__________________________________________________________________ Title: The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume 12: Philip II-Reuss Creator(s): Herbermann, Charles George (1840-1916) Print Basis: 1907-1913 Rights: From online edition Copyright 2003 by K. Knight, used by permission CCEL Subjects: All; Reference LC Call no: BX841.C286 LC Subjects: Christian Denominations Roman Catholic Church Dictionaries. Encyclopedias __________________________________________________________________ THE CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA AN INTERNATIONAL WORK OF REFERENCE ON THE CONSTITUTION, DOCTRINE, DISCIPLINE, AND HISTORY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH EDITED BY CHARLES G. HERBERMANN, Ph.D., LL.D. EDWARD A. PACE, Ph.D., D.D. CONDE B PALLEN, Ph.D., LL.D. THOMAS J. SHAHAN, D.D. JOHN J. WYNNE, S.J. ASSISTED BY NUMEROUS COLLABORATORS IN FIFTEEN VOLUMES VOLUME 12 Philip II to Reuss New York: ROBERT APPLETON COMPANY Imprimatur JOHN M. FARLEY ARCHBISHOP OF NEW YORK __________________________________________________________________ Philip II Philip II (Augustus) King of France, born 22 or 25 August, 1165; died at Mantes, 14 July, 1223, son of Louis VII and Alix de Champagne. He was saved from a serious illness after a pilgrimage made by his father to the tomb of Thomas à Becket; he succeeded to the throne 18 September, 1180. His marriage with Isabella of Hainault, niece of the Count of Flanders, the conflicts which he afterwards sustained against the latter, and the deaths of the Countess (1182) and Count of Flanders (1185), increased the royal power in the north of France. His strife with Henry II of England in concert with the sons of that monarch, Henry, Richard, and John, resulted in 1189 in the Treaty of Azay-sur-Cher, which enhanced the royal power in the centre of France. The struggle with the Plantagenets was the ruling idea of Philip II's whole policy. Richard Coeur de Lion having become King of England, 6 July, 1189, was at first on amicable terms with Philip. Together they undertook the Third Crusade, but quarreled in Palestine, and on his return Philip II accused Richard of having attempted to poison him. As Richard had supported in Sicily the claims of Tancred of Lecce against those of the Emperor Henry VI, the latter resolved to be avenged. Richard, having been taken captive on his return from the Crusade by the Duke of Austria, was delivered to Henry VI, who held him prisoner. Philip II sent William, Archbishop of Reims, to Henry VI to request that Richard should remain the captive of Germany or that he should be delivered to Philip as his prisoner. Without loss of time Philip reached an agreement with John Lackland, Richard's brother. Normandy was delivered up by a secret treaty and John acknowledged himself Philip's vassal. But, when in February, 1194, Richard was set free by Henry VI, John Lackland became reconciled with him and endless conflict followed between Richard and Philip. On 13 January, 1199, Innocent III imposed on them a truce of five years. Shortly after this Richard died. Subsequently Philip defended against John, Richard's successor, the claims of the young Arthur of Brittany, and then those of Hugh de Lusignan, Count of La Marche, whose betrothed had been abducted by John. The war between Philip and John, interrupted by the truces imposed by the papal legates, became a national war; and in 1206 John lost his possessions in central France. Philip was sometimes displeased with the pontifical intervention between France and the Plantagenets, but the prestige of Innocent III forced him to accept it. Protracted difficulties took place between him and the pope owing to the tenacity with which Innocent III compelled respect for the indissolubility of even royal marriages. In 1190 Philip lost his wife, Isabella of Hainault, whom he had married in order to inherit Artois, and in 1193 he married Ingeburga, sister of Canute VI, King of Denmark. As he immediately desired to repudiate her, an assembly of complaisant barons and bishops pronounced the divorce, but Ingeburga appealed to Rome. Despite the remonstrances of Celestine III, Philip, having imprisoned Ingeburga, married Agnes de Méran, daughter of a Bavarian nobleman. Innocent III, recently elected, called upon him to repudiate Agnes and take back Ingeburga, and on the king's refusal the legate, Peter of Capua, placed the kingdom under an interdict (1198). Most of the bishops refused to publish the sentence. The Bishops of Paris and Senlis, who published it, were punished by having their goods confiscated. At the end of nine months Philip appeared to yield; he feigned reconciliation with Ingeburga, first before the legate, Octavian, and then before the Council of Soissons (May, 1201), but he did not dismiss Agnes de Méran. She died in August, 1201, and Innocent III consented to legitimize the two children she had borne the king, but Philip persisted that Rome should pronounce his divorce from Ingeburga, whom he held prisoner at Etampes. Rome refused and Philip dismissed the papal legate (1209). In 1210 he thought of marrying a princess of Thuringia, and in 1212 renewed his importunities for the divorce with the legate, Robert de Courçon. Then, in 1213, having need of the aid of the pope and the King of Denmark, he suddenly restored Ingeburga to her station as queen. Another question which at first caused discord between Philip II and Innocent III, and regarding which they had later a common policy, was the question of Germany. Otto of Brunswick, who was Innocent III's candidate for the dignity of emperor, was the nephew of Richard and John Lackland. This was sufficient to cause Philip to interfere in favour of Philip of Suabia. They formed an alliance in June, 1198, and when Philip of Suabia was assassinated in 1208 Philip put forward the candidacy of Henry of Brabant. However, the whole of Germany rallied to Otto of Brunswick, who became emperor as Otto IV, and in 1209 Philip feared that the new emperor would invade France. But Otto IV quarrelled with Innocent III and was excommunicated and the pope by an unexpected move called upon Philip for subsidies and troops to aid him against Otto. They agreed to proclaim as emperor Frederick of Hohenstaufen, the future Frederick II, Philip giving Frederick 20,000 "marcs" to defray the cost of his election (November, 1212). Thus was inaugurated the policy by which France meddled in the affairs of Germany and for the first time the French king claimed, like the pope, to have a voice in the imperial election. The accord established between Innocent and Philip with regard to the affairs of Germany subsequently extended to those of England. Throughout his reign Philip dreamed of a landing in England. As early as 1209 he had negotiated with the English barons who were hostile to John Lackland, and in 1212 with the Irish and the Welsh. When John lackland subjected to cruel persecution the English bishops who, in spite of him, recognized Stephen Langton as Archbishop of Canterbury. Innocent III in 1212 placed England under interdict, and the legate, Pandulphus, declared that John Lackland had forfeited his throne. Then Philip, who received at his court all the exiles from England, consented to go to England in the name of Innocent III to take away the crown from John Lackland. It was to be given to his son, the future Louis VIII. On 22 May, 1213, the French expedition was to embark at Gravelines, when it was learned that John Lackland had become reconciled with Rome, and some months later he became a vassal of the pope. Thus failed, on the eve of its realization, the project of the French invasion of England. But the legate of Innocent III induced Philip to punish Ferrand, Count of Flanders, who was the ally of all the enemies of the king. At the battle of Bouvines (27 July, 1214) Ferrand, who supported Otto IV, was taken prisoner. This battle is regarded as the first French national victory. Philip II, asserting that he had on both sides two great and terrible lions, Otto and John, excused himself from taking part in the Crusade against the Albigenses. He permitted his son Louis to make two expeditions into Languedoc to support Simon de Montfort in 1215, and Amaury de Montfort in 1219, and again in 1222 he sent Amaury de Montfort two hundred knights and ten thousand foot soldiers under the Archbishop of Bourges and the Count of La Marche. He foresaw that the French monarchy would profit by the defeat of the Albigenses. Philip's reign was characterized by a gigantic advance of the French monarchy. Before his time the King of France reigned only over the Ile de France and Berri, and had no communication with the sea. To this patrimony Philip II added Artois, Amienois, Valois, Vernandois, a large portion of Beauvaisis, Normandy, Maine, Anjou, Touraine, and a part of Poitou and Saintonge. His bailiffs and seneschals established the royal power firmly in those countries. Paris became a fortified city and attracted to its university students from different countries. Thanks to the possession of Dieppe, Rouen, and certain parts of Saintonge, the French monarchy became a maritime and commercial power, and Philip invited foreign merchants to France. Flanders, Ponthieu, and Auvergne became subject fiefs, supervised by agents of the king. He exercised a sort of protectorate over Champagne and Burgundy. Brittany was in the hands of Pierre de Dreux, a Capetian of the younger branch. "History", writes M. Luchaire, "does not present so many, such rapid, and such complete changes in the fortune of a State". Philip Augustus did not interfere in episcopal elections. In Normandy, where the Plantagenets had assumed the custom of directly nominating the bishops, he did not follow their example. Guillaume Le Breton, in his poem the "Philippide", makes him say: "I leave to the men of God the things that pertain to the service of God." He favoured the emancipation of communes, desiring to be liked by the middle classes of the districts he annexed. He often exacted a tax in exchange for the communal charter. But he did not allow the communes to infringe on the property of clerics or the episcopal right of jurisdiction. At Noyen he intervened formally in behalf of the bishop, who was threatened by the commune. He undertook a campaign in defence of the bishops and abbots against certain feudal lords whom he himself desired to humiliate or weaken. In 1180, before he was king, he undertook an expedition into Berri to punish the Lord of Charenton, the enemy of the monks, and into Burgundy where the Count of Chalon and the Lord of Beaujeu were persecuting the Church. In 1186, on the complaint of the monks, he took possession of Chatillon-sur-Seine, in the Duchy of Burgundy, and forced the duke to repair the wrongs he had committed against the Church. In 1210 he sent troops to protect the Bishop of Clermont, who was threatened by the Count of Auvergne. But on the other hand, in virtue of the preponderance which he wished royalty to have over feudalism, he exacted of the bishops and abbots the performance of all their feudal duties, including military service; although for certain territories he was the vassal of the bishops of Picardy, he refused to pay them homage. Moreover, he declared with regard to Manasses, bishop of Orléans, that the royal court was entitled to judge at the trials of bishops, and he made common cause with lay feudalism in the endless discussions regarding the province of ecclesiastical tribunals, which at the beginning of the thirteenth century were disposed to extend their jurisdiction. An ordinance issued about 1205 at the instance of the king, executed in Normandy and perhaps elsewhere, stipulated that in certain cases lay judges might arrest and try guilty clerics, that the right of asylum of religious buildings should be limited, that the Church might not excommunicate those who did business on Sunday or held intercourse with Jews, and that a citizen having several children should not give more than half of his estate to that one of his sons who was a cleric. Finally he imposed on the clergy heavy financial exactions. He was the first king who endeavoured to compel clerics to pay the king a tenth of their income. In 1188 the archdeacon Peter of Blois defeated this claim, but in 1215 and 1218 Philip renewed it, and by degrees the resistance of the clergy gave way. Philip, however, was pious in his own way, and in the advice which St. Louis gave to his son he said that Philip, because of "God's goodness and mercy would rather lose his throne than dispute with the servants of Holy Church". Thus the reputation left by Philip II was quite different from that of Philip IV, or Frederick II of Germany. He never carried out towards the Church a policy of trickery or petty vexations, on the contrary he regarded it as his collaborator in the foundation of French unity. Le Breton, La Philippide, ed. Delaborde (Paris, 1883-5); Rigord and Le Breton, Chroniques; Delisle, Catalogue des actes de Philippe-Auguste (Paris, 1856); Luchaire, Philippe-Auguste in Lavisse, Hist. de France, III (Paris, 1901); Luchaire, L'Université de Paris sous Philippe-Auguste (Paris, 1899); Gautier, La France sous Philippe-Auguste (Tours, 1899); Cartellieri, Philipp II August, König von Frankreich (3 vols., Leipzig, 1899-1909); Davidsohn, Philipp August von Frankreich und Ingeborg (1888); Walker, On the increase of royal power in France under Philip Augustus (1888); Hutton, Philip Augustus (London, 1896). Georges Goyau Philip II (King of Spain) Philip II King of Spain, only son of the Emperor Charles V, and Isabella of Portugal, b. at Valladolid, 21 May, 1527; d. at the Escorial, 13 Sept., 1598. He was carefully educated in the sciences, learned French and Latin, though he never spoke anything but Castilian, and also showed much interest in architecture and music. In 1543 he married his cousin, Maria of Portugal, who died at the birth of Don Carlos (1545). He was appointed regent of Spain with a council by Charles V. In 1554 he married Mary Tudor, Queen of England, who was eleven years his senior. This political marriage gave Spain an indirect influence on affairs of England, recently restored to Catholicism; but in 1555 Philip was summoned to the Low Countries, and Mary's death in the same year severed the connection between the two countries. At a solemn conference held at Brussels, 22 Oct., 1555, Charles V ceded to Philip the Low Countries, the crowns of Castille, Aragon, and Sicily, on 16 Jan., 1556, and the countship of Burgundy on the tenth of June. He even thought of securing for him the imperial crown, but the opposition of his brother Ferdinand caused him to abandon that project. Having become king, Philip, devoted to Catholicism, defended the Faith throughout the world and opposed the progress of heresy, and these two things are the key to his whole reign. He did both by means of absolutism. His reign began unpleasantly for a Catholic sovereign. He had signed with France the Treaty of Vaucelles (5 Feb., 1556), but it was soon broken by France, which joined Paul IV against him. Like Julius II this pope longed to drive the foreigners out of Italy. Philip had two wars on his hands at the same time, in Italy and in the Low Countries. In Italy the Duke of Alva, Viceroy of Naples, defeated the Duke of Guise and reduced the pope to such distress that he was forced to make peace. Philip granted this on the most favourable terms and the Duke of Alva was even obliged to ask the pope's pardon for having invaded the Pontifical States. In the Low Countries Philip defeated the French at Saint Quentin (1557) and Gravelines (1558) and afterwards signed the Peace of Cateau-Cambresis (3 April, 1559), which was sealed by his marriage with Elizabeth of Valois, daughter of Henry II. Peace concluded, Philip, who had been detained in the Low Countries, returned to Spain. For more than forty years he directed from the Prince of Orange decided to proclaim Philip's his cabinet the affairs of the monarchy. He resided alternately at Madrid which he made the capital of the kingdom and in villégiatures, the most famous of which is the Escorial, which he built in fulfillment of a vow made at the time of the battle of Saint Quentin. In Spain, Philip continued the policy of the Catholic Ferdinand and Isabella. He was merciless in the supression of the Lutheran heresy, which had appeared in various parts of the country, notably at Valladolid and Seville. "If my own son were guilty like you", he replied to a gentleman condemned to death for heresy who had reproached him for his cruelty, "I should lead him with my own hands to the stake". He succeeded in exterminating Protestantism in Spain, but encountered another enemy no less dangerous. The Moriscoes of the ancient Kingdom of Granada had been conquered, but they remained the implacable enemies of their conquerors, from whom they were separated by religion, language, dress, and manners, and they plotted incessantly with the Mussulmans outside the country. Philip wished to force them to renounce their language and dress, whereupon they revolted and engagedin a bloody struggle against Spain which lasted three years (1567-70) until ended by Don Juan, natural son of Charles V. The defeated Moriscoes were transplanted in great numbers to the interior of the country. Another event of historical importance in Philip's reign was the conquest of Portugal in 1580. After the death of the young King Sebastian at the battle of Alcazar (1578) and that of his successor the aged Cardinal Henry (1580), Philip II, who through his mother was a grandson of King Emmanuel, pleaded his title of heir and sent the Duke of Alva to occupy the country. This was the only conquest of the reign. Iberian unity, thus realized, lasted from 1580 to 1640. Other events were the troubles in Aragon, which were fomented by Antonio Perez, former secretary of the king. Being pursued for high treason he sought refuge in his native country, and appealed for protection to its fueros that he might not be delivered to the Castilian judges, nor to the Inquisition. The inhabitants of Saragossa defended him by force of arms and he succeeded in escaping abroad, but Philip sent an army to punish Aragon, infringed on the fueros and established absolutism in the Kingdom of Aragon, hitherto proud of its freedom (1592). In the Low Countries, where Philip had committed the government to his aunt, Margaret of Parma, the nobles, chafed because of their want of influence, plotted and trumped up grievances. They protested against the presence in the country of several thousands of Spanish soldiers, against Cardinal de Granvelle's influence with the regent, and against the severity of Charles V's decrees against heresy. Philip recalled the Spanish soldiers and the Cardinal de Greavelle, but he refused to mitigate the decrees and declared that he did not wish to reign over a nation of heretics. The difficulties with the Iconoclasts having broken out he swore to punish them and sent thither the Duke of Alva with an army, whereupon Margaret of Parma resigned. Alva behaved as though in a conquered country, caused the arrest and execution of Count Egmont and de Hornes, who were accused of complicity with the rebels, created the Council of Troubles, which was popularly styled the "Council of Blood", defeated the Prince of Orange and his brother who had invaded the country with German mercenaries, but could not prevent the "Sea-beggars" from capturing Brille. He followed up his military successes but was recalled in 1573. His successor Requesens could not recover Leyden. Influenced by the Prince of Orange the provinces concluded the "Pacification of Ghent" which regulated the religious situation in the Low Countries without royal intervention. The new governor, Don Juan, upset the calculations of Orange by accepting the "Pacification ", and finally the Prince of Orange decided to proclaim Philip's deposition by the revolted provinces. The king replied by placing the prince under the ban; shortly afterwards he was slain by an assassin (1584). Nevertheless, the united provinces did not submit and were lost to Spain. Those of the South, however, were recovered one after another by the new governor, Alexander Farnese, Prince of Parma. But he having died in 1592 and the war becoming more difficult against the rebels, led by the great general Maurice of Nassau, son of William of Orange, Philip II realized that he must change his policy and ceded the Low Countries to his daughter Isabella, whom he espoused to the Archduke Albert of Austria, with the provision that the provinces would be returned to Spain in case there were no children by this union (1598). (See ALVA; EGMONT; GRANVELLE; NETHERLANDS.) The object of Philip's reign was only partly realized. He had safeguarded the religious unity of Spain and had exterminated heresy in the southern Low Countries, but the northern Low Countries were lost to him forever. Philip had three enemies to contend with abroad, Islam, England, and France. Islam was master of the Mediterranean, being in possession of the Balkan Peninsula, Asia Minor, Egypt, all the coast of northern Africa (Tunis, Algiers, Morocco); it had just conquered the Island of Cyprus and laid siege to the Island of Malta (1505), which had valiantly repulsed the assault. Dragut, the Ottoman admiral, was the terror of the Mediterranean. On several occasions Philip had fought against the Mussulman peril, meeting alternately with success and defeat. He therefore eagerly joined the Holy League organized by Pius V to resist Islam, and which Venice consented to join. The fleet of the League, commanded by Don Juan, brother of Philip II, inflicted on the Turkish fleet the terrible defeat of Lepanto (7 Oct., 1571), the results of which would have been greater had Venice not proved false and if Pius V had not died in 1572. Nevertheless, the Turkish domination of the Mediterranean was ended and in 1578 Philip concluded a treaty with the Turks which lasted till the end of his reign. Relations of intimacy with England had ceased at the death of Mary Tudor. Philip attempted to renew them by his chimerical project of marriage with Elizabeth, who had not yet become the cruel persecutor of Catholicism. When she constituted herself the protectress of Protestant interests throughout the world and did all in her power to encourage the revolt of the Low Countries, Philip thought of contending with her in her own country by espousing the cause of Mary Stuart, but Elizabeth did away with the latter in 1587, and furnished relief to the Low Countries against Philip, who thereupon armed an immense fleet (the Invincible Armada) against England. But being led by an incompetent commander it accomplished nothing and was almost wholly destroyed by storms (1588). This was an irreparable disaster which inaugurated Spain's naval decline. The English corsairs could with impunity pillage her colonies and under Drake even her own coast; in 1596 the Duke of Essex pillaged the flourishing town of Cadiz, and the sceptre of the seas passed from Spain to England. From 1559 Philip II had been at peace with France, and had contented himself with urging it to crush out heresy. French intervention in favour of the Low Countries did not cause him to change his attitude, but when at the death of Henry III in 1589 the Protestant Henry of Bourbon became heir to the throne of France, Philip II allied himself with the Guises, who were at the head of the League, supplied them with money and men, and on several occasions sent to their relief his great general Alexander Farnese. He even dreamed of obtaining the crown of France for his daughter Isabella, but this daring project was not realized. The conversion of Henry IV (1593). to Catholicism removed the last obstacle to his accession to the French throne. Apparently Philip II failed to grasp the situation, since he continued for two years more the war against Henry IV, but his fruitless efforts were finally terminated in 1595 by the absolution of Henry IV by Clement VIII. No sovereign has been the object of such diverse judgments. While the Spaniards regarded him as their Solomon and called him "the prudent king" (el rey prudente), to Protestants he was the "demon of the south" (dæmon meridianus) and most cruel of tyrants. This was because, having constituted himself the defender of Catholicism throughout the world, he encountered innumerable enemies, not to mention such adversaries as Antonio Perez and William of Orange who maligned him so as to justify their treason. Subsequently poets (Schiller in his "Don Carlos"), romance-writers, and publicists repeated these calumnies. As a matter of fact Philip II joined great qualities to great faults. He was industrious, tenacious, devoted to study, serious, simple-mannered, generous to those who served him, the friend and patron of arts. He was a dutiful son, a loving husband and father, whose family worshipped him. His piety was fervent, he had a boundless devotion to the Catholic Faith and was, moreover, a zealous lover of Justice. His stoical strength in adversity and the courage with which he endured the sufferings of his last illness are worthy of admiration. On the other hand he was cold, suspicious, secretive, scrupulous to excess, indecisive and procrastinating, little disposed to clemency or forgetfulness of wrongs. His religion was austere and sombre. He could not understand opposition to heresy except by force. Imbued with ideas of absolutism, as were all the rulers of his time, he was led into acts disapproved by the moral law. His cabinet policy, always behind-hand with regard to events and ill-informed concerning the true situation, explains his failures to a great extent. To sum up we may cite the opinion of Baumstark: "He was a sinner, as we all are, but he was also a king and a Christian king in the full sense of the term". GACHARD, Correspondance de Philippe II sur les affaires des Pays Bas (Brussels and Ghent, 1848-1851); IDEM, Lettres de Philippe II a ses filles (Paris, 1884); IDEM, Don Carlos et Philippe II (Paris, 1863); PRESCOTT, History of the reign of Philip II, King of Spain (London, 1855); CORDOBA, Felipe II, rey de Espana (Madrid, 1876-78); BAUMSTARK, Philippe II, Konig von Spanien (Freiburg, 1875), tr. into French, KURTH (1877); MONTANA, Nueva luz y juicio verdadero sobre Felipe II (Madrid, 1882); FORNERON, Histoire de Philippe II (Paris, 1882); HUME, Philip II of Spain (London, 1897). GODEFROID KURTH Philip IV (The Fair) Philip IV Surnamed Le Bel (the Fair) King of France, b. at Fontainebleau, 1268; d. there, 29 Nov., 1314; son of Philip III and Isabel of Aragon; became king, 5 Oct. 1285, on the death of his father, and was consecrated at Reims, 6 Jan., 1286, with his wife Jeanne, daughter of Henry I, King of Navarre, Count of Champagne and Brie; this marriage united these territories to the royal domain. Having taken Viviers and Lyons from the empire, Valenciennes, the inhabitants of which united themselves voluntarily with France, La Marche and Angoumois, which he seized from the lawful heirs of Hugues de Lusigan, Philip whished to expel Edward I of England from Guienne, all of which province, with the exception of Bordeaux and Bayonne, was occupied in 1294 and 1295. By the Treaty of Montreuil, negotiated by Boniface VIII, he gave Guienne as a gift to his daughter Isabel, who married the son of Edward I, on condition that this young prince should hold the province as Philip's vassal. Philip wished to punish Count Guy of Flanders, an ally of England, and caused Charles of Valois to invade his territory, but he was defeated at Coutrai by the Flemings, who were roused by the heavy taxes imposed on them by Philip; he took his revenge on the Flemings at the naval victory of Zierichzee and the land victory of Mons en Puelle; then in 1305 he recognized Robert, Guy's son, as his vassal and retained possession of Lille, Douai, Orchies and Valenciennes. Having thus extended his kingdom, Philip endeavored energetically to centralize the government and impose a very rigorous fiscal system. Legists like Enguerrand, Philippe de Marigny, Pierre de Latilly, Pierre Flotte, Raoul de Presle, and Guillaume de Plassan, helped him to establish firmly this royal absolutism and set up a tyrannical power. These legists were called the chevaliers de l'hôtel, the chevaliers ès lois, the milites regis; they were not nobles, neither did they bear arms, but they ranked as knights. The appearance of these legists in the Government of France is one of the leading events of the reign of Philip IV. Renan explains its significance in these words: "An entirely new class of politicians, owing their fortune entirely to their own merit and personal efforts, unreservedly devoted to the king who had made them, and rivals of the Church, whose place they hoped to fill in many matters, thus appeared in the history of France, and were destined to work a profound change in the conduct of public affairs." It was these legists who incited and supported Philip IV in his conflict with the papacy and the trial of the Templars. In the articles Boniface VIII; Clement V; Molai; Templars, will be found an account of the relations of Philip IV with the Holy See; M. Lizerand, in 1910, has given us a study on Philip IV and Clement V, containing thirty-seven unpublished letters written by the two sovereigns. The principal adviser of Philip in his hostile relations with the Curia was the legist Guillaume de Nogaret (q.v.). Renan, who made a close study of Nogaret's dealings with Boniface VIII, Clement V, and the Templars, thinks that despite his ardent profession of Catholic fidelity he was somewhat hypocritical, at all events "he was not an honest man," and that "he could not have been deceived by the false testimony which he stirred up and the sophisms he provoked." Nogaret's methods of combating Boniface VIII and the Templars are better understood when we examine, in Gaston Paris's work, the curious trial of Guichard, Bishop of Troyes, for witchcraft. Another important personage whose curious writings must be read to understand the policy of Philip correctly is Pierre Dubois. He had been a pupil of St. Thomas Aquinas at the University of Paris, and was a lawyer at Coutances. In 1300 Dubois wrote a work on the means of shortening the wars and conflicts of France; in 1302 he published several virulent pamphlets against Boniface VIII; between 1304 and 1308, he wrote a very important work "De recuperatione Terrae Sanctae"; in 1309 alone, he wrote on the question of the Holy Roman Empire, on the Eastern question, and against the Templars. Dubois started from the idea that France ought to subdue the papacy, after which ti would be easy for the King of France to use the papal influence for his own advantage. He whished his king to become master of the Papal States, to administer them, to reduce the castles and cities of this state to his obedience, and to force Tuscany, Sicily, England, and Aragon, vassal countries of the Holy See, to do homage to the King of France; in return the king was to grant the pope the revenues of the Papal States. "It depends on the pope," wrote he in his work of 1302, "to rid himself of his worldly occupations and to preserve his revenues without having any trouble about them; if he does not wish to accept such an advantageous offer, he will incur universal reproach for his cupidity, pride, and rash presumption." "Clement V," continued Dubois in his treatise "De recuperation Terrae Sanctae," "after having given up his temporal possessions to the King of France, would be protected against the miasma of Rome, and would live long in good health, in his native land of France, where he would create a sufficient number of French cardinals to preserve the papacy from the rapacious hands of the Romans." Dubois desired not only that the King of France should subjugate the papacy, but that the empire should be forced to cede to France the left bank of the Rhine, Provence, Savoy, and all its rights in Liguria, Venice and Lombardy. In 1308, after the death of the Emperor Albert I, he even thought of having the pope confer the imperial crown on the French Capets. He also devised plans for subjugating Spain. Thus reorganized by France Christian Europe was (in the mind of Pierre Dubois) to undertake the Crusade; the Holy Land would be reconquered, and on the return, the Palaeologi, who reigned at Constantinople, would be replaced by the Capetian, Charles of Valois, representing the rights of Catherine de Courtenay to the Latin Empire of Constantinople. The personal influence of Pierre Dubois on Philip IV must not be exaggerated. Although all his writings were presented to the king, Dubois never had an official place in Philips's council. However, there is an indisputable parallelism between his ideas and certain political maneuvers of Philip IV. For instance on 9 June, 1308, Philip wrote to Henry of Carinthia, King of Bohemia, to propose Charles of Valois as a candidate for the crown of Germany; and on 11 June he sent three knights into Germany to offer money to the electors. This was fruitless labour, however, for Henry of Luxemburg was elected and Clement V, less subservient to the King of France than certain enemies of the papacy have said, hastened to confirm the election. Philip IV was not really a free-thinker; he was religious, and even made pilgrimages: his attitude toward the inquisition is not that of a free-thinker, as is especially apparent in the trial of the Franciscan Bernard Délicieux. The latter brought the deputies of Carcassonne and Albi to Philip IV at Senlis, to complain of the Dominican inquisitors of Languedoc; the result of his action was an ordinance of Philip putting the Dominican inquisitors under the control of the bishops. On the receipt of this news Languedoc became inflamed against the Dominicans; Bernard Délicieux in 1303 headed the movement in Carcassonne, and when in 1304 Philip and the queen visited Toulouse and Carcassonne, he organized tumultuous manifestations. The king was displeased, and discontinued his proceedings against the Dominicans. Then Bernard Délicieux and some of the people of Carcassonne conspired to deliver the town into the hands of Prince Fernand, Infant of Majorca; Philip caused sixteen of the inhabitants to be hanged, and imposed a heavy fine on the town; and this conspiracy of Bernard Délicieux against the king and the Inquisition was one of the reasons of his condemnation later in 1318 to perpetual In Pace, or monastic imprisonment. Philip IV was not therefore in any way a systematic adversary of the inquisition. On the other hand, recently published documents show that he was sincerely attached to the idea of a Crusade. From the memoirs of Rabban Cauma, ambassador of Argoun, King of the Tatars, translated from the Syriac by Abbe Chabot, we learn that Philip said to Rabban in Sept., 1287: "If the Mongolians, who are not Christians, fight to capture Jerusalem, we have much more reason n to fight; if it be God's will, we will go with an army." And the news of the fall of Saint-Jean d'Acre (1291), which induced so many provincial councils to express a desire for a new crusade was certainly calculated to strengthen this resolution of the king. We have referred to Dubois's zeal for the conquest of the Holy Land; Nogaret was perhaps a still stronger advocate of the project; but in the plan which he outlined about 1310, the first step, according to him, was to place all the money of the Church of France in the king's hands. The French Church under Philip IV displayed very little independence; it was in reality enslaved to the royal will. Almost every year it contributed to the treasury with or without the pope's approval, a tenth and sometimes a fifth of its revenues; these pecuniary sacrifices were consented to by the clergy in the provincial councils, which in return asked certain concessions or favors of the king; but Philip's fiscal agents, if they met with resistance, laid down the principle that the king could by his own authority collect from all his subjects, especially in case of necessity, whatever taxes he wished. His officers frequently harassed the clergy in a monstrous manner; and the documents by which Philip confirmed the immunities of the Church always contained subtle restrictions which enabled the king's agents to violate them. A list of the gravamina of the Churches and the clerics, discussed at the Council of Vienne (1311), contains ample proof of the abuse of authority to which the Church was subjected, and the writer of the poem "Avisemens pour le roy Loys," composed in 1315 for Louis X, exhorted this new king to live in peace with the Church, which Philip IV had not done. To concentrate in his hands all the wealth of the French Church for the Crusade, and then to endeavor to make an agreement with the papacy for the control and disposition of the income of the Universal Church, was the peculiar policy of Philip IV. Recently some verses have been discovered, written by a contemporary on a leaf of register of the deliberations of Notre-Dame de Chartres, which reveal the impression produced by this policy on the minds of certain contemporaries: Jam Petri navais titubat, racio quia clavis. Errat; rex, papa, facti sunt unica capa, Declarant, do des Pilatus et alter Herodes. Philip IV, by his formal condemnation of the memory of Boniface VIII, appointed himself judge of the orthodoxy of the popes. It was laid down as a principle, says Geoffrey of Paris, that "the king is to submit to the spiritual power only if the pope is in the right faith." The adversaries of the "theocracy" of the Middle Ages hail Philip IV as its destroyer; and in their enthusiasm for him, by an extraordinary error, they proclaim him a precursor of modern liberty. On the contrary he was an absolutist in the fullest sense of the term. The Etats généraux of 1302, in which the Third Estate declared that the king had no superior on earth, were the precursors of the false Gallican theories of Divine right, so favorable to the absolutism of sovereigns. The civilization of the Middle Ages was based on a great principle, an essentially liberal principle, from which arose the political liberty of England; according to that principle, taxes before being raised by royal authority, ought to be approved by the tax-payers. Boniface VIII in the conflict of 1302 was only maintaining this principle, when he insisted on the consent of the clergy to the collection of the tithes. In the struggle between Philip and Boniface, Philip represents absolutism, Boniface the old medieval ideas of autonomy. "The reign of Philip IV," writes Renan, "is the reign which contributed most to form the France of the five succeeding centuries, with its good and bad qualities. The milites regis, those ennobled plebeians, became the agents of all important political business; the princes of the royal blood alone remained superior to or on an equality with them; the real nobility, which elsewhere established the parliamentary governments, was excluded from participating in the public policy." Renan is right in declaring that the first act of the French magistracy was "to diminish the power of the Church per fas et nefas" to establish the absolutism of the king; and that such conduct was for this magistracy "an original sin." Historiens de la France t. XX, XXIII; Langlois in Lavisse, Histoire de France, III (Paris 1903); Boutaric, La France sous Philippe le Bel (Paris, 1861); Renan, Etudes sur l'histoire religieuse du regne de Philippe le Bel (Paris, 1899); Wenck, Philippe der Schone von Frankreich, seine Personlichkeit und das Urteil der Zeitgenossen (Marbourg, 1905); Finke, Zur Charakteristik Philipps des Schonen in Mitteilungen des Instituts fur osterreichische Geschichte, XXVI (1905); Melanges sur le Regne de Philippe le Bel: recueil d'articles extraits du Moyen Age (Chalon-sur-Saone, 1906); Holtzman, Wilhelm von Nogaret (Freiburg im Br., 1897); Paris, Un proces criminel sous Philippe le Bel in Revue du Palais (Aug., 1908); Langlois, Les papiers de G. de Nogaret et de G. de Plaisians Tresor des Chartes (Notices et extraits des manuscrits), XXXIV; Langlois, Doleances du cleerge de France au temps de Philippe le Bel in Revue Bleue (9 Sept., and 14 Oct., 1905); Lizerand, Clement V et Philippe IV le Bel (Paris 1910); Arguillere, L'Appel au concile sous Philippe le Bel et la genese des theories conciliares in Revue des Questions Historiques (1911). GEORGES GOYAU St. Philip of Jesus St. Philip of Jesus Born in Mexico, date unknown; died at Nagasaki early in February, 1597. Though unusually frivolous as a boy, he joined the Discalced Franciscans of the Province of St. Didacus, founded by St. Peter Baptista, with whom he suffered martyrdom later. After some months in the Order, Philip grew tired of monastic life, left the Franciscans in 1589, took up a mercantile career, and went to the Philippines, where he led a life of pleasure. Later he desired to re-enter the Franciscans and was again admitted at Manila in 1590. After some years he was to have been ordained at the monastery in Mexico, the episcopal See of Manila being at that time vacant. He sailed, 12 July, 1596, but a storm drove the vessel upon the coast of Japan. The governor of the province confiscated the ship and imprisoned its crew and passengers, among whom were another Franciscan, Juan de Zamorra, two Augustinians, and a Dominican. The discovery of soldiers, cannon, and ammunition on the ship led to the suspicion that it was intended for the conquest of Japan, and that the missionaries were merely to prepare the way for the soldiers. This was also said, falsely and unwarrantably, by one of the crew (cf. JAPAN, CHRISTIANITY IN JAPAN, Catholicism). This enraged the Japanese Emperor Hideyoshi, generally called Taicosama by Europeans. He commanded, 8 December, 1596, the arrest of the Franciscans in the monastery at Miako, now Kyoto, whither St. Philip had gone. The religious were kept prisoners in the monastery until 30 December, when they were transferred to the city prison. There were six Franciscans, seventeen Japanese tertiaries, and the Japanese Jesuit, Paul Miki, with his two native servants. The ears of the prisoners were cropped on 3 January, 1597, and they were paraded through the streets of Kyoto; on 21 January they were taken to Osaka, and thence to Nagasaki, which they reached on 5 February. They were taken to a mountain near the city, "Mount of the Martyrs", bound upon crosses, after which they were pierced with spears. St. Philip was beatified in 1627 by Urban VIII, and, with his companions, canonized 8 June, 1862, by Pius IX. He is the patron saint of the city of Mexico. RIBADENEGRA, Historia de las Islas del Archipielago y Reynos de la Gran China, Tartaria . . . y Japon, V, VI (Barcelona, 1601); these are sometimes wrongly cited as Actas del martirio de San Pedro Bautista y sus companeros (Barcelona, 1601); Archivum franc. hist., I (Quaracchi, 1908), 536 sqq.; FRANCISCO DE S. ANTONIO, Chron. de la apostol. prov. de S. Gregorio . . . in Las Islas Philipinas, III (Manila, 1743), 31 sqq.; Acta SS., Feb.I, 723 sqq.; GERONIMO DE JESUS, Hist. della Christandad del Japon (1601); DA CIVEZZA, Saggio di Bibliog. Sanfrancesc. (Prato, 1879), 250, 590 sqq., 523; IDEM, Storia univ. delle missioni franc., VII, ii (Prato, 1891), 883 sqq.; DA ORIMA, Storia dei ventitre Martiri Giapponesi dell' Ord. Min. Osserv. (Rome, 1862); MELCHIORRI, Annal. Ord. Min. (Ancona, l869), 101 sqq. 218 sqq., 260 sqq. MICHAEL BIHL Philip of the Blessed Trinity Philip of the Blessed Trinity (ESPRIT JULIEN). Discalced Carmelite, theologian, born at Malaucene, near Avignon, 1603; died at Naples, 28 February, 1671. He took the habit at Lyons where he made his profession, 8 September, 1621. Choosing the missionary life, he studied two years at the seminary in Rome and proceeded in February, 1629, to the Holy Land and Persia, and thence to Goa where he became prior, and teacher of philosophy and theology. After the martyrdom of Dionysius, a Nativitate, his pupil, and Redemptus a Cruce, 29 Nov., 1638, Philip collected all available evidence and set out for Rome to introduce the cause of their beatification which, however, only terminated in 1900. He did not return to the mission, but was entrusted with important offices in France, in 1665, was elected general of the order with residence in Rome, and three years later, re-elected. While visiting all the provinces of his order, he was caught in a terrific gale off the coast of Calabria, and reached Naples in dying condition. Besides the classical languages he spoke fluently French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Persian, and Arabic. Of his numerous works the following have lasting value: "Summa philosophiae", 4 vols., Lyons, 1648, in which he follows not only the spirit but also the method of St. Thomas Aquinas; "Summa theologiae thomisticae", 5 vols., Lyons, 1653; "Summa theologiae mysticae", Lyons, 1656; reprinted in 3 vols., Paris, 1884; "Itinerarium orientale", Lyons, 1649, also in Italian and French; "Decor Carmeli religiosi", the lives of the saints and saintly members of his Order, Lyons, 1665; "Theologia carmelitana", Rome, 1665. The two last named and some smaller works dealing to some extent with historical matters of a controversial nature, called forth a reply from Pierre-Joseph de Haitze, under the titles "Des Moines empruntéz", and "Des Moines travestis". HENRICUS A SS.SACRAMENTO, Collectio Scriptorum Ord. Carmel. Excalc.II (Savona, 1884), 110. B. ZIMMERMAN Philippi Philippi (Gr. Phílippoi, Lat. Philippi). Philippi was a Macedonian town, on the borders of Thracia. Situated on the summit of a hill, it dominated a large and fertile plain, intersected by the Egnatian Way. It was north-west of Mount Pangea, near the River Gangites, and the Ægean Sea. In 358 b.c. it was taken, enlarged, and fortified by the King of Macedonia, Philip II, hence its name Philippi. Octavius Augustus (42 b.c.) conferred on it his jus Italicum (Acts, xiv, 12), which made the town a miniature Rome, and granted it the institutions and privileges of the citizens of Rome. That is why we find at Philippi, along with a remnant of the Macedonians, Roman colonists together with some Jews, the latter, however, so few that they had no synagogue, but only a place of prayer (proseuché). Philippi was the first European town in which St. Paul preached the Faith. He arrived there with Silas, Timothy, and Luke about the end of 52 a.d., on the occasion of his second Apostolic voyage. The Acts mention in particular a woman called Lydia of Thyatira, a seller of purple, in whose house St. Paul probably dwelt during his stay at Philippi. His labours were rewarded by many conversions (Acts, xvi), the most important taking place among women of rank, who seem to have retained their influence for a long time. The Epistle to the Philippians deals in a special manner with a dispute that arose between two of them, Evodia and Syntyche (iv, 