a week (see Rampolla, "Vita di. S. Melania Giuniore", appendix xxv, p. 478). But the ordinary rule on fasting days was to take but one meal a day and that only in the evening, while meat and, in the early centuries, wine were entirely forbidden. During Holy Week, or at least on Good Friday it was common to enjoin the xerophagiæ, i.e., a diet of dry food, bread, salt, and vegetables.

434 There does not seem at the beginning to have been any prohibition of lacticinia, as the passage just quoted from Socrates would show. Moreover, at a somewhat later date, Bede tells us of Bishop Cedda, that during Lent he took only one meal a day consisting of "a little bread, a hen's egg, and a little milk mixed with water" (Hist. Eccl., III, xxiii), while Theodulphus of Orleans in the eighth century regarded abstinence from eggs, cheese, and fish as a mark of exceptional virtue. None the less St. Gregory writing to St. Augustine of England laid down the rule, "We abstain from flesh meat, and from all things that come from flesh, as milk, cheese, and eggs." This decision was afterwards enshrined in the "Corpus Juris", and must be regarded as the common law of the Church. Still exceptions were admitted, and dispensations to eat "lacticinia" were often granted upon condition of making a contribution to some pious work. These dispensations were known in Germany as Butterbriefe, and several churches are said to have been partly built by the proceeds of such exceptions. One of the steeples of Rouen cathedral was for this reason formerly known as the Butter Tower. This general prohibition of eggs and milk during Lent is perpetuated in the popular custom of blessing or making gifts of eggs at Easter, and in the English usage of eating pancakes on Shrove Tuesday.

435 Relaxations of the Lenten Fast

436 From what has been said it will be clear that in the early Middle Ages Lent throughout the greater part of the Western Church consisted of forty weekdays, which were all fast days, and six Sundays. From the beginning to the end of that time all flesh meat, and also, for the most part, "lacticinia", were forbidden even on Sundays, while on all the fasting days only one meal was taken, which single meal was not permitted before evening. At a very early period, however (we find the first mention of it in Socrates), the practice began to be tolerated of breaking the fast at the hour of none, i.e., three o'clock. We learn in particular that Charlemagne, about the year 800, took his lenten repast at 2 p.m. This gradual anticipation of the hour of dinner was facilitated by the fact that the canonical hours of none, vespers, etc., represented rather periods than fixed points of time. The ninth hour, or none, was no doubt strictly three o'clock in the afternoon, but the Office of none might be recited as soon as sext, which, of course, corresponded to the sixth hour, or midday, was finished. Hence none in course of time came to be regarded as beginning at midday, and this point of view is perpetuated in our word noon which means midday and not three o'clock in the afternoon. Now the hour for breaking the fast during Lent was after Vespers (the evening service), but by a gradual process the recitation of Vespers was more and more anticipated, until the principle was at last officially recognized, as it is at present, that Vespers in lent may be said at midday. In this way, although the author of the "Micrologus" in the eleventh century still declared that those who took food before evening did not observe the lenten fast according to the canons (P.L., CLI, 1013), still, even at the close of the thirteenth century, certain theologians, for example the Franciscan Richard Middleton, who based his decision in part upon contemporary usage, pronounced that a man who took his dinner at midday did not break the lenten fast. Still more material was the relaxation afforded by the introduction of "collation". This seems to have begun in the ninth century, when the Council of Aix la Chapelle sanctioned the concession, even in monastic houses, of a draught of water or other beverage in the evening to quench the thirst of those who were exhausted by the manual labor of the day. From this small beginning a much larger indulgence was gradually evolved. The principle of parvitas materiae, i.e., that a small quantity of nourishment which was not taken directly as a meal did not break the fast, was adopted by St. Thomas Aquinas and other theologians, and in the course of centuries a recognized quantity of solid food, which according to received authorities must not exceed eight ounces, has come to be permitted after the midday repast. As this evening drink, when first tolerated in the ninth-century monasteries, was taken at the hour at which the "Collationes" (Conferences) of Abbot Cassian were being read aloud to the brethren, this slight indulgence came to be known as a "collation", and the name has continued since. Other mitigations of an even more substantial character have been introduced into lenten observance in the course of the last few centuries. To begin with, the custom has been tolerated of taking a cup of liquid (e.g., tea or coffee, or even chocolate) with a fragment of bread or toast in the early morning. But, what more particularly regards Lent, successive indults have been granted by the Holy See allowing meat at the principal meal, first on Sundays, and then on two, three, four, and five weekdays, throughout nearly the whole of Lent. Quite recently, Maundy Thursday, upon which meat was hitherto always forbidden, has come to share in the same indulgence. In the United States, the Holy See grants faculties whereby working men and their families may use flesh meat once a day throughout the year, except Fridays, Ash Wednesday, Holy Saturday, and the vigil of Christmas. The only compensation imposed for all these mitigations is the prohibition during Lent against partaking of both fish and flesh at the same repast. (See ABSTINENCE; FAST; CANONICAL IMPEDIMENTS; LAETARE SUNDAY; SEPTUAGESIMA; SEXAGESIMA; QUINQUAGESIMA; QUADRAGESIMA; VESTMENTS).

437 Herbert Thurston

Publius Lentulus

424 Publius Lentulus is a fictitious person, said to have been Governor of Judea before Pontius, and to have written the following letter to the Roman Senate: "Lentulus, the Governor of the Jerusalemites to the Roman Senate and People, greetings. There has appeared in our times, and there still lives, a man of great power (virtue), called Jesus Christ. The people call him prophet of truth; his disciples, son of God. He raises the dead, and heals infirmities. He is a man of medium size (statura procerus, mediocris et spectabilis); he has a venerable aspect, and his beholders can both fear and love him. His hair is of the colour of the ripe hazel-nut, straight down to the ears, but below the ears wavy and curled, with a bluish and bright reflection, flowing over his shoulders. It is parted in two on the top of the head, after the pattern of the Nazarenes. His brow is smooth and vary cheerful with a face without wrinkle or spot, embellished by a slightly reddish complexion. His nose and mouth are faultless. His beard is abundant, of the colour of his hair, not long, but divided at the chin. His aspect is simple and mature, his eyes are changeable and bright. He is terrible in his reprimands, sweet and amiable in his admonitions, cheerful without loss of gravity. He was never known to laugh, but often to weep. His stature is straight, his hands and arms beautiful to behold. His conversation is grave, infrequent, and modest. He is the most beautiful among the children of men."