2). In a disturbance of the populace, Paul and Silas were beaten with rods and cast into prison, from which being miraculously delivered, they set out for Thessalonica. Luke, however, continued to work for five years. The Philippians remained very attached and grateful to their Apostle and on several occasions sent him pecuniary aid (twice to Thessalonica, Phil., iv, 14-16; once to Corinth, II Cor., xi, 8-9; and once to Rome, Phil., iv, 10-18). See EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS). Paul returned there later; he visited them on his second journey, about 58, after leaving Ephesus (Acts, xx, 1-2). It is believed that he wrote his Second Epistle to the Corinthinas at Philippi, whither he returned on his way back to Jerusalem, passing Easter week there (Acts, xx, 5-6). He always kept in close communication with the inhabitants. Having been arrested at Cæsarea and brought to Rome, he wrote to them the Epistle we have in the New Testament, in which he dwells at great length on his predilection for them (i, 3, 7; iv, 1; etc.). Paul probably wrote them more letters than we possess; Polycarp, in his epistle to thte Philippians (II, 1 sq.), seems to allude to several letters (though the Greek word, 'epistolaí, is used also in speaking of a single letter), and Paul himself (Phil., iii, 1) seems to refer to previous writings. He hoped (i, 26; ii, 24) to revisit Philippi after his captivity, and he may have written there his First Epistle to Timothy (Tim., i, 3). Little is known of the subsequent history of the town. Later it was destroyed by the Turks; to-day nothing remains but some ruins. For bibliography see EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. A. Vander Herren Philippi, Titular See of Philippi A titular metropolitan see in Macedonia. As early as the sixth century b.c. we learn of a region called Datos, overrun by the inhabitants of Thasos, in which there was an outlying post called Crenides (the little springs), and a seaport, Neapolis or Cavala. About 460 b.c. Crenides and the country lying inland fell into the hands of the Thracians, who doubtless were its original inhabitants. In 360 b.c. the Thasians, aided by Callistratus the Athenian and other exiles, re-established the town of Datos, just when the discovery of auriferous deposits was exciting the neighbouring peoples. Philip of Macedonia took possession of it, and gave it his name, Philippi in the plural, as there were different sections of the town scattered at the foot of Mount Pangæus. He erected there a fortress barring the road between the Pangæus and the Hæmus. The gold mines, called Asyla, which were energetically worked, gave Philip an annual revenue of more than 1000 talents. In 168 b.c. the Romans captured the place. In the autumn of 42 b.c. the celebrated battle between the triumvirs and Brutus and Cassius was fought on the neighbouring marshy plain. In the first conflict Brutus triumphed over Octavius, whilst Antony repulsed Cassius, who committed suicide. Unable to maintain discipline in his army, and defeated twenty days later, Brutus also took his life. The same year a Roman colony was established there, which after the battle of Actium took the name of Colonia Augusta Julia Philippensis. When St. Ignatius of Antioch and the martyrs Zosimus and Rufus were passing through Philippi, St. Ignatius told the Christians of that town to send a letter of congratulation to the faithful of Antioch. They therefore wrote to Polycarp of Smyrna, asking him at the same time for the writings of St. Ignatius. Polycarp answered them in a letter, still extant, which was written before the death of St. Ignatius. Although the Church of Philippi was of Apostolic origin, it was never very important; it was a suffragan bishopric of Thessalonica. Towards the end of the ninth century it ranked as a metropolitan see and had six suffragan dioceses; in the fifteenth century it had only one, the See of Eleutheropolis. The Archdiocese of Cavala was reunited to the metropolis in December, 1616. In 1619, after a violent dispute with the Metropolitan of Drama, Clement, the titular of Philippi, got permission to assume the title of Drama also, and this was retained by the Metropolitan of Philippi until after 1721, when it was suppressed and the metropolis of Drama alone continued. In the "Echos d'Orient", III, 262-72, the writer of this article compiled a critical list of the Greek titulars of Philippi, containing sixty-two names, whereas only eighteen are given in Le Quien, "Oriens christianus", II, 67-70. Some Latin titulars are cited in Eubel, "Hierarchia catholica medii ævi", I, 418; II, 238; III, 291; Le Quien, op. cit., III, 1045. In the middle of the fourteenth century, Philippi is mentioned in connexion with the wars between John V, Palæologus, and Cantacuzenus, who has left a description of it (P. G., CLIV, 336). The ruins of Philippi lie near the deserted hamlet of Filibedjik, fifteen kilometres from Cavala, in the vilayet of Salonica; they contain the remains of the acropolis, a theatre anterior to the Roman occupations, a temple of Sylvanus, and numerous sculptured rocks bearing inscriptions. LEAKE, Northern Greece, III, 215-23; SMITH, Dict, of Gr. and Rom. Geog., s. v.; SEGNITZ, De Philippensibus tanquam luminaria in mundo (Leipzig, 1728); HOOG, De coetus christianorum Philippensis conditione prima (Leyden, 1823); HEUZEY, Mission archéologique de Macédoine (Paris, 1876), 1-124; MERTZIDÈS, Philippes (Constantinople, 1897), in Greek; TOMASCHEK, Zur Kunde der Hoemus-Halbinsel (Vienna, 1897), 77; FILLION in Dict. de la Bible. s. v. S. VAILHÉ. Philippine Islands Philippine Islands Situation and Area. The Philippine Islands lie between 116° 40' and 126° and 34' E. long., and 4° 40' and 21° 10' N. lat. The islands are washed by the China Sea on the north and the west, the Pacific Ocean on the east, and the Sea of Celebes on the south. They are nearly south of Japan, and north of Borneo and the Celebes, with which they are connected by three partly-submerged isthmuses. The archipelago belongs to the same geographic region as Borneo, Sumatra, and Java, and therefore to Asia rather than to Oceanica. In all there are 3141 islands; 1668 of them are listed by name. Luzon has an area of 40,969 sq. miles; Mindanao, 36,292 sq. m. Nine islands have an area between 1000-10,000 sq m; 20 between 100 and 1000 sq. m.; 73 between 10 and 100 sq. m.; and 262 between 1 and 10 sq. m. The remaining 2775 islands are each less than 1 sq. m. The total area of the islands is 115,026 sq. m. The extent of the Earth's surface included by the boundaries of the treaty lines is about 800,000 sq.m. Physical Geography -- Fauna and Flora. The scenery of the islands, especially Luzon, is very beautiful. The greatest known elevation, Mt. Apo, in Mindanao, is over 10,000 ft.; it was ascended for the first time by Father Mateo Gisbert, S.J., accompanied by two laymen, in 1880. There are twenty well-known and recent volcanic cones, twelve of them more or less active. Mayon Volcano, about 8000 ft., is probably the most beautiful symmetrical volcanic cone in the world. There are no very large rivers; the Cagayan of northern Luzon and the Rio Grande and the Agusan, both in Mindanao, are more than 200 miles in length. The largest lakes are Laguna de Bay, near Manila, and Laguna de Lanao, in Mindanao; the surface of the latter is 2200 ft above sea-level. Laguna de Bombon, in Batangas Province, Luzon, is the crater of an immense volcano, of roughly elliptical shape, seventeen by twelve miles. On an island in the lake is the active volcano of Taal. The fauna of the Philippines resembles that of the neighboring Malayan Islands to a certain extent. Two-thirds of the birds of the Philippines are peculiar to them; what is more strange is that 286 species of birds found in Luzon, at least fifty-one are not to be met with in any other part of the archipelago. The flora of the islands is similar to that of Java, Sumatra, and Borneo, but with differences sufficiently numerous to give it a marked individuality. Forests form seven-tenths of the area of the archipelago; they embrace a great variety of woods, many of them highly valuable. Mineral Resources. Coal is found in many parts of the islands. two mines are now in operation on the small island of Batan, Albay Province, Southern Luzon. The total output in the Philippines during 1909 was valued at nearly $100,000. About $250,000 worth of gold was mined the same year. Iron is also found, the product in 1909 being worth a little more than $15,000. Climate. The climate is, generally speaking, tropical, although there are points in the islands where it cannot strictly be so termed. The mean temperature in Manila during the period 1883-1902 was 80°F.; the average maximum during the same time was 97° and minimum 63°. The average rainfall in Manila is something more than 75 inches. Baguio, Province of Benguet, has been called the Simla of the Philippines. Climatic conditions are so favourable that the commission and assembly held their sessions there this year (1910) during the warm months. The mean minimum temperatures of four months of the year are lower in Baguio than at Simla, and almost equal for two other months. The monthly means are nearly equal for the two places during five months. Railways. Railway lines are in operation in Luzon, Panay, Cebu, and Negros, about four hundred miles in all. Population. A census of the islands taken in 1903 estimates the population at 7,635,426, of whom 6,987,686 are classed as civilized and 647,740 are wild. There are no question in Spanish times about the number of Christians; but a difference in opinion prevails about the number of the wild people. An estimate published in Madrid in 1891 puts down the non-civilized tribes (Moros included) at 1,400,000. According to the Director of the Census of 1903, there has been tendency to exaggerate; he admits that the number 647,740 is possibly too small, but that it is probably within ten per cent of the true number. Wild Tribes. The Negritos are believed to have been the aborigines of the islands. There remains about 23,000 of these, leading to-day a primitive life, nomadic within a certain district, living in groups of twenty or thirty under a chief. They are a race of dwarfs, four feet eight inches in height. They are of sooty black colour, their hair woolly, their toes almost as prehensile as fingers. The Negritos, it is thought, once occupied the entire archipelago, but were driven back into the mountains by the Malays. Among other wild tribes may be mentioned the Igorottes in Northern Luzon, some of whom are head-hunters. They are an industrious and warlike race. Belgian missionaries have been working among them in the past few years with considerable fruit. The Ibilao or Ilongot is noted for his bloodthirsty propensities; the Ifugaos are said to resemble the Japanese in appearance. They use the lasso with great dexterity, and with it capture the luckless traveler, decapitate him, and add the head to their collection. They wear as many rings in their ears as they have taken heads. In Palawan (Paragua) the most numerous tribe is that of the Tagbanuas, many of whom have been Christianized. The Manguianes occupy the interior of Mindoro; they are a docile race and do not flee from civilized man. Among the wild tribes of Mindanao may be mentioned the Manobos, Bagobos, Bukidnons, Tirurays, and Subanos. They are classed as Indonesians by some ethnologists. Slavery is practised, and human sacrifices are known to have taken place within the past few years. The Moros or Mohammedan Malays chiefly inhabit Mindanao and the Sulu archipelago, though they are found also in Basilan and Palawan. They were professional pirates, and advanced as far as Manila at the time of the arrival of the Spaniards. They killed large numbers of Filipinos, and carried others into slavery. Until within about sixty years ago, when Spanish gunboats of light draught were introduced, they made marauding excursions into the Visayan islands (Panay, Negros, Cebu, Bohol, Leyte, Samar, etc.), carrying off a thousand captives as slaves annually. They were the great obstacle to the civilization of Mindanao. The Moro is possessed of much physical strength, is indifferent to bloodshed, too proud to work, and extremely fanatical. Many of them build their towns in the water, with movable bamboo bridges connected with the shore. Flanking their settlements they build cottas or forts. The walls of some of these were twenty-four feet thick and thirty feet high. The United States Government respects the Moro custom of discarding the hat, by permitting the Moro Constabulary (military police) to wear a Turkish fex and to go barefoot. Extensive missionary work has been done by the Jesuits in Mindanao. Previous to the American occupation, they ministered to 200,000 Christians in various parts of the islands. Even among the Moros their efforts were successful and in one year (1892) they baptized 3000 Moros in the district of Davao. They established two large orphan asylums, one for boys and the other for girls, at Tamontaca, where liberated slave-children were trained to a useful life, and which later formed the basis of new Christian villages. For lack of support, a great deal of this work had to be abandoned with the withdrawal of Spanish sovereignty from the islands. Christian Tribes. The inhabitants of Luzon and adjacent islands are the Tagalogs, Pampangans, Bicols, Pangasinans, Ilocanos, Ibanags or Cagayanes, and Zambales. The most important of these are the Tagalogs, who number about a million and a half; the Pampangans, about 400,000, excel in agriculture; the Bicols in South-eastern Luzon were, according to Blumentritt, the first Malays in the Philippines; the Pangasinans, in the province of that name, number about 300,000; the Ilocanos, an industrious race, occupy the north-western coast of Luzon; the Ibanags, said to be the finest race and the most valiant men in the islands (Sawyer), dwell in the Northern and Eastern Luzon. The Zambales were famous head-hunters at the time of the Spanish conquest, and made drinking-cups out of their enemies' skulls. They number about 100,000. The Visayan Islands are inhabited by the Visayas, the most numerous tribe of the Philippines. Fewer wild people are found among them than in other portions of the archipelago. The population is about 3,000,000. There is a strong resemblance, mentally, morally, and physically, between individuals of the Visayas, but there is a great difference in their languages, a Visayan in Cebu, for instance will not understand a Visayan of Panay. For all that, it is said that the Filipinos had a common racial origin and at one time a common language. Physically, the Filipinos are of medium height, although tall men are to be found among them; especially in the mountain districts. Generally speaking, they are of a brownish colour, with black eyes, prominent cheek bones, the nose flat rather than arched or straight, nostrils wide and full mouth inclined to be large, lips full, good teeth, and round chin. The following estimates of the Filipinos are selected from the United States Census Report of 1903. The first gives an appreciation of the people shortly after the arrival of the Spaniards and before they were Christianized. The second and third are the views of an American and an Englishman, respectively, of the Christianized Filipino before and at the time of the American occupation. (1) Legaspi, after four years' residence, writes thus of the natives of Cebu: "They are a crafty and treacherous race....They are a people extremely vicious, fickle, untruthful, and full of other superstitions. No law binds relative to relative, parents to children, or brother to brother....If a man in some time of need shelters a relative or a brother in his house, supports him, and provides him with food for a few days, he will consider that relative as his slave from that time on....At times they sell their own children....Privateering and robbery have a natural attraction to them....I believe that these natives could be easily subdued by good treatment and the display of kindness". (2) Hon. Dean C. Worcester was in the Philippines in 1887-88 and 1890-93. He says: "The traveler cannot fail to be impressed by his (the Filipino's) open-handed and cheerful hospitality. He will go to any amount of trouble, and often to no little expense, in order to accommodate some perfect stranger. If cleanliness be next to godliness, he has much to recommend him. Hardly less noticeable than the almost universal hospitality are the well-regulated homes and the happy family life which one soon finds to be the rule. Children are orderly, respectful, and obedient to their parents. The native is self-respecting and self-restrained to a remarkable degree....he is patient under misfortune and forbearing under provocation....He is a kind father and a dutiful son. His aged relatives are never left in want, but are brought to his home and are welcome to share the best that it affords to the end of their days". (3) Frederick H. Sawyer lived for fourteen years in the Philippines; he writes: "The Filipino possessed a great deal of self-respect, and his demeanour is quiet and decorous. He is polite to others and expects to be treated politely himself. He is averse to rowdyism or horseplay of any kind, and avoids giving offence. For an inhabitant of the tropics, he is fairly industrious, sometimes even very hard-working. Those who have seen him poling cascos against the stream of the Pasig will admit this. He is a keen sportsman, and will readily put his money on his favourite horse or gamecock; he is also addicted to other forms of gambling. The position taken by women in a community is often considered as a test of the degree of civilization it has attained. Measured by this standard, the Filipinos come out well, for among them the wife exerts great influence in the family and the husband rarely completes any important business without her concurrence. "The Filipinos treat their children with great kindness and forbearance. Those who are well-off show much anxiety to secure a good education for their sons and even for their daughters. Parental authority extends to the latest period in life. I have seen a man of fifty years come as respectfully as a child to kiss the hands of his aged parents when the vesper bell sounded, and this notwithstanding the presence of several European visitors in the house. Children, in return, show great respect to both parents, and some morning and evening to kiss their hands. They are trained in good manners from their earliest youth, both by precept and example". History. The islands were discovered 16 March, 1521, by Ferdinand Magellan. Several other expeditions followed, but they were fruitless. In 1564 Legaspi sailed from Mexico for the Philippines. He was accompanied by the Augustinian friar Urdaneta. As a layman this celebrated priest had accompanied the expedition of Loaisa in 1524, which visited Mindanao and the Moluccas. Legaspi landed in Cebu in 1565. The islands had been called San Lazaro by Magellan; Villalobos, who commanded an expedition from Mexico, called the island at which he touched Filipina, in honour of Prince Philip. This name was extended to the whole archipelago by Legaspi, who was sent out by the former prince then ruling as Philip II. Though there were not wanting indications of hostility and distrust towards the Spaniards from the inhabitants of Cebu, Legaspi succeeded in winning their friendship after a few months. Later, in 1569, he removed the seat of government to Iloilo. He sent his nephew Juan Salcedo to explore the islands to the north. Salcedo's report to his uncle was favourable and in 1571 Legaspi, leaving the affairs of government in the hands of the natives, proceeded north and founded the city of Maynila, later Manila. Legaspi immediately set about the organization of the new colony; he appointed rulers of provinces, arranged for yearly voyages to New Spain, and other matters pertaining to the welfare of the country. In his work for pacification he was greatly aided by the friars who were then beginning the work of Christian civilization in the Philippines which was to go on for several centuries. Legaspi died in 1574. To him belongs the glory of founding the Spanish sovereignty in the islands. He was succeeded by Lavezares. About this time, the Chinese pirate Li-ma-hon invaded Luzon, with a fleet of over sixty vessels and about 6000 people. A storm that met the fleet as it neared Manila wrecked some of his boats, but Li-ma-hon proceeded on his journey and landed 1500 men. Repulsed in two attacks by the Spaniards, Li-ma-hon went north and settled in Pangasinan province. The following year (1575) Salcedo was sent against them; he defeated them and drove the fleeing Chinese into the mountains. A few years later the arrival of the first bishop is chronicled, the Dominican Salazar, one of the greatest figures in the history of the Philippines; he was accompanied by a few Jesuits (1581). The Augustinians had come with Legaspi, the Franciscans arrived in 1577, and the Dominicans in 1587. By unanimous vote of the entire colony the Jesuit Sanchez was sent to Spain to explain to Philip II the true state of affairs in the islands. His mission was entirely successful; Philip was persuaded to retain his new possessions, which many of his advisers were counseling him to relinquish. In 1591 an ambassador came from Japan demanding that tribute be paid that country. This the new governor Dasmarinas refused, but the drew up a treaty instead that was satisfactory to both parties. An expedition that started out against the Moluccas in 1593 ended disastrously. On the voyage some of the Chinese crew mutinied, killed Dasmarinas and took the ship to China. Dasmarinas built the fortress of Santiago, Manila, and fortified the city with stone walls. He was succeeded by his son Luis. During his governorship the convent of Santa Isabel, a school and home for children of Spanish soldiers was founded (1594). It exists to this day. The Audiencia or Supreme Court was re-established about this time. As it was appointed from Mexico and supported from the islands it had proved too great a drain on the resources of the colony, and so had been suppressed after the visit of the Jesuit Sanchez to Philip II. The last years of the sixteenth and the beginning of the seventeenth centuries were marked by the seizure, by the Japanese, of the richly-laden Spanish vessel from the islands. It had sought shelter in a storm in a port of that country. The crew were put to death. Then there was a fruitless expedition against Cambodia; a naval fight against two Dutch pirate-ships, one of which was captured; and a conspiracy of the Chinese against the Spaniards. The force of the latter, 130 in number, was defeated, and every man of them decapitated. The Chinese were repulsed later, and it is said that 23,000 of them were killed. The Recollect Fathers arrived in Manila in 1606. During the first half of the seventeenth century the colony had to struggle against internal and external foes; the Dutch in particular, the Japanese, the Chinese, the Moros, the natives of Bohol, Leyte, and Cagayan. A severe earthquake destroyed Manila in 1645. In spite of the difficulties against which the islands had to struggle, the work of the evangelization went rapidly forward. The members of the various religious orders, with a heroism rarely paralleled even in the annals of Christian missions, penetrated farther and farther into the interior of the country, and established their missions in what had been centres of Paganism. The natives were won by the self-sacrificing lives of the missionaries, and accepted the teachings of Christianity in great numbers. Books were written in the native dialects, schools were everywhere established, and every effort employed for the material and moral improvement of the people. From the time of the fearless Salazar, the missionaries had always espoused the cause of the natives against the injustices and exactions of the individual rulers. It is not strange, therefore, that trouble arose at times between the civil and ecclesiastical authorities. As these misunderstandings grew from the mistakes of individuals, they were not of long duration, and they did not in any way interfere with the firmer control of the islands which Spain was year by year obtaining, or with the healthy growth of the Church throughout the archipelago. Spanish sovereignty in the Philippines was threatened by the capture of Manila by the British under Draper in 1762. There were only 600 Spanish soldiers to resist a force of 6000 British with their Indian allies. Their depredations were so dreadful that Draper put a stop to them after three days. The city remained under British sovereignty until 1764. There were several uprisings by the natives during the beginning of the nineteenth century. One of the most serious of these was that headed by Apolinario de la Cruz, who called himself King of the Tagalogs. By attributing to himself supernatural power, he gathered about him a large number of deluded fanatics, men, women, and children. He was apprehended and put to death. An event of great importance was the introduction in 1860 of shallow-draught steel gunboats to be used against the piratical Moros of Mindanao. For centuries they had ravaged the Visayan islands, carrying off annually about a thousand prisoners. A severe earthquake in Manila in 1863 destroyed the chief public buildings, the cathedral, and other churches, except that of San Agustin. Some native clergy participated in a serious revolt against Spanish authority which occurred in Cavite in 1872. Three Filipino priests who were implicated in the uprising, Gomez, Zamora, and Burgos, were executed. It is said that the spirit of insurrection which manifested itself so strongly during the last quarter of the nineteenth century was the result of the establishment of certain secret societies. The first Masonic lodge of the Philippines was founded in Cavite in 1860. Lodges were later formed at Zamboanga (in Mindanao), Manila, and Cebu. Europeans only were admitted at first, but afterwards natives were received. The lodges were founded by anti-clericals, and naturally anti-clericals flocked largely to the standard. There was no idea then of separation from the mother country, but only of a more liberal form of government. After the insurrection at Cavite in 1872, the Spanish Masons separated themselves from the revolutionary ones. New societies were gradually formed, the most celebrated being the Liga Filipina, founded by the popular hero Dr. Rizal. Practically all the members were Masons, and men of means and education. A more powerful society and a powerful factor in the insurrection of 1896, recalling the American Ku Klux Klan, was the Katipunan. Its symbol KKK was literally anti-Spanish, for there is no K in Spanish. The full title of the society was "The Sovereign Worshipful Association of the Sons of the Country". The members (from 10,000 to 50,000) were poor people who subscribed little sums monthly for the purchase of arms, etc. Later a woman's lodge was organized. According to Sawyer "the Katipunan adopted some of the Masonic paraphernalia, and some of its initiatory ceremonies, but were in no sense Masonic lodges" (p.83). In 1896 another insurrection broke out near Manila, in Cavite province. Aguinaldo, a young school teacher, became prominent about this time. The spirit of revolt spread through the neighbouring provinces; there were several engagements, until finally, Aguinaldo, at the head of the remnant of rebels, left Cavite and took refuge near Angat in the Province of Bulacan. As it would have taken a long time to dislodge them, a method of conciliation was adopted. The result was the pact of Biak-na-bato, signed 14 Dec., 1897. By the terms of this agreement the Filipinos were not to plot against Spanish sovereignty for a period of three years; Aguinaldo and other followers were to be deported, for a period to be fixed by Spain. In return they were to receive the sum of $500,000 as indemnity; and those who had not taken up arms were to be given $350,000 as reimbursement for the losses they had incurred. The leaders of the insurrection of 1896 exercised despotic power, and ill-treated and robbed those of their countrymen who would not join them. Andres Bonifacio, the president of the Katipunan, ultimately became a victim of these despots. Thirty thousand Filipinos are reported to have lost their lives in the rebellion of 1896. In 1898 hostilities broke out between Spain and the United States. On 24 April, 1898, Aguinaldo met the American Consul at Singapore, Mr. Pratt; two days later he proceeded to Hong Kong. The American squadron under Commodore (now Admiral) Dewey destroyed the Spanish ships in Manila Bay. Aguinaldo and seventeen followers landed at Cavite from the United States vessel Hugh McCullough and were furnished arms by Dewey. Aguinaldo proclaimed dictatorial government, and asked recognition from foreign powers. The American troops took Manila on 13 August. A treaty of peace was signed at Paris by the terms of which the Philippines were ceded to the United States, and the latter paid Spain the sum of $20,000,000. It was later discovered that certain islands near Borneo were not included in the boundaries fixed by the peace commission. These were also ceded to the United States, which paid an additional $100,000. The Filipinos had organized a government of their own, the capital being Malolos, in the Province of Bulacan. Fighting between them and the Americans began on 4 Feb., 1899; but by the end of the year, all organized opposition was practically at an end. Aguinaldo was captured in April, 1901, and on 1 July of the same year the insurrection was declared to be extinct, the administration was turned over to the civil Government, and Judge Taft (now President) was appointed governor. American Government: General. The Spanish laws remain in force to-day, except as changed by military order, Act of Congress, or Act of the Philippine Commission. The first Philippine Commission was appointed by President McKinley Jan., 1899. The second Philippine Commission was sent to the islands in 1900. Its object was to establish a civil government based on the recommendations of the first commission. The principles that were to guide this commission are thus expressed in the following instructions given them: "The Commission should bear in mind that the government that they are establishing is designed not for our satisfaction or for the expression of our theoretical views, but for the happiness, peace, and prosperity of the people of the Philippine Islands, and the measures adopted should be made to conform to their customs, their habits, and even their prejudices, to the fullest extent consistent with the indispensable requisites of just and effective government." "No laws shall be made respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, and that the free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship without discrimination or preference shall for ever be allowed." This was confirmed by Act of Congress 1 July, 1902, in almost identical words (section 5). The members of the commission are appointed by the president, with the consent of the Senate; their tenure of office is at the pleasure of the president. There are nine commissioners, one of whom is the governor-general (the chief executive of the Philippine Islands), and four are secretaries of the departments of the Interior, of Commerce and Police, of Finance and Justice, and of Public Instruction. Each of these departments is divided into bureaus of which there are twenty-three in all. Through these the actual administration of the affairs of the Government is carried on. On 16 Oct., 1907, the Philippine Assembly was inaugurated. The assembly shares legislative power with the commission over all parts of the islands "not inhabited by the Moros or other non-Christian tribes". Over the Moros and the non-Christian tribes the commission alone has power. The legislative power of the commission and assembly over the Christian tribes is equal. No law may be made without the approval of both houses. If at any session the annual appropriation for the support of the Government shall not have been made, an amount equal to the last annual appropriation is considered thereby appropriated for the ensuing year. The members of the assembly are elected by popular vote. The right to this suffrage is extended to all male citizens of the Philippine Islands or of the United States, over twenty-three years of age, who possess at least one of the following qualifications: (1) ability to speak, read, and write English or Spanish; (2) ownership of real property to the value of $250 or the payment of $15 annually of the established taxes; (3) holding of municipal office under the Spanish Government in the Philippines. All acts passed by the commission and by the assembly are enacted by the authority of the United States Congress, which reserves the power and authority to annul them. The assembly may consist of not less than fifty nor more than a hundred members. Each province is entitled to one delegate; and if its population is more than 90,000, to an additional member for every extra 90,000 and major fraction thereof. There are at present eighty delegates, Manila is counted as a province. Thirty-one delegates are from the Visayan Islands, and forty-four from Luzon. The commission and assembly are authorized to send two commissioners to the United States to represent the interests of the Philippines at Washington. American Government: Provincial. According to their form of government, the islands are divided into three classes: the Christian provinces, the non-Christian provinces, and the Moro provinces. The officers of the Christian province are the governor, the treasurer, the third member of the provincial board, and the fiscal or district attorney. The governor and third member are elected to office; the treasurer and fiscal are appointed by the governor of the Philippine Islands with the consent of the Commission; the tenure of their office depends upon the governor-general. Any provincial officer may be suspended or removed from office by the governor-general for sufficient cause. The provincial governor, the treasurer, and the third member form the provincial board, which legislates in a limited way for the province. The non-Christian tribes are under a governor, secretary, treasurer, supervisor and fiscal. In some provinces there is also a lieutenant-governor. These officers are appointed by the governor-general with the consent of the commission. The Moro province includes the greater part of Mindanao, the whole of the Sulu Archipelago, and smaller groups of islands. The inhabitants number 500,000, half of them Moros; the remainder, with the exception of some thousand Christians, are wild tribes. The Government of the Moro province is civil-military. It is divided into five districts, each with its governor and secretary, appointed by the governor of the province. On the legislative council of the entire province there is, besides the governor, a secretary, treasurer, and attorney. While the governor-general appoints these officers, the two first named are usually officers of the United States army detailed for this purpose. The district officers are also usually detailed from the army. Courts of Justice. There is no trial by jury in the Philippine Islands. There are three classes of courts of justice: justice-of-the-peace courts, courts of first instance, and the supreme court; a justice of the peace must be at least twenty-three years of age. he is appointed by the governor from a number of individuals whose names are presented by a judge of the court of first instance, and by the director of education. Among his powers is that of performing marriage ceremonies. The courts of first instance try appeals from the lower court and cases in which they have original jurisdiction. These judges are appointed by the governor with the approval of the commission. Supreme Court. This court is composed of one chief justice and six associates. Important cases may be appealed from it to the Supreme Court of the United States. The supreme court rarely hears witnesses, but examines the written testimony made before the lower court, and listens to arguments of the opposing lawyers. The supreme court may not merely reverse or affirm the decision of the lower court, but it may even change the degree and kind of punishment. A defendant, for instance, sentenced to imprisonment for life or for twenty years may, and sometimes does, have his sentence changed on appeal to the supreme court to the death penalty. Religion. Before the arrival of the Spaniards the religion of the islands was similar to that of the majority of the Chinese, Japanese, and Malayans. They were worshippers of the souls of their ancestors, of the sun, the moon, the stars, plants, birds, and animals. Among the deities of the Tagalogs were: a blue bird, called Bathala (divinity); the crow, called Maylupa (lord of the earth); the alligator, called Nono (grandfather). They adored in common with other Malayans the tree Balete, which they did not dare cut. They had idols in their houses, called anito, and by the Visayans, diuata. There were anitos of the country who permitted them to pass over it; anitos of the fields who gave fertility to the soil; anitos of the sea who fed the fishes and guarded boats; and anitos to look after the house and newly-born infants. The anitos were supposed to be the souls of their ancestors. Their story of the origin of the world was that the sky and the water were walking together; a kite came between them, and in order to keep the waters from rising to the sky, placed upon them the islands, the Filipinos' idea of the world. The origin of man came about in the following manner: a piece of bamboo was floating on the water; the water cast it at the feet of a kite; the kite in anger broke the bamboo with its beak; out of one piece came man, and out of the other woman. The souls of the dead were supposed to feed on rice and tuba (a native liquor), thus food was placed at the graves of the dead, a custom which still survives among some of the uncivilized tribes of Mindanao. The ministers of religion were priestesses -- crafty and diabolical old women, who offered sacrifices of animals and even of human beings. Sacrifices of animals still occur among the tribes; and accounts of recent human sacrifice will be found in the reports of the Philippine Commission. The superstitions of the Filipinos were numerous. In Supreme Case no. 5381 there is given the testimony of Igorottes, who before starting to murder a man, a couple of years ago, killed some chickens and examined their entrails to discover if the time was favourable for the slaying of a man. The hooting of owls, the hissing of lizards, and the sight of a serpent had a supernatural signification. One of the most feared of the evil spirits was the asuang, which was supposed to capture children or lonely travelers. A fuller description of these superstitions is given in Delgado, "Historia General de las Islas Filipinas" (Manila, 1894), bk. III, xvi, xvii, and in Blumentritt, "Mythological Dictionary". As might be expected from idolatrous tribes in a tropical climate, the state of morality was low; wives were bought and sold, and children did not hesitate to enslave their own parents. It was on material such as this that the Spanish missionaries had to work. A Christian Malay race, a people that from the lower grade of savagery had advanced to the highest form of civilization, was the result of their efforts. Up to the year 1896 the Augustinians had founded 242 towns, with a population of more than 2,000,000. There were 310 religious of the order; this includes (and the same applies to the following figures) lay brothers, students, and invalids. The Franciscans number 455 in 153 towns, with a population of a little more than a million; there were 206 Dominicans in 69 towns, with about 700,000 inhabitants; 192 Recollects in 194 towns, with a population of 1,175,000; 167 Jesuits who ministered to about 200,000 Christians in the missions of Mindanao. The total religious therefore in 1906 was 1330 to look after a Catholic population of more than 5,000,000 while secular clergy were in charge of nearly a million more. The members of the religious orders in the Philippines in 1906 did not amount to 500. The condition of the Filipino people, as they were prior to the revolution of 1896, forms the best argument in favour of the labours of the religious orders. The islands were not conquered by force; the greater part of the fighting was to protect the natives from enemies from without. It was not until 1822 that there was a garrison of Spanish troops in the archipelago. And, as all impartial historians admit, the small number of troops needed was due solely to the religious influence of the priests over the people. The total strength of American regiments in the Philippines in 1910, including the Philippine Scouts, was 17,102. To this should be added more than 4000 members of the Philippine Constabulary, a military police necessary for the maintenance of order. Besides their far-reaching influence for peace, the religious orders did notable work in literature and science. Father Manuel Blance, an Augustinian, was the author of "Flora Filipina", a monumental work in four folio volumes, illustrated with hundreds of coloured plates reproduced from water-colour paintings of the plants of the Philippines. Father Rodrigo Aganduru Moriz, a Recollect (Augustinian Discalced), (1584-1626), after evangelizing the natives of Bataan, and founding houses of his order in Manila and Cebu, and missions in Mindanao, set sail from the Philippines. He spent some time in Persia, where he brought back numerous schismatics to the Faith and converted many infidels. Arriving in Rome, Urban VIII wished to send him back to Persia as Apostolic delegate with some religious of his order, but he died a few months later at the age of forty-two. Among his works are: "A General History of the Philippines", in two volumes; "The Persecution in Japan"; a book of sermons; a grammar and dictionary of a native dialect; "Origin of the Oriental Empires"; "Chronology of Oriental Kings and Kingdoms"; a narrative of his travels written for Urban VIII; a collection of maps of various islands, seas, and provinces; the work of the Augustinians (Discalced) in the conversion of the Philippines and of Japan; a family book of medicine for the use of Filipinos. The number of Augustinian authors alone, until 1780 was 131, and the books published by them more than 200 in nine native dialects, more than 100 in Spanish, besides a number of volumes in the Chinese and Japanese languages. How extensive and how varied were the missionary, literary, and scientific works of the members of the religious orders may be gathered from their chronicles. The Philippines constitute an ecclesiastical province, of which the Archbishop of Manila is the metropolitan. The suffragan sees are: Jaro; Nueva Caceres; Nueva Segovia; Cebu, Calbayog; Lipa; Tuguegarao; Zamboanga; and the Prefecture Apostolic of Palawan. There are over a thousand priests, and a Catholic population of 6,000,000. (See Cebu; Jaro; Manila, Archdiocese of; Manila Observatory; Nueva Caceres; Nueva Segovia; Palawan; Samar and Leyte; Tuguegarao; Zamboanga.) The Diocese of Lipa (Lipensis). The Diocese of Lipa, erected 10 April, 1910, comprises the Provinces of Batangas, La Laguna, Tayabas (with the Districts of Infanta and Principe), Mindoro, and the sub-Province of Marinduque, formerly parts of the Archdiocese of Manila. Rt. Rev Joseph Petrelli, D.D., the first bishop, was appointed 12 April, 1910, and consecrated at Manila, 12 June, 1910. There are 95 parishes; the Discalced Augustinians have charge of 14, and the Capuchins of 6. The diocese comprises 12,208 sq.m.; about 640,000 Christians; and 9000 non-Christians. Aglipayanism. The Aglipayano sect caused more annoyance than damage to the Church in the Philippines. The originator of the schism was a native priest, Gregorio Aglipay. He was employed as a servant in the Augustinian house, Manila, and being of ingratiating manners was educated and ordained priest. Later he took the field as an insurgent general. Being hard pressed by the American troops he surrendered and was paroled in 1901. In 1902 he arrogated himself the title of "Pontifex Maximus", and through friendship or fear drew to his allegiance some native priests. Those of the latter who were his friends he nominated "bishops". Simeon Mandac, one of the two lay pillars of the movement, is now serving a term of twenty years in the penitentiary for murder and rebellion. At first the schism seemed to make headway in the north, chiefly for political reasons. With the restoration of the churches under order of the Supreme Court in 1906-07 the schism began to dwindle, and its adherents are now inconsiderable. Religious Policy of the Government. Freedom of worship and separation of Church and State is a principle of the American Government. In a country where there was the strictest union of Church and State for more than three centuries, this policy is not without serious difficulties. At times ignorant officials may act as if the Church must be separated from her rights as a lawful corporation existing in the State. In some such way as this several Catholic churches were seized, with the connivance or the open consent of municipal officers, by adherents of the Aglipayano sect. It required time and considerable outlay of money for the Church to regain possession of her property through the courts. And even then the aggressors often succeeded in damaging as much as possible the church buildings or its belongings before surrendering them. There is no distinction or privilege accorded clergymen, except that they are precluded from being municipal councilors. However: "there shall be exempt from taxation burying grounds, church and their adjacent parsonages or convents, and lands and buildings used exclusively for religious charitable, scientific, or educational purposes and not for private profit". This does not apply to land or buildings owned by the Church to procure revenue for religious purposes, e.g. the support of a hospital, orphan asylum, etc., so that glebe land is taxable. The only exception made in the matter of free imports for church purposes is that Bibles and hymn books are admitted free of duty. Practically everything needed in the services of the Catholic Church, vestments, sacred vessels, altars, statues, pictures, etc. pay duty, if such goods are not purchased from or manufactured in the United States. Religious corporations or associations, of whatever sect or denomination, were authorized to hold land by an act of the commission passed in October, 1901. In April, 1906, the law of corporations came into force. Under this Act (no. 1459) a bishop, chief, priest, or presiding elder of any religious denomination, can become a corporation sole by filing articles of incorporation holding property in trust for the denomination. Authority is also given to any religious society or order, or any diocese, synod, or organization to incorporate under specified conditions to administer its temporalities. The same act empowers colleges and institutes of learning to incorporate. All cemeteries are under the control of the Bureau of Health. By an Act passed in Feb., 1906, existing cemeteries and burial grounds were to be closed unless authorized by the director of health; municipalities were empowered, subject to the same authority, to set apart land for a municipal burial ground, and to make by-laws without discriminating against race, nationality, or religion. The church burial grounds had generally to be enlarged or new ones consecrated, and individual graves indicated and allotted. The right to hold public funerals and to take the remains into church was not to be abridged or interfered with, except in times of epidemics or in case of contagious or infectious diseases, when a public funeral might be held at the grave after an hour had elapsed from the actual interment. The right of civil marriage was established in 1898, by order of General Otis. The certificate of marriage, by whomsoever celebrated, must be filed with the civil authorities. The forbidden degrees extend to half-blood and step-parents. A subsequent marriage while husband or wife is alive is illegal and void, unless the former marriage has been annulled or dissolved, or by presumption of death after seven years' absence. There is no express provision for divorce; but marriages may be annulled by order of judges of the court of first instance for impediments existing at the time of marriage, such as being under the age of consent (fourteen years for boys, twelve years for girls), insanity, etc. The local health officer shall report to the municipal president "all births that may come to his knowledge", the date, and names of parents. The parochial clergy have generally complete and carefully-kept registers of baptisms, and furnish certified copies to those who need them. The property of deceased persons was in general formerly distributed at a family council, with the approval of the courts. But it appears that at the present time the estates of deceased persons must be administered under direction of the courts of first instance. Testaments are made and property devolves in accordance with the provisions of the Spanish civil code. Education. The Spanish missionaries established schools immediately on reaching the islands. Wherever they penetrated, church and school went together. The Jesuits had two universities in Manila, besides colleges at Cavite, Marinduque, Arevalo, Cebu, and Zamboanga. The Dominicans had their flourishing University of S. Tomas, Manila, existing to this day, and their colleges in other large towns. There was no Christian village without its school; all the young people attended. On the Jesuits' return to the islands in 1859, the cause of higher education received a new impetus. They established the college of the Ateneo de Manila, where nearly all those who have been prominent in the history of their country during the last half-century were educated. They opened a normal school which sent its trained Filipino teachers over all parts of the islands. The normal school graduated during the thirty years of its existence 1948 teachers. After the American occupation a public-school system, modeled on that of the United States, was established by the Government. The total number of schools in operation for 1909-10 was 4531, an increase of 107 over the preceding year. The total annual enrolment was 587,317, plus 4946 in the schools of the Moro Province. The average monthly enrolment however was 427,165 and the average monthly attendance only 337,307; of these, 2300 were pupils of secondary schools, 15,487 of intermediate schools and 319,520 of primary schools. There were 732 American teachers, 8130 Filipino teachers, and 145 Filipino apprentices -- teachers who serve without pay. Act 74, sec. 16, provides: "No teacher or other person shall teach or criticize the doctrines of any church, religious sect, or denomination, or shall attempt to influence pupils for or against any church or religious sect in any public school. If any teacher shall intentionally violate this section he or she shall, after due hearing, be dismissed from the public service; provided: however, that it shall be lawful for the priest or minister of any church established in the town wherein a public school is situated, either in person or by a designated teacher of religion, to teach for one-half hour three times a week, in the school building, to those public-school pupils whose parents or guardians desire it and express their desire therefor in writing filed with the principal teacher of the school, to be forwarded to the division superintendent, who shall fix the hours and rooms for such teaching. But no public-school teachers shall either conduct religious exercises, or teach religion, or act as a designated religious teacher in the school building under the foregoing authority, and no pupil shall be required by any public-school teacher to attend and receive the religious instruction herein permitted. Should the opportunity thus given to teach religion be used by the priest, minister, or religious teacher for the purpose of arousing disloyalty to the United States, or of discouraging the attendance of pupils at any such public school, or creating a disturbance of public order, or of interfering with the discipline of the school, the division superintendent, subject to the approval of the director of education, may, after due investigation and hearing, forbid such offending priest, minister, or religious teacher from entering the public-school building thereafter." That the religion of the Filipino people must inevitably suffer from the present system of education is evident to anyone conversant with existing conditions. To the religious disadvantages common to the public school of the United States must be added the imitative habit characteristic of the Filipino, and the proselytizing efforts of American Protestant missionaries. The place in which the greatest amount of harm can be done to the religion of the Filipino is the secondary school. Despite the best intentions on the part of the Government, the very fact that the vast majority of the American teachers in these schools are not Catholics incapacitates a great number of them from giving the Catholic interpretation of points of history connected with the Reformation, the preaching of indulgences, the reading of the Bible, etc. Accustomed to identify his religion and his Government, the step towards concluding that the American Government must be a Protestant Government is an easy one for the young Filipino. Further, as the secondary schools are only situated in the provincial capitals, the students leave home to live in the capital of their province. It is among these young people particularly that the American Protestant missionary works. Even though he does not make the student a member of this or that particular sect, a spirit of indifferentism is generated which does not bode well for the future of the country, temporally or spiritually. A nation that is only three centuries distant from habits of idolatry and savagery cannot be removed from daily religious education and still be expected to prosper. That the majority of the Filipino people desires a Christian education for their children may be seen from this, that the Catholic colleges, academics, and school established in all the dioceses are overcrowded. For the present, and for many years to come, the majority of Filipinos cannot afford to pay a double school tax, and hence must accept the educational system imposed upon them by the United States. PHILIP M. FINEGAN Philippopolis, Titular Metropolitan of Philippopolis A titular metropolitan see of Thracia Secunda. The city was founded by Philip of Macedon in 342 b.c. on the site of the legendary Eumolpins. As he sent thither 2000 culprits in addition to the colony of veterans, the town was for some time known as Poniropolis as well as by its official designation. During Alexander's expedition, the entire country fell again under the sway of Seuthes III, King of the Odrysians, and it was only in 313 that the Hellenic supremacy was re-established by Lysimachus. In 200 b.c. the Thracians, for a brief interval it is true, drove back the Macedonian garrisons; later they passed under the protectorate and afterwards the domination of Rome in the time of Tiberius, The city was now called Trimontium, but only for a very short time (Pliny, "Hist. Nat.", IV, xviii). From the reign of Septimius Severus, Philippopolis bears the title of metropolis on coins and in inscriptions. It was there that the conventus of Thrace assembled. In 172 Marcus Aurelius fortified the city with walls; in 248 Philip granted it the title of colony, two years before its destruction by the Goths, who slaughtered 100,000 men there (Ammianus Marcellinus, XXVI, x). Restored again, it became the metropolis of Thracia Secunda. The exact date of the establishment of Christianity in this town is unknown; the oldest testimony, quite open to criticism, however, is in connexion with thirty-seven martyrs, whose feast is celebrated on 20 August, and who are said to have been natives of Philippopolis, though other towns of Thrace are frequently given as their native place. In 344 was held at Philippopolis the conciliabulum of the Eusebians, which brought together 76 bishops separated from their colleagues of Sardica, or Sofia, and adversaries of St. Athanasius and his friends. Among its most celebrated ancient metropolitans is Silvanus, who asked the Patriarch Proclus to transfer him to Troas on account of the severity of the climate, and whose name was inserted by Baronius in the Roman Martyrology for 2 December. Philippopolis, which from the fifth century at the latest was the ecclesiastical metropolis of Thracia Secunda and dependent on the Patriarchate of Constantinople, had three suffragan bishoprics in the middle of the seventh century (Gelzer, "Ungedruckte . . . Texte der Notitiæ episcopatuum", 542); in the tenth century it had ten (ibid., 577); towards the end of the fifteenth century it had none (ibid.). The Greek metropolitan see has continued to exist, in spite of the occupation of the Bulgarians. The latter, however, have erected there an orthodox metropolitan see of their own. Though generally held by the Byzantines Philippopolis was often captured by other peoples -- Huns, Avars, Slavs, Bulgarians, and the Franks who retained it from 1204 till 1235. It was taken by the Turks in 1370 and finally came under the sway of the Bulgarians in 1885. By transporting thither on several occasions Armenian and Syrian colonists, the Byzantines made it an advanced fortress to oppose the Bulgarians; unfortunately these colonists were nearly all Monophysites and especially Paulicians, so the city became the great centre of Manichæism in the Middle Ages. These heretics converted by the Capuchins in the seventeenth century have become fervent Catholics of the Latin rite. The city called Plovdif in Bulgarian contains at present 47,000 inhabitants, of whom about 4000 are Catholics. The Greeks and Turks are fairly numerous; the Catholic parish is in charge of secular priests; there is a seminary, which however has only from 20 to 25 students. The Assumptionists, who number about 30, have had since 1884 a college with a commercial department, attended by 250 pupils; the primary school for boys was established in 1863 by the Assumptionist Sisters; the Sisters of St. Joseph have a boarding-school and a primary school for girls; the Sisters of Charity of Agram have an hospital. LE QUIEN, Oriens. christ., I, 1155-62; TSOUKALAS, Description historico-géographique de l'éparchie de Philippopolis (Vienna, 1851), in Greek; MÜLLER, Ptolemoei Geographia, I (Paris), 483; JIRECEK, Das Fürstenthum Bulgarien (Prague, 1891), 378-87; DUPUY-PÉYOU, La Bulgarie aux Bulgares (Paris, 1896), 142-8, 291-8; Revue franco-bulgare (1910), 10-18. S. VAILHÉ. Philippopolis Philippopolis Titular see in Arabia, suffragan of Bostra. Its bishop, Hormisdas, was present at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 (LeQuien, "Oriens christianus", II, 861). An inscription makes known another bishop, Basil, in 553 ("Echos d'Orient", XII, 1909, 103). Philippopolis figures as a see in the "Notitiae Episcopatuum" in the sixth century (op. cit., X, 1907, 145). There were also several titular bishops in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries (Eubel, "Hierarchia catholica medii aevi", II, 238; III, 291). The ancient name of this place is unknown. The Emperor Philip (244-9) founded this town and gave it his name (Aurelius Victor, "De Caesar.", 28). Thenceforth it grew very rapidly as evidenced by the fine ruins, remains of the colonnades of a temple and colossal baths, discovered on its site at Shohba in the Hauran. WADDINGTON, Inscriptions grecques et latines recueillies en Grece et en Asie Mineure, 490-3; GELZER, Georgii Cyprii Descriptio orbis romani, 204; Revue biblique, VII (1898), 601-3; Echos d'Orient, II (1899), 175. S. VAILHÉ St. Philip Romolo Neri St. Philip Romolo Neri THE APOSTLE OF ROME. Born at Florence, Italy, 22 July, 1515; died 27 May, 1595. Philip's family originally came from Castelfranco but had lived for many generations in Florence, where not a few of its members had practised the learned professions, and therefore took rank with the Tuscan nobility. Among these was Philip's own father, Francesco Neri, who eked out an insufficient private fortune with what he earned as a notary. A circumstance which had no small influence on the life of the saint was Francesco's friendship with the Dominicans; for it was from the friars of S. Marco, amid the memories of Savonarola, that Philip received many of his early religious impressions. Besides a younger brother, who died in early childhood, Philip had two younger sisters, Caterina and Elisabetta. It was with them that "the good Pippo", as he soon began to be called, committed his only known fault. He gave a slight push to Caterina, because she kept interrupting him and Elisabetta, while they were reciting psalms together, a practice of which, as a boy, he was remakably fond. One incident of his childhood is dear to his early biographers as the first visible intervention of Providence on his behalf, and perhaps dearer still to his modern disciples, because it reveals the human characteristics of a boy amid the supernatural graces of a saint. When about eight years old he was left alone in a courtyard to amuse himself; seeing a donkey laden with fruit, he jumped on its back; the beast bolted, and both tumbled into a deep cellar. His parents hastened to the spot and extricated the child, not dead, as they feared, but entirely uninjured. From the first it was evident that Philip's career would run on no conventional lines; when shown his family pedigree he tore it up, and the burning of his father's house left him unconcerned. Having studied the humanities under the best scholars of a scholarly generation, at the age of sixteen he was sent to help his father's cousin in business at S. Germano, near Monte Cassino. He applied himself with diligence, and his kinsman soon determined to make him his heir. But he would often withdraw for prayer to a little mountain chapel belonging to the Benedictines of Monte Cassino, built above the harbour of Gaeta in a cleft of rock which tradition says was among those rent at the hour of Our Lord's death. It was here that his vocation became definite: he was called to be the Apostle of Rome. In 1533 he arrived in Rome without any money. He had not informed his father of the step he was taking, and he had deliberately cut himself off from his kinsman's patronage. He was, however, at once befriended by Galeotto Caccia, a Florentine resident, who gave him a room in his house and an allowance of flour, in return for which he undertook the education of his two sons. For seventeen years Philip lived as a layman in Rome, probably without thinking of becoming a priest. It was perhaps while tutor to the boys, that he wrote most of the poetry which he composed both in Latin and in Italian. Before his death he burned all his writings, and only a few of his sonnets have come down to us. He spent some three years, beginning about 1535, in the study of philosophy at the Sapienza, and of theology in the school of the Augustinians. When he considered that he had learnt enough, he sold his books, and gave the price to the poor. Though he never again made study his regular occupation, whenever he was called upon to cast aside his habitual reticence, he would surprise the most learned with the depth and clearness of his theological knowledge. He now devoted himself entirely to the sanctification of his own soul and the good of his neighbour. His active apostolate began with solitary and unobtrusive visits to the hospitals. Next he induced others to accompany him. Then he began to frequent the shops, warehouses, banks, and public places of Rome, melting the hearts of those whom he chanced to meet, and exhorting them to serve God. In 1544, or later, he became the friend of St. Ignatius. Many of his disciples tried and found their vocations in the infant Society of Jesus; but the majority remained in the world, and formed the nucleus of what afterwards became the Brotherhood of the Little Oratory. Though he "appeared not fasting to men", his private life was that of a hermit. His single daily meal was of bread and water, to which a few herbs were sometimes added, the furniture of his room consisted of a bed, to which he usually preferred the floor, a table, a few chairs, and a rope to hang his clothes on; and he disciplined himself frequently with small chains. Tried by fierce temptations, diabolical as well as human, he passed through them all unscathed, and the purity of his soul manifested itself in certain striking physical traits. He prayed at first mostly in the church of S. Eustachio, hard by Caccia's house. Next he took to visiting the Seven Churches. But it was in the catacomb of S. Sebastiano -- confounded by early biographers with that of S. Callisto -- that he kept the longest vigils and received the most abundant consolations. In this catacomb, a few days before Pentecost in 1544, the well-known miracle of his heart took place. Bacci describes it thus: "While he was with the greatest earnestness asking of the Holy Ghost His gifts, there appeared to him a globe of fire, which entered into his mouth and lodged in his breast; and thereupon he was suddenly surprised with such a fire of love, that, unable to bear it, he threw himself on the ground, and, like one trying to cool himself, bared his breast to temper in some measure the flame which he felt. When he had remained so for some time, and was a little recovered, he rose up full of unwonted joy, and immediately all his body began to shake with a violent tremour; and putting his hand to his bosom, he felt by the side of his heart, a swelling about as big as a man's fist, but neither then nor afterwards was it attended with the slightest pain or wound." The cause of this swelling was discovered by the doctors who examined his body after death. The saint's heart had been dilated under the sudden impulse of love, and in order that it might have sufficient room to move, two ribs had been broken, and curved in the form of an arch. From the time of the miracle till his death, his heart would palpitate violently whenever he performed any spiritual action. During his last years as a layman, Philip's apostolate spread rapidly. In 1548, together with his confessor, Persiano Rosa, he founded the Confraternity of the Most Holy Trinity for looking after pilgrims and convalescents. Its members met for Communion, prayer, and other spiritual exercises in the church of S. Salvatore, and the saint himself introduced exposition of the Blessed Sacrament once a month (see FORTY HOURS' DEVOTION). At these devotions Philip preached, though still a layman, and we learn that on one occasion alone he converted no less than thirty dissolute youths. In 1550 a doubt occurred to him as to whether he should not discontinue his active work and retire into absolute solitude. His perplexity was set at rest by a vision of St. John the Baptist, and by another vision of two souls in glory, one of whom was eating a roll of bread, signifying God's will that he should live in Rome for the good of souls as though he were in a desert, abstaining as far as possible from the use of meat. In 1551, however, he received a true vocation from God. At the bidding of his confessor -- nothing short of this would overcome his humility -- he entered the priesthood, and went to live at S. Girolamo, where a staff of chaplains was supported by the Confraternity of Charity. Each priest had two rooms assigned to him, in which he lived, slept, and ate, under no rule save that of living in charity with his brethren. Among Philip's new companions, besides Persiano Rosa, was Buonsignore Cacciaguerra (see "A Precursor of St. Philip" by Lady Amabel Kerr, London), a remarkable penitent, who was at that time carrying on a vigorous propaganda in favour of frequent Communion. Philip, who as a layman had been quietly encouraging the frequent reception of the sacraments, expended the whole of his priestly energy in promoting the same cause; but unlike his precursor, he recommended the young especially to confess more often than they communicated. The church of S. Girolamo was much frequented even before the coming of Philip, and his confessional there soon became the centre of a mighty apostolate. He stayed in church, hearing confessions or ready to hear them, from daybreak till nearly midday, and not content with this, he usually confessed some forty persons in his room before dawn. Thus he laboured untiringly throughout his long priesthood. As a physician of souls he received marvellous gifts from God. He would sometimes tell a penitent his most secret sins without his confessing them; and once he converted a young nobleman by showing him a vision of hell. Shortly before noon he would leave his confessional to say Mass. His devotion to the Blessed Sacrament, like the miracle of his heart, is one of those manifestations of sanctity which are peculiarly his own. So great was the fervour of his charity, that, instead of recollecting himself before Mass, he had to use deliberate means of distraction in order to attend to the external rite. During the last five years of his life he had permission to celebrate privately in a little chapel close to his room. At the "Agnus Dei" the server went out, locked the doors, and hung up a notice: "Silence, the Father is saying Mass". When he returned in two hours or more, the saint was so absorbed in God that he seemed to be at the point of death. Philip devoted his afternoons to men and boys, inviting them to informal meetings in his room, taking them to visit churches, interesting himself in their amusements, hallowing with his sweet influence every department of their lives. At one time he had a longing desire to follow the example of St. Francis Xavier, and go to India. With this end in view, he hastened the ordination of some of his companions. But in 1557 he sought the counsel of a Cistercian at Tre Fontane; and as on a former occasion he had been told to make Rome his desert, so now the monk communicated to him a revelation he had had from St. John the Evangelist, that Rome was to be his India. Philip at once abandoned the idea of going abroad, and in the following year the informal meetings in his room developed into regular spiritual exercises in an oratory, which he built over the church. At these exercises laymen preached and the excellence of the discourses, the high quality of the music, and the charm of Philip's personality attracted not only the humble and lowly, but men of the highest rank and distinction in Church and State. Of these, in 1590, Cardinal Nicolo Sfondrato, became Pope Gregory XIV, and the extreme reluctance of the saint alone prevented the pontiff from forcing him to accept the cardinalate. In 1559, Philip began to organize regular visits to the Seven Churches, in company with crowds of men, priests and religious, and laymen of every rank and condition. These visits were the occasion of a short but sharp persecution on the part of a certain malicious faction, who denounced him as "a setter-up of new sects". The cardinal vicar himself summoned him, and without listening to his defence, rebuked him in the harshest terms. For a fortnight the saint was suspended from hearing confessions; but at the end of that time he made his defence, and cleared himself before the ecclesiastical authorities. In 1562, the Florentines in Rome begged him to accept the office of rector of their church, S. Giovanni dei Fiorentini, but he was reluctant to leave S. Girolamo. At length the matter was brought before Pius IV, and a compromise was arrived at (1564). While remaining himself at S. Girolamo, Philip became rector of S. Giovanni, and sent five priests, one of whom was Baronius, to represent him there. They lived in community under Philip as their superior, taking their meals together, and regularly attending the exercises at S. Girolamo. In 1574, however, the exercises began to be held in an oratory at S. Giovanni. Meanwhile the community was increasing in size, and in 1575 it was formally recognised by Gregory XIII as the Congregation of the Oratory, and given the church of S. Maria in Vallicella. The fathers came to live there in 1577, in which year they opened the Chiesa Nuova, built on the site of the old S. Maria, and transferred the exercises to a new oratory. Philip himself remained at S. Girolamo till 1583, and it was only in obedience to Gregory XIII that he then left his old home and came to live at the Vallicella. The last years of his life were marked by alternate sickness and recovery. In 1593, he showed the true greatness of one who knows the limits of his own endurance, and resigned the office of superior which had been conferred on him for life. In 1594, when he was in an agony of pain, the Blessed Virgin appeared to him, and cured him. At the end of March, 1595, he had a severe attack of fever, which lasted throughout April; but in answer to his special prayer God gave him strength to say Mass on 1 May in honour of SS. Philip and James. On the following 12 May he was seized with a violent haemorrhage, and Cardinal Baronius, who had succeeded him as superior, gave him Extreme Unction. After that he seemed to revive a little and his friend Cardinal Frederick Borromeo brought him the Viaticum, which he received with loud protestations of his own unworthiness. On the next day he was perfectly well, and till the actual day of his death went about his usual duties, even reciting the Divine Office, from which he was dispensed. But on 15 May he predicted that he had only ten more days to live. On 25 May, the feast of Corpus Christi, he went to say Mass in his little chapel, two hours earlier than usual. "At the beginning of his Mass", writes Bacci, "he remained for some time looking fixedly at the hill of S. Onofrio, which was visible from the chapel, just as if he saw some great vision. On coming to the Gloria in Excelsis he began to sing, which was an unusual thing for him, and sang the whole of it with the greatest joy and devotion, and all the rest of the Mass he said with extraordinary exultation, and as if singing." He was in perfect health for the rest of that day, and made his usual night prayer; but when in bed, he predicted the hour of the night at which he would die. About an hour after midnight Father Antonio Gallonio, who slept under him, heard him walking up and down, and went to his room. He found him lying on the bed, suffering from another haemorrhage. "Antonio, I am going", he said; Gallonio thereupon fetched the medical men and the fathers of the congregation. Cardinal Baronius made the commendation of his soul, and asked him to give the fathers his final blessing. The saint raised his hand slightly, and looked up to heaven. Then inclining his head towards the fathers, he breathed his last. Philip was beatified by Paul V in 1615, and canonized by Gregory XV in 1622. It is perhaps by the method of contrast that the distinctive characteristics of St. Philip and his work are brought home to us most forcibly (see Newman, "Sermons on Various Occasions", n. xii; "Historical Sketches", III, end of ch. vii). We hail him as the patient reformer, who leaves outward things alone and works from within, depending rather on the hidden might of sacrament and prayer than on drastic policies of external improvement; the director of souls who attaches more value to mortification of the reason than to bodily austerities, protests that men may become saints in the world no less than in the cloister, dwells on the importance of serving God in a cheerful spirit, and gives a quaintly humorous turn to the maxims of ascetical theology; the silent watcher of the times, who takes no active part in ecclesiastical controversies and is yet a motive force in their development, now encouraging the use of ecclesiastical history as a bulwark against Protestantism, now insisting on the absolution of a monarch, whom other counsellors would fain exclude from the sacraments (see BARONIUS), now praying that God may avert a threatened condemnation (see SAVONAROLA) and receiving a miraculous assurance that his prayer is heard (see Letter of Ercolani referred to by Capecelatro); the founder of a Congregation, which relies more on personal influence than on disciplinary organization, and prefers the spontaneous practice of counsels of perfection to their enforcement by means of vows; above all, the saint of God, who is so irresistibly attractive, so eminently lovable in himself, as to win the title of the "Amabile santo". GALLONIO, companion of the saint was the first to produce a Life of St. Philip, published in Latin (1600) and in Italian (1601), written with great precision, and following a strictly chronological order. Several medical treatises were written on the saint's palpitation and fractured ribs, e. g. ANGELO DA BAGNAREA's Medica disputatio de palpitatione cordis, fractura costarum, aliisque affectionibus B. Philippi Nerii. . .qua ostenditur praedictas affectiones fuisse supra naturam, dedicated to Card. Frederick Borromeo (Rome, 1613). BACCI wrote an Italian Life and dedicated it to Gregory XV (1622). His work is the outcome of a minute examination of the processes of canonization, and contains important matter not found in GALLONIO. BROCCHI's Life of St. Philip, contained in his Vite de' santi e beati Fiorentini (Florence, 1742), includes the saint's pedigree, and gives the Florentine tradition of his early years; for certain chronological discrepancies between GALLONIO, BACCI, and BROCCHI, see notes on the chronology in ANTROBUS' ed. of BACCI. Other Lives are by RICCI (Rome, 1670), whose work was an enlargement of BACCI, and includes his own Lives of the Companions of St. Philip; MARCIANO (1693); SONZONIO (1727); BERNABEI (d. 1662), whose work is published for the first time by the BOLLANDISTS (Acta SS., May, VII); RAMIREZ, who adapts the language of Scripture to St. Philip in a Latin work called the Via lactea, dedicated to Innocent XI (Valencia, 1682); and BAYLE (1859). GEOTHE at the end of his Italien. Reise (Italian Journey) gives a sketch of the saint, entitled Filippo Neri, der humoristische Heilige. The most important modern Life is that of CAPECELATRO (1879), treating fully of the saint's relations with the persons and events of his time. There is an English Life by HOPE (London, New York, Cincinnati, Chicago). An abridged English translation of BACCI appeared in penal times (Paris, 1656), a fact which shows our Catholic forefathers' continued remembrance of the saint, who used to greet the English College students with the words, "Salvete, flores martyrum." FABER's Modern Saints (1847) includes translations of an enlarged ed. of BACCI, and of RICCI's Lives of the Companions. Of the former there is a new and revised edition by ANTROBUS (London, 1902). CAPECELATRO's work has been translated by POPE (London, 1882). English renderings of two of St. Philip's sonnets by RYDER are published at the end of the recent editions of BACCI and CAPECELATRO, together with translations of St. Philip's letters. These were originally published in BISCONI's Raccolta di lettere di santi e beati Fiorentini (Florence, 1737); but since that time twelve other letters have come to light. C. SEBASTIAN RITCHIE Peter Philips Peter Philips (Also known as PETRUS PHILIPPUS, PIETRO PHILLIPO.) Born in England about 1560; date and place of death unknown. It is generally accepted that Philips, remaining faithful to the Church, left England for the Netherlands, whence he went to Rome, and afterwards, returning to Antwerp, became organist at the court of the governor, Duke Albert. Having entered Holy orders, he held a canonry at Bethune, in Flanders, which he exchanged for a similar honour at Soignes in 1612. It has been pointed out that the title-pages of his published works are the best index to his movements and abiding places, and they are various. Philips ranks in importance as a musician with Tallys, Byrd, Morley, and Orlando Gibbons, and is considered one of the great masters of his time. Besides canzoni and madrigals for six and eight voices, he left innumerable instrumental works which have been preserved in the libraries of Antwerp, Leyden, Strasburg, and London. Nineteen of these are contained in "The Fitz-William Virginal Book" by J. A. Fuller- Maitland and W. B. Squire. To the Church, however, Philips devoted his best efforts. Besides single numbers found in various collections of his period, a volume of five-part motets; another of similar works for eight voices; "Gemmulae sacrae" for two and three voices and figured bass; "Les rossignols spirituels", a collection of two- and four-part pieces, some to Latin words, but most of them to French; "Deliciae sacrae", forty-one compositions for two and three parts, are preserved in the British Museum. The library of John IV of Portugal contains Philips's posthumous works -- masses for six, eight, and nine voices, and motets for eight voices. His "Cantiones sacrae" have recently been made available for modern use, and have been added to the repertoire of the choir of Westminster Cathedral. BERGMANS, L'Organiste des archiducs Albert et Isabelle (Ghent, 1903); SQUIRE in GROVE, Dictionary of Music, s.v. JOSEPH OTTEN Philip the Arabian Philip the Arabian (Philippus) Emperor of Rome (244-249), the son of an Arab sheik, born in Bosra. He rose to be an influential officer of the Roman army. In 243 the Emperor Gordianus III was at war with Persia; the administration of the army and the empire were directed with great success by his father-in-law Timesitheus. Timesitheus, however, died in 243 and the helpless Gordianus, a minor, appointed Marcus Julius Philippus as his successor. By causing a scarcity of provisions Philip increased the exasperation of the soldiers against the emperor and they proclaimed Philip emperor. Philip now had Gordianus secretly executed. However, as he erected a monument to Gordianus on the Euphrates and deified him, he deceived the Senate and obtained recognition as emperor. He abandoned the advantages Timesitheus had won from the Persian King Sapor. He withdrew from Asia, and recalled a large number of divisions of the army from Dacia, Rhaetia, and Britain to northern Italy to protect it against incursions from the East. On account of invasions by the Capri he hastened to the lower Danube, where he was successful in two battles. Consequently on coins he bears the surname of Carpicus Maximus. Philip gave high offices of State to his relations who misused these positions. He also made his son Philip, when seven years of age, co-ruler. The most important event of his reign was the celebration of the thousandth year of the existence of Rome in April, 248. The insecurity of his authority in the outlying districts showed itself in the appearance of rival emperors proclaimed by the legions stationed there. The Goths sought to settle permanently in Roman territory; and as the army of the Danube could not defend itself without a centralized control, the soldiers, at the close of 248, forced Decius, sent to suppress the mutinies, to accept the position of emperor. Decius advanced into Italy, where he defeated Philip near Verona. Philip and his son were killed. During Philip's reign Christians were not disturbed. The emperor also issued police regulations for the maintenance of public morality. A statement of St. Jerome's caused Philip to be regarded in the Middle Ages as the first Christian Emperor of Rome. MOMMSEN, Rom. Gesch. V (Berlin, 1885); for further bibliography, see PERTINAX. KARL HOEBER Philistines Philistines (Septuagint phylistieim in the Pentateuch and Josue, elsewhere allophyloi, "foreigners"). In the Biblical account the Philistines come into prominence as the inhabitants of the maritime plain of Palestine from the time of the Judges onward. They are mentioned in the genealogy of the nations (Genesis 10:14; cf. I Par. 1:11-12), where together with the Caphtorim they are set down as descendants of Mesraim. It is conjectured with probability that they came originally from Crete, sometimes identified with Caphtor, and that they belonged to a piratical, seafaring people. They make their first appearance in Biblical history late in the period of the Judges in connection with the prophesied birth of the hero Samson. The angel appearing to Saraa, wife of Manue of the race of Dan, tells her that, though barren, she shall bear a son who "shall begin to deliver Israel from the hands of the Philistines" (Judges 13:1-5); and we are informed in the same passage that the domination of the Philistines over Israel had lasted forty years. In the subsequent chapters graphic accounts are given of the encounters between Samson and these enemies of his nation who were encroaching upon Israel's western border. In the early days of Samuel we find the Philistines trying to make themselves masters of the interior of Palestine, and in one of the ensuing battles they succeeded in capturing the Ark of the Covenant (I Kings 4). The coming of a pestilence upon them, however, induced them to return it, and it remained for many years in the house of Abinadab in Cariathiarim (I Kings 5; 6; 7). After Saul became king the Philistines tried to break his power, but were unsuccessful, chiefly owing to the bravery of Jonathan (I Kings 13; 14). Their progress was not, however, permanently checked, for we are told (I Kings 14:52) that there was a "great war against the Philistines all the days of Saul", and at the end of the latter's reign we find their army still in possession of the rich plain of Jezrael including the city of Bethsan on its eastern border (I Kings 31:10). They met with a severe defeat, however, early in the reign of David (II Kings 5:20-25), who succeeded in reducing them to a state of vassalage (II Kings 8:1). Prior to this date the power of the Philistines seems to have been concentrated in the hands of the rulers of the cities of Gaza, Ascalon, Azotus (Ashdod), Accaron, and Geth, and a peculiar title signifying "Lord of the Philistines" was borne by each of these petty kings. The Philistines regained their independence at the end of the reign of David, probably about the time of the schism, for we find the Kings of Israel in the ninth century endeavouring to wrest from them Gebbethon, a city on the border of the maritime plain (III Kings 15:27; 16:15). Towards the close of the same century the Assyrian ruler, King Adad-Nirari, placed them under tribute and began the long series of Assyrian interference in Philistine affairs. In Amos (1:6, 8) we find a denunciation of the Philistine monarchies as among the independent kingdoms of the time. During the latter part of the eighth century and during the whole of the seventh the history of the Philistines is made up of a continual series of conspiracies, conquests, and rebellions. Their principal foes were the Assyrians on the one side and the Egyptians on the other. In the year of the fall of Samaria (721 B.C.) they became vassals of Sargon. They rebelled, however, ten years later under the leadership of Ashdod, but without permanent success. Another attempt was made to shake off the Assyrian yoke at the end of the reign of Sennacherib. In this conflict the Philistine King of Accaron, who remained faithful to Sennacherib, was cast into prison by King Ezechias of Juda. The allies who were thus brought together were defeated at Eltekeh and the result was the siege of Jerusalem by Sennacherib (IV Kings 18; 19). Esarhaddon and Asurbanipal in their western campaigns crossed the territory of the Philistines and held it in subjection, and after the decline of Assyria the encroachments of the Assyrians gave place to those of the Egyptians under the Twenty-sixth Dynasty. It is probable that the Philistines suffered defeat at the hands of Nabuchodonosor, though no record of his conquest of them has been preserved. The old title "Lords of the Philistines" has now disappeared, and the title "King" is bestowed by the Assyrians on the Philistine rulers. The siege of Gaza, which held out against Alexander the Great, is famous, and we find the Ptolemies and Seleucids frequently fighting over Philistine territory. The land finally passed under Roman rule, and its cities had subsequently an important history. After the time of the Assyrians the Philistines cease to be mentioned by this name. Thus Herodotus speaks of the "Arabians" as being in possession of the lower Mediterranean coast in the time of Cambyses. From this it is inferred by some that at that time the Philistines had been supplanted. In the ebb and flow of warring nations over this land it is more than probable that they were gradually absorbed and lost their identity. It is generally supposed that the Philistines adopted in the main the religion and civilization of the Chanaanites. In I Kings 5:2, we read: "And the Philistines took the ark of God, and brought it into the temple of Dragon, and set it by Dragon", from which we infer that their chief god was this Semitic deity. The latter appears in the Tel el-Amarna Letters and also in the Babylonian inscriptions. At Ascalon likewise there was a temple dedicated to the Semitic goddess Ishtar, and as the religion of the Philistines was thus evidently Semitic, so also were probably the other features of their civilization. Besides the standard Commentaries see MASPERO, Histoire ancienne des peuples de l'Orient (6th ed., Paris, 1904), tr., The Dawn of Civilization (4th ed., London, 1901); BRUGSCH, Egypt under the Pharaohs (tr., London, 1880), ix-xiv. JAMES F. DRISCOLL Robert Phillip Robert Phillip Priest, d. at Paris, 4 Jan., 1647. He was descended from the Scottish family of Phillip of Sanquhar, but nothing is known of his early life. Ordained in Rome, he returned in 1612 to Scotland where he was betrayed by his father, seized while saying Mass, and tried at Edinburgh as a seminary priest, 14 Sept., 1613. The sentence of death was commuted to banishment, and he withdrew to France, where he joined the French Oratory recently founded by Cardinal de Bérulle. In 1628 he went to England as confessor to Queen Henrietta Maria, and at her request he besought the pope for financial aid against the king's enemies. The subsequent negotiations were discovered, and Phillip was impeached on the charge of being a papal spy and of having endeavoured to pervert Prince Charles, but proceedings dropped owing to the displeasure of Richelieu at the introduction of his own name into the matter. Later he was committed to the Tower for refusing to be sworn on the Anglican Bible on 2 Nov., 1641, when he had been summoned by the Lords' committee to be examined touching State matters. Released through the queen's influence, he accompanied her to The Hague in March, 1642, and remained with her in Paris till his death. NALSON, Collection of Affairs of State, II (London, 1682-3); BERINGTON, Memoirs of Panzani (Birmingham, 1793); STOTHERT; Catholic Church in Scotland, ed. GORDON (Glasgow, 1869); FOLEY, Records of Eng. Jesuits, V (London, 1879); SECCOMBE in Dict. Nat. Biog., s.v. PHILIPS, ROBERT; GILLOW, Bible. Dict. Eng. Cath., s.v. EDWIN BURTON Phillips, George George Phillips A canonist, born at Königsberg, 6 Sept., 1804; died at Vienna, 6 September, 1872, was the son of James Phillips, an Englishman who had acquired wealth as a merchant in Königsberg, and of a Scotchwoman née Hay. On completing his course at the gymnasium, George studied law at the Universities of Berlin and Göttingen (1822-24); his principal teachers were von Savigny and Eichhorn, and, under the influence of the latter, he devoted himself mainly to the study of Germanic law. After obtaining the degree of Doctor of Law at Göttingen in 1824, he paid a long visit to England. In 1826 he qualified at Berlin as Privatdozent (tutor) for German law, and in 1827 was appointed professor extraordinary in this faculty. In the same year he married Charlotte Housselle, who belonged to a French Protestant family settled in Berlin. Phillips formed a close friendship with his colleague K. E. Jarcke, professor at Berlin since 1825, who had entered the Catholic Church in 1824. Jarcke's influence and his own searching studies into medieval Germany led to the conversion of Phillips and his wife in 1828 (14 May). Jarcke having removed to Vienna in 1832, Phillips accepted in 1833 a call to Munich as counsel in the Bavarian Ministry of the Interior. In 1834 he was named professor of history, and a few months later professor of law at the University of Munich. He now joined that circle of illustrious men including the two Görres, Möhler, Döllinger, and Ringseis, who, filled with enthusiasm for the Church, laboured for the renewal of the religious life, the defence of Catholic rights and religious freedom, and the revival of Catholic scholarship. In 1838 he founded with Guido Görres the still flourishing militant "Historischpolitische Blätter". His lectures, notable for their excellence and form, treated with unusual fullness subjects connected with ecclesiastical interests. In consequence of the Lola Montez affair, in connexion with which Phillips signed, with six other Munich professors, an address of sympathy with the dismissed minister Abel, he was relieved of his chair in 1847. In 1848 