425 Different manuscripts vary from the foregoing text in several details: Dobschutz ("Christusbilder", Leipzig, 1899) enumerates the manuscripts and gives an "apparatus criticus" . The letter was first printed in the "Life of Christ" by Ludolph the Carthusian (Cologne, 1474), and in the "Introduction to the works of St. Anselm" (Nuremberg, 1491). But it is neither the work of St. Anselm nor of Ludolph. According to the manuscript of Jena, a certain Giacomo Colonna found the letter in 1421 in an ancient Roman document sent to Rome from Constantinople. It must be of Greek origin, and translated into Latin during the thirteenth or fourteenth century, though it received its present form at the hands of humanist of the fifteenth or sixteenth century. The description agrees with the so-called Abgar picture of our Lord; it also agrees with the portrait of Jesus Christ drawn by Nicephorus, St. John Damascene, and the Book of Painters (of Mt. Athos). Munter ("Die Sinnbilder und Kunstvorstellungen der alten Christen", Altona 1825, p. 9) believes he can trace the letter down to the time of Diocletian; but this is not generally admitted. The letter of Lentulus is certainly apocryphal: there never was a Governor of Jerusalem; no Procurator of Judea is known to have been called Lentulus, a Roman governor would not have addressed the Senate, but the emperor, a Roman writer would not have employed the expressions, "prophet of truth", "sons of men", "Jesus Christ". The former two are Hebrew idioms, the third is taken from the New Testament. The letter, therefore, shows us a description of our Lord such as Christian piety conceived him.

426 VON-DOBSCHUTZ, Christusbilder in Texte und Untersuchungen, XVIII, (Leipzig, 1899); supplement, 308-29; KRAUS, Real-Encyklopadie der christlichen Alterhumer, s. v.; HARNACK in HERZOG, Realencyklopadie, VIII (1881), 548; Vig., Dict. de la Bible.

427 A.J. Maas

Pope St. Leo I (the Great)

427 (Reigned 440-61).

428 Place and date of birth unknown; died 10 November, 461. Leo's pontificate, next to that of St. Gregory I, is the most significant and important in Christian antiquity. At a time when the Church was experiencing the greatest obstacles to her progress in consequence of the hastening disintegration of the Western Empire, while the Orient was profoundly agitated over dogmatic controversies, this great pope, with far-seeing sagacity and powerful hand, guided the destiny of the Roman and Universal Church. According to the "Liber Pontificalis" (ed. Mommsen, I, 101 sqq., ed. Duchesne, I, 238 sqq.), Leo was a native of Tuscany and his father's name was Quintianus. Our earliest certain historical information about Leo reveals him a deacon of the Roman Church under Pope Celestine I (422-32). Even during this period he was known outside of Rome, and had some relations with Gaul, since Cassianus in 430 or 431 wrote at Leo's suggestion his work "De Incarnatione Domini contra Nestorium" (Migne, P.L., L, 9 sqq.), prefacing it with a letter of dedication to Leo. About this time Cyril of Alexandria appealed to Rome against the pretensions of Bishop Juvenal of Jerusalem. From an assertion of Leo's in a letter of later date (ep. cxvi, ed. Ballerini, I, 1212; II, 1528), it is not very clear whether Cyril wrote to him in the capacity of Roman deacon, or to Pope Celestine. During the pontificate of Sixtus III (422-40), Leo was sent to Gaul by Emperor Valentinian III to settle a dispute and bring about a reconciliation between Aëtius, the chief military commander of the province, and the chief magistrate, Albinus. This commission is a proof of the great confidence placed in the clever and able deacon by the Imperial Court. Sixtus III died on 19 August, 440, while Leo was in Gaul, and the latter was chosen his successor. Returning to Rome, Leo was consecrated on 29 September of the same year, and governed the Roman Church for the next twenty-one years.

429 Leo's chief aim was to sustain the unity of the Church. Not long after his elevation to the Chair of Peter, he saw himself compelled to combat energetically the heresies which seriously threatened church unity even in the West. Leo had ascertained through Bishop Septimus of Altinum, that in Aquileia priests, deacons, and clerics, who had been adherents of Pelagius, were admitted to communion without an explicit abjuration of their heresy. The pope sharply censured this procedure, and directed that a provincial synod should be assembled in Aquileia, at which such persons were to be required to abjure Pelagianism publicly and to subscribe to an unequivocal confession of Faith (epp. i and ii). This zealous pastor waged war even more strenuously against Manichæism, inasmuch as its adherents, who had been driven from Africa by the Vandals, had settled in Rome, and had succeeded in establishing a secret Manichæan community there. The pope ordered the faithful to point out these heretics to the priests, and in 443, together with the senators and presbyters, conducted in person an investigation, in the course of which the leaders of the community were examined. In several sermons he emphatically warned the Christians of Rome to be on their guard against this reprehensible heresy, and repeatedly charged them to give information about its followers, their dwellings, acquaintances, and rendezvous (Sermo ix, 4, xvi, 4; xxiv, 4; xxxiv, 4 sq.; xlii, 4 sq.; lxxvi, 6). A number of Manichæans in Rome were converted and admitted to confession; others, who remained obdurate, were in obedience to imperial decrees banished from Rome by the civil magistrates. On 30 January, 444, the pope sent a letter to all the bishops of Italy, to which he appended the documents containing his proceedings against the Manichæans in Rome, and warned them to be on their guard and to take action against the followers of the sect (ep. vii). On 19 June, 445, Emperor Valentinian III issued, doubtless at the pope's instigation, a stern edict in which he estasblished seven punishments for the Manichæans ("Epist. Leonis", ed. Ballerini, I, 626; ep. viii inter Leon. ep). Prosper of Aquitaine states in his "Chronicle" (ad an. 447; "Mon. Germ. hist. Auct. antiquissimi", IX, I, 341 sqq.) that, in consequence of Leo's energetic measures, the Manichæans were also driven out of the provinces, and even Oriental bishops emulated the pope's example in regard to this sect. In Spain the heresy of Priscillianism still survived, and for some time had been attracting fresh adherents. Bishop Turibius of Astorga became cognizant of this, and by extensive journeys collected minute information about the condition of the churches and the spread of Priscillianism. He compiled the errors of the heresy, wrote a refutation of the same, and sent these documents to several African bishops. He also sent a copy to the pope, whereupon the latter sent a lengthy letter to Turibius (ep. xv) in refutation of the errors of the Priscillianists. Leo at the same time ordered that a council of bishops belonging to the neighbouring provinces should be convened to institute a rigid enquiry, with the object of determining whether any of the bishops had become tainted with the poison of this heresy. Should any such be discovered, they were to be excommunicated without hesitation. The pope also addressed a similar letter to the bishops of the Spanish provinces, notifying them that a universal synod of all the chief pastors was to be summoned; if this should be found to be impossible, the bishops of Galicia at least should be assembled. These two synods were in fact held in Spain to deal with the points at issue "Hefele, "Konziliengesch." II, 2nd ed., pp. 306 sqq.).

430 The greatly disorganized ecclesiastical condition of certain countries, resulting from national migrations, demanded closer bonds between their episcopate and Rome for the better promotion of ecclesiastical life. Leo, with this object in view, determined to make use of the papal vicariate of the bishops of Arles for the province of Gaul for the creation of a centre for the Gallican episcopate in immediate union with Rome. In the beginning his efforts were greatly hampered by his conflict with St. Hilary, then Bishop of Arles. Even earlier, conflicts had arisen relative to the vicariate of the bishops of Arles and its privileges. Hilary made excessive use of his authority over other ecclesiastical provinces, and claimed that all bishops should be consecrated by him, instead of by their own metropolitan. When, for example, the complaint was raised that Bishop Celidonius of Besançon had been consecrated in violation of the canons-the grounds alleged being that he had, as a layman, married a widow, and, as a public officer, had given his consent to a death sentence-Hilary deposed him, and consecrated Importunus as his successor. Celidonius thereupon appealed to the pope and set out in person for Rome. About the same time Hilary, as if the see concerned had been vacant, consecrated another bishop to take the place of a certain Bishop Projectus, who was ill. Projectus recovered, however, and he too laid a complaint at Rome about the action of the Bishop of Arles. Hilary then went himself to Rome to justify his proceedings. The pope assembled a Roman synod (about 445) and, when the complaints brought against Celidonius could not be verified, reinstated the latter in his see. Projectus also received his bishopric again. Hilary returned to Arles before the synod was over; the pope deprived him of jurisdiction over the other Gallic provinces and of metropolitan rights over the province of Vienne, only allowing him to retain his Diocese of Arles.

431 These decisions were disclosed by Leo in a letter to the bishops of the Province of Vienne (ep. x). At the same time he sent them an edict of Valentinian III of 8 July, 445, in which the pope's measures in regard to St. Hilary were supported, and the primacy of the Bishop of Rome over the whole Church solemnly recognized "Epist. Leonis," ed. Ballerini, I, 642). On his return to his bishopric Hilary sought a reconciliation with the pope. After this there arose no further difficulties between these two saintly men and, after his death in 449, Hilary was declared by Leo as "beatæ memoriæ". To Bishop Ravennius, St. Hilary's successor in the see of Arles, and the bishops of that province, Leo addressed most cordial letters in 449 on the election of the new metropolitan (epp. xl, xli). When Ravennius consecrated a little later a new bishop to take the place of the deceased Bishop of Vaison, the Archbishop of Vienne, who was then in Rome, took exception to this action. The bishops of the province of Arles then wrote a joint letter to the pope, in which they begged him to restore to Ravennius the rights of which his predecessor Hilary had been deprived (ep. lxv inter ep. Leonis). In his reply dated 5 May, 450 (ep. lxvi), Leo acceded to their request. The Archbishop of Vienne was to retain only the suffragan Bishoprics of Valence, Tarentaise, Geneva, and Grenoble; all the other sees in the Province of Vienne were made subject to the Archbishop of Arles, who also became again the mediator between the Holy See and the whole Gallic episcopate. Leo transmitted to Ravennius (ep. lxvii), for communication to the other Gallican bishops, his celebrated letter to Flavian of Constantinople on the Incarnation. Ravennius thereupon convened a synod, at which forty-four chief pastors assembled. In their synodal letter of 451, they affirm that they accept the pope's letter as a symbol of faith (ep. xxix inter ep. Leonis). In his answer Leo speaks further of the condemnation of Nestorius (ep. cii). The Vicariate of Arles for a long time retained the position Leo had accorded it. Another papal vicariate was that of the bishops of Thessalonica, whose jurisdiction extended over Illyria. The special duty of this vicariate was to protect the rights of the Holy See over the district of Eastern Illyria, which belonged to the Eastern Empire. Leo bestowed the vicariate upon Bishop Anastasius of Thessalonica, just as Pope Siricius had formerly entrusted it to Bishop Anysius. The vicar was to consecrate the metropolitans, to assemble in a synod all bishops of the Province of Eastern Illyria, to oversee their administration of their office; but the most important matters were to be submitted to Rome (epp. v, vi, xiii). But Anastasius of Thessalonica used his authority in an arbitrary and despotic manner, so much so that he was severely reproved by Leo, who sent him fuller directions for the exercise of his office (ep. xiv).

432 In Leo's conception of his duties as supreme pastor, the maintenance of strict ecclesiastical discipline occupied a prominent place. This was particularly important at a time when the continual ravages of the barbarians were introducing disorder into all conditions of life, and the rules of morality were being seriously violated. Leo used his utmost energy in maintining this discipline, insisted on the exact observance of the ecclesiastical precepts, and did not hesitate to rebuke when necessary. Letters (ep. xvii) relative to these and other matters were sent to the different bishops of the Western Empire-e.g., to the bishops of the Italian provinces (epp. iv, xix, clxvi, clxviii), and to those of Sicily, who had tolerated deviations from the Roman Liturgy in the administration of Baptism (ep. xvi), and concerning other matters (ep. xvii). A very important disciplinary decree was sent to bishop Rusticus of Narbonne (ep. clxvii). Owing to the dominion of the Vandals in Latin North Africa, the position of the Church there had become extremely gloomy. Leo sent the Roman priest Potentius thither to inform himself about the exact condition, and to forward a report to Rome. On receiving this Leo sent a letter of detailed instructions to the episcopate of the province about the adjustment of numerous ecclesiastical and disciplinary questions (ep. xii). Leo also sent a letter to Dioscurus of Alexandria on 21 July, 445, urging him to the strict observance of the canons and discipline of the Roman Church (ep. ix). The primacy of the Roman Church was thus manifested under this pope in the most various and distinct ways. But it was especially in his interposition in the confusion of the Christological quarrels, which then so profoundly agitated Eastern Christendom, that Leo most brilliantly revealed himself the wise, learned, and energetic shepherd of the Church (see ). From his first letter on this subject, written to Eutyches on 1 June, 448 (ep. xx), to his last letter written to the new orthodox Patriarch of Alexandria, Timotheus Salophaciolus, on 18 August, 460 (ep. clxxi), we cannot but admire the clear, positive, and systematic manner in which Leo, fortified by the primacy of the Holy See, took part in this difficult entanglement. For particulars refer to the articles: ; ; .