he was elected deputy of a Münster district for the National Assembly of Frankfort, at which he energetically upheld the Catholic interests. In 1850, after declining a call as professor to Würzburg, he accepted the chair of German law at Innsbruck, and there resumed his academic activity. Invited to fill the same chair in Vienna in 1851, he removed to the Austrian capital, and remained there until his death. Once (1862-7) he accepted a long leave of absence to complete his "Kirchenrecht". He always maintained his relations with his friends in Munich and other cities of Germany, and never relaxed his activity in furthering Catholic interests. As a writer, his labours lay in the domain of German law, canon law, and their respective histories. At first his activity was directed mainly to the first-mentioned, his principal contributions on the subject being: "Versuch einer Darstellung des angelsächsischen Rechtes" (Göttingen, 1825); "Englische Reichs- und Rechtsgeschichte", of which two volumes (dealing with the period 1066-1189) appeared (Berlin, 1827-8); "Deutsche Geschichte mit besonderer Rücksicht auf Religion, Recht und Verfassung", of which two volumes alone were issued (Berlin, 1832-4), deals with Merovingian and Carlovingian times; "Grundsätze des gemeinen deutschen Privatrechts mit Einschluss des Lehnrechts" (Berlin, 1838); "Deutsche Reichs- und Rechtsgeschichte" (Munich, 1845). After his call to Munich, however, Phillips recognized his chief task in the treatment of canon law from the strictly Catholic standpoint. In addition to numerous smaller treatises, he published in this domain: "Die Diözesansynode" (Freiburg, 1849), and especially his great "Kirchenrecht", which appeared in seven volumes (Ratisbon, 1845-72), and was continued by Vering (vol. VIII, i, Ratisbon, 1889). This comprehensive and important work exercised a great influence on the study of canon law and its principles. Phillips also published a "Lehrbuch des Kirchenrechts" (Ratisbon, 1859-62; 3rd ed. by Moufang, 1881) and "Vermischte Schriften" (3 vols., Ratisbon, 1856-60). ROSENTHAL, Konvertitenbilder, I (2nd ad.), 478 sqq., SCHULTE in Allg. deutsche Biogr., XXVI (Leipzig, 1888), 80 sqq.; WURZBACH, Biogr. Lex. d. Kaisertums Oesterreich, XXII, 211 sqq. J. P. KIRSCH. Philo Judaeus Philo Judæus Born about 25 b.c.. His family, of a sacerdotal line, was one of the most powerful of the populous Jewish colony of Alexandria. His brother Alexander Lysimachus was steward to Anthony's second daughter, and married one of his sons to the daughter of Herod Agrippa, whom he had put under financial obligations. Alexander's son, Tiberius Alexander, apostatized and became procurator of Judea and Prefect of Egypt. Philo must have received a Jewish education, studying the laws and national traditions, but he followed also the Greek plan of studies (grammar with reading of the poets, geometry, rhetoric, dialectics) which he reagarded as a preparation for philosophy. Notwithstanding the lack of direct information about his philosophical training, his works show that he had a first hand knowledge of the stoical theories then prevailing, Plato's dialogues, the neo-Pythagorean works, and the moral popular literature, the outcome of Cynicism. He remained, however, profoundly attached to the Jewish religion with all the practices which it implied among the Jews of the dispersion and of which the basis was the unity of worship at the Temple in Jerusalem. Toward the Alexandrine community and the duties which it required of him, his attitude was perhaps changeable; he possessed in his youth a taste for an exclusively contemplative life and solitary retreats; and he complains of an official function which forced him to abandon his studies. Later he became engrossed with the material and moral interests of the community. His "Allegorical Commentary" often alludes to the vocations to which the Alexandrine Jews were subjected; a special treatise is devoted to the persecution of Flaccus, Prefect of Egypt. The best-known episode of his life is the voyage he made to Rome in 39; he had been chosen as head of the embassy which was to lay before Emperor Caius Caligula the complaints of the Jews regarding the introduction of statues of the emperor in the synagogues. This hardship, due to the Alexandrians, was all the more grievous to the Jews, as they had long been known for their loyalty, and their attachment to the empire was doubtless one of the chief causes of anti-Semitism at Alexandria. The drawing up of the account of the embassy shortly after the death of Caius (41) is the latest known fact in the life of Philo. Writings These contain most valuable information, not only on the intellectual and moral situation of the Jewish community at Alexandria, but still more on the philosophical and religious syncretism prevailing in Greek civilization. They may be divided: (1) expositon of the Jewish Law; (2) apologetical works; (3) philosophical treatises. (1) The expositons of the Law are in three works of varied character: (a) "The Exposition of the Law", which begins by a treatise on the creation of the world (Commentaries on the first chapter of Genesis) and continues with treatises on Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph (those on Isaac and Jacob are lost). Each of the patriarchs is considered as a type of a virtue and the life as a natural or unwritten law. Then follows a series of treatises on the laws written by Moses, grouped in order according to the Ten Commandments. The Exposition closes with the laws referring to general virtues (On Justice and Courage), and a treatise on the reward reserved to those who obey the Law. (See "De Præmiis et Poe;nis", §§ 1, 2.) (b) The great "Allegorical Commentary on Genesis" is the chief source of information regarding Philo's ideas; in it he applies systematically the method of allegorical interpretation. The commentary follows the order of verses from Gen., ii, 1, to iv, 17, with some more or less important lacunæ. It is not known whether the work began by a treatise on chapter 1, concerning creation; in any case, it can be seen from the allusions to this chapter that Philo had a system of interpretation on this point. Notwithstanding its form, this work is not a series of interpretations strung together verse by verse; the author considers Genesis in its entirety as a history of the soul from its formation in the intelligible world to the complete development of wisdom after its fall and its restoration by repentance (see ed. Mangey, "De Posteritate Caini", p. 259). The object of the allegorical method is to discern in each person and in his actions the symbol of some phase either in the fall or in the restoration of the soul. (c) "Questions and Solutions" are a series of questions set down at each verse of the Mosaic books. An Armenian translation has preserved the questions on Genesis (Gen., ii, 4- xxiii, 8, with lacunæ) and the questions on Exodus (Ex., xii, 2-xxviii, 38), some Greek fragments of these works and of the questions on Leviticus, a very mediocre Latin translation of the last part of the questions on Genesis (iv, 154 sq.). In Samson and Jonas, there is much less unity than in the preceding ones. This first group of works is addressed to readers already initiated in the Mosaic Law, i.e. to the author's coreligionists. (2) It is quite different with his apologetical writings. The "Life of Moses" is a résumé of the Jewish Law, intended for a larger public. The treatise "On Repentance" was written for the edification of the newly converted. The treatise "On Humanity" which followed that "On Piety" seems from its introduction to pertain to the "Life of Moses" and not to the "Exposition of the Law" as tradition and some contemporaneous scholars maintain. The Upothetiná (fragments in Eusebius, "Evangelical Preparation", VIII, v, vi) as well as the "Apology for the Jews" (ibid., VIII, x) were written to defend his coreligionists against calumnies, while the "Contemplative Life" was to cultivate the best fruits of the Mosaic worship. The "Against Flaccus" and the "Embassy to Caius", with another work lost in the persecution of Sejanus, were intended to establish the truth about the pretended impiety of the Jews. (3) Finally, we have purely philosophical treatises: "On the Liberty of the Wise", "On the Incorruptibility of the World" (authenticity contested by Bernays, but generally admitted now), "On Providence", "On Animals" (these last two in the Armenian translations). The small treatise "De Mundo" is merely a compilation of passages from other works. The question of chronology is more difficult than that of classification. The solution of the difficulty would be of great value especially for the subdivisions of the first group of writings, in order to understand the development of Philo's doctrines; but on this point there is a wide divergence of opinion. It is probable, however, that the "Exposition of the Law" with the frequent appeals to the authority of the masters and its cautious way of introducing the allegorical interpretation is anterior to the "Allegorical Commentary" which shows more assurance and independence of thought. Doctrine Philo's work belongs for the most part to the immense literature of commentaries on the Law, and it is especially as a commentator that he must be considered. But in this regard he holds a unique place. First of all, he uses the Greek translation of the Septuagint. The variations that have been pointed out between his text and that which we now possess of the Septuagint may be explained to our satisfaction, not by the reading of the Hebrew text (Ritter), but by the fact that our recension is of a later date than the one he used. Furthermore, his method of interpretation appears as something new and original among the juridical commentaries of the Palestinian rabbis. Eliminating what formed the common basis of all commentaries of this kind-the interpretation of the Hebrew proper names (Philo gives them at times a Greek etymology), the particular rules for the signs which indicate that Moses intended us to look beyond the literal sense (Siegfried), the oral traditions added to the account of the Pentateuch (and again, at the beginning of the "Life of Moses" these traditions are clearly of Alexandrine origin), and the prescriptions of the worship in Jerusalem-two essential features remain: first, the conviction that the Jewish law is identical with the natural; and then the allegorical interpretation. The first, according to which the acts of the prophets and the prescriptions of Moses are regarded as ideals conformable to nature (in the Stoic sense), gives to the Jewish religion a universality incompatible with the narrow national Messianism of the Jewish sibyls. Philo thus abandons entirely the Messianic promises; there is no national tradition to exclude the Gentile from Judaism. To find his precursors one must go back to the Prophets; tradition he revives, but only with serious modifications. To the idea of moral universality he adds the idea of nature which he received from the Stoics. His interpretation is wholly bent on identifying the Mosaic prescription with natural law. The second feature is the allegorical interpretation. Without doubt Philo had his predecessors among the Alexandrines. The proof of this is found not in the fragments of Aristobulus (which are grossly false and later than Philo), but in the work of Philo himself, which is based sometimes on the authority of his predecessors, in the "Wisdom of Solomon" (an Alexandrine work of the first century b.c., which contains some traces of this method), and finally in the description Philo has given us of the occupations of the Therapeutæ and the Essenes. The tradition, however, thus formed cannot have amounted to much, for it does not prevail against personal inspiration and it lacks unity. This interpretation appears to us rather as a day-by-day creation of that age, and in Philo's works we can follow an allegory in process of formation, e.g. the interpretation of man "after the image of God". The development of the interior moral life as Philo conceived it is always bound up with his allegorical method. This method differs from that of most of his Greek predecessors who sought an artificial means to bring out the philosophical conceptions in time-honoured texts, such as that of Homer. As a rule he does not search in the sacred text for any strictly philosophical theory; more often he puts forth these theories directly on their own merits. Though at times enthusiastic in his admiration of Greek philosophers, he does not try to represent them as unavowed disciples of Moses. What he seeks in Genesis is not this or that truth, but the description of the attitudes of the soul towards God, such as innocence, sin, repentance. The allegorical method of Philo neither proves nor attempts to prove anything. It is not a mode of apologetic; in the "Life of Moses" e.g. this method is seldom employed; the only apologetic feature is the presentation of the high moral import of the Jewish laws taken in their literal sense. But the method is indispensable for the interior life; it gives the concrete image which the mystic needs to explain his effusions, and it makes the Jewish books profitable in the spiritual life. The spiritual life consists in the feeling of confidence which gives us faith in God, a feeling which coincides with that of the nothingness of man left to his own strength. Faith in God is not in itself the condition but the end or crowning of this life, and human life oscillates between confidence in self and confidence in God. This God conceived in His relations with the moral needs of man has the omnipotence and infinite goodness of the God of the prophets; it is by no means the God of the Stoics, in direct relation with the cosmos rather than with man. Under this influence the Philonian cult became an eminently moral one: the originality of Philonism consists in its moral interpretation of the actions of the divinity upon the world, which till then had been regarded more in their physical aspect. The fundamental idea is here that of Divine power conceived according to the manner of the Jews as goodness and sovereignty in relation to man. It is remarkable that with this idea the cosmic power of philosophy or of Greek religion is transformed by Philo into moral power. Divine wisdom is without doubt like the Isis in Plutarch's treatise, mother of the world, but above all mother of goodness in the virtuous soul. The "Man of God" is the moral consciousness of man rather than the prototype or ideal. The Divine spirit is transformed from the material ether into the principle of moral inspiration. We recognize, it is true, the traces of the cosmic origin of the Divine intermediaries; the angels are material intermediaries as well as spiritual, and Philo accepts the belief in the power of the heavenly bodies as an inferior degree of wisdom. Nevertheless he did his best to suppress every material intermediary between man and God. This is quite evident in the celebrated theory of the Logos of God. This Logos, which according to the Stoics is the bond between the different parts of the world, and according to the Heracliteans the source of the cosmic oppositions, is regarded by Philo as the Divine word which reveals God to the soul and calms the passions (see Logos). It is finally from this point of view of the interior life that Philo transforms the moral conception of the Greeks which he knew mainly in the most popular forms (cynical diatribes); he discovers in them the idea of the moral conscience accepted though but slightly developed by philosophers up to that time. A very interesting point of view is the consideration of the various moral systems of the Greeks, not simply as true or false, but as so many indications of the soul's progress or recoil at different stages. Consult various editions of Philo's works: Mangey (2 vols., London, 1742); Cohn and Wendland, I-V (Berlin, 1896-1906); Cumont, De Æternitate Mundi (Berlin, 1891); Conybeare, Philo about Contemplative Life (Oxford, 1895); Harris, Fragments of Philo Judæus (Cambridge, 1886); Wendland, Neuentdeckte Fragmente Philos (Berlin, 1891). Writings: Grossmann, De Philonis operum continua serie, I (Leipzig, 1841), II (1842); Massebieau, Le Classement des OEuvres de Philon in Biblioth. de l'Ecole des hautes études, I (1889), 191; Massebieau and BrÉhier, Chronologie de la Vie et des OEuvres de Philon in Revue d'hist. des Relig. (1906), 1-3. Doctrine: Drummond, Philo Judæus (2 vols., London, 1888); Herriot, Philon le Juif; Essai sur l'Ecole Juive d'Alexandrie (Paris, 1898); Martin, Philon (Paris, 1907); BrÉhier, Les Idées Philosophiques et Religieuses de Philon d'Alexandrie (Paris, 1908); SchÜrer, Gesch. des Judischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi (3rd ed., Berlin, 1909); Siegfried, Philo v. Alexandria als Ausleger d. A. T. (Jena, 1875). Emile BrÉhier Philomelium Philomelium A titular see in Pisidia, suffragan of Antioch. According to ancient writers Philomelium was situated in the south-west of Phrygia near the frontier of Lycaonia, on the road from Synnada to Iconium. It formed part of the "conventus" of Synnada. Its coins show that it was allied with the neighbouring city of Mandropolis (now Mandra). In the sixth century it formed part of Pisidia, the inhabitants of which pronounced its name Philomede or Philomene. In the Middle Ages it is often mentioned by Byzantine historians in connexion with the wars with the Seljukian sultans of Iconium. In the twelfth century it was one of the chief cities of the sultanate; from this time it bore the Turkish name of Ak-Sheher (white city), and to-day is the chief town of the caza of the vilayet of Konieh, numbering 4000 inhabitants, nearly all Mussulmans, and is a station on the railway from Eski-Shehr to Konieh. The ancient ruins are unimportant; they include a few inscriptions, some of them Christian. In a suburb is the tomb of Nasr Eddin Hodja, famous for his sanctity among the Turks. Christianity was introduced into Philomelium at an early date. In 196 the Church of Smyrna wrote to the Church of Philomelium announcing the martyrdom of St. Polycarp (Eusebius "Hist. Eccl.", IV, xix). Seven of its bishops are known: Theosebius, present at the Council of Constantinople (381); Paul, at Chalcedon (451); Marcianus, who signed the letter to Emperor Leo from the bishops of Pisidia (458); Aristodemus, present at the Council of Constantinople (553); Marinus, at Constantinople (680 and 692); Sisinnius, at Nicæa (787); Euthymius at the Photian Council of Constantinople (879). In the Greek "Notitiæ episcopatuum" Philomelium is first mentioned among the suffragan sees of Antioch in Pisidia, and in the ninth century among those of Amorium in Phrygia. It receives mention until the thirteenth century. Acta SS., Jan,. III, 317; LE QUIEN, Oriens christ., I, 1059; HAMILTON, Researches, I, 472; II, 184; ARUNDELL, Discoveries, I, 282 sq.; TEXIER, Asie Mineure, 435; SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geogr., s. v., contains bibliography ot ancient authors; see also the notes of MÜLLER in Ptolemy, ed, DIDOT, I, 831. S. PÉTRIDÈS Saint Philomena St. Philomena On 25 May, 1802, during the quest for the graves of Roman martyrs in the Catacomb of Priscilla, a tomb was discovered and opened; as it contained a glass vessel it was assumed to be the grave of a martyr. The view, then erroneously entertained in Rome, that the presence of such vessels (supposed to have contained the martyr's blood) in a grave was a symbol of martyrdom, has been rejected in practice since the investigations of De Rossi (cf. Leclercq in "Dict. d.archéol. chrét. et de liturg.", s.v. Ampoules de sang). The remains found in the above-mentioned tomb were shown to be those of a young maiden, and, as the name Filumena was discovered on the earthenware slabs closing the grave, it was assumed that they were those of a virgin martyr named Philumena. On 8 June, 1805, the relics were translated to the church of Mungano, Diocese of Nola (near Naples), and enshrined under one of its altars. In 1827 Leo XII presented the church with the three earthenware tiles, with the inscription, which may be seen in the church even today. On the basis of alleged revelations to a nun in Naples, and of an entirely fanciful and indefensible explanation of the allegorical paintings, which were found on the slabs beside the inscription, a canon of the church in Mugnano, named Di Lucia, composed a purely fictitious and romantic account of the supposed martyrdom of St. Philomena, who is not mentioned in any of the ancient sources. In consequence of the wonderful favours received in answer to prayer before the relics of the saint at Mugnano, devotion to them spread rapidly, and, after instituting investigations into the question, Gregory XVI appointed a special feast to be held on 9 September, "in honorem s. Philumenae virginis et martyris" (cf. the lessons of this feast in the Roman Breviary). The earthenware plates were fixed in front of the grave as follows: LUMENA PAX TECUM FI. The plates were evidently inserted in the wrong order, and the inscription should doubtless read PAX TECUM FILUMENA. The letters are painted on the plates with red paint, and the inscription belongs to the primitive class of epigraphical memorials in the Catacomb of Priscilla, thus, dating from about the middle or second half of the second century. The disarrangement of the inscription proves that it must have been completed before the plates were put into position, although in the numerous other examples of this kind in the same catacomb the inscription was added only after the grave had been closed. Consequently, since the disarrangement of the plates can scarcely be explained as arising from an error, Marucchi seems justified in concluding that the inscription and plates originally belonged to an earlier grave, and were later employed (now in the wrong order) to close another. Apart from the letters, the plates contain three arrows, either as a decoration or a punctuation, a leaf as decoration, two anchors, and a palm as the well-known Christian symbols. Neither these signs nor the glass vessel discovered in the grave can be regarded as a proof of martyrdom. J.P. KIRSCH Philosophy Philosophy + I. Definition of Philosophy. + II. Division of Philosophy. + III. The Principal Systematic Solutions. + IV. Philosophical Methods. + V. The Great Historical Currents of Thought. + VI. Contemporary Orientations. + VII. Is Progress in Philosophy Indefinite, or Is there a Philosophia Perennis? + VIII. Philosophy and the Sciences. + IX. Philosophy and Religion. + X. The Catholic Church and Philosophy. + XI. The Teaching of Philosophy. + XII. Bibliography I. DEFINITION OF PHILOSOPHY Etymology According to its etymology, the word "philosophy" (philosophia, from philein, to love, and sophia, wisdom) means "the love of wisdom". This sense appears again in sapientia, the word used in the Middle Ages to designate philosophy. In the early stages of Greek, as of every other, civilization, the boundary line between philosophy and other departments of human knowledge was not sharply defined, and philosophy was understood to mean "every striving towards knowledge". This sense of the word survives in Herodotus (I, xxx) and Thucydides (II, xl). In the ninth century of our era, Alcuin, employing it in the same sense, says that philosophy is "naturarum inquisitio, rerum humanarum divinarumque cognitio quantum homini possibile est aestimare" -- investigation of nature, and such knowledge of things human and Divine as is possible for man (P.L., CI, 952). In its proper acceptation, philosophy does not mean the aggregate of the human sciences, but "the general science of things in the universe by their ultimate determinations and reasons"; or again, "the intimate knowledge of the causes and reasons of things", the profound knowledge of the universal order. Without here enumerating all the historic definitions of philosophy, some of the most significant may be given. Plato calls it "the acquisition of knowledge", ktêsis epistêmês (Euthydemus, 288 d). Aristotle, mightier than his master at compressing ideas, writes: tên onomazomenên sophian peri ta procirc;ta aitia kai tas archas hupolambanousi pantes -- "All men consider philosophy as concerned with first causes and principles" (Metaph., I, i). These notions were perpetuated in the post-Aristotelean schools (Stoicism, Epicureanism, neo-Platonism), with this difference, that the Stoics and Epicureans accentuated the moral bearing of philosophy ("Philosophia studium summae virtutis", says Seneca in "Epist.", lxxxix, 7), and the neo-Platonists its mystical bearing (see section V below). The Fathers of the Church and the first philosophers of the Middle Ages seem not to have had a very clear idea of philosophy for reasons which we will develop later on (section IX), but its conception emerges once more in all its purity among the Arabic philosophers at the end of the twelfth century and the masters of Scholasticism in the thirteenth. St. Thomas, adopting the Aristotelean idea, writes: "Sapientia est scientia quae considerat causas primas et universales causas; sapientia causas primas omnium causarum considerat" -- Wisdom [i.e. philosophy] is the science which considers first and universal causes; wisdom considers the first causes of all causes" (In Metaph., I, lect. ii). In general, modern philosophers may be said to have adopted this way of looking at it. Descartes regards philosophy as wisdom: "Philosophiae voce sapientiae studium denotamus" -- "By the term philosophy we denote the pursuit of wisdom" (Princ. philos., preface); and he understands by it "cognitio veritatis per primas suas causas" -- " knowledge of truth by its first causes" (ibid.). For Locke, philosophy is the true knowledge of things; for Berkeley, "the study of wisdom and truth" (Princ.). The many conceptions of philosophy given by Kant reduce it to that of a science of the general principles of knowledge and of the ultimate objects attainable by knowledge -- "Wissenschaft von den letzten Zwecken der menschlichen Vernunft". For the numerous German philosophers who derive their inspiration from his criticism -- Fichte, Hegel, Schelling, Schleiermacher, Schopenhauer, and the rest -- it is the general teaching of science (Wissenschaftslehre). Many contemporary authors regard it as the synthetic theory of the particular sciences: "Philosophy", says Herbert Spencer, "is completely unified knowledge" (First Principles, #37). Ostwald has the same idea. For Wundt, the object of philosophy is "the acquisition of such a general conception of the world and of life as will satisfy the exigencies of the reason and the needs of the heart" -- "Gewinnung einer allgemeinen Welt -- und Lebensanschauung, welche die Forderungen unserer Vernunft und die Bedurfnisse unseres Gemüths befriedigen soll" (Einleit. in d. Philos., 1901, p. 5). This idea of philosophy as the ultimate science of values (Wert lehre) is emphasized by Windelband, Déring, and others. The list of conceptions and definitions might be indefinitely prolonged. All of them affirm the eminently synthetic character of philosophy. In the opinion of the present writer, the most exact and comprehensive definition is that of Aristotle. Face to face with nature and with himself, man reflects and endeavours to discover what the world is, and what he is himself. Having made the real the object of studies in detail, each of which constitutes science (see section VIII), he is led to a study of the whole, to inquire into the principles or reasons of the totality of things, a study which supplies the answers to the last Why's. The last Why of all rests upon all that is and all that becomes: it does not apply, as in any one particular science (e.g. chemistry), to this or that process of becoming, or to this or that being (e.g. the combination of two bodies), but to all being and all becoming. All being has within it its constituent principles, which account for its substance (constitutive material and formal causes); all becoming, or change, whether superficial or profound, is brought about by an efficient cause other than its subject; and lastly things and events have their bearings from a finality, or final cause. The harmony of principles, or causes, produces the universal order. And thus philosophy is the profound knowledge of the universal order, in the sense of having for its object the simplest and most general principles, by means of which all other objects of thought are, in the last resort, explained. By these principles, says Aristotle, we know other things, but other things do not suffice to make us know these principles (dia gar tauta kai ek toutôn t'alla gnôrizetai, all' ou tauta dia tôn hupokeimenôn -- Metaph., I). The expression universal order should be understood in the widest sense. Man is one part of it: hence the relations of man with the world of sense and with its Author belong to the domain of philosophy. Now man, on the one hand, is the responsible author of these relations, because he is free, but he is obliged by nature itself to reach an aim, which is his moral end. On the other hand, he has the power of reflecting upon the knowledge which he acquires of all things, and this leads him to study the logical structure of science. Thus philosophical knowledge leads to philosophical acquaintance with morality and logic. And hence we have this more comprehensive definition of philosophy: "The profound knowledge of the universal order, of the duties which that order imposes upon man, and of the knowledge which man acquires from reality" -- "La connaissance approfondie de l'ordre universel, des devoirs qui en résultent pour l'homme et de la science que l'homme acquiert de la rémite"' (Mercier, "Logique", 1904, p. 23). -- The development of these same ideas under another aspect will be found in section VIII of this article. II. DIVISIONS OF PHILOSOPHY Since the universal order falls within the scope of philosophy (which studies only its first principles, not its reasons in detail), philosophy is led to the consideration of all that is: the world, God (or its cause), and man himself (his nature, origin, operations, moral end, and scientific activities). It would be out of the question to enumerate here all the methods of dividing philosophy that have been given: we confine ourselves to those which have played a part in history and possess the deepest significance. A. In Greek Philosophy Two historical divisions dominate Greek philosophy: the Platonic and the Aristotelean. (1) Plato divides philosophy into dialectic, physics, and ethics. This division is not found in Plato's own writings, and it would be impossible to fit his dialogues into the triple frame, but it corresponds to the spirit of the Platonic philosophy. According to Zeller, Xenocrates (314 B.C.) his disciple, and the leading representative of the Old Academy, was the first to adopt this triadic division, which was destined to go down through the ages (Grundriss d. Geschichte d. griechischen Philosophie, 144), and Aristotle follows it in dividing his master's philosophy. Dialectic is the science of objective reality, i.e., of the Idea (idea eidos), so that by Platonic dialectic we must understand metaphysics. Physics is concerned with the manifestations of the Idea, or with the Real, in the sensible universe, to which Plato attributes no real value independent of that of the Idea. Ethics has for its object human acts. Plato deals with logic, but has no system of logic; this was a product of Aristotle's genius. Plato's classification was taken up by his school (the Academy), but it was not long in yielding to the influence of Aristotle's more complete division and according a place to logic. Following the inspirations of the old Academics, the Stoics divided philosophy into physics (the study of the real), logic (the study of the structure of science) and morals (the study of moral acts). This classification was perpetuated by the neo-Platonists, who transmitted it to the Fathers of the Church, and through them to the Middle Ages. (2) Aristotle, Plato's illustrious disciple, the most didactic, and at the same time the most synthetic, mind of the Greek worid, drew up a remarkable scheme of the divisions of philosophy. The philosophical sciences are divided into theoretic, practical, and poetic, according as their scope is pure speculative knowledge, or conduct (praxis), or external production (poiêsis). Theoretic philosophy comprises: (a) physics, or the study of corporeal things which are subject to change (achôrista men all' ouk akinêta) (b) mathematics, or the study of extension, i.e., of a corporeal property not subject to change and considered, by abstraction, apart from matter (akinêta men ou chôrista d'isôs, all' hôs en hulê); (c) metaphysics, called theology, or first philosophy, i.e. the study of being in its unchangeable and (whether naturally or by abstraction) incorporeal determinations (chôrista kau akinêt). Practical philosophy comprises ethics, economics, and politics, the second of these three often merging into the last. Poetic philosophy is concerned in general with the external works conceived by human intelligence. To these may conveniently be added logic, the vestibule of philosophy, which Aristotle studied at length, and of which he may be called the creator. To metaphysics Aristotle rightly accords the place of honour in the grouping of philosophical studies. He calls it "first philosophy". His classification was taken up by the Peripatetic School and was famous throughout antiquity; it was eclipsed by the Platonic classification during the Alexandrine period, but it reappeared during the Middle Ages. B. In the Middle Ages Though the division of philosophy into its branches is not uniform in the first period of the Middle Ages in the West, i.e. down to the end of the twelfth century, the classifications of this period are mostly akin to the Platonic division into logic, ethics, and physics. Aristotle's classification of the theoretic sciences, though made known by Boethius, exerted no influence for the reason that in the early Middle Ages the West knew nothing of Aristotle except his works on logic and some fragments of his speculative philosophy (see section V below). It should be added here that philosophy, reduced at first to dialectic, or logic, and placed as such in the Trivium, was not long in setting itself above the liberal arts. The Arab philosophers of the twelfth century (Avicenna, Averroes) accepted the Aristotelean classification, and when their works -- particularly their translations of Aristotle's great original treatises -- penetrated into the West, the Aristotelean division definitively took its place there. Its coming is heralded by Gundissalinus (see section XII), one of the Toletan translators of Aristotle, and author of a treatise, "De divisione philosophiae", which was imitated by Michael Scott and Robert Kilwardby. St. Thomas did no more than adopt it and give it a precise scientific form. Later on we shall see that, conformably with the medieval notion of sapientia, to each part of philosophy corresponds the preliminary study of a group of special sciences. The general scheme of the division of philosophy in the thirteenth century, with St. Thomas's commentary on it, is as follows: There are as many parts of philosophy as there are distinct domains in the order submitted to the philosopher's reflection. Now there is an order which the intelligence does not form but only considers; such is the order realized in nature. Another order, the practical, is formed either by the acts of our intelligence or by the acts of our will, or by the application of those acts to external things in the arts: e.g., the division of practical philosophy into logic, moral philosophy, and aesthetics, or the philosophy of the arts ("Ad philosophiam naturalem pertinet considerare ordinem rerum quem ratio humana considerat sed non facit; ita quod sub naturali philosophia comprehendamus et metaphysicam. Ordo autem quem ratio considerando facit in proprio actu, pertinet ad rationalem philosophiam, cujus est considerare ordinem partium orationis ad invicem et ordinem principiorum ad invicem et ad conclusiones. Ordo autem actionum voluntariarum pertinet ad considerationem moralis philosophiae. Ordo autem quem ratio considerando facit in rebus exterioribus per rationem humanam pertinet ad artes mechanicas." To natural philosophy pertains the consideration of the order of things which human reason considers but does not create -- just as we include metaphysics also under natural philosophy. But the order which reason creates of its own act by consideration pertains to rational philosophy, the office of which is to consider the order of the parts of speech with reference to one another and the order of the principles with reference to one another and to the conclusions. The order of voluntary actions pertains to the consideration of moral philosophy, while the order which the reason creates in external things through the human reason pertains to the mechanical arts. -- In "X Ethic. ad Nic.", I, lect. i). The philosophy of nature, or speculative philosophy, is divided into metaphysics, mathematics, and physics, according to the three stages traversed by the intelligence in its effort to attain a synthetic comprehension of the universal order, by abstracting from movement (physics), intelligible quantity (mathematics), being (metaphysics) (In lib. Boeth. de Trinitate, Q. v., a. 1). In this classification it is to be noted that, man being one element of the world of sense, psychology ranks as a part of physics. C. In Modern Philosophy The Scholastic classification may be said, generally speaking, to have lasted, with some exceptions, until the seventeenth century. Beginning with Descartes, we find a multitude of classifications arising, differing in the principles which inspire them. Kant, for instance, distinguishes metaphysics, moral philosophy, religion, and anthropology. The most widely accepted scheme, that which still governs the division of the branches of philosophy in teaching, is due to Wolff (1679-1755), a disciple of Leibniz, who has been called the educator of Germany in the eighteenth century. This scheme is as follows: 1. Logic. 2. Speculative Philosophy. o Ontology, or General Metaphysics. o Special Metaphysics. # Theodicy (the study of God). # Cosmology (the study of the World). # Psychology (the study of Man). 3. Practical Philosophy. o Ethics o Politics o Economics Wolff broke the ties binding the particular sciences to philosophy, and placed them by themselves; in his view philosophy must remain purely rational. It is easy to see that the members of Wolff's scheme are found in the Aristotelean classification, wherein theodicy is a chapter of metaphysics and psychology a chapter of physics. It may even be said that the Greek classification is better than Wolff's in regard to speculative philosophy, where the ancients were guided by the formal object of the study -- i.e. by the degree of abstraction to which the whole universe is subjected, while the moderns always look at the material object -- i.e., the three categories of being, which it is possible to study, God, the world of sense, and man. D. In Contemporary Philosophy The impulse received by philosophy during the last half-century gave rise to new philosophical sciences, in the sense that various branches have been detached from the main stems. In psychology this phenomenon has been remarkable: criteriology, or epistemology (the study of the certitude of knowledge) has developed into a special study. Other branches which have formed themselves into new psychological sciences are: physiological psychology or the study of the physiological concomitant of psychic activities; didactics, or the science of teaching; pedagogy, or the science of education; collective psychology and the psychology of people (Volkerpsychologie), studying the psychic phenomena observable in human groups as such, and in the different races. An important section of logic (called also noetic, or canonic) is tending to sever itself from the main body, viz., methodology, which studies the special logical formation of various sciences. On moral philosophy, in the wide sense, have been grafted the philosophy of law, the philosophy of society, or social philosophy (which is much the same as sociology), and the philosophies of religion and of history. III. THE PRINCIPAL SYSTEMATIC SOLUTIONS From what has been said above it is evident that philosophy is beset by a great number of questions It would not be possible here to enumerate all those questions, much less to detail the divers solutions which have been given to them. The solution of a philosophic question is called a philosophic doctrine or theory. A philosophic system (from sunistêmi, put together) is a complete and organized group of solutions. It is not an incoherent assemblage or an encyclopedic amalgamation of such solutions; it is dominated by an organic unity. Only those philosophic systems which are constructed conformably with the exigencies of organic unity are really powerful: such are the systems of the Upanishads, of Aristotle, of neo-Platonism, of Scholasticism, of Leibniz, Kant and Hume. So that one or several theories do not constitute a system; but some theories, i.e. answers to a philosophic question, are important enough to determine the solution of other important problems of a system. The scope of this section is to indicate some of these theories. A. Monism, or Pantheism, and Pluralism, Individualism, or Theism Are there many beings distinct in their reality, with one Supreme Being, God at the summit of the hierarchy; or is there but one reality (monas, hence monism), one All-God (pan-theos) of whom each individual is but a member or fragment (Substantialistic Pantheism), or else a force, or energy (Dynamic Pantheism)? Here we have an important question of metaphysics the solution of which reacts upon all other domains of philosophy. The system of Aristotle, of the Scholastics, and of Leibniz are Pluralistic and Theistic; the Indian, neo-Platonic, and Hegelian are Monistic. Monism is a fascinating explanation of the real, but it only postpones the difficulties which it imagines itself to be solving (e.g. the difficulty of the interaction of things), to say nothing of the objection, from the human point of view, that it runs counter to our most deep-rooted sentiments. B. Objectivism and Subjectivism Does being, whether one or many, possess its own life, independent of our mind, so that to be known by us is only accident to being, as in the objective system of metaphysics (e.g. Aristotle, the Scholastics, Spinoza)? Or is being no other reality than the mental and subjective presence which it acquires in our representation of it as in the Subjective system (e.g. Hume)? It is in this sense that the "Revue de métaphysique et de morale" (see bibliography) uses the term metaphysics in its title. Subjectivism cannot explain the passivity of our mental representations, which we do not draw out of ourselves, and which therefore oblige us to infer the reality of a non-ego. C. Substantialism and Phenomenism Is all reality a flux of phenomena (Heraclitus, Berkeley, Hume, Taine), or does the manifestation appear upon a basis, or substance, which manifests itself, and does the phenomenon demand a noumenon (the Scholastics)? Without an underlying substance, which we only know through the medium of the phenomenon, certain realities, as walking, talking, are inexplicable, and such facts as memory become absurd. D. Mechanism and Dynamism (Pure and Modified) Natural bodies are considered by some to be aggregations of homogeneous particles of matter (atoms) receiving a movement which is extrinsic to them, so that these bodies differ only in the number and arrangement of their atoms (the Atomism, or Mechanism, of Democritus, Descartes, and Hobbes). Others reduce them to specific, unextended, immaterial forces, of which extension is only the superficial manifestation (Leibniz). Between the two is Modified Dynamism (Aristotle), which distinguishes in bodies an immanent specific principle (form) and an indeterminate element (matter) which is the source of limitation and extension. This theory accounts for the specific characters of the entities in question as well as for the reality of their extension in space. E. Materialism, Agnosticism, and Spiritualism That everything real is material, that whatever might be immaterial would be unreal, such is the cardinal doctrine of Materialism (the Stoics, Hobbes, De Lamettrie). Contemporary Materialism is less outspoken: it is inspired by a Positivist ideology (see section VI), and asserts that, if anything supra-material exists, it is unknowable (Agnosticism, from a and gnôsis, knowledge. Spencer, Huxley). Spiritualism teaches that incorporeal, or immaterial, beings exist or that they are possible (Plato, Aristotle, St. Augustine, the Scholastics, Descartes, Leibniz). Some have even asserted that only spirits exist: Berkeley, Fichte, and Hegel are exaggerated Spiritualists. The truth is that there are bodies and spirits; among the latter we are acquainted (though less well than with bodies) with the nature of our soul, which is revealed by the nature of our immaterial acts, and with the nature of God, the infinite intelligence, whose existence is demontrated by the very existence of finite things. Side by side with these solutions relating to the problems of the real, there is another group of solutions, not less influential in the orientation of a system, and relating to psychical problems or those of the human ego. F. Sensualism and Rationalism, or Spiritualism These are the opposite poles of the ideogenetic question, the question of the origin of our knowledge. For Sensualism the only source of human knowledge is sensation: everything reduces to transformed sensations. This theory, long ago put forward in Greek philosophy (Stoicism, Epicureanism), was developed to the full by the English Sensualists (Locke, Berkeley, Hume) and the English Associationists (Brown, Hartley, Priestley); its modern form is Positivism (John Stuart Mill, Huxley, Spencer, Comte, Taine, Littré etc.). Were this theory true, it would follow that we can know only what falls under our senses, and therefore cannot pronounce upon the existence or non-existence, the reality or unreality, of the super-sensible. Positivism is more logical than Materialism. In the New World, the term Agnosticism has been very happily employed to indicate this attitude of reserve towards the super-sensible. Rationalism (from ratio, reason), or Spiritualism, establishes the existence in us of concepts higher than sensations, i.e. of abstract and general concepts (Plato, Aristotle, St. Augustine, the Scholastics, Descartes, Leibniz, Kant, Cousin etc.). Ideologic Spiritualism has won