433 Eutyches appealed to the pope after he had been excommunicated by Flavian, Patriarch of Constantinople, on account of his Monophysite views. The pope, after investigating the disputed question, sent his sublime dogmatic letter to Flavian (ep. xxviii), concisely setting forth and confirming the doctrine of the Incarnation, and the union of the Divine and human natures in the one Person of Christ . In 449 the council, which was designated by Leo as the "Robber Synod", was held. Flavian and other powerful prelates of the East appealed to the pope. The latter sent urgent letters to Constantinople, particularly to Emperor Theodosius II and Empress Pulcheria, urging them to convene a general council in order to restore peace to the Church. To the same end he used his influence with the Western emperor, Valentinian III, and his mother Galla Placidia, especially during their visit to Rome in 450. This general council was held in Chalcedon in 451 under Marcian, the successor of Theodosius. It solemnly accepted Leo's dogmatical epistle to Flavian as an expression of the Catholic Faith concerning the Person of Christ. The pope confirmed the decrees of the Council after eliminating the canon, which elevated the Patriarchate of Constantinople, while diminishing the rights of the ancient Oriental patriarchs. On 21 March, 453, Leo issued a circular letter confirming his dogmatic definition (ep. cxiv). Through the mediation of Bishop Julian of Cos, who was at that time the papal ambassador in Constantinople, the pope tried to protect further ecclesiastical interests in the Orient. He persuaded the new Emperor of Constantinople, Leo I, to remove the heretical and irregular patriarch, Timotheus Ailurus, from the See of Alexandria. A new and orthodox patriarch, Timotheus Salophaciolus, was chosen to fill his place, and received the congratulations of the pope in the last letter which Leo ever sent to the Orient.

434 In his far-reaching pastoral care of the Universal Church, in the West and in the East, the pope never neglected the domestic interests of the Church at Rome. When Northern Italy had been devastated by Attila, Leo by a personal encounter with the King of the Huns prevented him from marching upon Rome. At the emperor's wish, Leo, accompanied by the Consul Avienus and the Prefect Trigetius, went in 452 to Upper Italy, and met Attila at Mincio in the vicinity of Mantua, obtaining from him the promise that he would withdraw from Italy and negotiate peace with the emperor. The pope also succeeded in obtaining another great favour for the inhabitants of Rome. When in 455 the city was captured by the Vandals under Genseric, although for a fortnight the town had been plundered, Leo's intercession obtained a promise that the city should not be injured and that the lives of the inhabitants should be spared. These incidents show the high moral authority enjoyed by the pope, manifested even in temporal affairs. Leo was always on terms of intimacy with the Western Imperial Court. In 450 Emperor Valentinian III visited Rome, accompanied by his wife Eudoxia and his mother Galla Placidia. On the feast of Cathedra Petri (22 February), the Imperial family with their brilliant retinue took part in the solemn services at St. Peter's, upon which occasion the pope delivered an impressive sermon. Leo was also active in building and restoring churches. He built a basilica over the grave of Pope Cornelius in the Via Appia. The roof of St. Paul's without the Walls having been destroyed by lightning, he had it replaced, and undertook other improvements in the basilica. He persuaded Empress Galla Placidia, as seen from the inscription, to have executed the great mosaic of the Arch of Triumph, which has survived to our day. Leo also restored St. Peter's on the Vatican. During his pontificate a pious Roman lady, named Demetria, erected on her property on the Via Appia a basilica in honour of St. Stephen, the ruins of which have been excavated.

435 Leo was no less active in the spiritual elevation of the Roman congregations, and his sermons, of which ninety-six genuine examples have been preserved, are remarkable for their profundity, clearness of diction, and elevated style. The first five of these, which were delivered on the anniversaries of his consecration, manifest his lofty conception of the dignity of his office, as well as his thorough conviction of the primacy of the Bishop of Rome, shown forth in so outspoken and decisive a manner by his whole activity as supreme pastor. Of his letters, which are of great importance for church history, 143 have come down to us: we also possess thirty which were sent to him. The so-called "Sacramentarium Leonianum" is a collection of orations and prefaces of the Mass, prepared in the second half of the sixth century. Leo died on 10 November, 461, and was buried in the vestibule of St. Peter's on the Vatican. In 688 Pope Sergius had his remains transferred to the basilica itself, and a special altar erected over them. They rest to-day in St. Peter's, beneath the altar specially dedicated to St. Leo. In 1754 Benedict XIV exalted him to the dignity of Doctor of the Church (doctor ecclesiæ). In the Latin Church the feast day of the great pope is held on 11 April, and in the Eastern Church on 18 February.

436 Leonis Opera omnia, ed. ARDICINIO DELLA PORTA, (Rome, 1470); ed. QUESNEL (2 vols., Paris, 1675); edd. PETRUS AND HIERONYMUS BALLERINI (2 vols., Venice, 1753-7); ed. in P.L., LIV-VI; AMELLI, S. Leone dMagno e l'Oriente (Rome, 1886), 361-8; JAFFÉ Regesta Rom. Pont., 2nd ed., I, 58 sqq.; VON NOSTITZ­RIENECK, Die Briefe Papst Leos I. im Codex Monacen. 14540 in Historisches Jahrbuch (1897), 117- 33; IDEM, Die päpstlichen Urbanden f252;r Thessalonike und deren Kritik durch Prof. Friedrich in Zeitsch. für kath. Theologie (1897), 1-50. Translation of letters and sermons given in FELTOE, A select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, XIId (2nd series, New York, 1896); Sacramentarium Leonianum, ed. FELTOE (Cambridge, 1897). Concerning the Sacramentarium, cf. DUCHESNE, Christian Worship; its origin and evolution (London, 1903), 135 sqq.; and PROBST, Die ältesten römischen Sacramentarien und Ordines erklärt (Münster, 1892).;-Liber Pontificalis, ed. DUCHESNE, I, 238 sqq.; Tillemont, Mémoires pour servir à l'histoire eccles., XV, 414 sqq.; ARENDT, Leo der Grosse u. seine Zeit (Mainz, 1835); PERTHEL, Papst Leos I. Leben u. Lehren (Jena, 1843d); DE SAINT­CHÉRON, Hist. du Pontificat de Saint-Léon le Grand (Paris, 1845; 2nd ed., 1861-4); FR. AND P. BÖHRINGER, Die Väter den Papsttums Leo I und Gregor I in Die Kirche Christi u. ihre Zeugen (Stuttgart, 1879); BERTANI, Vita di Leone Magno (2 vols., Monza, 1880-2); GORE in Dict. Christ. Biog. (London, 1882), s. v.; LANGEN, Gesch. der röm. Kirche, II (Bonn, 1885), 1 sqq.; GRISAR, Gesch. Roms u. der Päpste im Mittelalter, I, 308 sqq.; IDEM, Il Primato romano nel secolo quinto in Analecta Romana, I (Rome, 1900), 307-52; IDEM, Rom u. die fränkische Kirche vornehmlich im VI. Jahrhundert in Zeitschr. für kath. Theologie (1890), 447-93; GUNDLACH, Der Streit der Bistümer Arles u. Vienne um den Primatus Galliarum in Neues Archiv (1899), 250 sqq.; (1890), 9 sqq., 233 sqq.; KUHN, Die Christologie Leos I. des Grossen (Würtzburg, 1894); HEFELE, Konziliengesch., II (2nd ed.), passim.

437 J.P. Kirsch

Pope St. Leo II

430 Pope (682-83), date of birth unknown; d. 28 June, 683. He was a Sicilian, and son of one Paul. Though elected pope a few days after the death of St. Agatho (10 June, 681), he was not consecrated till after the lapse of a year and seven months (17 Aug., 682). Under Leo's predecessor St. Agatho, negotiations had been opened between the Holy See and Emperor Constantine Pogonatus concerning the relations of the Byzantine Court to papal elections. Constantine had already promised Agatho to abolish or reduce the tax which for about a century the popes had had to pay to the imperial treasury on the occasion of their consecration, and under Leo's successor he made other changes in what had hitherto been required of the Roman Church at the time of a papal election. In all probability, therefore, it was continued correspondence on this matter which caused the delay of the imperial confirmation of Leo's election, and hence the long postponement of his consecration. The most important act accomplished by Leo in his short pontificate was his confirmation of the acts of the Sixth Oecumenical Council (680-1). This council had been held in Constantinople against the Monothelites, and had been presided over by the legates of Pope Agatho. After Leo had notified the emperor that the decrees of the council had been confirmed by him, he proceeded to make them known to the nations of the West. The letters which he sent for this end to the king and to the bishops and nobles of Spain have come down to us. In them he explained what the council had effected, and he called upon the bishops to subscribe to its decrees. At the same time he was at pains to make it clear that in condemning his predecessor Honorius I, he did so, not because he taught heresy, but because he was not active enough in opposing it. In accordance with the papal mandate, a synod was held at Toledo (684) in which the Council of Constantinople was accepted.

431 The fact that Ravenna had long been the residence of the emperors or of their representatives, the exarchs, had awakened the ambition of its archbishops. They aspired to the privileges of patriarchs and desired to be autocephalous, i.e. free from the direct jurisdiction of the pope, considered as their primate. As they could not succeed in inducing the popes to agree to their wishes, they attempted to secure their accomplishment by an imperial decree recognizing them as autocephalous. But this did not prove sufficient to enable the archbishops to effect their purpose, and Leo obtained from Constantine Pogonatus the revocation of the edict of Constans. On his side, however, Leo abolished the tax which the archbishops had been accustomed to pay when they received the pallium. And though he insisted that the archbishops-elect must come to Rome to be consecrated, he consented to the arrangement that they should not be obliged to remain in Rome more than eight days at the time of their consecration, and that, while they were not to be bound to come again to Rome themselves in order to offer their homage to the pope, they were each year to send a delegate to do so in their name. Perhaps because he feared that the Lombards might again ravage the catacombs, Leo transferred thence many of the relics of the martyrs into a church which he built to receive them. This pope, who is called by his contemporary biographer both just and learned, is commemorated as a saint in the Roman Martyrology on 28 June.

432 [Note: The feast of Saint Leo II was formerly observed on 3 July with the rank of a semi-double.]

433 Liber Pontificalis, ed. DUCHESNE, I (Paris, 1886), 359 sqq.; VILLANUNO, Summa Concil. Hispaniae, I (Barcelona, 1850), 310 sq.; Acta SS., June, V, 375 sqq.; MANN, Lives of the Popes, I (London, 1902), pt. II, 49 sqq.

434 Horace K. Mann.

Pope St. Leo III

433 Date of birth unknown; died 816. He was elected on the very day his predecessor was buried (26 Dec., 795), and consecrated on the following day. It is quite possible that this haste may have been due to a desire on the part of the Romans to anticipate any interference of the Franks with their freedom of election. Leo was a Roman, the son of Atyuppius and Elizabeth. At the time of his election he was Cardinal-Priest of St. Susanna, and seemingly also vestiarius, or chief of the pontifical treasury, or wardrobe. With the letter informing Charlemagne that he had been unanimously elected pope, Leo sent him the keys of the confession of St. Peter, and the standard of the city. This he did to show that he regarded the Frankish king as the protector of the Holy See. In return he received from Charlemagne letters of congratulation and a great part of the treasure which the king had captured from the Avars. The acquisition of this wealth was one of the causes which enabled Leo to be such a great benefactor to the churches and charitable institutions of Rome.