the adherence of humanity's greatest thinkers. Upon the spirituality, or immateriality, of our higher mental operations is based the proof of the spirituality of the principle from which they proceed and, hence, of the immortality of the soul. G. Scepticism, Dogmatism, and Criticism So many answers have been given to the question whether man can attain truth, and what is the foundation of certitude, that we will not attempt to enumerate them all. Scepticism declares reason incapable of arriving at the truth. and holds certitude to be a purely subjective affair (Sextus Empiricus, Ænesidemus). Dogmatism asserts that man can attain to truth, and that, in measure to be further determined, our cognitions are certain. The motive of certitude is, for the Traditionalists, a Divine revelation, for the Scotch School (Reid) it is an inclination of nature to affirm the principles of common sense; it is an irrational, but social, necessity of admitting certain principles for practical dogmatism (Balfour in his "Foundations of Belief" speaks of "non-rational impulse", while Mallock holds that "certitude is found to be the child, not of reason but of custom" and Brunetière writes about "the bankruptcy of science and the need of belief"); it is an affective sentiment, a necessity of wishing that certain things may be verities (Voluntarism; Kant's Moral Dogmatism), or the fact of living certain verities (contemporary Pragmatism and Humanism William James, Schiller). But for others -- and this is the theory which we accept -- the motive of certitude is the very evidence of the connection which appears between the predicate and the subject of a proposition, an evidence which the mind perceives, but which it does not create (Moderate Dogmatism). Lastly for Criticism, which is the Kantian solution of the problem of knowledge, evidence is created by the mind by means of the structural functions with which every human intellect is furnished (the categories of the understanding). In conformity with these functions we connect the impressions of the senses and construct the world. Knowledge, therefore, is valid only for the world as represented to the mind. Kantian Criticism ends in excessive Idealism, which is also called Subjectivism. or Phenomenalism, and according to which the mind draws all its representations out of itself, both the sensory impressions and the categories which connect them: the world becomes a mental poem, the object is created by the subject as representation (Fichte, Schelling, Hegel). H. Nominalism, Realism, and Conceptualism Nominalism, Realism, and Conceptualism are various answers to the question of the real objectivity of our predications, or of the relation of fidelity existing between our general representations and the external world. I. Determinism and Indeterminism Has every phenomenon or fact its adequate cause in an antecedent phenomenon or fact (Cosmic Determinism)? And, in respect to acts of the will, are they likewise determined in all their constituent elements (Moral Determinism, Stoicism, Spinoza)? If so, then liberty disappears, and with it human responsibility, merit and demerit. Or, on the contrary, is there a category of volitions which are not necessitated, and which depend upon the discretionary power of the will to act or not to act and in acting to follow freely chosen direction? Does liberty exist? Most Spiritualists of all schools have adopted a libertarian philosophy, holding that liberty alone gives the moral life an acceptable meaning; by various arguments they have confirmed the testimony of conscience and the data of common consent. In physical nature causation and determinism rule; in the moral life, liberty. Others, by no means numerous, have even pretended to discover cases of indeterminism in physical nature (the so-called Contingentist theories, e.g. Boutroux). J. Utilitarianism and the Morality of Obligation What constitutes the foundation of morality in our actions? Pleasure or utility say some, personal or egoistic pleasure (Egoism -- Hobbes, Bentham, and "the arithmetic of pleasure"); or again, in the pleasure and utility of all (Altruism -- John Stuart Mill). Others hold that morality consists in the performance of duty for duty's sake, the observance of law because it is law, independently of personal profit (the Formalism of the Stoics and of Kant). According to another doctrine, which in our opinion is more correct, utility, or personal advantage, is not incompatible with duty, but the source of the obligation to act is in the last analysis, as the very exigencies of our nature tell us, the ordinance of God. IV. PHILOSOPHICAL METHODS Method (meth' hodos) means a path taken to reach some objective point. By philosophical method is understood the path leading to philosophy, which, again, may mean either the process employed in the construction of a philosophy (constructive method, method of invention), or the way of teaching philosophy (method of teaching, didactic method). We will deal here with the former of these two senses; the latter will be treated in section XI. Three methods can be, and have been, applied to the construction of philosophy. A. Experimental (Empiric, or Analytic) Method The method of all Empiric philosophers is to observe facts, accumulate them, and coordinate them. Pushed to its ultimate consequences, the empirical method refuses to rise beyond observed and observable fact; it abstains from investigating anything that is absolute. It is found among the Materialists, ancient and modern, and is most unreservedly applied in contemporary Positivism. Comte opposes the "positive mode of thinking", based solely upon observation, to the theological and metaphysical modes. For Mill, Huxley, Bain, Spencer, there is not one philosophical proposition but is the product, pure and simple, of experience: what we take for a general idea is an aggregate of sensations; a judgment is the union of two sensations; a syllogism, the passage from particular to particular (Mill, "A System of Logic, Rational and Inductive", ed. Lubbock, 1892; Bain, "Logic", New York, 1874). Mathematical propositions, fundamental axioms such as a = a, the principle of contradiction, the principle of causality are only "generalizations from facts of experience" (Mill, op. cit., vii, #5). According to this author, what we believe to be superior to experience in the enunciation of scientific laws is derived from our subjective incapacity to conceive its contradictory; according to Spencer, this inconceivability of the negation is developed by heredity. Applied in an exaggerated and exclusive fashion, the experimental method mutilates facts, since it is powerless to ascend to the causes and the laws which govern facts. It suppresses the character of objective necessity which is inherent in scientific judgments, and reduces them to collective formulae of facts observed in the past. It forbids our asserting, e.g., that the men who will be born after us will be subject to death, seeing that all certitude rests on experience, and that by mere observation we cannot reach the unchangeable nature of things. The empirical method, left to its own resources, checks the upward movement of the mind towards the causes or object of the phenomena which confront it. B. Deductive, or Synthetic a Priori, Method At the opposite pole to the preceding, the deductive method starts from very general principles, from higher causes, to descend (Lat. deducere, to lead down) to more and more complex relations and to facts. The dream of the Deductionist is to take as the point of departure an intuition of the Absolute, of the Supreme Reality -- for the Theists, God; for the Monists, the Universal Being -- and to draw from this intuition the synthetic knowledge of all that depends upon it in the universe, in conformity with the metaphysical scale of the real. Plato is the father of deductive philosophy: he starts from the world of Ideas, and from the Idea of the Sovereign Good, and he would know the reality of the world of sense only in the Ideas of which it is the reflection. St. Augustine, too, finds his satisfaction in studying the universe, and the least of the beings which compose it, only in a synthetic contemplation of God, the exemplary, creative, and final cause of all things. So, too, the Middle Ages attached great importance to the deductive method. "I propose", writes Boethius, "to build science by means of concepts and maxims, as is done in mathematics." Anselm of Canterbury draws from the idea of God, not only the proof of the real existence of an infinite being, but also a group of theorems on His attributes and His relations with the world. Two centuries before Anselm, Scotus Eriugena, the father of anti-Scholasticism, is the completest type of the Deductionist: his metaphysics is one long description of the Divine Odyssey, inspired by the neo-Platonic, monistic conception of the descent of the One in its successive generations. And, on the very threshold of the thirteenth century, Alain de Lille would apply to philosophy a mathematical methodology. In the thirteenth century Raymond Lully believed that he had found the secret of "the Great Art" (ars magna), a sort of syllogism-machine, built of general tabulations of ideas, the combination of which would give the solution of any question whatsoever. Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz are Deductionists: they would construct philosophy after the manner of geometry (more geometrico), linking the most special and complicated theorems to some very simple axioms. The same tendency appears among the Ontologists and the post-Kantian Pantheists in Germany (Fichte, Schelling, Hegel), who base their philosophy upon an intuition of the Absolute Being. The deductive philosophers generally profess to disdain the sciences of observation. Their great fault is the compromising of fact, bending it to a preconceived explanation or theory assumed a priori, whereas the observation of the fact ought to precede the assignment of its cause or of its adequate reason. This defect in the deductive method appears glaringly in a youthful work of Leibniz's, "Specimen demonstrationum politicarum pro rege Polonorum eligendo", published anonymously in 1669, where he demonstrates hy geometrical methods (more geometrico), in sixty propositions, that the Count Palatine of Neuburg ought to be elected to the Polish Throne. C. Analytico-Synthetic Method This combination of analysis and synthesis, of observation and deduction, is the only method appropriate to philosophy. Indeed, since it undertakes to furnish a general explanation of the universal order (see section I), philosophy ought to begin with complex effects, facts known by observation, before attempting to include them in one comprehensive explanation of the universe. This is manifest in psychology, where we begin with a careful examination of activities, notably of the phenomena of sense, of intelligence, and of appetite; in cosmology, where we observe the series of changes, superficial and profound, of bodies; in moral philosophy, which sets out from the observation of moral facts; in theodicy, where we interrogate religious beliefs and feelings; even in metaphysics, the starting-point of which is really existing being. But observation and analysis once completed, the work of synthesis begins. We must pass onward to a synthetic psychology that shall enable us to comprehend the destinies of man's vital principle; to a cosmology that shall explain the constitution of bodies, their changes, and the stability of the laws which govern them; to a synthetic moral philosophy establishing the end of man and the ultimate ground of duty; to a theodicy and deductive metaphysics that shall examine the attributes of God and the fundamental conceptions of all being. As a whole and in each of its divisions, philosophy applies the analytic-synthetic method. Its ideal would be to give an account of the universe and of man by a synthetic knowledge of God, upon whom all reality depends. This panoramic view -- the eagle's view of things -- has allured all the great geniuses. St. Thomas expresses himself admirably on this synthetic knowledge of the universe and its first cause. The analytico-synthetic process is the method, not only of philosophy, but of every science, for it is the natural law of thought, the proper function of which is unified and orderly knowledge. "Sapientis est ordinare." Aristotle, St. Thomas, Pascal, Newton, Pasteur, thus understood the method of the sciences. Men like Helmholtz and Wundt adopted synthetic views after doing analytical work. Even the Positivists are metaphysicians, though they do not know it or wish it. Does not Herbert Spencer call his philosophy synthetic? and does he not, by reasoning, pass beyond that domain of the "observable" within which he professes to confine himself? V. THE GREAT HISTORICAL CURRENTS Among the many peoples who have covered the globe philosophic culture appears in two groups: the Semitic and the Indo-European, to which may be added the Egyptians and the Chinese. In the Semitic group (Arabs, Babylonians, Assyrians, Aramaeans, Chaldeans) the Arabs are the most important; nevertheless, their part becomes insignificant when compared with the intellectual life of the Indo-Europeans. Among the latter, philosophic life appears successively in various ethnic divisions, and the succession forms the great periods into which the history of philosophy is divided; first, among the people of India (since 1500 B.C.); then among the Greeks and the Romans (sixth century B.C. to sixth century of our era); again, much later, among the peoples of Central and Northern Europe. A. Indian Philosophy The philosophy of India is recorded principally in the sacred books of the Veda, for it has always been closely united with religion. Its numerous poetic and religious productions carry within themselves a chronology which enables us to assign them to three periods. (1) The Period of the Hymns of the Rig Veda (1500-1000 B.C.) This is the most ancient monument of Indo-Germanic civilization; in it may be seen the progressive appearance of the fundamental theory that a single Being exists under a thousand forms in the multiplied phenomena of the universe (Monism). (2) The Period of the Brahmans (1000-500 B.C.) This is the age of Brahminical civilization. The theory of the one Being remains, but little by little the concrete and anthropomorphic ideas of the one Being are replaced by the doctrine that the basis of all things is in oneself (âtman). Psychological Monism appears in its entirety in the Upanishads: the absolute and adequate identity of the Ego -- which is the constitutive basis of our individuality (âtman) -- and of all things, with Brahman, the eternal being exalted above time, space, number, and change, the generating principle of all things in which all things are finally reabsorbed -- such the fundamental theme to be found in the Upanishad under a thousand variations of form. To arrive at the âtman, we must not stop at empirical reality which is multiple and cognizable; we must pierce this husk, penetrate to the unknowable and ineffable superessence, and identify ourselves with it in an unconscious unity. (3) The Post-Vedic or Sanskrit, Period (since 500 B.C.) From the germs of theories contained in the Upanishad a series of systems spring up, orthodox or heterodox. Of the orthodox systems, Vedanta is the most interesting; in it we find the principles of the Upanishads developed in an integral philosophy which comprise metaphysics, cosmology, psychology, and ethics (transmigration, metempsychosis). Among the systems not in harmony with the Vedic dogmas, the most celebrated is Buddhism, a kind of Pessimism which teaches liberation from pain in a state of unconscious repose, or an extinction of personality (Nirvâna). Buddhism spread in China, where it lives side by side with the doctrines of Lao Tse and that of Confucius. It is evident that even the systems which are not in harmony with the Veda are permeated with religious ideas. B. Greek Philosophy This philosophy, which occupied six centuries before, and six after, Christ, may be divided into four periods, corresponding with the succession of the principal lines of research (1) From Thales of Miletus to Socrates (seventh to fifth centuries B.C. -- preoccupied with cosmology) (2) Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle (fifth to fourth centuries B.C. -- psychology); (3) From the death of Aristotle to the rise of neo-Platonism (end of the fourth century B.C. to third century after Christ -- moral philosophy); (4) neo-Platonic School (from the third century after Christ, or, including the systems of the forerunners of neo-Platonism, from the first century after Christ, to the end of Greek philosophy in the seventh century-mysticism). (1) The Pre-Socratic Period The pre-Socratic philosophers either seek for the stable basis of things -- which is water, for Thales of Miletus; air, for Anaximenes of Miletus; air endowed with intelligence, for Diogenes of Apollonia; number, for Pythagoras (sixth century B.C.); abstract and immovable being, for the Eleatics -- or they study that which changes: while Parmenides and the Eleatics assert that everything is, and nothing changes or becomes. Heraclitus (about 535-475) holds that everything becomes, and nothing is unchangeable. Democritus (fifth century) reduces all beings to groups of atoms in motion, and this movement, according to Anaxagoras, has for its cause an intelligent being. (2) The Period of Apogee: Socrates, Plato, Aristotle. When the Sophists (Protagoras, Gorgias) had demonstrated the insufficiency of these cosmologies, Socrates (470-399) brought philosophical investigation to bear on man himself, studying man chiefly from the moral point of view. From the presence in us of abstract ideas Plato (427-347) deduced the existence of a world of supersensible realities or ideas, of which the visible world is but a pale reflection. These ideas, which the soul in an earlier life contemplated, are now, because of its union with the body, but faintly perceived. Aristotle (384-322), on the contrary, shows that the real dwells in the objects of sense. The theory of act and potentiality, of form and matter, is a new solution of the relations between the permanent and the changing. His psychology, founded upon the principle of the unity of man and the substantial union of soul and body, is a creation of genius. And as much may be said of his logic. (3) The Moral Period After Aristotle (end of the fourth Century B.C.) four schools are in evidence: Stoic, Epicurean, Platonic, and Aristotelean. The Stoics (Zeno of Citium, Cleanthes, Chrysippus), like the Epicureans, make speculation subordinate to the quest of happiness, and the two schools, in spite of their divergencies, both consider happiness to be ataraxia or absence of sorrow and preoccupation. The teachings of both on nature (Dynamistic Monism with the Stoics, and Pluralistic Mechanism with the Epicureans) are only a prologue to their moral philosophy. After the latter half of the second century B.C. we perceive reciprocal infiltrations between the various schools. This issues in Eclecticism. Seneca (first century B.C.) and Cicero (106-43 B.C.) are attached to Eclecticism with a Stoic basis; two great commentators of Aristotle, Andronicus of Rhodes (first century B.C.) and Alexander of Aphrodisia about 200), affect a Peripatetic Eclecticism. Parallel with Eclecticism runs a current of Scepticism (AEnesidemus, end of first century B.C., and Sextus Empiricus, second century A.D.). (4) The Mystical Period In the first century B.C. Alexandria had become the capital of Greek intellectual life. Mystical and theurgic tendencies, born of a longing for the ideal and the beyond, began to appear in a current of Greek philosophy which originated in a restoration of Pythagorism and its alliance with Platonism (Plutarch of Chieronea, first century B.C.; Apuleius of Madaura; Numenius, about 160 and others), and still more in the Graeco-Judaic philosophy of Philo the Jew (30 B.C. to A.D. 50). But the dominance of these tendencies is more apparent in neo-Platonism. The most brilliant thinker of the neo-Platonic series is Plotinus (A.D. 20-70). In his "Enneads" he traces the paths which lead the soul to the One, and establishes, in keeping with his mysticism, an emanationist metaphysical system. Porphyry of Tyre (232-304), a disciple of Plotinus, popularizes his teaching, emphasizes its religious bearing, and makes Aristotle's "Organon" the introduction to neo-Platonic philosophy. Later on, neo-Platonism, emphasizing its religious features, placed itself, with Jamblichus, at the service of the pagan pantheon which growing Christianity was ruining on all sides, or again, as with Themistius at Constantinople (fourth century), Proclus and Simplicius at Athens (fifth century), and Ammonius at Alexandria, it took an Encyclopedic turn. With Ammonius and John Philoponus (sixth century) the neo-Platonic School of Alexandria developed in the direction of Christianity. C. Patristic Philosophy In the closing years of the second century and, still more, in the third century, the philosophy of the Fathers of the Church was developed. It was born in a civilization dominated by Greek ideas, chiefly neo-Platonic, and on this side its mode of thought is still the ancient. Still, if some, like St. Augustine, attach the greatest value to the neo-Platonic teachings, it must not be forgotten that the Monist or Pantheistic and Emanationist ideas, which have been accentuated by the successors of Plotinus, are carefully replaced by the theory of creation and the substantial distinction of beings; in this respect a new spirit animates Patristic philosophy. It was developed, too, as an auxiliary of the dogmatic system which the Fathers were to establish. In the third century the great representatives of the Christian School of Alexandria are Clement of Alexandria and Origen. After them Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory of Nazianzus, St. Ambrose, and, above all, St. Augustine (354-430) appear. St. Augustine gathers up the intellectual treasures of the ancient world, and is one of the principal intermediaries for their transmission to the modern world. In its definitive form Augustinism is a fusion of intellectualism and mysticism, with a study of God as the centre of interest. In the fifth century, pseudo-Dionysius perpetuates many a neo-Platonic doctrine adapted to Christianity, and his writings exercise a powerful influence in the Middle Ages. D. Medieval Philosophy The philosophy of the Middle Ages developed simultaneously in the West, at Byzantium, and in divers Eastern centres; but the Western philosophy is the most important. It built itself up with great effort on the ruins of barbarism: until the twelfth century, nothing was known of Aristotle, except some treatises on logic, or of Plato, except a few dialogues. Gradually, problems arose, and, foremost, in importance, the question of universals in the ninth, tenth, and eleventh centuries (see NOMINALISM). St. Anselm (1O33-1109) made a first attempt at systematizing Scholastic philosophy, and developed a theodicy. But as early as the ninth century an anti-Scholastic philosophy had arisen with Eriugena who revived the neo-Platonic Monism. In the twelfth century Scholasticism formulated new anti-Realist doctrines with Adelard of Bath, Gauthier de Mortagne, and, above all, Abelard and Gilbert de la Porrée, whilst extreme Realism took shape in the schools of Chartres. John of Salisbury and Alain de Lille, in the twelfth century, are the co-ordinating minds that indicate the maturity of Scholastic thought. The latter of these waged a campaign against the Pantheism of David of Dinant and the Epicureanism of the Albigenses -- the two most important forms of anti-Scholastic philosophy. At Byzantium, Greek philosophy held its ground throughout the Middle Ages, and kept apart from the movement of Western ideas. The same is true of the Syrians and Arabs. But at the end of the twelfth century the Arabic and Byzantine movement entered into relation with Western thought, and effected, to the profit of the latter, the brilliant philosophical revival of the thirteenth century. This was due, in the first place, to the creation of the University of Paris; next, to the foundation of the Dominican and Franciscan orders; lastly, to the introduction of Arabic and Latin translations of Aristotle and the ancient authors. At the same period the works of Avicenna and Averroes became known at Paris. A pleiad of brilliant names fills the thirteenth century -- Alexander of Hales, St. Bonaventure, Bl. Albertus Magnus, St. Thomas Aquinas, Godfrey of Fontaines, Henry of Ghent, Giles of Rome, and Duns Scotus -- bring Scholastic synthesis to perfection. They all wage war on Latin Averroism and anti-Scholasticism, defended in the schools of Paris by Siger of Brabant. Roger Bacon, Lully, and a group of neo-Platonists occupy a place apart in this century, which is completely filled by remarkable figures. In the fourteenth century Scholastic philosophy betrays the first symptoms of decadence. In place of individualities we have schools, the chief being the Thomist, the Scotist, and the Terminist School of William of Occam, which soon attracted numerous partisans. With John of Jandun, Averroism perpetuates its most audacious propositions; Eckhart and Nicholas of Cusa formulate philosophies which are symptomatic of the approaching revolution. The Renaissance was a troublous period for philosophy. Ancient systems were revived: the Dialectic of the Humanistic philologists (Laurentius Valla, Vivés), Platonism, Aristoteleanism, Stoicism. Telesius, Campanella, and Giordano Bruno follow a naturalistic philosophy. Natural and social law are renewed with Thomas More and Grotius. All these philosophies were leagued together against Scholasticism, and very often against Catholicism. On the other hand, the Scholastic philosophers grew weaker and weaker, and, excepting for the brilliant Spanish Scholasticism of the sixteenth century (Bañez, Suarez, Vasquez, and so on), it may be said that ignorance of the fundamental doctrine became general. In the seventeenth century there was no one to support Scholasticism: it fell, not for lack of ideas, but for lack of defenders. E. Modern Philosophy The philosophies of the Renaissance are mainly negative: modern philosophy is, first and foremost, constructive. The latter is emancipated from all dogma; many of its syntheses are powerful; the definitive formation of the various nationalities and the diversity of languages favour the tendency to individualism. The two great initiators of modern philosophy are Descartes and Francis Bacon. The former inaugurates a spiritualistic philosophy based on the data of consciousness, and his influence may be traced in Malebranche, Spinoza, and Leibniz. Bacon heads a line of Empiricists, who regarded sensation as the only source of knowledge. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, a Sensualist philosophy grew up in England, based on Baconian Empiricism, and soon to develop in the direction of Subjectivism. Hobbes, Locke, Berkeley, and David Hume mark the stages of this logical evolution. Simultaneously an Associationist psychology appeared also inspired by Sensualism, and, before long, it formed a special field of research. Brown, David Hartley, and Priestley developed the theory of association of ideas in various directions. At the outset Sensualism encountered vigorous opposition, even in England, from the Mystics and Platonists of the Cambridge School (Samuel Parker and, especially, Ralph Cudworth). The reaction was still more lively in the Scotch School, founded and chiefly represented by Thomas Reid, to which Adam Ferguson, Oswald, and Dugald Stewart belonged in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and which had great influence over Eclectic Spiritualism, chiefly in America and France. Hobbes's "selfish" system was developed into a morality by Bentham, a partisan of Egoistic Utilitarianism, and by Adam Smith, a defender of Altruism, but provoked a reaction among the advocates of the moral sentiment theory (Shaftesbury, Hutcheson, Samuel Clarke). In England, also, Theism or Deism was chiefly developed, instituting a criticism of all positive religion, which it sought to supplant with a philosophical religion. English Sensualism spread in France during the eighteenth century: its influence is traceable in de Condillac, de la Mettrie, and the Encyclopedists; Voltaire popularized it in France and with Jean-Jacques Rousseau it made its way among the masses, undermining their Christianity and preparing the Revolution of 1759. In Germany, the philosophy of the eighteenth century is, directly or indirectly, connected with Leibniz -- the School of Wolff, the Aesthetic School (Baumgarten), the philosophy of sentiment. But all the German philosophers of the eighteenth century were eclipsed by the great figure of Kant. With Kant (1724-1804) modern philosophy enters its second period and takes a critical orientation. Kant bases his theory of knowledge, his moral and aesthetic system, and his judgments of finality on the structure of the mind. In the first half of the eighteenth century, German philosophy is replete with great names connected with Kantianism -- after it had been put through a Monistic evolution, however -- Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel have been called the triumvirate of Pantheism; then again, Schopenhauer, while Herbart returned to individualism. French philosophy in the nineteenth century is at first dominated by an eclectic Spiritualistic movement with which the names of Maine de Biran and, especially, Victor Cousin are associated. Cousin had disciples in America (C. Henry), and in France he gained favour with those whom the excesses of the Revolution had alarmed. In the first half of the nineteenth century French Catholics approved the Traditionalism inaugurated by de Bonald and de Lamennais, while another group took refuge in Ontologism. In the same period Auguste Comte founded Positivism, to which Littré and Taine adhered, though it rose to its greatest height in the English-speaking countries. In fact, England may be said to have been the second fatherland of Positivism; John Stuart Mill, Huxley, Alexander Bain and Herbert Spencer expanded its doctrines, combined them with Associationism and emphasized it criteriological aspect, or attempted (Spencer) to construct a vast synthesis of human sciences. The Associationist philosophy at this time was confronted by the Scotch philosophy which, in Hamilton, combined the teachings of Reid and of Kant and found an American champion in Noah Porter. Mansel spread the doctrines of Hamilton. Associationism regained favour with Thomas Brown and James Mill, but was soon enveloped in the large conception of Positivism, the dominant philosophy in England. Lastly, in Italy, Hegel was for a long time the leader of nineteenth-century philosophical thought (Vera and d'Ercole), whilst Gioberti, the ontologist and Rosmini occupy a distinct position. More recently, Positivism has gained numerous adherents in Italy. In the middle of the century, a large Krausist School existed in Spain, represented chiefly by Sanz del Rio (d. 1869) and N. Salmeron. Balmes (181O-48), the author of "Fundamental Philosophy" is an original thinker whose doctrines have many points of contact with Scholasticism. VI. CONTEMPORARY ORIENTATIONS A. Favourite Problems Leaving aside social questions, the study of which belongs to philosophy in only some of their aspects, it may be said that in the philosophic interest of the present day psychological questions hold the first place, and that chief among them is the problem of certitude. Kant, indeed, is so important a factor in the destinies of contemporary philosophy not only because he is the initiator of critical formalism, but still more because he obliges his successors to deal with the preliminary and fundamental question of the limits of knowledge. On the other hand the experimental investigation of mental processed has become the object of a new study, psycho-physiology, in which men of science co-operate with philosophers, and which meets with increasing success. This study figures in the programme of most modern universities. Originating at Leipzig (the School of Wundt) and Würzburg, it has quickly become naturalized in Europe and America. In America, "The Psychological Review" has devoted many articles to this branch of philosophy. Psychological studies are the chosen field of the American (Ladd, William James, Hall). The great success of psychology has emphasized the subjective character of aesthetics, in which hardly anyone now recognizes the objective and metaphysical element. The solutions in vogue are the Kantian, which represents the aesthetic judgment as formed in accordance with the subjective, structural function of the mind, or other psychologic solutions which reduce the beautiful to a psychic impression (the "sympathy", or Einfühlung, of Lipps; the "concrete intuition" of Benedetto Croce). These explanations are insufficient, as they neglect the objective aspect of the beautiful -- those elements which, on the part of the object, are the cause of the aesthetic impression and enjoyment. It may be said that the neo-Scholastic philosophy alone takes into account the objective aesthetic factor. The absorbing influence of psychology also manifests itself to the detriment of other branches of philosophy; first of all, to the detriment of metaphysics, which our contemporaries have unjustly ostracized -- unjustly, since, if the existence or possibility of a thing-in-itself is considered of importance, it behooves us to inquire under what aspects of reality it reveals itself. This ostracism of metaphysics, moreover, is largely due to misconception and to a wrong understanding of the theories of substance, of faculties, of causes etc., which belong to the traditional metaphysics. Then again, the invasion of psychology is manifest in logic: side by side with the ancient logic or dialectic, a mathematical or symbolic logic has developed (Peano, Russell, Peirce, Mitchell, and others) and, more recently, a genetic logic which would study, not the fixed laws of thought, but the changing process of mental life and its genesis (Baldwin). We have seen above (section II, D) how the increasing cultivation of psychology has produced other scientific ramifications which find favour with the learned world. Moral philosophy, long neglected, enjoys a renewed vogue notably in America, where ethnography is devoted to its service (see, e.g., the publications of the Smithsonian Institution). "The International Journal of Ethics" is a review especially devoted to this line of work. In some quarters, where the atmosphere is Positivist, there is a desire to get rid of the old morality, with its notions of value and of duty, and to replace it with a collection of empiric rules subject to evolution (Sidgwick, Huxley, Leslie Stephen, Durkheim, Levy-Bruhl). As to the history of philosophy, not only are very extended special studies devoted to it, but more and more room is given it in the study of every philosophic question. Among the causes of this exaggerated vogue are the impulse given by the Schools of Cousin and of Hegel, the progress of historical studies in general, the confusion arising from the clash of rival doctrines, and the distrust engendered by that confusion. Remarkable works have been produced by Deussen, on Indian and Oriental philosophy; by Zeller, on Greek antiquity; by Denifle, Hauréau, Bäumker, and Mandonnet, on the Middle Ages; by Windelband, Kuno Fischer, Boutroux and Höffding, on the modern period; and the list might easily be considerably prolonged. B. The Opposing Systems The rival systems of philosophy of the present time may be reduced to various groups: Positivism, neo-Kantianism, Monism, neo-Scholasticism. Contemporary philosophy lives in an atmosphere of Phenomenism, since Positivism and neo-Kantianism are at one on this important doctrine: that science and certitude are possible only within the limits of the world of phenomena, which is the immediate object of experience. Positivism, insisting on the exclusive rights of sensory experience, and Kantian criticism, reasoning from the structure of our cognitive faculties, hold that knowledge extends only as far as appearances; that beyond this is the absolute, the dark depths, the existence of which there is less and less disposition to deny, but which no human mind can fathom. On the contrary, this element of the absolute forms an integral constituent in neo-Scholasticism which has revived, with sobriety and moderation, the fundamental notions of Aristotelean and Medieval metaphysics, and has succeeded in vindicating them against attack and objection. (1) Positivism Positivism, under various forms, is defended in England by the followers of Spencer, by Huxley, Lewes, Tyndall, F. Harrison, Congreve, Beesby, J. Bridges, Grant Allen (James Martineau is a reactionary against Positivism); by Balfour, who at the same time propounds a characteristic theory of belief, and falls back on Fideism. From England Positivism passed over to America, where it soon dethroned the Scottish doctrines (Carus). De Roberty, in Russia, and Ribot, in France, are among its most distinguished disciples. In Italy it is found in the writings of Ferrari, Ardigo, and Morselli; in Germany, in those of Laas, Riehl, Guyau, and Durkheim. Less brutal than Materialism, the radical vice of Positivism is its identification of the knowable with the sensible. It seeks in vain to reduce general ideas to collective images, and to deny the abstract and universal character of the mind's concepts. It vainly denies the super-experiential value of the first logical principles in which the scientific life of the mind is rooted; nor will it ever succeed in showing that the certitude of such a judgment as 2 + 2 = 4 increases with our repeated addition of numbers of oxen or of coins. In morals, where it would reduce precepts and judgments to sociological data formed in the collective conscience and varying with the period and the environment, Positivism stumbles against the judgments of value, and the supersensible ideas of obligation, moral good, and law, recorded in every human conscience and unvarying in their essential data. (2) Kantianism Kantianism had been forgotten in Germany for some thirty years (1830-60); Vogt, Büchner, and Molesehott had won for Materialism an ephemeral vogue; but Materialism was swept away by a strong Kantian reaction. This reversion towards Kant (Rückkehr zu Kant) begins to be traceable in 1860 (notably as a result of Lange's "History of Materialism"), and the influence of Kantian doctrines may be said to permeate the whole contemporary German philosophy (Otto Liebmann, von Hartmann, Paulsen, Rehmke, Dilthey, Natorp, Fueken, the Immanentists, and the Empirico-criticists). French neo-Criticism, represented by Renouvier, was connected chiefly with Kant's second "Critique" and introduced a specific Voluntarism. Vacherot, Secrétan, Lachelier, Boutroux, Fouillée, and Bergson are all more or less under tribute to Kantianism. Ravaisson proclaims himself a follower of Maine de Biran. Kantianism has taken its place in the state programme of education and Paul Janet, who, with F. Bouillier and Caro, was among the last legatees of Cousin's Spiritualism, appears, in his "Testament philosophique", affecting a Monism with a Kantian inspiration. All those who, with Kant and the Positivists, proclaim the "bankruptcy of science" look for the basis of our certitude in an imperative demand of the will. This Voluntarism, also called Pragmatism (William James), and, quite recently, Humanism (Schiller at Oxford), is inadequate to the establishment of the theoretic moral and social sciences upon an unshakable base: sooner or later, reflection will ask what this need of living and of willing is worth, and then the intelligence will return to its position as the supreme arbiter of certitude. From Germany and France Kantianism has spread everywhere. In England it has called into activity the Critical Idealism associated with T. H. Green and Bradley. Hodgson, on the contrary, returns to Realism. S. Laurie may be placed between Green and Martineau. Emerson, Harris, Everett, and Royce spread Idealistic Criticism in America; Shadworth Hodgson, on the other hand, and Adamson tend to return to Realism, whilst James Ward emphasizes the function of the will. (3) Monism With a great many Kantians, a stratum of Monistic ideas is superimposed on Criticism, the thing in itself being considered numerically one. The same tendencies are observable among Positivist Evolutionists like Clifford and Romanes, or G.T. Ladd. (4) Neo-Scholasticism Neo-Scholasticism, the revival of which dates from the last third of the nineteenth century (Liberatore, Taparelli, Cornoldi, and others), and which received a powerful impulse under Leo XIII, is tending more and more to become the philosophy of Catholics. It replaces Ontologism, Traditionalism, Gunther's Dualism, and Cartesian Spiritualism, which had manifestly become insufficient. Its syntheses, renewed and completed, can be set up in opposition to Positivism and Kantianism, and even its adversaries no longer dream of denying the worth of its doctrines. The bearings of neo-Scholasticism have been treated elsewhere (see NEO-SCHOLASTICISM). VII. IS PROGRESS IN PHILOSOPHY INDEFINITE, OR IS THERE A PHILOSOPHIA PERENNIS? Considering the historic succession of systems and the evolution of doctrines from the remotest ages of India down to our own times, and standing face to face with the progress achieved by contemporary scientific philosophy, must we not infer the indefinite progress of philosophic thought? Many have allowed themselves to be led away by this ideal dream. Historic Idealism (Karl Marx) regards philosophy as a product fatally engendered by pre-existing causes in our physical and social environment. Auguste Comte's "law of the three states", Herbert Spencer's evolutionism Hegel's "indefinite becoming of the soul", sweep philosophy along in an ascending current toward an ideal perfection, the realization of which no one can foresee. For all these thinkers, philosophy is variable and relative: therein lies their serious error. Indefinite progress, condemned by history in many fields, is untenable in the history of philosophy. Such a notion is evidently refuted by the appearance of thinkers like Aristotle and Plato three centuries before Christ, for these men, who for ages have dominated, and still dominate, human thought, would be anachronisms, since they would be inferior to the thinkers of our own time. And no one would venture to assert this. History shows, indeed, that there are adaptations of a synthesis to its environment, and that every age has its own aspirations and its special way of looking at problems and their solutions; but it also presents unmistakable evidence of incessant new beginnings, of rhythmic oscillations from one pole of thought to the other. If Kant found an original formula of Subjectivism and the reine Innerlichkeit, it would be a mistake to think that Kant had no intellectual ancestors: he had them in the earliest historic ages of philosophy: M. Deussen has found in the Vedic hymn of the Upanishads the distinction between noumenon and phenomenon, and writes, on the theory of Mâyâ, "Kants Grunddogma, so alt wie die Philosophie" ("Die Philos. des Upanishad's", Leipzig, 1899, p. 204). It is false to say that all truth is relative to a given time and latitude, and that philosophy is the product of economic conditions in a ceaseless course of evolution, as historical Materialism holds. Side by side with these things, which are subject to change and belong to one particular condition of the life of mankind, there is a soul of truth circulating in every system, a mere fragment of that complete and unchangeable truth which haunts the human mind in its most disinterested investigations. Amid the oscillations of historic systems there is room for a philosophia perennis -- as it were a purest atmosphere of truth, enveloping the ages, its clearness somehow felt in spite of cloud and mist. "The truth Pythagoras sought after, and Plato, and Aristotle, is the same that Augustine and Aquinas pursued. So far as it is developed in history, truth is the daughter of time; so far as it bears within itself a content independent of time, and therefore of history, it is the daughter of eternity" [Willmann, "Gesch. d Idealismus", II (Brunswick, 1896), 55O; cf. Commer "Die immerwahrende Philosophie" (Vienna, 1899)]. This does not mean that essential and permanent verities do not adapt themselves to the intellectual life of each epoch. Absolute immobility in philosophy, no less than absolute relativity, is contrary to nature and to history. It leads to decadence and death. It is in this sense that we must interpret the adage: Vita in motu. VIII. PHILOSOPHY AND THE SCIENCES Aristotle of old laid the foundation of a philosophy supported by observation and experience. We need only glance through the list of his works to see that astronomy, mineralogy, physics and chemistry, biology, zoology, furnished him with examples and bases for his theories on the constitution, of the heavenly and terrestrial bodies, the nature of the vital principle, etc. Besides, the whole Aristotelean classification of the branches of philosophy (see section II) is inspired by the same idea of making philosophy -- general science -- rest upon the particular sciences. The early Middle Ages, with a rudimentary scientific culture, regarded all its learning, built up on the Trivium (grammar, rhetoric, dialectic) and Quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, music), as preparation for philosophy. In the thirteenth century, when Scholasticism came under Aristotelean influences, it incorporated the sciences in the programme of philosophy itself. This may be seen in regulation issued by the Faculty of Arts of Paris 19 March, 1255, "De libris qui legendi essent" This order prescribes the study of commentaries or various scientific treatises of Aristotle, notably those on the first book of the "Meteorologica", on the treatises on Heaven and Earth, Generation, the Senses and Sensations, Sleeping and Waking, Memory, Plants, and Animals. Here are amply sufficient means for the magistri to familiarize the "artists" with astronomy, botany, physiology, and zoology to say nothing of Aristotle's "Physics", which was also prescribed as a classical text, and which afforded opportunities for numerous observations in chemistry and physics as then understood. Grammar and rhetoric served as preliminary studies to logic, Bible history, social science, and politics were introductory to moral philosophy. Such men as Albertus Magnus and