434 Prompted by jealousy or ambition, or by feelings of hatred and revenge, a number of the relatives of Pope Adrian I formed a plot to render Leo unfit to hold his sacred office. On the occasion of the procession of the Greater Litanies (25 April, 799), when the pope was making his way towards the Flaminian Gate, he was suddenly attacked by a body of armed men. He was dashed to the ground, and an effort was made to root out his tongue and tear out his eyes. After he had been left for a time bleeding in the street, he was hurried off at night to the monastery of St. Erasmus on the Cœ;lian. There, in what seemed quite a miraculous manner, he recovered the full use of his eyes and tongue. Escaping from the monastery, he betook himself to Charlemagne, accompanied by many of the Romans. He was received by the Frankish king with the greatest honour at Paderborn, although his enemies had filled the king's ears with malicious accusations against him. After a few months' stay in Germany, the Frankish monarch caused him to be escorted back to Rome, where he was received with every demonstration of joy by the whole populace, natives and foreigners. The pope's enemies were then tried by Charlemagne's envoys and, being unable to establish either Leo's guilt or their own innocence, were sent as prisoners to France (Frankland). In the following year (800) Charlemagne himself came to Rome, and the pope and his accusers were brought face to face. The assembled bishops declared that they had no right to judge the pope; but Leo of his own free will, in order, as he said, to dissipate any suspicions in men's minds, declared on oath that he was wholly guiltless of the charges which had been brought against him. At his special request the death sentence which had been passed upon his principal enemies was commuted into a sentence of exile.

435 A few days later, Leo and Charlemagne again met. It was on Christmas Day in St. Peter's. After the Gospel had been sung, the pope approached Charlemagne, who was kneeling before the Confession of St. Peter, and placed a crown upon his head. The assembled multitude at once made the basilica ring with the shout: "To Charles, the most pious Augustus, crowned by God, to our great and pacific emperor life and victory!" By this act was revived the Empire in the West, and, in theory, at least, the world was declared by the Church subject to one temporal head, as Christ had made it subject to one spiritual head. It was understood that the first duty of the new emperor was to be the protector of the Roman Church and of Christendom against the heathen. With a view to combining the East and West under the effective rule of Charlemagne, Leo strove to further the project of a marriage between him and the Eastern empress Irene. Her deposition, however (801), prevented the realization of this excellent plan. Some three years after the departure of Charlemagne from Rome (801), Leo again crossed the Alps to see him (804). According to some he went to discuss with the emperor the division of his territories between his sons. At any rate, two years later, he was invited to give his assent to the emperor's provisions for the said partition. Equally while acting in harmony with the pope, Charlemagne combatted the heresy of Adoptionism which had arisen in Spain; but he went somewhat further than his spiritual guide when he wished to bring about the general insertion of the Filioque in the Nicene Creed. The two were, however, acting together when Salzburg was made the metropolitical city for Bavaria, and when Fortunatus of Grado was compensated for the loss of his see of Grado by the gift of that of Pola. The joint action of the pope and the emperor was felt even in England. Through it Eardulf of Northumbria recovered his kingdom, and the dispute between Eanbald, Archbishop of York, and Wulfred, Archbishop of Canterbury, was regulated.

436 Leo had, however, many relations with England solely on his own account. By his command the synod of Beccanceld (or Clovesho, 803), condemned the appointing of laymen as superiors of monasteries. In accordance with the wishes of Ethelheard, Archbishop of Canterbury, Leo excommunicated Eadbert Praen for seizing the throne of Kent, and withdrew the pallium which had been granted to Litchfield, authorizing the restoration of the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the See of Canterbury "just as St. Gregory the Apostle and Master of the nation of the English had arranged it". Leo was also called upon to intervene in the quarrels between Archbishop Wulfred and Cenulf, King of Mercia. Very little is known of the real causes of the misunderstandings between them, but, whoever was the more to blame, the archbishop seems to have had the more to suffer. The king appears to have induced the pope to suspend him from the exercise of his episcopal functions, and to keep the kingdom under a kind of interdict for a period of six years. Till the hour of his death (822), greed of gold caused Cenulf to continue his persecution of the archbishop. It also caused him to persecute the monastery of Abingdon, and it was not until he had received from its abbot a large sum of money that, acting, as he declared, at the request of "the lord Apostolic and most glorious Pope Leo", he decreed the inviolability of the monastery.

437 During the pontificate of Leo, the Church of Constantinople was in a state of unrest. The monks, who at this period were flourishing under the guidance of such men as St. Theodore the Studite, were suspicious of what they conceived to be the lax principles of their patriarch Tarasius, and were in vigorous opposition to the evil conduct of their emperor Constantine VI. To be free to marry Theodota, their sovereign had divorced his wife Maria. Though Tarasius condemned the conduct of Constantine, still, to avoid greater evils, he refused, to the profound disgust of the monks, to excommunicate him. For their condemnation of his new marriage Constantine punished the monks with imprisonment and exile. In their distress the monks turned for help to Leo, as they did when they were maltreated for opposing the arbitrary reinstatement of the priest whom Tarasius had degraded for marrying Constantine to Theodota. The pope replied, not merely with words of praise and encouragement, but also by the dispatch of rich presents; and, after Michael I came to the Byzantine throne, he ratified the treaty between him and Charlemagne which was to secure peace for East and West.

438 Not only in the last mentioned transaction, but in all matters of importance, did the pope and the Frankish emperor act in concert. It was on Charlemagne's advice that, to ward off the savage raids of the Saracens, Leo maintained a fleet, and caused his coast line to be regularly patrolled by his ships of war. But because he did not feel competent to keep the Moslem pirates out of Corsica, he entrusted the guarding of it to the emperor. Supported by Charlemagne, he was able to recover some of the patrimonies of the Roman Church in the neighbourhood of Gaeta, and again to administer them through his rectors. But when the great emperor died (28 Jan., 814), evil times once more broke on Leo. Af fresh conspiracy was formed against him, but on this occasion the pope was apprised of it before it came to a head. He caused the chief conspirators to be seized and executed. No sooner had this plot been crushed than a number of nobles of the Campagna rose in arms and plundered the country. They were preparing to march on Rome itself, when they were overpowered by the Duke of Spoleto, acting under the orders of the King of Italy (Langobardia). The large sums of money which Charlemagne gave to the papal treasury enabled Leo to become an efficient helper of the poor and a patron of art, and to renovate the churches, not only of Rome, but even of Ravenna. He employed the imperishable art of mosaic not merely to portray the political relationship between Charlemagne and himself, but chiefly to decorate the churches, especially his titular church of St. Susanna. Up to the end of the sixteenth century a figure of Leo in mosaic was to be seen in that ancient church.

439 Leo III was buried in St. Peter's (12 June, 816), where his relics are to be found along with those of Sts. Leo I, Leo II, and Leo IV. He was canonized in 1673. The silver denarii of Leo III still extant bear the name of the Frankish emperor upon them as well as that of Leo, showing thereby the emperor as the protector of the Church, and overlord of the city of Rome.

440 Liber Pontificalis, ed. Duchesne, II (Paris, 1892), 1 sqq.; Codex Carolinus, ed. Jaffé (Berlin, 1867); Annales Einhardi (so called) and other Chronicles, in Mon. Germ.: Script., I; Carmen de Carolo Magno, in P.L., XCVIII. Cf. Bryce, The Holy Roman Empire (London, 1889A); Kleinklausz, L'Empire Carolingien (Paris, 1902); Hodgkin, Italy and her Invaders, VIII (Oxford, 1899); Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, ed. Mühlbacher, I (Innsbruck, 1908); Mann, The Lives of the Popes in the Early Middle Ages, II (London, 1906), 1 sqq.

441 Horace K. Mann.

Pope St. Leo IV

436 (Reigned 847-55)

437 A Roman and the son of Radoald, was unanimously elected to succeed Sergius II, and as the alarming attack of the Saracens on Rome in 846 caused the people to fear for the safety of the city, he was consecrated (10 April, 847) without the consent of the emperor. Leo received his early education at Rome in the monastery of St. Martin, near St. Peter's. His pious behaviour attracted the notice of Gregory IV, who made him a subdeacon; and he was created Cardinal-Priest of the church of the Quatuor Coronati by Sergius II. As soon as Leo, much against his will, became pope, he began to take precautions against a repetition of the Saracen raid of 846. He put the walls of the city into a thorough state of repair, entirely rebuilding fifteen of the great towers. He was the first to enclose the Vatican hill by a wall. To do this, he received money from the emperor, and help from all the cities and agricultural colonies (domus cultae) of the Duchy of Rome. The work took him four years to accomplish, and the newly fortified portion was called the Leonine City, after him. In 852 the fortifications were completed, and were blessed by the pope with great solemnity.

438 Whilst the work of refortifying the city was in progress, a great fleet of the Saracens sailed for Rome, seemingly from Sardinia, but it was completely destroyed off Ostia by the allied fleets of Rome, Naples, Amalfi, and Gaeta, and by a tempest (849). When the rebuilding of the walls of Rome was accomplished, Leo rebuilt Portus, and handed it over to a number of Corsican exiles, whom the ravages of the Saracens had driven from their homes. Other cities too in the Roman duchy were fortified, either by the pope himself or in consequence of his exhortations. Leo also endeavoured to make good the damage which the Saracen raid of 846 had done to the different churches. St. Peter's had suffered very severely, and though as a whole it never again reached its former magnificence, Leo managed to make it in parts at least more beautiful than it had been before. St. Martin's, where he had been educated, the Quatuor Coronati, of which he had been the priest, the Lateran Palace, the Anglo-Saxon Borgo, Subiaco, and many other places both in Rome and out of it were renovated by the energetic Leo. It was by this pope that the church of S. Maria Nova was built, to replace S. Maria Antiqua, which the decaying Palace of the Caesars threatened to engulf, and of which the ruins have recently been brought to light. In 850 Leo associated with Lothair in the empire his son Louis, by imposing on him the imperial crown. Three years later "he hallowed the child Alfred to king [says an old English historian] by anointing; and receiving him for his own child by adoption, gave him confirmation, and sent him back [to England] with the blessing of St. Peter the Apostle."

439 The same year (853) he held an important synod in Rome, in which various decrees were passed for the furtherance of ecclesiastical discipline and learning, and for the condemnation of the refractory Anastasius, Cardinal of St. Marcellus, and sometime librarian of the Roman Church. Equally rebellious conduct on the part of John, Archbishop of Ravenna, forced Leo to undertake a journey to that city to inspire John and his accomplices with respect for the law. It was while engaged in endeavouring to inspire another archbishop, Hincmar of Reims, with this same reverence, that Leo died. Another man who, till his death (851), defied the authority of the pope was Nomenoe, Duke of Brittany. Anxious to be independent of the imperial authority Nomenoe, in defiance both of Leo and Charles the Bald, not only deposed a number of bishops, but made new ones, and subjected them to a metropolitan see (Dol) of his own creation. It was not till the thirteenth century that the Archbishop of Tours recovered his jurisdiction over the Breton bishops. For consecrating a bishop outside his own diocese, St. Methodius, Patriarch of Constantinople, had suspended Gregory Asbestas, Bishop of Syracuse. St. Ignatius, who succeeded St. Methodius, in consequence forbade Gregory to be present at his consecration. This led Gregory to break all bounds. St. Ignatius accordingly caused him to be deposed, and begged the pope to confirm the deposition. This, however, Leo would not do, because, as he said, Ignatius had assembled bishops and deposed others without his knowledge, whereas he ought not to have done so "in the absence of our legates or of letters from us". Despite the fact that Leo was then in opposition to the Patriarch of Constantinople, one of his dependents, Daniel, a magister militum, accused him to the Frankish Emperor Louis of wishing to overthrow the domination of the Franks by a Greek alliance. Leo had, however, no difficulty in convincing Louis that the charge was absolutely groundless. Daniel was condemned to death and only escaped it by the intercession of the emperor. Shortly after this Leo died, and was buried in St. Peter's (17 July, 855). He is credited with being a worker of miracles both by his biographer and by the Patriarch Photius. His name is found in the Roman Martyrology.

440 Liber Pontificalis, ed. DUCHESNE, II, 106 sq.; his letters in P.L., CXV, CXXIX; the letters of Hincmar in P.L., CXXVI; the annals of Hincmar etc. Mon. Germ. Hist.: Script., I; Life of St. Ignatius and other documents in LABBE, Concilia, VIII; cf. LANCIANI, The Destruction of Ancient Rome (London, 1901), 132 sq.; THURSTON, The Roman Sacring of King Alfred in The Month (Oct., 1901); FORTESCUE, The Orthodox Eastern Church (London, 1907), 136 sq.; DE BROLO, Storia della Chiesa in Sicilia (Palermo, 1884), II, 265 sq.; MANN, Lives of the Popes, II (London, 1902), 258 sqq.