Roger Bacon expressed their views on the necessity of linking the sciences with philosophy and preached it by example. So that both antiquity and the Middle Ages knew and appreciated scientific philosophy. In the seventeenth century the question of the relation between the two enters upon a new phase: from this period modern science takes shape and begins that triumphal march which it is destined to continue through the twentieth century, and of which the human mind is justly proud. Modern scientific knowledge differs from that of antiquity and the Middle Ages in three important respects: the multiplication of sciences; their independent value; the divergence between common knowledge and scientific knowledge. In the Middle Ages astronomy was closely akin to astrology, chemistry to alchemy, physics to divination; modern science has severely excluded all these fantastic connections. Considered now from one side and again from another, the physical world has revealed continually new aspects, and each specific point of view has become the focus of a new study. On the other hand, by defining their respective limits, the sciences have acquired autonomy; useful in the Middle Ages only as a preparation for rational physics and for metaphysics, they are nowadays of value for themselves, and no longer play the part of handmaids to philosophy. Indeed, the progress achieved within itself by each particular science brings one more revolution in knowledge. So long as instruments of observation were imperfect, and inductive methods restricted, it was practically impossible to rise above an elementary knowledge. People knew, in the Middle Ages, that Wine, when left exposed to the air, became vinegar; but what do facts like this amount to in comparison with the complex formulae of modern chemistry? Hence it was that an Albertus Magnus or a Roger Bacon could flatter himself, in those days, with having acquired all the science of his time, a claim which would now only provoke a smile. In every department progress has drawn the line sharply between popular and scientific knowledge; the former is ordinarily the starting-point of the latter, but the conclusions and teachings involved in the sciences are unintelligible to those who lack the requisite preparation. Do not, then, these profound modifications in the condition of the sciences entail modifications in the relations which, until the seventeenth century, had been accepted as existing between the sciences and philosophy? Must not the separation of philosophy and science widen out to a complete divorce? Many have thought so, both scientists and philosophers, and it was for this that in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries so many savants and philosophers turned their backs on one another. For the former, philosophy has become useless; the particular sciences, they say, multiplying and becoming perfect, must exhaust the whole field of the knowable, and a time will come when philosophy shall be no more. For the philosophers, philosophy has no need of the immeasurable mass of scientific notions which have been acquired, many of which possess only a precarious and provisional value. Wolff, who pronounced the divorce of science from philosophy, did most to accredit this view, and he has been followed by certain Catholic philosophers who held that scientific study may be excluded from philosophic culture. What shall we say on this question? That the reasons which formerly existed for keeping touch with science are a thousand times more imperative in our day. If the profound synthetic view of things which justifies the existence of philosophy presupposes analytical researches, the multiplication and perfection of those researches is certainly reason for neglecting them. The horizon of detailed knowledge widens incessantly; research of every kind is busy exploring the departments of the universe which it has mapped out. And philosophy, whose mission is to explain the order of the universe by general and ultimate reasons applicable, not only to a group of facts, but to the whole body of known phenomena, cannot be indifferent to the matter which it has to explain. Philosophy is like a tower whence we obtain the panorama of a great city -- its plan, its monuments, its great arteries, with the form and location of each -- things which a visitor cannot discern while he goes through the streets and lanes, or visits libraries, churches, palaces, and museums, one after another. If the city grows and develops, there is all the more reason, if we would know it as a whole, why we should hesitate to ascend the tower and study from that height the plan upon which its new quarters have been laid out. It is, happily, evident that contemporary philosophy is inclined to be first and foremost a scientific philosophy; it has found its way back from its wanderings of yore. This is noticeable in philosophers of the most opposite tendencies. There would be no end to the list if we had to enumerate every case where this orientation of ideas has been adopted. "This union", says Boutroux, speaking of the sciences and philosophy, "is in truth the classic tradition of philosophy. But there had been established a psychology and a metaphysics which aspired to set themselves up beyond the sciences, by mere reflection of the mind upon itself. Nowadays all philosophers are agreed to make scientific data their starting-point" (Address at the International Congress of Philosophy in 1900; Revue de Métaph. et de Morale, 1900, p. 697). Boutroux and many others spoke similarly at the International Congress of Bologna (April, 1911). Wundt introduces this union into the very definition of philosophy, which, he says, is "the general science whose function it is to unite ia a system free of all contradictions the knowledge acquired through the particular sciences, and to reduce to their principles the general methods of science and the conditions of knowledge supposed by them" ("Einleitung in die Philosophie", Leipzig, 1901, p. 19). And R. Eucken says: "The farther back the limits of the observable world recede, the more conscious are we of the lack of an adequately comprehensive explanation" -- " Gesammelte Aufsatze zur Philos. u. Lebensanschanung" (Leipzig, 1903), p. 157]. This same thought inspired Leo XIII when he placed the parallel and harmonious teaching of philosophy and of the sciences on the programme of the Institute of Philosophy created by him in the University of Louvain (see NEO-SCHOLASTICISM). On their side, the scientists have been coming to the same conclusions ever since they rose to a synthetic view of that matter which is the object of their study. So it was with Pasteur, so with Newton. Ostwald, professor of chemistry at Leipzig, has undertaken to publish the "Annalen der Naturphilosophie", a review devoted to the cultivation of the territory which is common to philosophy and the sciences A great many men of science, too, are engaged in philosophy without knowing it: in their constant discussions of "Mechanism", "Evolutionism", "Transformism", they are using terms which imply a philosophical theory of matter. If philosophy is the explanation as a whole of that world which the particular sciences investigate in detail, it follows that the latter find their culmination in the former, and that as the sciences are so will philosophy be. It is true that objections are put forward against this way of uniting philosophy and the sciences. Common observation, it is said, is enough support for philosophy. This is a mistake: philosophy cannot ignore whole departments of knowledge which are inaccessible to ordinary experience biology, for example, has shed a new light on the philosophic study of man. Others again adduce the extent and the growth of the sciences to show that scientific philosophy must ever remain an unattainable ideal; the practical solution of this difficulty concerns the teaching of philosophy (see section XI). IX. PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGION Religion presents to man, with authority, the solution of man's problems which also concern philosophy. Such are the questions of the nature of God, of His relation with the visible world, of man's origin and destiny Now religion, which precedes philosophy in the social life, naturally obliges it to take into consideration the points of religious doctrine. Hence the close connection of philosophy with religion in the early stages of civilization, a fact strikingly apparent in Indian philosophy, which, not only at its beginning but throughout its development, was intimately bound up with the doctrine of the sacred books (see above). The Greeks, at least during the most important periods of their history, were much less subject to the influences of pagan religions; in fact, they combined with extreme scrupulosity in what concerned ceremonial usage a wide liberty in regard to dogma. Greek thought soon took its independent flight Socrates ridicules the gods in whom the common people believed; Plato does not banish religious ideas from his philosophy; but Aristotle keeps them entirely apart, his God is the Actus purus, with a meaning exclusively philosophic, the prime mover of the universal mechanism. The Stoics point out that all things obey an irresistible fatality and that the wise man fears no gods. And if Epicurus teaches cosmic determinism and denies all finality, it is only to conclude that man can lay aside all fear of divine intervention in mundane affairs. The question takes a new aspect when the influences of the Oriental and Jewish religions are brought to bear on Greek philosophy by neo-Pythagorism, the Jewish theology (end of the first century), and, above all, neo-Platonism (third century B.C.). A yearning for religion was stirring in the world, and philosophy became enamoured of every religious doctrine Plotinus (third century after Christ), who must always remain the most perfect type of the neo-Platonic mentality, makes philosophy identical with religion, assigning as its highest aim the union of the soul with God by mystical ways. This mystical need of the supernatural issues in the most bizarre lucubrations from Plotinus's successors, e.g. Jamblicus (d. about A.D. 330), who, on a foundation of neo-Platonism, erected an international pantheon for all the divinities whose names are known. It has often been remarked that Christianity, with its monotheistic dogma and its serene, purifying morality, came in the fulness of time and appeased the inward unrest with which souls were afflicted at the end of the Roman world. Though Christ did not make Himself the head of a philosophical school, the religion which He founded supplies solutions for a group of problems which philosophy solves by other methods (e.g. the immortality of the soul). The first Christian philosophers, the Fathers of the Church, were imbued with Greek ideas and took over from the circumambient neo-Platonism the commingling of philosophy and religion. With them philosophy is incidental and secondary, employed only to meet polemic needs, and to support dogma; their philosophy is religious. In this Clement of Alexandria and Origen are one with St. Augustine and Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite. The early Middle Ages continued the same traditions, and the first philosophers may be said to have received neo-Platonic influences through the channel of the Fathers. John Scotus Eriugena (ninth century), the most remarkable mind of this first period, writes that "true religion is true philosophy and, conversely, true philosophy is true religion" (De div. praed., I, I). But as the era advances a process of dissociation sets in, to end in the complete separation between the two sciences of Scholastic theology or the study of dogma, based fundamentally on Holy Scripture, and Scholastic philosophy, based on purely rational investigation. To understand the successive stages of this differentiation, which was not completed until the middle of the thirteenth century, we must draw attention to certain historical facts of capital importance. (1) The origin of several philosophical problems, in the early Middle Ages, must be sought within the domain of theology, in the sense that the philosophical discussions arose in reference to theological questions. The discussion, e.g. of transubstantiation (Berengarius of Tours), raised the problem of substance and of change, or becoming. (2) Theology being regarded as a superior and sacred science, the whole pedagogic and didactic organization of the period tended to confirm this superiority (see section XI). (3) The enthusiasm for dialectics, which reached its maximum in the eleventh century, brought into fashion certain purely verbal methods of reasoning bordering on the sophistical. Anselm of Besata (Anselmus Peripateticus) is the type of this kind of reasoner. Now the dialecticians, in discussing theological subjects, claimed absolute validity for their methods, and they ended in such heresies as Gottschalk's on predestination, Berengarius's on transubstantiation, and Roscelin's Tritheism. Berengarius's motto was: "Per omnia ad dialecticam confugere". There followed an excessive reaction on the part of timorous theologians, practical men before all things, who charged dialectics with the sins of the dialecticians. This antagonistic movement coincided with an attempt to reform religious life. At the head of the group was Peter Damian (1007-72), the adversary of the liberal arts; he was the author of the saying that philosophy is the handmaid of theology. From this saying it has been concluded that the Middle Ages in general put philosophy under tutelage, whereas the maxim was current only among a narrow circle of reactionary theologians. Side by side with Peter Damian in Italy, were Manegold of Lautenbach and Othloh of St. Emmeram, in Germany. (4) At the same time a new tendency becomes discernible in the eleventh century, in Lanfranc, William of Hirschau, Rodulfus Ardens, and particularly St. Anselm of Canterbury; the theologian calls in the aid of philosophy to demonstrate certain dogmas or to show their rational side. St. Anselm, in an Augustinian spirit, attempted this justification of dogma, without perhaps invariably applying to the demonstrative value of his arguments the requisite limitations. In the thirteenth century these efforts resulted in a new theological method, the dialectic. (5) While these disputes as to the relations of philosophy and theology went on, many philosophical questions were nevertheless treated on their own account, as we have seen above (universals, St. Anselm's theodicy, Abelard's philosophy, etc.). (6) The dialectic method, developed fully in the twelfth century, just when Scholastic theology received a powerful impetus, is a theological, not a philosophical, method. The principal method in theology is the interpretation of Scripture and of authority; the dialectic method is secondary and consists in first establishing a dogma and then showing its reasonableness, confirming the argument from authority by the argument from reason. It is a process of apologetics. From the twelfth century onward, these two theological methods are fairly distinguished by the words auctoritates, rationes. Scholastic theology, condensed in the "summae" and "books of sentences", is henceforward regarded as distinct from philosophy. The attitude of theologians towards philosophy is threefold: one group, the least influential, still opposes its introduction into theology, and carries on the reactionary traditions of the preceding period (e.g. Gauthier de Saint-Victor); another accepts philosophy, but takes a utilitarian view of it, regarding it merely as a prop of dogma (Peter Lombard); a third group, the most influential, since it includes the three theological schools of St. Victor, Abelard, and Gilbert de la Porrée, grants to philosophy, in addition to this apologetic role, an independent value which entitles it to be cultivated and studied for its own sake. The members of this group are at once both theologians and philosophers. (7) At the opening of the thirteenth century one section of Augustinian theologians continued to emphasize the utilitarian and apologetic office of philosophy. But St. Thomas Aquinas created new Scholastic traditions, and wrote a chapter on scientific methodology in which the distinctness and in dependence of the two sciences is thoroughly established. Duns Scotus, again, and the Terminists exaggerated this independence. Latin Averroism, which had a brilliant but ephemeral vogue in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, accepted whole and entire in philosophy Averroistic Peripateticism, and, to safeguard Catholic orthodoxy, took refuge behind the sophism that what is true in philosophy may be false in theology, and conversely -- wherein they were more reserved than Averroes and the Arab philosophers, who regarded religion as something inferior, good enough for the masses, and who did not trouble themselves about Moslem orthodoxy. Lully, going to extremes, maintained that all dogma is susceptible of demonstration, and that philosophy and theology coalesce. Taken as a whole, the Middle Ages, profoundly religious, constantly sought to reconcile its philosophy with the Catholic Faith. This bond the Renaissance philosophy severed. In the Reformation period a group of publicists, in view of the prevailing strife, formed projects of reconciliation among the numerous religious bodies. They convinced themselves that all religions possess a common fund of essential truths relating to God, and that their content is identical, in spite of divergent dogmas. Besides, Theism, being only a form of Naturism applied to religion, suited the independent ways of the Renaissance. As in building up natural law, human nature was taken into consideration, so reason was interrogated to discover religious ideas. And hence the wide acceptance of Theism, not among Protestants only, but generally among minds that had been carried away with the Renaissance movement (Erasmus, Coornheert). For this tolerance or religious indifferentism modern philosophy in more than one instance substituted a disdain of positive religions. The English Theism or Deism of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries criticizes all positive religion and, in the name of an innate religious sense, builds up a natural religion which is reducible to a collection of theses on the existence of God and the immortality of the soul. The initiator of this movement was Herbert of Cherbury (1581-1648); J. Toland (1670-1722), Tindal (1656-1733), and Lord Bolingbroke took part in it. This criticizing movement inaugurated in England was taken up in France, where it combined with an outright hatred of Catholicism. Pierre Bayle (1646-17O6) propounded the thesis that all religion is anti-rational and absurd, and that a state composed of Atheists is possible. Voltaire wished to substitute for Catholicism an incoherent mass of doctrines about God. The religious philosophy of the eighteenth century in France led to Atheism and paved the way for the Revolution. In justice to contemporary philosophy it must be credited with teaching the amplest tolerance towards the various religions; and in its programme of research it has included religious psychology, or the study of the religious sentiment. For Catholic philosophy the relations between philosophy and theology, between reason and faith, were fixed, in a chapter of scientific methodology, by the great Scholastic thinkers of the thirteenth century. Its principles, which still retain their vitality, are as follows: (a) Distinctness of the two sciences. The independence of philosophy in regard to theology, as in regard to any other science whatsoever, is only an interpretation of this undeniable principle of scientific progress, as applicable in the twentieth century as it was in the thirteenth, that a rightly constituted science derives its formal object, its principles, and its constructive method from its own resources, and that, this being so, it cannot borrow from any other science without compromising its own right to exist. (b) Negative, not positive, material, not formal, subordination of philosophy in regard to theology. This means that, while the two sciences keep their formal independence (the independence of the principles by which their investigations are guided), there are certain matters where philosophy cannot contradict the solutions afforded by theology. The Scholastics of the Middle Ages justified this subordination, being profoundly convinced that Catholic dogma contains the infallible word of God, the expression of truth. Once a proposition, e.g. that two and two make four, has been accepted as certain, logic forbids any other science to form any conclusion subversive of that proposition. The material mutual subordination of the sciences is one of those laws out of which logic makes the indispensable guarantee of the unity of knowledge. "The truth duly demonstrated by one science serves as a beacon in another science." The certainty of a theory in chemistry imposes its acceptance on physics, and the physicist who should go contrary to it would be out of his course. Similarly, the philosopher cannot contradict the certain data of theology, any more than he can contradict the certain conclusions of the individual sciences. To deny this would be to deny the conformity of truth with truth, to contest the principle of contradiction, to surrender to a relativism which is destructive of all certitude. "It being supposed that nothing but what is true is included in this science (sc. theology) . . . it being supposed that whatever is true by the decision and authority of this science can nowise be false by the decision of right reason: these things, I say, being supposed, as it is manifest from them that the authority of this science and reason alike rest upon truth, and one verity cannot be contrary to another, it must be said absolutely that reason can in no way be contrary to the authority of this Scripture, nay, all right reason is in accord with it" (Henry of Ghent, "Summa Theologica", X, iii, n.4). But when is a theory certain? This is a question of fact, and error is easy. In proportion as the principle is simple and absolute, so are its applications complex and variable. It is not for philosophy to establish the certitude of theological data, any more than to fix the conclusions of chemistry or of physiology. The certainty of those data and those conclusions must proceed from another source. "The preconceived idea is entertained that a Catholic savant is a soldier in the service of his religious faith, and that, in his hands, science is but a weapon to defend his Credo. In the eyes of a great many people, the Catholic savant seems to be always under the menace of excommunication, or entangled in dogmas which hamper him, and compelled, for the sake of loyalty to his Faith, to renounce the disinterested love of science and its free cultivation" (Mercier, "Rapport sur les études supér. de philos.", 1891, p. 9). Nothing could be more untrue. X. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND PHILOSOPHY The principles which govern the doctrinal relations of philosophy and theology have moved the Catholic Church to intervene on various occasions in the history of philosophy. As to the Church's right and duty to intervene for the purpose of maintaining the integrity of theological dogma and the deposit of faith, there is no need of discussion in this place. It is interesting, however, to note the attitude taken by the Church towards philosophy throughout the ages, and particularly in the Middle Ages, when a civilization saturated with Christianity had established extremely intimate relations between theology and philosophy. A. The censures of the Church have never fallen upon philosophy as such, but upon theological applications, judged false, which were based upon philosophical reasonings. John Scotus Eriugena, Roscelin, Berengarius, Abelard, Gilbert de la Porrée were condemned because their teachings tended to subvert theological dogmas. Eriugena denied the substantial distinction between God and created things; Roscelin held that there are three Gods; Berengarius, that there is no real transubstantiation in the Eucharist; Abelard and Gilbert de la Porrée essentially modified the dogma of the Trinity. The Church, through her councils, condemned their theological errors; with their philosophy as such she does not concern herself. "Nominalism", says Hauréau, "is the old enemy. It is, in fact, the doctrine which, because it best accords with reason, is most remote from axioms of faith. Denounced before council after council, Nominalism was condemned in the person of Abelard as it had been in the person of Roscelin" (Hist. philos. scol., I, 292). No assertion could be more inaccurate. What the Church has condemned is neither the so-called Nominalism, nor Realism, nor philosophy in general, nor the method of arguing in theology, but certain applications of that method which are judged dangerous, i.e. matters which are not philosophical. In the thirteenth century a host of teachers adopted the philosophical theories of Roscelin and Abelard, and no councils were convoked to condemn them. The same may be said of the condemnation of David of Dinant (thirteenth century), who denied the distinction between God and matter, and of various doctrines condemned in the fourteenth century as tending to the negation of morality. It has been the same in modern times. To mention only the condemnation of Gunther, of Rosmini, and of Ontologism in the nineteenth century, what alarmed the Church was the fact that the theses in question had a theologic: bearing. B. The Church has never imposed any philosophical system, though she has anathematized many doctrines, or branded them as suspect. This corresponds with the prohibitive, but not imperative attitude of theology in regard to philosophy. To take one example, faith teaches that the world was created in time; and yet St. Thomas maintains that the concept of eternal creation (ab aeterno) involves no contradiction. He did not think himself obliged to demonstrate creation in time: his teaching would have been heterodox only if, with the Averroists his day, he had maintained the necessary eternity of the world. It may, perhaps, be objected that many Thomistic doctrines were condemned in 1277 by Etienne Tempier, Bishop of Paris. But it is well to note, and recent works on the subject have abundantly proved this, that Tempier's condemnation, in so far as it applied to Thomas Aquinas, was the issue of intrigues and personal animosity, and that, in canon law, it had no force outside of the Diocese of Paris. Moreover, it was annulled by one of Tempier's successors, Etienne de Borrète, in 1325. C. The Church has encouraged philosophy. To say nothing of the fact that all those who applied themselves to science and philosophy in the Middle Ages were churchmen, and that the liberal arts found an asylum in capitular and monastic schools until the twelfth century, it is important to remark that the principal universities of the Middle Ages were pontifical foundations. This was the case with Paris. To be sure, in the first years of the university's aquaintance with the Aristotelean encyclopaedia (late twelfth century) there were prohibitions against reading the "Physics", the "Metaphysics", and the treatise "On the Soul". But these restrictions were of a temporary character and arose out of particular circumstanccs. In 1231, Gregory IX laid upon a commission of three consultors the charge to prepare an amended edition of Aristotle "ne utile per inutile vitietur" (lest what is useful suffer damage through what is useless). The work of expurgatio. was done, in point of fact, by the Albertine-Thomist School, and, beginning from the year 1255, the Faculty of Arts, with the knowledge of the ecclesiastical authority, ordered the teaching of all the books previously prohibited (see Mandonnet, "Siger de Brabant et l'averroïsme latin au XIIIe s.", Louvain 1910). It might also be shown how in modern times and in our own day the popes have encouraged philosophic studies. Leo XIII, as is well known, considered the restoration of philosophic Thomism on of the chief tasks of his pontificate. XI. THE TEACHING OF PHILOSOPHY The methods of teaching philosophy have varied in various ages. Socrates used to interview his auditors, and hold symposia in the market-place, on the porticoes and in the public gardens. His method was interrogation, he whetted the curiosity of the audience and practised what had become known as Socratic irony and the maieutic art (maieutikê techne), the art of delivering minds of their conceptions. His successor opened schools properly so called, and from the place occupied by these schools several systems took their names (the Stoic School, the Academy, the Lyceum). In the Middle Ages and down to the seventeenth century the learned language was Latin. The German discourses of Eckhart are mentioned as merely sporadic examples. From the ninth to the twelfth century teaching was confined to the monastic and cathedral schools. It was the golden age of schools. Masters and students went from one school to another: Lanfranc travelled over Europe; John of Salisbury (twelfth century) heard at Paris all the then famous professors of philosophy; Abelard gathered crowds about his rostrum. Moreover: as the same subjects were taught everywhere, and from the same text-books, scholastic wanderings were attended with few disadvantages. The books took the form of commentaries or monographs. From the time of Abelard a method came into use which met with great success, that of setting forth the pros and cons of a question, which was later perfected by the addition of a solutio. The application of this method was extended in the thirteenth century (e.g. in the "Summa theologica" of St. Thomas). Lastly, philosophy being an educational preparation for theology, the "Queen of the Sciences", philosophical and theological topics were combined in one and the same book, or even in the same lecture. At the end of the twelfth century and the beginning of the thirteenth, the University of Paris was organized, and philosophical teaching was concentrated in the Faculty of Arts. Teaching was dominated by two principles: internationalism and freedom. The student was an apprentice-professor: after receiving the various degrees, he obtained from the chancellor of the university a licence to teach (licentia docendi). Many of the courses of this period have been preserved, the abbreviated script of the Middle Ages being virtually a stenographic system. The programme of courses drawn up in 1255 is well known: it comprises the exegesis of all the books of Aristotle. The commentary, or lectio (from legere, to read), is the ordinary form of instruction (whence the German Vorlesungen and the English lecture). There were also disputations, in which questions were treated by means of objections and answers; the exercise took a lively character, each one being invited to contribute his thoughts on the subject. The University of Paris was the model for all the others, notably those of Oxford and Cambridge. These forms of instruction in the universities lasted as long as Aristoteleanism, i.e. until the seventeenth century. In the eighteenth century -- the siècle des lumières (Erklärung) -- philosophy took a popular and encyclopedic form, and was circulated in the literary productions of the period. In the nineteenth century it resumed its didactic attitude in the universities and in the seminaries, where, indeed its teaching had long continued. The advance of philological and historical studies had a great influence on the character of philosophical teaching: critical methods were welcomed, and little by little the professors adopted the practice of specializing in this or that branch of philosophy -- a practice which is still in vogue. Without attempting to touch on all the questions involved in modern methods of teaching philosophy, we shall here indicate some of the principal features. A. The Language of Philosophy The earliest of the moderns -- as Descartes or Leibniz -- used both Latin and the vernacular, but in the nineteenth century (except in ecclesiastical seminaries and in certain academical exercises mainly ceremonial in character) the living languages supplanted Latin; the result has been a gain in clearness of thought and interest and vitality of teaching. Teaching in Latin too often contents itself with formulae: the living language effects a better comprehension of things which must in any case be difficult. Personal experience, writes Fr. Hogan, formerly superior of the Boston Seminary, in his "Clerical Studies" (Philadelphia, 1895-1901), has shown that among students who have learned philosophy, particularly Scholastic, only in Latin, very few have acquired anything more than a mass of formulae, which they hardly understand; though this does not always prevent their adhering to their formulae through thick and thin. Those who continue to write in Latin -- as many Catholic philosophers, often of the highest worth, still do -- have the sad experience of seeing their books confined to a very narrow circle of readers. B. Didactic Processes Aristotle's advice, followed by the Scholastics, still retains its value and its force: before giving the solution of a problem, expound the reasons for and against. This explains, in particular, the great part played by the history of philosophy or the critical examination of the solutions proposed by the great thinkers. Commentary on a treatise still figures in some special higher courses; but contemporary philosophical teaching is principally divided according to the numerous branches of philosophy (see section II). The introduction of laboratories and practical seminaries (séminaires practiques) in philosophical teaching has been of the greatest advantage. Side by side with libraries and shelves full of periodicals there is room for laboratories and museums, once the necessity of vivifying philosophy by contact with the sciences is admitted (see section VIII). As for the practical seminary, in which a group of students, with the aid of a teacher, investigate to some special problem, it may be applied to any branch of philosophy with remarkable results. The work in common, where each directs his individual efforts towards one general aim, makes each the beneficiary of the researches of all; it accustoms them to handling the instruments of research, facilitates the detection of facts, teaches the pupil how to discover for himself the reasons for what he observes, affords a real experience in the constructive methods of discovery proper to each subject, and very often decides the scientific vocation of those whose efforts have been crowned with a first success. C. The Order of Philosophical Teaching One of the most complex questions is: With what branch ought philosophical teaching to begin, and what order should it follow? In conformity with an immemorial tradition, the beginning is often made with logic. Now logic, the science of science, is difficult to understand and unattractive in the earliest stages of teaching. It is better to begin with the sciences which take the real for their object: psychology, cosmology, metaphysics, and theodicy. Scientific logic will be better understood later on; moral philosophy presupposes psychology; systematic history of philosophy requires a preliminary acquaintance with all the branches of philosophy (see Mercier, "Manuel de philosophie", Introduction, third edition, Louvain, 1911). Connected with this question of the order of teaching is another: viz. What should be the scientific teaching preliminary to philosophy? Only a course in the sciences specially appropriate to philosophy can meet the manifold exigencies of the problem. The general scientific courses of our modern universities include too much or too little: "too much in the sense that professional teaching must go into numerous technical facts and details with which philosophy has nothing to do; too little, because professional teaching often makes the observation of facts its ultimate aim, whilst, from our standpoint, facts are, and can be, only a means, a starting-point, towards acquiring a knowledge of the most general causes and laws" (Mercier, "Rapport sur les études supérieures de philosophie", Louvain, 1891, p. 25). M. Boutroux, a professor at the Sorbonne, solves the problem of philosophical teaching at the university in the same sense, and, according to him, the flexible and very liberal organization of the faculty of philosophy should include "the whole assemblage of the sciences, whether theoretic, mathematico-physical, or philologico-historical" ("Revue internationale de l'enseignement", Paris, 1901, p. 51O). The programme of courses of the Institute of Philosophy of Louvain is drawn up in conformity with this spirit. XII. BIBLIOGRAPHY GENERAL WORKS. -- MERCIER, Cours de philosophie. Logique. Criteriologie générale. Ontologie. Psychologie (Louvain, 1905-10); NYS, Cosmologie (Louvain, 1904); Stonyhurst Philosophical Series: -- CLARKE, Logic (London, 1909); JOHN RICKABY, First Principles of Knowledge (London, 1901); JOSEPH RICKABY, Moral Philosophy (London, 1910); BOEDDER, Natural Theology (London, 1906); MAHER, Psychology (London, 1909); JOHN RICKABY, General Metaphysics (London, 1909); WALKER, Theories of Knowledge (London, 1910--); ZIGLIARA, Summa philos. (Paris); SCHIFFINI, Principia philos. (Turin); URRABURU, Institut. philosophiae (Valladolid); IDEM, Compend. phil. schol. (Madrid); Philosophia Locensis: -- PASCH, Inst. Logicales (Freiburg, 1888); IDEM, Inst. phil. natur. (Freiburg, 1880); IDEM, Inst. psychol. (Freiburg, 1898); HONTHEIM, Inst. theodicaeae; MEYER, Inst. iuris notur.; DOMET DE VORGEs, Abrégé de métaophysique (Paris); FAROES, Etudes phil. (Paris); GUTBERLET, Lehrbuch der Philos. Logik und Erkenntnistheorie, Algemeine Metaphys., Naturphilos., Die psychol., Die Theodicee, Ethik u. Naturrecht, Ethik u. Religion (Münster, 1878-85); RABIER, Leçons de phil. (Paris); WINDELBAND with the collaboration of LIEBMANN, WUNDT, LIPPS, BAUSH, LASK, RICKERT, TROELTSCH, and GROOS, Die Philos. im Beginn des zwanzigsten Jahrhund. (Heidelberg); Systematische Philosophie by DILTHEY, RIEHL, WUNDT, OSTWALD, EBBINGHAUS, EUCKEM, PAULSEN, and MUNCH; LIPPS, Des Gesamtwerkers, Die Kultur der Gegenwärt (Leipzig), pt. I, vi; DE WULF, tr. COFFEY, Scholasticism Old and New. An Introduction to Neo-Scholastic Philosophy (Dublin, 1907); KULPE, Einleitung in die Philos. (Leipzig); WUNDT, Einleitung in die Philos. (Leipzig); HARPER, The Metaphysics of the School (London, 1879-84). DICTIONARIES. -- BALDWIN, Dict. of Philosophy and Psychology (London, 1901-05); FRANCE, Dict. des sciences Phil. (Paris, 1876); EISLER, Wörterbuch der Philosoph. Begriffe (Berlin, 1899); Vocabulaire technique et critique de Phil., in course of publication by the Soc. française do philosophie. COLLECTIONS. -- Bibliothèque de l'Institut supérieur de Philosophie; PEILLAUBE, Bibl. de Phil. expérimentale (Paris); RIVIERE, Bibl. de Phil. contemporaine (Paris); Coll. historique des grands Philosophes (Paris); LE BON, Bibl. de Philosophie scientif. (Paris); PIAT, Les grands Philosophes (Paris); Philosophische Bibliothek (Leipzig). PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS. -- Mind, a quarterly review of psychology and Philosophy (London, 1876--); The Philosoph. Rev. (New York, 1892--); Internat. Jour. of Ethics (Philadelphia); Proc. of Aristotelian Society (London, 1888--); Rev. Neo-scholastique de Phil. (Louvain, 1894--); Rev. des sciences phil. et théol. (Paris) Revue Thomiste (Toulouse, 1893--); Annales de Philosophie Chret. (Paris, 1831--); Rev. de Philos. (Paris); Philosophisches Jahrbuch (Fulda); Zeitschr. für Philos. und Philosophische Kritik, formerly Fichte-Utrisische Zeitschr. (Leipzig, 1847--); Kantstudien (Berlin, 1896--); Arch. f. wissehoftliche Philos. und Soziologie (Leipzig, 1877--); Arch. f. systematische Philos. (Berlin, 1896); Arch. f. Gesch. d. Philos. (Berlin, 1888--); Rev. Phil. de la France et de l'Etranger (Paris, 1876--); Rev. de métaph. et de morale (Paris, 1894--); Tijdschrift voor Wijsbegeerte (Amsterdam, 1907--); Riv. di filosofio neo-scholastico (Florence, 1909--); Rivisto di filosofia (Modena). DIVISION OF PHILOSOPHY. -- Methods. -- MARIETAN, Le probème de la classification des sciences d'Aristote d S. Thomas (Paris, 1901); WILLMANN, Didaktik (Brunswick, 1903). GENERAL HISTORY. -- UEBERWEG, Hist. of Philosophy, tr. HARRIS (New York, 1875-76); ERDMANN, Hist. of Phil. (London, 1898); WINDELBAND, Hist. of Phil. (New York, 1901); TURNER, Hist. of Phil. (Boston, 1903); WILLMANN, Gesch. des Idealismus (Brunswick, 1908); ZELLER, Die Philos. der Griechen (Berlin), tr. ALLEYNE, RETEHEL, GOODWIN, COSTELLOE, and MUIRHEAD (London); DE WULF, Hist. of Mediaeval Phil. (London, 1909; Paris, Tubingen, and Florence, 1912); WINDELRAND, Gesch. der neueren Philos. (Leipzig, 1872-80), tr. TUFTS (New York, 1901); HOFFDING, Den nyere Filosofis Historie (Copenhagen, 1894), tr. MAYER, A Hist. of Mod. Phil. (London, 1900); FISHER, Geschichte der neueren Philosophie (Heidelberg, 1889-1901); STÖCKL, Lehrbuch der Geschichte der Philosophie (Mainz, 1888; tr. in part by FINLAY, Dublin, 1903); WEBER, History of Philosophy, tr. THILLY (New York, 1901). CONTEMPORARY HISTORY. -- EUCKEN, Geistige Strömungen der Gegenwart (Leipzig, 1901); WINDELBAND, Die Philos. im Beginn d. XX. Jahr., I (Heidelberg); CALDERON, Les courants phil. dans l'Amérique Latine (Heidelberg, 1909); CEULEMANS, Le mouvement phil. en Amérique in Rev. néo-scholast. (Nov., 1909); BAUMANN, Deutsche u. ausserdeutsche Philos. der letzen Jahrzehnte (Gotha, 1903). PHILOSOPHY AND THEOLOGY. -- HEITZ, Essai hist. sur les rapp. entre la philosophie et la foi de Bérenger de Tours à S. Thomas (Paris, 1909); BRUNHES, La foi chrét. et la pil. au temps de la renaiss. caroling. (Paris, 1903); GRABMANN, Die Gesch. der scholast. methode (Freiburg, 1909). MAURICE DE WULF Philoxenus Philoxenus (AKHSENAYA) OF MABBOGH. Born at Tahal, in the Persian province of Beth-Garmai in the second quarter of the fifth century; died at Gangra, in Paphlagonia, 523. He studied at Edessa when Ibas was bishop of that city (435-57). Shortly after he joined the ranks of the Monophysites and became their most learned and courageous champion. In 485 he was appointed Bishop of Hierapolis, or Mabbogh (Manbidj) by Peter the Fuller. He continued to attack the Decrees of Chalcedon and to defend the "Henoticon" of Zeno. He twice visited Constantinople in the interests of his party, and in 512 he persuaded the Emperor Anastasius to depose Flavian of Antioch and to appoint Severus in his stead. His triumph, however, was short-lived. Anastasius died in 518 and was succeeded by the orthodox Justin I. By a decree of the new ruler the bishops who had been deposed under Zeno and Anastasius were restored to their sees, and Philoxenus, with fifty-three other Monophysites, was banished. He went to Philippopolis, in Thrace, and afterwards to Gangra where he was murdered. Philoxenus is considered one of the greatest masters of Syriac prose. He wrote treatises on liturgy, exegesis, moral and dogmatic theology, besides many letters which are important for the ecclesiastical history of his time. Notice must be taken of the Philoxenian Syriac version of the Holy Scriptures. This version was not Philoxenus's own work, but was made, upon his request and under his direction, by the chorepiscopus Polycarp about 505. It seems to have been a free revision of the Peshitta according to the Lucian recension of the Septuagint. It is not known whether it extended to the whole Bible. Of the Philoxenian version of the Old Testament we have only a few fragments of the Book of Isaias (xxviii, 3-17; xlii, 17-xlix, 18, lxvi, 11-23) preserved in Syr. manuscripts Add. 17106 of the British Museum, and published by Ceriani. Of the New Testament we have the Second Epistle of St. Peter, the Second and Third Epistles of St. John and the Epistle of St. Jude, all of which are printed in our Syriac Bibles. There remain also a few fragments of the Epistles of St. Paul (Rom., vi, 20; I Cor., i, 28; II Cor., vii, 13; x, 4; Eph., vi, 12), first published by Wiseman from Syr. MS. 153 of the Vatican. Gwynn is of the opinion that the Syriac text of the Apocalypse published by himself in 1897 probably belongs to the original Philoxenian. DUVAL, Litterature Syriaque (3rd ed., Paris, 1907); WRIGHT, A Short History of Syriac Literature (London, 1894); ASSEMANI, Bibliotheca Orientalis, II (Rome, 1719); WISEMAN, Horae Syriacae (Rome, 1828); CERIANI, Monumenta sacra et profana, V (Milan, 1868); RENAUDOT, Liturgiarum orientalium Collectio, II (Frankfort, 1847); MARTIN, Syro-Chaldaicae Institutiones (1873); GUIDI, La Lettera di Filosseno ai monaci di Tell Adda (Rome, 1886); FROTHINGHAM, Stephen bar Sudaili, the Syrian Mystic and the Book of Hierotheos (Leyden, 1886); WALLIS-BUDGE, The Discourses of Philoxenus, Bishop of Mabbogh (2 vols., London, 1894); VASCHALDE, Three Letters of Philoxenus, Bishop of Mabbogh (485-519): being the letter to the monks, the first letter to the monks of Beth-Gaugal, and the letter to Emperor Zeno, with an English translation, and an introduction to the life, works, and doctrine of Philoxenus (Rome, 1902); IDEM, Philoxeni Mabbugens is Tractatus de Trinitate et Incarnatione in Corpus, Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium (Paris, 1907); GWYNN, The Apocalypse of St. John in a Syria Version hitherto unknown (Dublin, 1897); IDEM, Remnants of the later Syriac Versions of the Bible (Oxford, 1909); BAETHGEN, Philoxenus von Mabug uber den Glaubenin Zeitschrift fur Kirchgeschichte, V (1882), 122-38. A. VASCHLADE Titular See of Phocaea Phocæa A titular see in Asia, suffragan of Ephesus. The town of Phocæa was founded in the eleventh century b.c. by colonists from Phocidia led by two Athenians. They settled first on a small island on the neighbouring coast, a territory given by the Cymæans, between the Bays of Cymæus and Hermæus, 23 miles north of Smyrna. It was admitted to the Ionian Confederation after having accepted kings of the race of Codrus. Its fine position, its two ports, and the enterprising spirit of the inhabitants made it one of the chief maritime cities of ancient times. Historians speak of it but rarely before the Roman wars against Antiochus, The prætor Æmilius Regillus took possession of the town (189 b.c.); he disturbed neither its boundaries nor its laws. During the war against Aristonicus, who reclaimed the throne of Pergamum, the Phocæans took his part and, through the intervention of Massilia, escaped being severely punished by the Romans. At the time the latter had definitively established his power in Asia, Phocæa was only a commercial town; its money was coined until the time of the later Empire; but its harbour gradually silted up and the inhabitants abandoned it. In 978 Theodore Carentenus built Bardas Sclerus near Phocæa. In 1090 the Turk Tchaga of Smyrna took possession of it for a short time. The Venetians traded there after 1082, but the Genoese quickly supplanted them. In 1275 Michael VIII Palæologus gave Manuel Zaccaria the territory of the city and the right to exploit the neighbouring alum mines. In 1304 the Genoese, with the co-operation of the Greeks of the adjoining towns, erected a fortress to defend the town against the Turks, and some distance from the ancient Phocæa founded a city which they called New Phocæa. In 1336 Andronicus the Young, allied with Saroukhan, Sultan of Magnesia, besieged the two towns and obliged them to pay the tribute stipulated in 1275. They continued also to pay annually to Saroukhan 500 ducats. From 1340 to 1345 the Greeks occupied the two towns, and again in 1358 for a short period. At the time of the invasion of Timur in 1403, they purchased peace by the payment of money. In the midst of difficulties the Genoese colony continued until the end of 1455, when it passed into the hands of the Turks. In 1650 a naval battle between the Turks and Venetians took place in sight of Phocæa. To-day Phocæa, in Turkish Fotchatin, or Eski Fotcha (ancient Phocæa), is the capital of a caza of the vilayet of Smyrna, has about 6000 inhabitants (4500 Greeks), and exports salt. About six miles to the north, Yeni Fotcha (new Phocæa) is situated on the Gulf of Tchandarli; it has 4500 inhabitants (3500 Greeks), and exports agricultural products. Seven Greek bishops of Phocæa are known by their signatures at the Councils; Mark, at Sardica (344); Theoctistus, at Ephesus (441); Quintus, at Chalcedon (451); John, at Constantinople (692); Leo, at Nice (787); Nicetas, at Constantinople (869); Paul, at Constantinople (879). In 1387 ancient Phocæa was separated from Ephesus and given to the suffragan of Smyrna. In 1403 it still had a titular. The Genoese colony had its Latin bishops, seven of whose names are recorded from 1346 to 1475; the later ones were undoubtedly non-residents: Bartholomew, 1346; John, 1383; John, before 1427; Nicholas, 1427; Ludovicus, about 1450; Stephanus, 1457; Ægidius, 1475. LE QUIEN, Oriens christ., I, 735; III, 1077; TEXIER, Asie mineure, 371-5; THISQUEN, Phocaica (Bonn, 1842); DE MASLATRIE, Trésor de chronologie (Paris, 1889), 1787; TOMASCHEK, Zur historischen Topographie von Kleinasien im Mittelalter (Vienna, 1891), 25-27; WAECHTER, Der Verfall des Griechentums in Kleinasien im XIV. Jahrhundert (Leipzig, 1903), 63; CUINET, La Turquie d'Asie, III, 478-85. S. PÉTRIDÈS. Phoenecia Phoe;nicia Phoe;nicia is a narrow strip of land, about one hundred and fifty miles long and thirty miles wide, shut in between the Mediterranean on the west and the high range of Lebanon on the east, and consisting mostly of a succession of narrow valleys, ravines, and hills, the latter descending gradually towards the sea. On the north it is bounded by the River Orontes and Mount Casius, and by Mount Carmel on the south. The land is fertile and well irrigated by numerous torrents and streams deriving their waters mainly from the melting snows and rain-storms of the winter and spring seasons. The principal vegetation consists of the renowned cedars of Lebanon, cypresses, pines, palms, olive, vine, fig, and pomegranates. On this narrow strip of land, the Phoe;nicians had twenty-five cities of which the most important were Tyre, Sidon, Aradus, Byblus, Marathus, and Tripolis. Less important were Laodicea, Simyra, Arca, Aphaca, Berytus, Ecdippa, Akko, Dor, Joppa, Gabala, Betrys, and Sarepta. The name "Phoe;nicia" is in all probability of Greek origin, phoîniks being a Greek derivative of phoînos, blood-red. Our principal sources of information concerning Phoe;nicia are: first, numerous Phoe;nician inscriptions found in Phoe;nicia, Cyprus, Egypt, Greece, Sicily, Spain, Africa, Italy, and France, and published in the "Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum", the oldest being a simple one of the ninth century b.c.; the rest of little historical value, and of comparatively late date, i.e., from the fourth century b.c. down; second, Egyptian and Assyro-Babylonian historical inscriptions, especially the Tell-el-Amarna letters of the fifteenth century b.c., in which are found frequent and valuable references to Phoe;nicia and its political relations with Western Asia and Egypt; the Old Testament, especially in III Kings, v, xvi; Isaias, xxiii; Jeremias, xxv, xxvii, and Ezechiel, xxvi-xxxii; finally, some Greek and Latin historians and writers, both ecclesiastical and pagan. The oldest historical references to Phoe;nicia are found in the Egyptian inscriptions of the Pharaohs, Aahmes (1587-62 b.c.) and his successors Thothmes I (1541-16 b.c.), and Thothmes III (1503-1449 b.c.) in which the Phoe;nicians are called "Dahe" or "Zahi", and "Fenkhu". In the Tell-el-Amarna letters is found much interesting information concerning their cities and especially Tyre, famous for her wealth. During all this period Egyptian suzerainty was more or less effective. Sidon was gradually eclipsed by the rising power and wealth of Tyre, against which the Philistines were powerless, though they constantly attacked the former. About the year 1250, after conquering Ashdod, Askelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath, they forced the Sidonians to surrender the city of Dor. At this time Tyre became foremost in Phoe;nicia and one of the greatest and wealthiest cities of the Mediterranean region. Its first king was Hiram, the son of Abi-Baal and contemporary of David and Solomon. His reign lasted some forty years, and to his energy Tyre owed much of its renown. He enlarged the city, surrounding it with massive walls, improved its harbours, and rebuilt the temple of Melkarth. He forced the Philistine pirates to retreat, thus securing prosperity in maritime commerce and caravan trade, and Phoe;nician colonization spread along the coast of Asia Minor, Sicily, Greece, and Africa. He established a commercial alliance with the Hebrews, and his Phoe;nician artists and craftsmen greatly aided them in building the temple, and palaces of Solomon. He quelled the revolt in Utica and established Phoe;nician supremacy in North Africa where Carthage, the most important of all Phoe;nician colonies, was later built. Hiram was succeeded in 922 by his son Abd-Starte I, who, after seven years of troubled reign, was murdered, and most of his successors also met with a violent end. About this time hostilities arose between Phoe;nicia and Assyria, although two centuries earlier Tiglath-pileser I, when marching through the northern part of Phoe;nicia, was hospitably entertained by the inhabitants of Aradus. In 880 Ithbaal became King of Phoe;nicia, contemporaneous with Asshur-nasir-pal in Assyria and Achab in Israel. He was succeeded by Baal-azar and Metten I. Metten reigned for nine years and died, leaving Pygmalion, an infant son, but nominating as his successor Sicharbas, the high priest of Melkarth, who was married to Elissa, his daughter. The tale runs that when Pygmalion came to manhood he killed Sicharbas, upon which Elissa, with such nobles as adhered to her, fled first to Cyprus and afterwards to Africa, where the colony of Carthage was founded (c. 850 b.c.). Asshur-nasir-pal and his son and successor Shalmaneser II nominally conquered Phoe;nicia; but in 745 b.c. Tiglath- pileser III compelled the northern tribes to accept Assyrian governors. As soon as this scheme of complete absorption became manifest a general conflict ensued, from which Assyria emerged victorious and several Phoe;nician cities were captured and destroyed. The invasion of Shalmaneser IV in 727 was frustrated, but in 722 he almost sacked the city of Tyre. Sargon, his successor and great general, compelled Elulæus, King of Tyre, to come to honourable terms with him. In 701 Sennacherib conquered the revolting cities of Syria and Phoe;nicia. Elulæus fled to Cyprus and Tubaal was made king. In 680 Abd-Melkarth, his successor, rebelled against the Assyrian domination, but fled before Esarhaddon, the son of Sennacherib. Sidon was practically destroyed, most of its inhabitants carried off to Assyria, and their places filled by captives from Babylonia and Elam. During the reign of Asshurbanipal (668-625 b.c.) Tyre was once more attacked and conquered, but, as usual, honourably treated. In 606 the Assyrian empire itself was demolished by the allied Babylonians and Medes, and in 605 Nabuchadonosor, son and successor of Nabopolassar, after having conquered Elam and the adjacent countries, subdued (586 b.c.) Syria, Palestine, Phoe;nicia, and Egypt. As the Tyrians had command of the sea, it was thirteen years before their city surrendered, but the long siege crippled its commerce, and Sidon regained its ancient position as the leading city. Phoe;nicia was passing through its final stage of national independence and glory. From the fifth century on, it was continually harassed by the incursions of various Greek colonies who gradually absorbed its commerce and industry. It passed repeatedly under the rule of the Medo-Persian kings, Cyrus, Cambyses, Darius, and finally Xerxes, who attacked the Athenians at Salamis with the aid of the Phoe;nician navy, but their fleet was defeated and destroyed. In 332, it was finally and completely conquered by Alexander the Great, after whose death and subsequent to the partition of his great Macedonian empire amongst his four generals, it fell to Laodemon. In 214, Ptolemy attacked Laodemon and annexed Phoe;nicia to Egypt. In 198 b.c., it was absorbed by the Seleucid dynasty of Syria, after the downfall of which (65 a.d.), it became a Roman province and remained such till the Mohammedan conquest of Syria in the seventh century. Phoe;nicia now forms one of the most important Turkish vilayets of Syria with Beyrout as its principal city. The whole political history and constitution of Phoe;nicia may be summarized as follows: The Phoe;nicians never built an empire, but each city had its little independent territory, assemblies, kings, and government, and for general state business sent delegates to Tyre. They were not a military, but essentially a seafaring and commercial people, and were successively conquered by the Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, and Romans, to whom, because of their great wealth, they fulfilled all their obligations by the payment of tribute. Although blessed with fertile land and well provided by nature, the Phoe;nicians, owing to their small territory and comparatively large population, were compelled, from the very remotest antiquity, to gain their livelihood through commerce. Hence, their numerous caravan routes to the East, and their wonderful marine commerce with the West. They were the only nation of the ancient East who had a navy. By land they pushed their trade to Arabia for gold, agate, onyx, incense, and myrrh; to India for pearls, spices, ivory, ebony, and ostrich plumes; to Mesopotamia for cotton and linen clothes; to Palestine and Egypt for grain, wheat, and barley; to the regions of the Black Sea for horses, slaves, and copper. By sea they encircled all the Mediterranean coast, along Syria, North Africa, Asia Minor, the Ægean Sea, and even Spain, France, and England. A logical result of this remarkable commercial activity was the founding in Cyprus, Egypt, Crete, Sicily, Africa, Malta, Sardinia, Spain, Asia Minor, and Greece of numerous colonies, which became important centres of Phoe;nician commerce and civilization, and in due time left their deep mark upon the history and civilization of the classical nations of the Mediterranean world. Owing to this activity also, the Phoe;nician developed neither literature nor acts. The work done by them for Solomon shows that their architectural and mechanical skill was great only in superiority to that of the Hebrews. The remains of their architecture are heavy and their æsthetic art is primitive in character. In literature, they left nothing worthy of preservation. To them is ascribed the simplification of the primitive, pictorial or ideographic, and syllabic systems of writing into an alphabetic one consisting of twenty-two letters and written from right to left, from which are derived all the later and modern Semitic and European alphabets. This tradition, however, must be accepted with some modification. There is also no agreement as to whether the basis of this Phoe;nician alphabet is of Egyptian (hieroglyphic and hieratic) or of Assyro-Babylonian (cuneiform) origin. Those who derive it from a Cypriot prototype have not as yet sufficiently demonstrated the plausibility and probability of their opinion. The recent discovery of numerous Minoan inscriptions in the Island of Crete, some of them dating as early as 2000 b.c., has considerably complicated the problem. Other inventions, or improvements, in science and mechanics, such as weights and measures, glass manufacture, coinage, the finding of the polar star, and navigation are perhaps justly attributed to the Phoe;nicians. Both ethnographically and linguistically, they belong to the so-called Semitic group. They were called Canaanites, and spoke a dialectical variety of the Canaanite group of Western Semitic tongues, closely akin to the dialects of the Semitic inhabitants of Syria, Palestine, and Canaan. A few specimens of their language, as it was spoken by the colonies in North Africa towards the end of the third century b.c., may still be read in Plautus, from which it appears to have already attained a great degree of consonantal and vocal decay. The dialect of the inscriptions is more archaic and less corrupt. Our information concerning the religion of the Phoe;nicians is meagre and mainly found in the Old Testament, in classical traditions, and legends. Of special interest, however, are the votive inscriptions in which a great number of proper names generally construed with that of some divinity are found. Phoe;nician polytheism, like that of the other Semitic nations, was based partly on Animism and partly on the worship of the great powers of nature, mostly of astral origin. They deified the sun and the moon, which they considered the great forces that create and destroy, and called them Baal and Astaroth. Each city had its divine pair: at Sidon it was Baal Sidon (the sun) and Astarte (the moon); at Gebel, Baal Tummuz and Baaleth; at Carthage, Baal Hamon and Tanith. But the same god changed his name according as he was conceived as creator or destroyer; thus Baal as destroyer was worshipped at Carthage under the name of Moloch. These gods, represented by idols, had their temples, altars, and priests. As creators they were honoured with orgies and tumultuous feasts; as destroyers by human victims. Astoreth (Venus), whom the Sidonians represented by the crescent of the moon and the dove, had her cult in the sacred woods. Baal Moloch was figured at Carthage as a bronze colossus with arms extended and lowered. To appease him children were laid in his arms, and fell at once into a pit of fire. When Agathocles besieged the city the principal Carthaginians sacrificed to Moloch as many as two hundred of their children. Although this sensual and sanguinary religion inspired the surrounding nations with horror, they, nevertheless, imitated it. Hence, the Hebrews frequently sacrificed to Baal on the mountains, and the Greeks adored Astarte of Sidon under the name of Aphrodite, and Baal Melkart of Tyre under the name of Herakles. The principal Phoe;nician divinities are Adonis, El, Eshmon, Baal, Gad, Moloch, Melkarth, Sakan, Anath, Astaroth, Rasaph, Sad, and many others. (For the history of Christianity in Phoe;nicia and its present condition see Syria.) Movers, Die Phönizier (Bonn-Berlin, 1841-56); Lenormant- Babelon, Hist. ancienne de l'Orient (6 vols., Paris, 1881-88), see especially vol. VI; Kenrick, Phoe;nicia (London, 1855); Rawlinson, Hist. of Phoe;nicia (London, 1889); Meyer, Gesch. d. Altertums (Stuttgart, 1884- 1902); Pietschmann, Gesch. d. Phönizier (Berlin, 1889); Renan, La Mission de Phénicie (Paris, 1874); Perrot and Chipiez, Hist. of Art in Phoe;nicia (London, 1885); Baudissin, Studien zur semitischen Religionsgesch., I, II (Leipzig, 1876-78); Baethgen, Beitrage zur Semitisches Religionsgesch., 16-65; SchrÖder, D. Phöniz. Sprache (Halle, 1869); Williams, The Hist. of the Art of Writing (London-New York, 1902); Landau, Die Phönizier in Der Alte Orient (Leipzig, 1903); Eiselen, Sidon, a Study in Oriental Hist. (New York, 1907). Gabriel Oussani Photinus Photinus A heretic of the fourth century, a Galatian and deacon to Marcellus, Metropolitan of Ancyra; d. 376. He became the Bishop of Sirmium in Pannonia, an important position on account of the frequent residence of the Emperor Constantius there. The city was more Latin than Greek, and Photinus knew both languages. Marcellus was deposed by the Arian party, but was restored by Pope Julius and the Synod of Sardica (343), and was believed by them to be orthodox. But Photinus was obviously heretical, and the Eusebian court-party condemned them both at the Synod of Antioch (344), which drew up the "macrostich" creed. Three envoys were sent to the West and in a synod at Milan (345) Photinus was condemned, but not Marcellus; communion was refused to the envoys because they refused to anathematize Arius. It is evident from the way in which Pope Liberius mentions this synod that Roman legates were present, and St. Hilary calls its sentence a condemnation by the Romans. Two years later another synod, perhaps also at Milan, tried to obtain the deposition of Photinus but this was impossible owing to an outbreak of the populace in his favour. Another synod was held against him at Sirmium; some Arianizing propositions from it are quoted by St. Hilary. The heretic appealed to the emperor, who appointed judges before whom he should be heard. For this purpose a great synod assembled at Sirmium (351). Basil, the supplanter of Marcellus as Bishop of Ancyra and the future leader of the Semi-Arians, disputed with Photinus. The heretic was deposed, and twenty-seven anathematisms were agreed to. Photinus probably returned to his see at the accession of Julian, like the other exiled bishops, for St. Jerome says he was banished by Valentinian (364-75). Eventually he settled in Galatia. Epiphanius, writing at about the date of his death, considered his heresy dead in the West. In Pannonia there were still some Photinians in 381, and a Photinian named Marcus, driven from Rome under Innocent I, found adherents in Croatia. In later writers, e. g., St. Augustine, Photinian is the name for any who held Christ to be a mere man. We obtain some knowledge of the heresies of Photinus from the twenty-seven anathematisms of the council of 351, of which all but 1, 10, 12, 13, 18, 23, 24, 25 (according to St. Hilary's order: 1, 10, 11, 12, 17, 22, 24, 25) and possibly 2 are directed against him. We have corroborative evidence from many writers, especially St. Epiphanius, who had before him the complete minutes of the disputation with Basil of Ancyra. The canons obviously misrepresent Photinus's doctrine in condemning it, in so far as they sometimes say "Son" where Photinus would have said "Word". He makes the Father and the Word one Person (prosopon). The Word is equally with the Father unbegotten, or is called a part of the Father, eternally in Him as our logos is in us. The latent Word (endiathetos) becomes the explicit Word (prophorikos) not, apparently, at the creation, but at the Incarnation, for only then is He really Son. The Divine Substance can be dilated and contracted (so St. Hilary translates platynesthai and systellesthai, while Mercator's version of Nestorius's fourth sermon gives "extended and collected"). This is exactly the wording of Sabellius, who said that God platynetai, is broadened out, into Son and Spirit. To Photinus the expansion forms the Son, who is not, until the human birth of Christ. Hence before the Incarnation there is no Son, and God is Father and Word, Logopator. The Incarnation seems to have been conceived after a Nestorian fashion, for Photinus declared the Son of Mary to be mere man, and this is the best-known point in his teaching. He was consequently classed with Paul of Samosata; Jerome even calls him an Ebionite, probably because, like Mercator, he believed him to have denied the Virgin birth. But this is perhaps an error. He certainly said that the Holy Ghost descended upon Christ and that He was conceived by the Holy Ghost. By His union with the prophoric Word, Christ was the Son. The Holy Ghost is identified like the Word with the Unbegotten; He is a part of the Father and the Word, as the Word is a part of the Father. It is evident that Photinus went so far beyond Marcellus that it is unfair to call him his follower. In his Trinitarian doctrine he is a Modalist Monarchian, and in his Christology a Dynamistic Monarchian, combining the errors of Theodotus with those of Sabellius. But it is clear that his views were partly motived by the desire to get away from the Ditheism which not only the Arians but even the Eastern moderates were unable to avoid, and he especially denounced the Arian doctrine that the Son is produced by the Will of the Father. His writings are lost; the chief of them were "Contra Gentes" and "Libri ad Valentinianum", according to St. Jerome; he wrote a work in both Greek and Latin against all the heresies, and an explanation of the Creed. See ARIANISM; also HEFELE, Councils, II; WALCH, Historie der Ketzereien, III (Leipzig, 1766); KLOSE, Gesch. und Lehre des Marcellus und Photinus (Hamburg, 1837); ZAHN, Marcellus von Ancyra (Gotha, 1867); FFOULKES in Dict. Christ. Biog. (1887). JOHN CHAPMAN Photius of Constantinople Photius of Constantinople Photius of Constantinople, chief author of the great schism between East and West, was b. at Constantinople c. 815 (Hergenröther says "not much earlier than 827", "Photius", I, 316; others, about 810); d. probably 6 Feb., 897. His father was a spatharios (lifeguard) named Sergius. Symeon Magister ("De Mich. et Theod.", Bonn ed., 1838, xxix, 668) says that his mother was an escaped nun and that he was illegitimate. He further relates that a holy bishop, Michael of Synnada, before his birth foretold that he would become patriarch, but would work so much evil that it would be better that he should not be born. His father then wanted to kill him and his mother, but the bishop said: "You cannot hinder what god has ordained. Take care for yourself." His mother also dreamed that she would give birth to a demon. When he was born the abbot of the Maximine monastery baptized him and gave him the name Photius (Enlightened), saying: "Perhaps the anger of God will be turned from him" (Symeon Magister, ibid., cf. Hergenröther, "Photius", I, 318-19). These stories need not be taken seriously. It is certain that the future patriarch belonged to one of the great families of Constantinople; the Patriarch Tarasius (784-806), in whose time the seventh general council (Second of Nicæa, 787) was held, was either elder brother or uncle of his father (Photius: Ep. ii, P. G., CII, 609). The family was conspicuously orthodox and had suffered some persecution in Iconoclast times (under Leo V, 813-20). Photius says that in his youth he had had a passing inclination for the monastic life ("Ep. ad Orient. et Oecon.", P. G., CII, 1020), but the prospect of a career in the world soon eclipsed it. He early laid the foundations of that erudition which eventually made him one of the most famous scholars of all the Middle Ages. His natural aptitude must have been extraordinary, his industry was colossal. Photius does not appear to have had any teachers worthy of being remembered; at any rate he never alludes to his masters. Hergenröther, however, notes that there were many good scholars at Constantinople while Photius was a child and young man, and argues from his exact and systematic knowledge of all branches of learning that he could not have been entirely self-taught (op. cit., I, 322). His enemies appreciated his learning. Nicetas, the friend and biographer of his rival Ignatius, praises Photius's skill in grammar, poetry, rhetoric, philosophy, medicine, law, "and all science" ("Vita S. Ignatii" in Mansi, XVI, 229). Pope Nicholas I, in the heat of the quarrel writes to the Emperor Michael III: "Consider very carefully how Photius can stand, in spite of his great virtues and universal knowledge" (Ep. xcviii "Ad Mich.", P. G., CXIX, 1030). It is curious that so learned a man never knew Latin. While he was still a young man he made the first draft of his encyclopædic "Myrobiblion". At an early age, also, he began to teach grammar, philosophy, and theology in his own house to a steadily increasing number of students. His public career was to be that of a statesman, coupled with a military command. His brother Sergius married Irene, the emperor's aunt. This connexion and his undoubted merit procured Photius speedy advancement. He became chief secretary of State (protosekretis) and captain of the Life Guard (protospatharios). He was unmarried. Probably about 838 he was sent on an embassy "to the Assyrians" ("Myrobiblion", preface), i. e., apparently, to the Khalifa at Bagdad. In the year 857, then, when the crisis came in his life, Photius was already one of the most prominent members of the Court of Constantinople. That crisis is the story of the Great Schism (see GREEK CHURCH). The emperor was Michael III (842-67), son of the Theodora who had finally restored the holy images. When he succeeded his father Theophilus (829-842) he was only three years old; he grew to be the wretched boy known in Byzantine history as Michael the Drunkard (ho methystes). Theodora, at first regent, retired in 856, and her brother Bardas succeeded, with the title of Cæsar. Bardas lived in incest with his daughter-in-law Eudocia, wherefore the Patriarch Ignatius (846-57) refused him Holy Communion on the Epiphany of 857. Ignatius was deposed and banished (Nov. 23, 857), and the more pliant Photius was intruded into his place. He was hurried through Holy Orders in six days; on Christmas Day, 857, Gregory Asbestas of Syracuse, himself excommunicate for insubordination by Ignatius, ordained Photius patriarch. By this act Photius committed three offences against canon law: he was ordained bishop without having kept the interstices, by an excommunicate consecrator, and to an already occupied see. To receive ordination from an excommunicate person made him too excommunicate ipso facto. After vain attempts to make Ignatius resign his see, the emperor tried to obtain from Pope Nicholas I (858-67) recognition of Photius by a letter grossly misrepresenting the facts and asking for legates to come and decide the question in a synod. Photius also wrote, very respectfully, to the same purpose (Hergenröther, "Photius", I, 407-11). The pope sent two legates, Rodoald of Porto and Zachary of Anagni, with cautious letters. The legates were to hear both sides and report to him. A synod was held in St. Sophia's (May, 861). The legates took heavy bribes and agreed to Ignatius's deposition and Photius's succession. They returned to Rome with further letters, and the emperor sent his Secretary of State, Leo, after them with more explanations (Hergenröther, op. cit., I, 439-460). In all these letters both the emperor and Photius emphatically acknowledge the Roman primacy and categorically invoke the pope's jurisdiction to confirm what has happened. Meanwhile Ignatius, in exile at the island Terebinth, sent his friend the Archimandrite Theognostus to Rome with an urgent letter setting forth his case (Hergenröther, I, 460-461). Theognostus did not arrive till 862. Nicholas, then, having heard both sides, decided for Ignatius, and answered the letters of Michael and Photius by insisting that Ignatius must be restored, that the usurpation of his see must cease (ibid, I, 511-16, 516-19). He also wrote in the same sense to the other Eastern patriarchs (510-11). From that attitude Rome never wavered: it was the immediate cause of the schism. In 863 the pope held a synod at the Lateran in which the two legates were tried, degraded, and excommunicated. The synod repeats Nicholas's decision, that Ignatius is lawful Patriarch of Constantinople; Photius is to be excommunicate unless he retires at once from his usurped place. But Photius had the emperor and the Court on his side. Instead of obeying the pope, to whom he had appealed, he resolved to deny his authority altogether. Ignatius was kept chained in prison, the pope's letters were not allowed to be published. The emperor sent an answer dictated by Photius saying that nothing Nicholas could do would help Ignatius, that all the Eastern Patriarchs were on Photius's side, that the excommunication of the legates must be explained and that unless the pope altered his decision, Michael would come to Rome with an army to punish him. Photius then kept his place undisturbed for four years. In 867 he carried the war into the enemy's camp by excommunicating the pope and his Latins. The reasons he gives for this, in an encyclical sent to the Eastern patriarchs, are: that Latins 1. fast on Saturday 2. do not begin Lent till Ash Wednesday (instead of three days earlier, as in the East) 3. do not allow priests to be married 4. do not allow priests to administer confirmation 5. have added the filioque to the creed. Because of these errors the pope and all Latins are: "forerunners of apostasy, servants of Antichrist who deserve a thousand deaths, liars, fighters against God" (Hergenröther, I, 642-46). It is not easy to say what the Melchite patriarchs thought of the quarrel at this juncture. Afterwards, at the Eighth General Council, their legates declared that they had pronounced no sentence against Photius because that of the pope was obviously sufficient. Then, suddenly, in the same year (Sept. 867), Photius fell. Michael III was murdered and Basil I (the Macedonian, 867-86) seized his place as emperor. Photius shared the fate of all Michael's friends. He was ejected from the patriarch's palace, and Ignatius restored. Nicholas I died (Nov. 13, 867). Adrian II (867-72), his successor, answered Ignatius's appeal for legates to attend a synod that should examine the whole matter by sending Donatus, Bishop of Ostia, Stephen, Bishop of Nepi, and a deacon, Marinus. They arrived at Constantinople in Sept., 869, and in October the synod was opened which Catholics recognize as the Eighth General Council (Fourth of Constantinople). This synod tried Photius, confirmed his deposition, and, as he refused to renounce his claim, excommunicated him. The bishops of his party received light penances (Mansi, XVI, 308-409). Photius was banished to a monastery at Stenos on the Bosphorus. Here he spent seven years, writing letters to his friends, organizing his party, and waiting for another chance. Meanwhile Ignatius reigned as patriarch. Photius, as part of his policy, professed great admiration for the emperor and sent him a fictitious pedigree showing his descent form St. Gregory the Illuminator and a forged prophecy foretelling his greatness (Mansi, XVI, 284). Basil was so pleased with this that he recalled him in 876 and appointed him tutor to his son Constantine. Photius ingratiated himself with everyone and feigned reconciliation with Ignatius. It is doubtful how far Ignatius believed in him, but Photius at this time never tires of expatiating on his close friendship with the patriarch. He became so popular that when Ignatius died (23 Oct, 877) a strong party demanded that Photius should succeed him; the emperor was now on their side, and an embassy went to Rome to explain that everyone at Constantinople wanted Photius to be patriarch. The pope (John VIII, 872-82) agreed, absolved him from all censure, and acknowledged him as patriarch. This concession has been much discussed. It has been represented, truly enough, that Photius had shown himself unfit for such a post; John VIII's acknowledgment of him has been described as showing deplorable weakness. On the other hand, by Ignatius's death the See of Constantinople was now really vacant; the clergy had an undoubted right to elect their own patriarch; to refuse to acknowledge Photius would have provoked a fresh breach with the East, would not have prevented his occupation of the see, and would have given his party (including the emperor) just reason for a quarrel. The event proved that almost anything would have been better than to allow his succession, if it could be prevented. But the pope could not foresee that, and no doubt hoped that Photius, having reached the height of his ambition, would drop the quarrel. In 878, then, Photius at last obtained lawfully the place he had formerly usurped. Rome acknowledged him and restored him to her communion. There was no possible reason now for a fresh quarrel. But he had identified himself so completely with that strong anti-Roman party in the East which he mainly had formed, and, doubtless, he had formed so great a hatred of Rome, that now he carried on the old quarrel with as much bitterness as ever and more influence. Nevertheless he applied to Rome for legates to come to another synod. There was no reason for the synod, but he persuaded John VIII that it would clear up the last remains of the schism and rivet more firmly the union between East and West. His real motive was, no doubt, to undo the effect of the synod that had deposed him. The pope sent three legates, Cardinal Peter of St. Chrysogonus, Paul, Bishop of Ancona, and Eugene, Bishop of Ostia. The synod was opened in St. Sophia's in November, 879. This is the "Psuedosynodus Photiana" which the Orthodox count as the Eighth General Council. Photius had it all his own way throughout. He revoked the acts of the former synod (869), repeated all his accusations against the Latins, dwelling especially on the filioque grievance, anathematized all who added anything to the Creed, and declared that Bulgaria should belong to the Byzantine Patriarchate. The fact that there was a great majority for all these measures shows how strong Photius's party had become in the East. The legates, like their predecessors in 861, agreed to everything the majority desired (Mansi, XVII, 374 sq.). As soon as they had returned to Rome, Photius sent the Acts to the pope for his confirmation. Instead John, naturally, again excommunicated him. So the schism broke out again. This time it lasted seven years, till Basil I's death in 886. Basil was succeeded by his son Leo VI (886-912), who strongly disliked Photius. One of his first acts was to accuse him of treason, depose, and banish him (886). The story of this second deposition and banishment is obscure. The charge was that Photius had conspired to depose the emperor and put one of his own relations on the throne---an accusation which probably meant that the emperor wanted to get rid of him. As Stephen, Leo's younger brother, was made patriarch (886-93) the real explanation may be merely that Leo disliked Photius and wanted a place for his brother. Stephen's intrusion was as glaring an offence against canon law as had been that of Photius in 857; so Rome refused to recognize him. It was only under his successor Antony II (893-95) that a synod was held which restored reunion for a century and a half, till the time of Michael Cærularius (1043-58). But Photius had left a powerful anti-Roman party, eager to repudiate the pope's primacy and ready for another schism. It was this party, to which Cærularius belonged, that triumphed at Constantinople under him, so that Photius is rightly considered the author of the schism which still lasts. After this second deposition Photius suddenly disappears from history. It is not even known in what monastery he spent his last years. Among his many letters there is none that can be dated certainly as belonging to this second exile. The date of his death, not quite certain, is generally given as 6 February, 897. That Photius was one of the greatest men of the Middle Ages, one of the most remarkable characters in all church history, will not be disputed. His fatal quarrel with Rome, though the most famous, was only one result of his many-sided activity. During the stormy years he spent on the patriarch's throne, while he was warring against the Latins, he was negotiating with the Moslem Khalifa for the protection of the Christians under Moslem rule and the care of the Holy Places, and carrying on controversies against various Eastern heretics, Armenians, Paulicians etc. His interest in letters never abated. Amid all his cares he found time to write works on dogma, Biblical criticism, canon law, homilies, an encyclopædia of all kinds of learning, and letters on all questions of the day. Had it not been for his disastrous schism, he might be counted the last, and one of the greatest, of the Greek Fathers. There is no shadow of suspicion against his private life. He bore his exiles and other troubles manfully and well. He never despaired of his cause and spent the years of adversity in building up his party, writing letters to encourage his old friends and make new ones. And yet the other side of his character is no less evident. His insatiable ambition, his determination to obtain and keep the patriarchal see, led him to the extreme of dishonesty. His claim was worthless. That Ignatius was the rightful patriarch as long as he lived, and Photius an intruder, cannot be denied by any one who does not conceive the Church as merely the slave of a civil government. And to keep this place Photius descended to the lowest depth of deceit. At the very time he was protesting his obedience to the pope he was dictating to the emperor insolent letters that denied all papal jurisdiction. He misrepresented the story of Ignatius's deposition with unblushing lies, and he at least connived at Ignatius's ill-treatment in banishment. He proclaimed openly his entire subservience to the State in the whole question of his intrusion. He stops at nothing in his war against the Latins. He heaps up accusations against them that he must have known were lies. His effrontery on occasions is almost incredible. For instance, as one more grievance against Rome, he never tires of inveighing against the fact that Pope Marinus I (882-84), John VIII's successor, was translated from another see, instead of being ordained from the Roman clergy. He describes this as an atrocious breach of canon law, quoting against it the first and second canons of Sardica; and at the same time he himself continually transferred bishops in his patriarchate. The Orthodox, who look upon him, rightly, as the great champion of their cause against Rome, have forgiven all his offences for the sake of this championship. They have canonized him, and on 6 Feb., when they keep his feast, their office overflows with his praise. He is the "far-shining radiant star of the church", the "most inspired guide of the Orthodox", "thrice blessed speaker for God", "wise and divine glory of the hierarchy, who broke the horns of Roman pride" ("Menologion" for 6 Feb., ed. Maltzew, I, 916 sq.). The Catholic remembers this extraordinary man with mixed feelings. We do not deny his eminent qualities and yet we certainly do not remember him as a thrice blessed speaker for God. One may perhaps sum up Photius by saying that he was a great man with one blot on his character---his insatiable and unscrupulous ambition. But that blot so covers his life that it eclipses everything else and makes him deserve our final judgment as one of the worst enemies the Church of Christ ever had, and the cause of the greatest calamity that ever befell her. WORKS Of Photius's prolific literary production part has been lost. A great merit of what remains is that he has preserved at least fragments of earlier Greek works of which otherwise we should know nothing. This applies especially to his "Myriobiblion". 1. The "Myriobiblion" or "Bibliotheca" is a collection of descriptions of books he had read, with notes and sometimes copious extracts. It contains 280 such notices of books (or rather 279; no. 89 is lost) on every possible subject---theology, philosophy, rhetoric, grammar, physics, medicine. He quotes pagans and Christians, Acts of Councils, Acts of Martyrs, and so on, in no sort of order. For the works thus partially saved (otherwise unknown) see Krumbacher, "Byz. Litter.", 518-19. 2. The "Lexicon" (Lexeon synagoge) was compiled, probably, to a great extent by his students under his direction (Krumbacher, ibid., 521), from older Greek dictionaries (Pausanias, Harpokration, Diogenianos, Ælius Dionysius). It was intended as a practical help to readers of the Greek classics, the Septuagint, and the New testament. Only one MS. of it exists, the defective "Codex Galeanus" (formerly in the possession of Thomas Gale, now at Cambridge), written about 1200. 3. The "Amphilochia", dedicated to one of his favourite disciples, Amphilochius of Cyzicus, are answers to questions of Biblical, philosophical, and theological difficulties, written during his first exile (867-77). There are 324 subjects discussed, each in a regular form--question, answer, difficulties, solutions---but arranged again in no order. Photius gives mostly the views of famous Greek Fathers, Epiphanius, Cyril of Alexandria, John Damascene, especially Theodoret. 4. Biblical works.---Only fragments of these are extant, chiefly in Catenas. The longest are from Commentaries on St. Matthew and Romans. 5. Canon Law.---The classical "Nomocanon" (q. v.), the official code of the Orthodox Church, is attributed to Photius. It is, however, older than his time (see JOHN SCHOLASTICUS). It was revised and received additions (from the synods of 861 and 879) in Photius's time, probably by his orders. The "Collections and Accurate Expositions" (Eunagolai kai apodeixeis akribeis) (Hergenröther, op. cit., III, 165-70) are a series of questions and answers on points of canon law, really an indirect vindication of his own claims and position. A number of his letters bear on canonical questions. 6. Homilies.---Hergenröther mentions twenty-two sermons of Photius (III, 232). Of these two were printed when Hergenröther wrote (in P. G., CII, 548, sq.), one on the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin, and one at the dedication of a new church during his second patriarchate. Later, S. Aristarches published eighty-three homilies of different kinds (Constantinople, 1900). 7. Dogmatic and polemical works.---Many of these bear on his accusations against the Latins and so form the beginning of the long series of anti-Catholic controversy produced by Orthodox theologians. The most important is "Concerning the Theology about the Holy Ghost" (Peri tes tou hagiou pneumatos mystagonias, P. G., CII, 264-541), a defence of the Procession from God the Father alone, based chiefly on John, xv, 26. An epitome of the same work, made by a later author and contained in Euthymius Zigabenus's "Panoplia", XIII, became the favourite weapon of Orthodox controversialists for many centuries. The treatise "Against Those who say that Rome is the First See", also a very popular Orthodox weapon, is only the last part or supplement of the "Collections", often written out separately. The "Dissertation Concerning the Reappearance of the Manichæans" (Diegesis peri tes manichaion anablasteseos, P. G., CII, 9-264), in four books, is a history and refutation of the Paulicians. Much of the "Amphilochia" belongs to this heading. The little work "Against the Franks and other Latins" (Hergenröther, "Monumenta", 62-71), attributed to Photius, is not authentic. It was written after Cærularius (Hergenröther, "Photius", III, 172-224). 8. Letters.---Migne, P. G., CII, publishes 193 letters arranged in three books; Balettas (London, 1864) has edited a more complete collection in five parts. They cover all the chief periods of Photius's life, and are the most important source for his history. A. Ehrhard (in Krumbacher, "Byzantinische Litteratur", 74-77) judges Photius as a distinguished preacher, but not as a theologian of the first importance. His theological work is chiefly the collection of excerpts from Greek Fathers and other sources. His erudition is vast, and probably unequalled in the Middle Ages, but he has little originality, even in his controversy against the Latins. Here, too, he only needed to collect angry things said by Byzantine theologians before his time. But his discovery of the filioque grievance seems to be original. Its success as a weapon is considerably greater than its real value deserves (Fortescue, "Orthodox Eastern Church", 372-84). Editions.