441 Horace K. Mann.

Pope Leo V

439 Very little is known of him. We have no certainty either as to when he was elected or as to exactly how long he reigned. It is highly probable that he was pope during August, 903. He was a native of Priapi, a small place in the district of Ardea. When chosen he was not one of the cardinal-priests of Rome, but was attached to some church outside the City. Hence, in contemporary catalogues of the popes he is called a presbiter forensis. Auxilius, a writer of the time, says that he held "the rudder of the Holy Roman Church" for thirty days, and that "he was a man of God and of praiseworthy life and holiness." Except that he issued a Bull exempting the canons of Bologna from the payment of taxes, we know of nothing that he did as pope. The circumstances of his death are as obscure as those of his life. After a pontificate of somewhat over a month he was seized by Christopher, Cardinal-Priest of St. Damasus, and cast into prison. The intruder promptly seated himself in the chair of Peter, but was soon after displaced by Sergius III. According to one authority, Sergius took "pity" on the two imprisoned pontiffs, and caused them both to be put to death. However, it seems more likely that Leo died a natural death in prison or in a monastery.

440 Liber Pontificalis, ed. DUCHESNE, II (Paris, 1892), 234; JAFFE, Reg. Pontif., II (Leipzig, 1888), 746. Cf. MANN, Lives of the Popes in the Early Middle Ages, IV (London, 1906), 111 sqq.

441 Horace K. Mann.

Pope Leo VI

442 The exact dates of the election and death of Leo VI are uncertain, but it is clear that he was pope during the latter half of 928. If, as some suppose, he was elected in June, 928, then he died in February, 929, as he reigned seven months and five days. Others, however, believe he became pope before the month of June. He was a Roman, the son of the primicerius, Christopher, who had been prime-minister of John VIII. When Leo became pope, he was Cardinal-Priest of St. Susanna. His immediate predecessor, John X, had been engaged in settling questions of ecclesiastical jurisdiction in Dalmatia; some of these were decided by Leo VI, and there is extant a Bull of his in which he states that he has granted the pallium to Archbishop John of Spalato, orders all the bishops of Dalmatia to obey him, and to confine their operations within the limits of their own dioceses, and instructs Bishop Gregory to be content with the Diocese of Scodra. The only other item of information regarding Leo which has reached us is that "according to most writers he was buried in St. Peter's".

443 Liber Pontifcalis, ed. DUCHESNE, II (Paris, 1892), 242: MANN, Lives of the Popes in the Early Middle Ages, IV, 188.

444 Horace K. Mann

Pope Leo VII

445 Date of birth unknown; d. 13 July, 939. A Roman and priest of St. Sixtus, and probably a Benedictine monk, he was elected pope 3 January, 936. He seems to have been placed upon the Chair of Peter by the power of Alberic, prince and senator of the Romans. Alberic's authority in Rome was disputed by Hugo, who bore the title of King of Italy (Langobardia). The city was being besieged by Hugo when the famous Odo, Abbot of Cluny, reached it. He had been summoned by Leo, who knew his great influence with both Alberic and Hugo, to make peace between them. Odo accomplished the desires of the pope, and a marraige between Alberic and Hugo's daughter Alda effected at least a temporary understanding between the belligerents. The Bulls of Leo consist for the most part of grants of privilege to various monasteries, especailly to Cluny. One, however, is a letter to Frederick, Archbishop of Mainz. With a view to co-operating in the work of reform which was being accomplished in Germany by Henry I (the Fowler) and his son Otho I, Leo named Frederick his vicar throughout all Germany, with power to proceed against all erring clerics. He would not, however, allow the archbishop to baptize the Jews by force, though he did authorize their expulsion from the cities on their refusal to embrace Christianity.

446 Liber Pontificalis, ed. Duchesne, II (Paris, 1892), 244; Jaffé Reg. Pontif., I (Leipzig, 1888), 3597 sqq.; Mann, Lives of the Popes in the Early Middle Ages, IV (London, 1906), 205 sqq.

447 Horace K. Mann

Pope Leo VIII

448 Date of birth unknown; d. between 20 February and 13 April, 965. When the Emperor Otho I illegally brought about the deposition of the unworthy Pope John XII (Nov., 963), he equally illegally caused to be elected, to fill his place, a layman, "Leo, the venerable protonotary". Leo was a Roman and the son of one John. His family was well known in the Clivus Argentarii (now Via di Marforio, between the Corso and the Forum Romanum), and he himself gave his name to various streets in the neighbourhood of his home. Chosen pope on 4 December, he was consecrated Bishop of Rome on 6 December, all the lesser orders having, in violation of the canon law, been bestowed upon him in the meantime by Sico, Bishop of Ostia. A few weeks after Leo's consecration, the Romans made a vain effort to overthrow the authority of the emperor. They were severely punished for their attempt; but, through the intercession of Leo, Otho restored to them the hostages he had received from them. No sooner, however, did the emperor leave Rome, than the people rose and expelled his nominee (Feb., 964). John XII at once returned to the city, summoned a council, condemned Leo "one of the employees of our curia, who has broken his faith with us", and degraded those clerics who had been ordained by him. Soon after this John died (14 May, 964), and the Romans unwisely elected to succeed him the Cardinal-Deacon Benedict. Indignant at the expulsion of Leo, and the election of Benedict, Otho hurried to Rome, and was soon in possession of both it and the new pope. Leo returned with the emperor, and at once brought Benedict to trial. With the consent of all his would-be judges, Benedict was degraded to the rank of a deacon, Leo himself tearing the pallium from his shoulders (July, 964). If it be the fact, as is asserted by a contemporary, that Benedict acquiesced in his deposition, and if, as seems certain, no further protest was made against Leo's position, he may well be regarded as a true pope from July, 964, to his death in 965, about the month of March.

449 No extant records inform us of any deeds which Leo performed during the period when he may be safely regarded as a true pope. He is said, indeed, to have given Otho the right of nominating any one he chose to be pope or bishop, and to have restored to Otho all the lands which his predecessors had bestowed upon the papacy. It is generally allowed, however, that the documents which make these statements are imperial productions forged during the investiture quarrel.

450 Liber Pontificalis, ed. Duchesne, II (Paris, 1892), 250; Liutprand, Hist. Ottonis (Hanover, 1877), ix sqq.; Ann. Altahenses majores (Hanover, 1868), an., 963 sq.; Jaffé, Reg., I (Leipzig, 1888), 467 sqq. Cf. Fisher, The Medieval Empire, II (London, 1897), 113; Duchesne, The Beginnings of the Temporal Sovereignty of the Popes (London, 1908), 222 sqq.; Mann, The Lives of the Popes in the Early Middle Ages, IV, 260-81.

451 Horace K. Mann.