---The works of Photius known at the time were collected by Migne, P. G., CI-CV. J. Balettas, Photiou epistolai (London, 1864), contains other letters (altogether 260) not in Migne. A. Papadopulos-Kerameus, "S. Patris Photii Epistolæ XLV" (St. Petersburg, 1896) gives forty-five more, of which, however, only the first twenty-one are authentic. S. Aristaches, Photiou logoi kai homiliai 83 (Constantinople, 1900, 2 vols.), gives other homilies not in Migne. Oikonomos has edited the "Amphilochia" (Athens, 1858) in a more complete text. J. Hergenröther, "Monumenta græca ad Photium eiusque historiam pertinentia" (Ratisbon, 1869), and Papadopulos-Kerameus, "Monumenta græca et latina ad historiam Photii patriarchæ pertinentia" (St. Petersburg, 2 parts, 1899 and 1901), add further documents. The Acts of the Synods of 869 and 879 are the most important sources (Mansi, XVI and XVII). THEOGNOSTUS (Archimandrite at Constantinople), Libellos periechon panta ta kata ton megan, a contemporary account of the beginning of the schism (in Mansi, XVI, 295, sq.); NIKETAS DAVID PAPHLAGON (d. 890); Bios Ignatiou (Mansi, XVI, 209 sq.). PAPADOPULOS-KERAMEUS declared this to be a fourteenth-century forgery in the Vizant. Vremennik (1899), 13-38, Pseudoniketas ho paphlagon; he was successfully refuted by VASILJEWSKI (ibid., 39-56); cf. Byzant. Zeitschrift, IX, (1900), 268 sq. GENESIOS, Basileiai (written between 945-959), a history of the emperors and Court from Leo V (813-20) to Basil I (867-86), published in Corpus Scriptorum Hist. Byzantinæ (Bonn, 1834) and P. G., CIX,15 sqq.; LEO GRAMMATICUS, re-edition of SYMEON MAGISTER, Chronicle, in Corpus Script., 1842, and P. G. CVIII, 1037 sqq. HERGENRÖTHER, Photius, Patriarch von Konstantinopel, sein Leben, seine Schriften u. das griechische Schisma (Ratisbon, 1867-69) (the most learned and exhaustive work on the subject). DEMETRAKOPULOS, Historia tou schismatos tes latinikes apo tes orthodoxou ekklesias (Leipzig, 1867), is an attempted rejoinder to HERGENRÖTHER, as is also KREMOS, Historia tou schismatos ton duo ekklesion (Athens, 1905-07, two volumes published out of four). LÄMMER, Papst Nikolaus u. die byzantinsche Staatskirche seiner Zeit (Berlin, 1857); PICHLER, Geschichte der kirchlichen Trennung zwischen dem Orient. u. Occident (Munich, 1864-65); NORDEN, Das Papsttum und Byzanz (Berlin, 1903); KRUMBACHER, Geschichte der Byzantinischen Litteratur (Munich, 1897), 73-79, 515-524 (with copious bibliography); FORTESCUE, The Orthodox Eastern Church (London, 1907), 135-171; RUINAUT, Le schisme de Photius (Paris, 1910). ADRIAN FORTESCUE Phylacteries Phylacteries ( Phulachterion -- safeguard, amulet, or charm). The word occurs only once in the New Testament (Matthew 23:5), in the great discourse of Our Lord against the Pharisees whom He reproaches with ostentation in the discharge of their religious and social duties: "For they make their phylacteries broad and enlarge their fringes." By the Jews the phylacteries are termed tephillin, plural of the word tephillah, "a prayer," and consist of two small square cases of leather, one of which is worn on the forehead, the other on the upper left arm. The case for the forehead holds four distinct compartments, that for the arm only one. They contain narrow strips of parchment on which are copied passages from the Pentateuch, viz., Exodus 13:1-10; and Deuteronomy 6:4-9; 11:13-21. The practice of wearing the phylacteries at stated moments is still regarded as a sacred religious duty by the orthodox Jews. KLEIN, Die Totaphoth nach Bibel und Tradition in Jahrbuecher f. Prot. Theol. (Berlin, 1881), 666-689; VIGOUROUX, Dict. de la Bible, s.v. Phylacteres. JAMES F. DRISCOLL History of Physics History of Physics The subject will be treated under the following heads: I. A Glance at Ancient Physics; II. Science and Early Christian Scholars; III. A Glance at Arabian Physics; IV. Arabian Tradition and Latin Scholasticism; V. The Science of Observation and Its Progress + Astronomers + The Statics of Jordanus + Thierry of Freiberg + Pierre of Maricourt; VI. The Articles of Paris (1277) + Possibility of Vacuum; VII. The Earth's Motion + Oresme; VIII. Plurality of Worlds; IX. Dynamics + Theory of Impetus + Inertia + Celestial and Sublunary Mechanics Identical; X. Propagation of the Doctrines of the School of Paris in Germany and Italy + Purbach and Regiomontanus + Nicholas of Cusa + Vinci; XI. Italian Averroism and its Tendencies to Routine + Attempts at Restoring the Astronomy of Homocentric Spheres; XII. The Copernican Revolution; XIII. Fortunes of the Copernican System in the Sixteenth Century; XIV. Theory of the Tides; XV. Statics in the Sixteenth Century + Stevinus; XVI. Dynamics in the Sixteenth Century; XVII. Galileo's Work; XVIII. Initial Attempts in Celestial Mechanics + Gilbert + Kepler; XIX. Controversies concerning Geostatics; XX. Descartes's Work; XXI. Progress of Experimental Physics; XXII. Undulatory Theory of Light; XXIII. Development of Dynamics; XXIV. Newton's Work; XXV. Progress of General and Celestial Mechanics in the Eighteenth Century; XXVI. Establishment of the Theory of Electricity and Magnetism; XXVII. Molecular Attraction; XXVIII. Revival of the Undulatory Theory of Light; XXIX. Theories of Heat. I. A GLANCE AT ANCIENT PHYSICS Although at the time of Christ's birth Hellenic science had produced nearly all its masterpieces, it was still to give to the world Ptolemy's astronomy, the way for which had been paved for more than a century by the works of Hipparchus. The revelations of Greek thought on the nature of the exterior world ended with the "Almagest", which appeared about a.d. 145, and then began the decline of ancient learning. Those of its works that escaped the fires kindled by Mohammedan warriors were subjected to the barren interpretations of Mussulman commentators and like parched seed, awaited the time when Latin Christianity would furnish a favourable soil in which they could once more flourish and bring forth fruit. Hence it is that the time when Ptolemy put the finishing touches to his "Great Mathematical Syntax of Astronomy" seems the most opportune in which to study the field of ancient physics. An impassable frontier separated this field into two regions in which different laws prevailed. From the moon's orbit to the sphere enclosing the world, extended the region of beings exempt from generation, change, and death, of perfect, divine beings, and these were the star-sphere and the stars themselves. Inside the lunar orbit lay the region of generation and corruption, where the four elements and the mixed bodies generated by their mutual combinations were subject to perpetual change. The science of the stars was dominated by a principle formulated by Plato and the Pythagoreans, according to which all the phenomena presented to us by the heavenly bodies must be accounted for by combinations of circular and uniform motions. Moreover, Plato declared that these circular motions were reducible to the rotation of solid globes all limited by spherical surfaces concentric with the World and the Earth, and some of these homocentric spheres carried fixed or wandering stars. Eudoxus of Cnidus, Calippus, and Aristotle vied with one another in striving to advance this theory of homocentric spheres, its fundamental hypothesis being incorporated in Aristotle's "Physics" and "Metaphysics". However, the astronomy of homocentric spheres could not explain all celestial phenomena, a considerable number of which showed that the wandering stars did not always remain at an equal distance from the Earth. Heraclides Ponticus in Plato's time, and Aristarchus of Samos about 280 b.c. endeavoured to account for all astronomical phenomena by a heliocentric system, which was an outline of the Copernican mechanics; but the arguments of physics and the precepts of theology proclaiming the Earth's immobility, readily obtained the ascendency over this doctrine which existed in a mere outline. Then the labours of Apollonius Pergæus (at Alexandria, 205 b.c.), of Hipparchus (who made observation at Rhodes in 128 and 127 b.c.), and finally of Ptolemy (Claudius Ptolemæus of Pelusium) constituted a new astronomical system that claimed the Earth to be immovable in the centre of the universe; a system that seemed, as it were, to reach its completion when, between a.d. 142 and 146, Ptolemy wrote a work called Megale mathematike syntaxis tes astronomias, its Arabian title being transliterated by the Christians of the Middle Ages, who named it "Almagest". The astronomy of the "Almagest" explained all astronomical phenomena with a precision which for a long time seemed satisfactory, accounting for them by combinations of circular motions; but, of the circles described, some were eccentric to the World, whilst others were epicyclic circles, the centres of which described deferent circles concentric with or eccentric to the World; moreover, the motion on the deferent was no longer uniform, seeming so only when viewed from the centre of the equant. Briefly, in order to construct a kinematical arrangement by means of which phenomena could be accurately represented, the astronomers whose work Ptolemy completed had to set at naught the properties ascribed to the celestial substance by Aristotle's "Physics", and between this "Physics" and the astronomy of eccentrics and epicycles there ensued a violent struggle which lasted until the middle of the sixteenth century. In Ptolemy's time the physics of celestial motion was far more advanced than the physics of sublunary bodies, as, in this science of beings subject to generation and corruption, only two chapters had reached any degree of perfection, namely, those on optics (called perspective) and statics. The law of reflection was known as early as the time of Euclid, about 320 b.c., and to this geometrician was attributed, although probably erroneously, a "Treatise on Mirrors", in which the principles of catoptrics were correctly set forth. Dioptrics, being more difficult, was developed less rapidly. Ptolemy already knew that the angle of refraction is not proportional to the angle of incidence, and in order to determine the ratio between the two he undertook experiments the results of which were remarkably exact. Statics reached a fuller development than optics. The "Mechanical Questions" ascribed to Aristotle were a first attempt to organize that science, and they contained a kind of outline of the principle of virtual velocities, destined to justify the law of the equilibrium of the lever; besides, they embod. the happy idea of referring to the lever theory the theory of all simple machines. An elaboration, in which Euclid seems to have had some part, brought statics to the stage of development in which it was found by Archimedes (about 287-212 b.c.), who was to raise it to a still higher degree of perfection. It will here suffice to mention the works of genius in which the great Syracusan treated the equilibrium of the weights suspended from the two arms of a lever, the search for the centre of gravity, and the equilibrium of liquids and floating bodies. The treatises of Archimedes were too scholarly to be widely read by the mechanicians who succeeded this geometrician; these men preferred easier and more practical writings as, for instance, those on the lines of Aristotle's "Mechanical Questions". Various treatises by Heron of Alexandria have preserved for us the type of these decadent works. II. SCIENCE AND EARLY CHRISTIAN SCHOLARS Shortly after the death of Ptolemy, Christian science took root at Alexandria with Origen (about 180-253), and a fragment of his "Commentaries on Genesis", preserved by Eusebius, shows us that the author was familiar with the latest astronomical discoveries, especially the precession of the equinoxes. However, the writings in which the Fathers of the Church comment upon the work of the six days of Creation, notably the commentaries of St. Basil and St. Ambrose, borrow but little from Hellenic physics; in fact, their tone would seem to indicate distrust in the teachings of Greek science, this distrust being engendered by two prejudices: in the first place, astronomy was becoming more and more the slave of astrology, the superstitions of which the Church diligently combatted; in the second place, between the essential propositions of peripatetic physics and what we believe to be the teaching of Holy Writ, contradictions appeared; thus Genesis was thought to teach the presence of water above the heaven of the fixed stars (the firmament) and this was incompatible with the Aristotelean theory concerning the natural place of the elements. The debates raised by this question gave St. Augustine an opportunity to lay down wise exegetical rules, and he recommended Christians not to put forth lightly, as articles of faith, propositions contradicted by physical science based upon careful experiments. St. Isidore of Seville (d. 636), a bishop, considered it legitimate for Christians to desire to know the teachings of profane science, and he laboured to satisfy this curiosity. His "Etymologies" and "De natura rerum" are merely compilations of fragments borrowed from all the pagan and Christian authors with whom he was acquainted. In the height of the Latin Middle Ages these works served as models for numerous encyclopædias, of which the "De natura rerum" by Bede (about 672-735) and the "De universo" by Rabanus Maurus (776-856) were the best known. However, the sources from which the Christians of the West imbibed a knowledge of ancient physics became daily more numerous, and to Pliny the Elder's "Natural History", read by Bede, were added Chalcidius's commentary on Plato's "Timæus" and Martianus Capella's "De Nuptiis Philologiæ et Mercurii", these different works inspiring the physics of John Scotus Eriugena. Prior to a.d. 1000 a new Platonic work by Macrobius, a commentary on the "Somnium Scipionis", was in great favour in the schools. Influenced by the various treatises already mentioned, Guillaume of Conches (1080-1150 or 1154) and the unknown author of "De mundi constitutione liber", which, by the way, has been falsely attributed to Bede, set forth a planetary theory making Venus and Mercury satellites of the sun, but Eriugena went still further and made the sun also the centre of the orbits of Mars and Jupiter. Had he but extended this hypothesis to Saturn, he would have merited the title of precursor of Tycho Brahe. III. A GLANCE AT ARABIAN PHYSICS The authors of whom we have heretofore spoken had only been acquainted with Greek science through the medium of Latin tradition, but the time came when it was to be much more completely revealed to the Christians of the West through the medium of Mussulman tradition. There is no Arabian science. The wise men of Mohammedanism were always the more or less faithful disciples of the Greeks, but were themselves destitute of all originality. For instance, they compiled many abridgments of Ptolemy's "Almagest", made numerous observations, and constructed a great many astronomical tables, but added nothing essential to the theories of astronomical motion; their only innovation in this respect, and, by the way, quite an unfortunate one, was the doctrine of the oscillatory motion of the equinoctial points, which the Middle Ages ascribed to Thâbit ibn Kûrrah (836-901), but which was probably the idea of Al-Zarkali, who lived much later and made observations between 1060 and 1080. This motion was merely the adaptation of a mechanism conceived by Ptolemy for a totally different purpose. In physics, Arabian scholars confined themselves to commentaries on the statements of Aristotle, their attitude being at times one of absolute servility. This intellectual servility to Peripatetic teaching reached its climax in Abul ibn Roshd, whom Latin scholastics called Averroës (about 1120-98) and who said: Aristotle "founded and completed logic, physics, and metaphysics . . . because none of those who have followed him up to our time, that is to say, for four hundred years, have been able to add anything to his writings or to detect therein an error of any importance". This unbounded respect for Aristotle's work impelled a great many Arabian philosophers to attack Ptolemy's "Astronomy" in the name of Peripatetic physics. The conflict between the hypotheses of eccentrics and epicycles was inaugurated by Ibn Bâdja, known to the scholastics as Avempace (d. 1138), and Abu Bekr ibn el-Tofeil, called Abubacer by the scholastics (d. 1185), and was vigorously conducted by Averroës, the protégé of Abubacer. Abu Ishâk ibn al-Bitrogi, known by the scholastics as Alpetragius, another disciple of Abubacer and a contemporary of Averroës, advanced a theory on planetary motion wherein he wished to account for the phenomena peculiar to the wandering stars, by compounding rotations of homocentric spheres; his treatise, which was more neo-Platonic than Peripatetic, seemed to be a Greek book altered, or else a simple plagiarism. Less inflexible in his Peripateticism than Averroës and Alpetragius, Moses ben Maimun, called Maimonides (1139-1204), accepted Ptolemy's astronomy despite its incompatibility with Aristotelean physics, although he regarded Aristotle's sublunary physics as absolutely true. IV. ARABIAN TRADITION AND LATIN SCHOLASTICISM It cannot be said exactly when the first translations of Arabic writings began to be received by the Christians of the West, but it was certainly previously to the time of Gerbert (Sylvester II; about 930-1003). Gerbert used treatises translated from the Arabic, and containing instructions on the use of astronomical instruments, notably the astrolabe, to which instrument Hermann the Lame (1013-54) devoted part of his researches. In the beginning of the twelfth century the contributions of Mohammedan science and philosophy to Latin Christendom became more and more frequent and important. About 1120 or 1130 Adelard of Bath translated the "Elements" of Euclid, and various astronomical treatises; in 1141 Peter the Venerable, Abbot of Cluny, found two translators, Hermann the Second (or the Dalmatian) and Robert of Rétines, established in Spain; he engaged them to translate the Koran into Latin, and in 1143 these same translators made Christendom acquainted with Ptolemy's planisphere. Under the direction of Raimond (Archbishop of Toledo, 1130; d. 1150), Domengo Gondisalvi (Gonsalvi; Gundissalinus), Archdeacon of Segovia, began to collaborate with the converted Jew, John of Luna, erroneously called John of Seville (Johannes Hispalensis). While John of Luna applied himself to works in mathematics, he also assisted Gondisalvi in translating into Latin a part of Aristotle's physics, the "De Cælo" and the "Metaphysics", besides treatises by Avicenna, Al-Gazâli, Al-Fârâbi, and perhaps Salomon ibn Gebirol (Avicebron). About 1134 John of Luna translated Al-Fergâni's treatise "Astronomy", which was an abridgement of the "Almagest", thereby introducing Christians to the Ptolemaic system, while at the same time his translations, made in collaboration with Gondisalvi, familiarized the Latins with the physical and metaphysical doctrines of Aristotle. Indeed the influence of Aristotle's "Physics" was already apparent in the writings of the most celebrated masters of the school of Chartres (from 1121 until before 1155), and of Gilbert de la Porrée (1070-1154). The abridgement of Al-Fergâni's "Astronomy", translated by John of Luna, does not seem to have been the first work in which the Latins were enabled to read the exposition of Ptolemy's system; it was undoubtedly preceded by a more complete treatise, the "De Scientia stellarum" of Albategnius (Al-Battâni), latinized by Plato of Tivoli about 1120. However, the "Almagest" itself was still unknown. Moved by a desire to read and translate Ptolemy's immortal work, Gerard of Cremona (d. 1187) left Italy and went to Toledo, eventually making the translation which he finished in 1175. Besides the "Almagest", Gerard rendered into Latin other works, of which we have a list comprising seventy-four different treatises. Some of these were writings of Greek origin, and included a large portion of the works of Aristotle, a treatise by Archimedes, Euclid's "Elements" (completed by Hypsicles), and books by Hippocrates. Others were Arabic writings, such as the celebrated "Book of Three Brothers", composed by the Beni Mûsa, "Optics" by Ibn Al-Haitam (the Alhazen of the Scholastics), "Astronomy" by Geber, and "De motu octavæ sphæræ" by Thâbit ibn Kûrrah. Moreover, in order to spread the study of Ptolemaic astronomy, Gerard composed at Toledo his "Theoricæ planetarum", which during the Middle Ages became one of the classics of astronomical instruction. Beginners who obtained their first cosmographic information through the study of the "Sphæra", written about 1230 by Joannes de Sacrobosco, could acquire a knowledge of eccentrics and epicycles by reading the "Theoricæ planetarum" of Gerard of Cremona. In fact, until the sixteenth century, most astronomical treatises assumed the form of commentaries, either on the "Sphæra", or the "Theoricæ planetarum". "Aristotle's philosophy", wrote Roger Bacon in 1267, "reached a great development among the Latins when Michael Scot appeared about 1230, bringing with him certain parts of the mathematical and physical treatises of Aristotle and his learned commentators". Among the Arabic writings made known to Christians by Michael Scot (before 1291; astrologer to Frederick II) were the treatises of Aristotle and the "Theory of Planets", which Alpetragius had composed in accordance with the hypothesis of homocentric spheres. The translation of this last work was completed in 1217. By propagating among the Latins the commentaries on Averroës and on Alpetragius's theory of the planets, as well as a knowledge of the treatises of Aristotle, Michael Scot developed in them an intellectual disposition which might be termed Averroism, and which consisted in a superstitious respect for the word of Aristotle and his commentator. There was a metaphysical Averroism which, because professing the doctrine of the substantial unity of all human intellects, was in open conflict with Christian orthodoxy; but there was likewise a physical Averroism which, in its blind confidence in Peripatetic physics, held as absolutely certain all that the latter taught on the subject of the celestial substance, rejecting in particular the system of epicycles and eccentrics in order to commend Alpetragius's astronomy of homocentric spheres. Scientific Averroism found partisans even among those whose purity of faith constrained them to struggle against metaphysical Averroism, and who were very often Peripatetics in so far as was possible without formally contradicting the teaching of the Church. For instance, William of Auvergne (d. 1249), who was the first to combat "Aristotle and his sectarians" on metaphysical grounds, was somewhat misled by Alpetragius's astronomy, which, moreover, he understood but imperfectly. Albertus Magnus (1193 or 1205-1280) followed to a great extent the doctrine of Ptolemy, although he was sometimes influenced by the objections of Averroës or affected by Alpetragius's principles. Vincent of Beauvais in his "Speculum quadruplex", a vast encyclopædic compilation published about 1250, seemed to attach great importance to the system of Alpetragius, borrowing the exposition of it from Albertus Magnus. Finally, even St. Thomas Aquinas gave evidence of being extremely perplexed by the theory (1227-74) of eccentrics and epicycles which justified celestial phenomena by contradicting the principles of Peripatetic physics, and the theory of Alpetragius which honoured these principles but did not go so far as to represent their phenomena in detail. This hesitation, so marked in the Dominican school, was hardly less remarkable in the Franciscan. Robert Grosseteste or Greathead (1175-1253), whose influence on Franciscan studies was so great, followed the Ptolemaic system in his astronomical writings, his physics being imbued with Alpetragius's ideas. St. Bonaventure (1221-74) wavered between doctrines which he did not thoroughly understand, and Roger Bacon (1214-92) in several of his writings weighed with great care the arguments that could be made to count for or against each of these two astronomical theories, without eventually making a choice. Bacon, however, was familiar with a method of figuration in the system of eccentrics and epicycles which Alhazen had derived from the Greeks; and in this figuration all the motions acknowledged by Ptolemy were traced back to the rotation of solid orbs accurately fitted one into the other. This representation, which refuted most of the objections raised by Averroës against Ptolemaic astronomy, contributed largely to propagate the knowledge of this astronomy, and it seems that the first of the Latins to adopt it and expatiate on its merits was the Franciscan Bernard of Verdun (end of thirteenth century), who had read Bacon's writings. In sublunary physics the authors whom we have just mentioned did not show the hesitation that rendered astronomical doctrines so perplexing, but on almost all points adhered closely to Peripatetic opinions . V. THE SCIENCE OF OBSERVATION AND ITS PROGRESS ASTRONOMERS THE STATICS OF JORDANUS THIERRY OF FREIBERG PIERRE OF MARICOURT Averroism had rendered scientific progress impossible, but fortunately in Latin Christendom it was to meet with two powerful enemies: the unhampered curiosity of human reason, and the authority of the Church. Encouraged by the certainty resulting from experiments, astronomers rudely shook off the yoke which Peripatetic physics had imposed upon them. The School of Paris in particular was remarkable for its critical views and its freedom of attitude towards the argument of authority. In 1290 William of Saint-Cloud determined with wonderful accuracy the obliquity of the ecliptic and the time of the vernal equinox, and his observations led him to recognize the inaccuracies that marred the "Tables of Toledo", drawn up by Al-Zarkali. The theory of the precession of the equinoxes, conceived by the astronomers of Alfonso X of Castile, and the "Alphonsine Tables" set up in accordance with this theory, gave rise in the first half of the fourteenth century to the observations, calculations, and critical discussions of Parisian astronomers, especially of Jean des Linières and his pupil John of Saxonia or Connaught. At the end of the thirteenth century and the beginning of the fourteenth, sublunary physics owed great advancement to the simultaneous efforts of geometricians and experimenters -- their method and discoveries being duly boasted of by Roger Bacon who, however, took no important part in their labours. Jordanus de Nemore, a talented mathematician who, not later than about the beginning of the thirteenth century, wrote treatises on arithmetic and geometry, left a very short treatise on statics in which, side by side with erroneous propositions, we find the law of the equilibrium of the straight lever very correctly established with the aid of the principle of virtual displacements. The treatise, "De ponderibus", by Jordanus provoked research on the part of various commentators, and one of these, whose name is unknown and who must have written before the end of the thirteenth century, drew, from the same principle of virtual displacements, demonstrations, admirable in exactness and elegance, of the law of the equilibrium of the bent lever, and of the apparent weight (gravitas secundum situm) of a body on an inclined plane. Alhazen's "Treatise on Perspective" was read thoroughly by Roger Bacon and his contemporaries, John Peckham (1228-91), the English Franciscan, giving a summary of it. About 1270 Witelo (or Witek; the Thuringopolonus), composed an exhaustive ten-volume treatise on optics, which remained a classic until the time of Kepler, who wrote a commentary on it. Albertus Magnus, Roger Bacon, John Peckham, and Witelo were deeply interested in the theory of the rainbow, and, like the ancient meteorologists, they all took the rainbow to be the image of the sun reflected in a sort of a concave mirror formed by a cloud resolved into rain. In 1300 Thierry of Freiberg proved by means of carefully-conducted experiments in which he used glass balls filled with water, that the rays which render the bow visible have been reflected on the inside of the spherical drops of water, and he traced with great accuracy the course of the rays which produce the rainbows respectively. The system of Thierry of Freiberg, at least that part relating to the primary rainbow, was reproduced about 1360 by Themon, "Son of the Jew" (Themo ju d i), and, from his commentary on "Meteors", it passed on down to the days of the Renaissance when, having been somewhat distorted, it reappeared in the writings of Alessandro Piccolomini, Simon Porta, and Marco and Antonio de Dominis, being thus propagated until the time of Descartes. The study of the magnet had also made great progress in the course of the thirteenth century; the permanent magnetization of iron, the properties of the magnetic poles, the direction of the Earth's action exerted on these poles or of their action on one another, are all found very accurately described in a treatise written in 1269 by Pierre of Maricourt (Petrus Peregrinus). Like the work of Thierry of Freiberg on the rainbow, the "Epistola de magnete" by Maricourt was a model of the art of logical sequence between experiment and deduction. VI. THE ARTICLES OF PARIS (1277) POSSIBILITY OF VACUUM The University of Paris was very uneasy because of the antagonism existing between Christian dogmas and certain Peripatetic doctrines, and on several occasions it combatted Aristotelean influence. In 1277 Etienne Tempier, Bishop of Paris, acting on the advice of the theologians of the Sorbonne, condemned a great number of errors, some of which emanated from the astrology, and others from the philosophy of the Peripatetics. Among these errors considered dangerous to faith were several which might have impeded the progress of physical science, and hence it was that the theologians of Paris declared erroneous the opinion maintaining that God Himself could not give the entire universe a rectilinear motion, as the universe would then leave a vacuum behind it, and also declared false the notion that God could not create several worlds. These condemnations destroyed certain essential foundations of Peripatetic physics; because, although, in Aristotle's system, such propositions were ridiculously untenable, belief in Divine Omnipotence sanctioned them as possible, whilst waiting for science to confirm them as true. For instance, Aristotle's physics treated the existence of an empty space as a pure absurdity; in virtue of the "Articles of Paris" Richard of Middletown (about 1280) and, after him, many masters at Paris and Oxford admitted that the laws of nature are certainly opposed to the production of empty space, but that the realization of such a space is not, in itself, contrary to reason; thus, without any absurdity, one could argue on vacuum and on motion in a vacuum. Next, in order that such arguments might be legitimatized, it was necessary to create that branch of mechanical science known as dynamics. VII. THE EARTH'S MOTION ORESME The "Articles of Paris" were of about the same value in supporting the question of the Earth's motion as in furthering the progress of dynamics by regarding vacuum as something conceivable. Aristotle maintained that the first heaven (the firmament) moved with a uniform rotary motion, and that the Earth was absolutely stationary, and as these two propositions necessarily resulted from the first principles relative to time and place, it would have been absurd to deny them. However, by declaring that God could endow the World with a rectilinear motion, the theologians of the Sorbonne acknowledged that these two Aristotelean propositions could not be imposed as a logical necessity and thenceforth, whilst continuing to admit that, as a fact, the Earth was immovable and that the heavens moved with a rotary diurnal motion, Richard of Middletown and Duns Scotus (about 1275-1308) began to formulate hypotheses to the effect that these bodies were animated by other motions, and the entire school of Paris adopted the same opinion. Soon, however, the Earth's motion was taught in the School of Paris, not as a possibility, but as a reality. In fact, in the specific setting forth of certain information given by Aristotle and Simplicius, a principle was formulated which for three centuries was to play a great rôle in statics, viz. that every heavy body tends to unite its centre of gravity with the centre of the Earth. When writing his "Questions" on Aristotle's "De Cælo" in 1368, Albert of Helmstadt (or of Saxony) admitted this principle, which he applied to the entire mass of the terrestrial element. The centre of gravity of this mass is constantly inclined to place itself in the centre of the universe, but, within the terrestrial mass, the position of the centre of gravity is incessantly changing. The principal cause of this variation is the erosion brought about by the streams and rivers that continually wear away the land surface, deepening its valleys and carrying off all loose matter to the bed of the sea, thereby producing a displacement of weight which entails a ceaseless change in the position of the centre of gravity. Now, in order to replace this centre of gravity in the centre of the universe, the Earth moves without ceasing; and meanwhile a slow but perpetual exchange is being effected between the continents and the oceans. Albert of Saxony ventured so far as to think that these small and incessant motions of the Earth could explain the phenomena of the precession of the equinoxes. The same author declared that one of his masters, whose name he did not disclose, announced himself in favour of the daily rotation of the Earth, inasmuch as he refuted the arguments that were opposed to this motion. This anonymous master had a thoroughly convinced disciple in Nicole Oresme who, in 1377, being then Canon of Rouen and later Bishop of Lisieux, wrote a French commentary on Aristotle's treatise "De Cælo", maintaining with quite as much force as clearness that neither experiment nor argument could determine whether the daily motion belonged to the firmament of the fixed stars or to the Earth. He also showed how to interpret the difficulties encountered in "the Sacred Scriptures wherein it is stated that the sun turns, etc. It might be supposed that here Holy Writ adapts itself to the common mode of human speech, as also in several places, for instance, where lt is written that God repented Himself, and was angry and calmed Himself and so on, all of which is, however, not to be taken in a strictly literal sense". Finally, Oresme offered several considerations favourable to the hypothesis of the Earth's daily motion. In order to refute one of the objections raised by the Peripatetics against this point, Oresme was led to explain how, in spite of this motion, heavy bodies seemed to fall in a vertical line; he admitted their real motion to be composed of a fall in a vertical line and a diurnal rotation identical with that which they would have if bound to the Earth. This is precisely the principle to which Galileo was afterwards to turn. VIII. PLURALITY OF WORLDS Aristotle maintained the simultaneous existence of several worlds to be an absurdity, his principal argument being drawn from his theory of gravity, whence he concluded that two distinct worlds could not coexist and be each surrounded by its elements; therefore it would be ridiculous to compare each of the planets to an earth similar to ours. In 1277 the theologians of Paris condemned this doctrine as a denial of the creative omnipotence of God; Richard of Middletown and Henry of Ghent (who wrote about 1280), Guillaume Varon (who wrote a commentary on the "Sentences" about 1300), and, towards 1320, Jean de Bassols, William of Occam (d. after 1347), and Walter Burley (d. about 1348) did not hesitate to declare that God could create other worlds similar to ours. This doctrine, adopted by several Parisian masters, exacted that the theory of gravity and natural place developed by Aristotle be thoroughly changed; in fact, the following theory was substituted for it. If some part of the elements forming a world be detached from it and driven far away, its tendency will be to move towards the world to which it belongs and from which it was separated; the elements of each world are inclined so to arrange themselves that the heaviest will be in the centre and the lightest on the surface. This theory of gravity appeared in the writings of Jean Buridan of Béthune, who became rector of the University of Paris in 1327, teaching at that institution until about 1360; and in 1377 this same theory was formally proposed by Oresme. It was also destined to be adopted by Copernicus and his first followers, and to be maintained by Galileo, William Gilbert, and Otto von Guericke. IX. DYNAMICS THEORY OF IMPETUS INERTIA CELESTIAL AND SUBLUNARY MECHANICS IDENTICAL If the School of Paris completely transformed the Peripatetic theory of gravity, it was equally responsible for the overthrow of Aristotelean dynamics. Convinced that, in all motion, the mover should be directly contiguous to the body moved, Aristotle had proposed a strange theory of the motion of projectiles. He held that the projectile was moved by the fluid medium, whether air or water, through which it passed and this, by virtue of the vibration brought about in the fluid at the moment of throwing, and spread through it. In the sixth century of our era this explanation was strenuously opposed by the Christian Stoic, Joannes Philoponus, according to whom the projectile was moved by a certain power communicated to it at the instant of throwing; however, despite the objections raised by Philoponus, Aristotle's various commentators, particularly Averroës, continued to attribute the motion of the projectile to the disturbance of the air, and Albertus Magnus, St. Thomas Aquinas, Roger Bacon, Gilles of Rome, and Walter Burley persevered in maintaining this error. By means of most spirited argumentation, William of Occam made known the complete absurdity of the Peripatetic theory of the motion of projectiles. Going back to Philoponus's thesis, Buridan gave the name impetus to the virtue or power communicated to the projectile by the hand or instrument throwing it; he declared that in any given body in motion, this impetus was proportional to the velocity, and that, in different bodies in motion propelled by the same velocity, the quantities of impetus were proportional to the mass or quantity of matter defined as it was afterwards defined by Newton. In a projectile; impetus is gradually destroyed by the resistance of air or other medium and is also destroyed by the natural gravity of the body in motion, which gravity is opposed to the impetus if the projectile be thrown upward; this struggle explains the different peculiarities of the motion of projectiles. In a falling body, gravity comes to the assistance of impetus which it increases at every instant, hence the velocity of the fall is increasing incessantly. With the assistance of these principles concerning impetus, Buridan accounts for the swinging of the pendulum. He likewise analyses the mechanism of impact and rebound and, in this connexion, puts forth very correct views on the deformations and elastic reactions that arise in the contiguous parts of two bodies coming into collision. Nearly all this doctrine of impetus is transformed into a very correct mechanical theory if one is careful to substitute the expression vis viva for impetus. The dynamics expounded by Buridan were adopted in their entirety by Albert of Saxony, Oresme, Marsile of Inghem, and the entire School of Paris. Albert of Saxony appended thereto the statement that the velocity of a falling body must be proportional either to the time elapsed from the beginning of the fall or to the distance traversed during this time. In a projectile, the impetus is gradually destroyed either by the resistance of the medium or by the contrary tendency of the gravity natural to the body. Where these causes of destruction do not exist, the impetus remains perpetually the same, as in the case of a millstone exactly centred and not rubbing on its axis; once set in motion it will turn indefinitely with the same swiftness. It was under this form that the law of inertia at first became evident to Buridan and Albert of Saxony. The conditions manifested in this hypothetic millstone are realized in the celestial orbs, as in these neither friction nor gravity impedes motion; hence it may be admitted that each celestial orb moves indefinitely by virtue of a suitable impetus communicated to it by God at the moment of creation. It is useless to imitate Aristotle and his commentators by attributing the motion of each orb to a presiding spirit. This was the opinion proposed by Buridan and adopted by Albert of Saxony; and whilst formulating a doctrine from which modern dynamics was to spring, these masters understood that the same dynamics governs both celestial and sublunary bodies. Such an idea was directly opposed to the essential distinction established by ancient physics between these two kinds of bodies. Moreover, following William of Occam, the masters of Paris rejected this distinction; they acknowledged that the matter constituting celestial bodies was of the same nature as that constituting sublunary bodies and that, if the former remained perpetually the same, it was not because they were, by nature, incapable of change and destruction, but simply because the place in which they were contained no agent capable of corrupting them. A century elapsed between the condemnations pronounced by Etienne Tempier (1277) and the editing of the "Traité du Ciel et du Monde" by Oresme (1377) and, within that time, all the essential principles of Aristotle's physics were undermined, and the great controlling ideas of modern science formulated. This revolution was mainly the work of Oxford Franciscans like Richard of Middletown, Duns Scotus, and William of Occam, and of masters in the School of Paris, heirs to the tradition inaugurated by these Franciscans; among the Parisian masters Buridan, Albert of Saxony, and Oresme were in the foremost rank. X. PROPAGATION OF THE DOCTRINES OF THE SCHOOL OF PARIS IN GERMANY AND ITALY PURBACH AND REGIOMONTANUS NICHOLAS OF CUSA VINCI The great Western Schism involved the University of Paris in politico-religious quarrels of extreme violence; the misfortunes brought about by the conflict between the Armagnacs and Burgundians and by the Hundred Years' War, completed what these quarrels had begun, and the wonderful progress made by science during the fourteenth century in the University of Paris suddenly ceased. However, the schism contributed to the diffusion of Parisian doctrines by driving out of Paris a large number of brilliant men who had taught there with marked success. In 1386 Marsile of Inghem (d. 1396), who had been one of the most gifted professors of the University of Paris, became rector of the infant University of Heidelberg, where he introduced the dynamic theories of Buridan and Albert of Saxony. About the same time, another master, reputedly of Paris, Heinrich Heimbuch of Langenstein, or of Hesse, was chiefly instrumental in founding the University of Vienna and, besides his theological knowledge, brought thither the astronomical tradition of Jean des Linières and John of Saxony. This tradition was carefully preserved in Vienna, being magnificently developed there throughout the fifteenth century, and paving the way for Georg Purbach (1423-61) and his disciple Johann Müller of Königsberg, surnamed Regiomontanus (1436-76). It was to the writing of theories calculated to make the Ptolemaic system known, to the designing and constructing of exact instruments, to the multiplying of observations, and the preparing of tables and almanacs (ephemerides), more accurate than those used by astronomers up to that time, that Purbach and Regiomontanus devoted their prodigious energy. By perfecting all the details of Ptolemy's theories, which they never called in question, they were most helpful in bringing to light the defects of these theories and in preparing the materials by means of which Copernicus was to build up his new astronomy. Averroism flourished in the Italian Universities of Padua and Bologna, which were noted for their adherence to Peripatetic doctrines. Still from the beginning of the fifteenth century the opinions of the School of Paris began to find their way into these institutions, thanks to the teaching of Paolo Nicoletti of Venice (flourished about 1420). It was there developed by his pupil Gaetan of Tiene (d. 1465). These masters devoted special attention to propagating the dynamics of impetus in Italy. About the time that Paola of Venice was teaching at Padua, Nicholas of Cusa came there to take his doctorate in law. Whether it was then that the latter became initiated in the physics of the School of Paris matters little, as in any event it was from Parisian physics that he adopted those doctrines that smacked least of Peripateticism. He became thoroughly conversant with the dynamics of impetus and, like Buridan and Albert of Saxony, attributed the motion of the celestial spheres to the impetus which God had communicated to them in creating them, and which was perpetuated because, in these spheres, there was no element of destruction. He admitted that the Earth moved incessantly, and that its motion might be the cause of the precession of the equinoxes. In a note discovered long after his death, he went so far as to attribute to the Earth a daily rotation. He imagined that the sun, the moon, and the planets were so many systems, each of which contained an earth and elements analogous to our Earth and elements, and to account for the action of gravity in each of these systems he followed closely the theory of gravity advanced by Oresme. Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) was perhaps more thoroughly convinced of the merits of the Parisian physics than any other Italian master. A keen observer, and endowed with insatiable curiosity, he had studied a great number of works, amongst which we may mention the various treatises of the School of Jordanus, various books by Albert of Saxony, and in all likelihood the works of Nicholas of Cusa; then, profiting by the learning of these scholars, he formally enunciated or else simply intimated many new ideas. The statics of the School of Jordanus led him to discover the law of the composition of concurrent forces stated as follows: the two component forces have equal moments as regards the direction of the resultant, and the resultant and one of the components have equal moments as regards the direction of the other component. The statics derived from the properties which Albert of Saxony attributed to the centre of gravity caused Vinci to recognize the law of the polygon of support and to determine the centre of gravity of a tetrahedron. He also presented the law of the equilibrium of two liquids of different density in communicating tubes, and the principle of virtual displacements seems to have occasioned his acknowledgement of the hydrostatic law known as Pascal's. Vinci continued to meditate on the properties of impetus, which he called impeto or forza, and the propositions that he formulated on the subject of this power very often showed a fairly clear discernment of the law of the conservation of energy. These propositions conducted him to remarkably correct and accurate conclusions concerning the impossibility of perpetual motion. Unfortunately he misunderstood the pregnant explanation, afforded by the theory of impetus, regarding the acceleration of falling bodies, and like the Peripatetics attributed this acceleration to the impulsion of the encompassing air. However, by way of compensation, he distinctly asserted that the velocity of a body that falls freely is proportional to the time occupied in the fall, and he understood in what way this law extends to a fall on an inclined plane. When he wished to determine how the path traversed by a falling body is connected with the time occupied in the fall, he was confronted by a difficulty which, in the seventeenth century, was likewise to baffle Baliani and Gassendi. Vinci was much engrossed in the analysis of the deformations and elastic reactions which cause a body to rebound after it has struck another, and this doctrine, formulated by Buridan, Albert of Saxony, and Marsile of Inghem he applied in such a way as to draw from it the explanation of the flight of birds. This flight is an alternation of falls during which the bird compresses the air beneath it, and of rebounds due to the elastic force of this air. Until the great painter discovered this explanation, the question of the flight of birds was always looked upon as a problem in statics, and was likened to the swimming of a fish in water. Vinci attached great importance to the views developed by Albert of Saxony in regard to the Earth's equilibrium. Like the Parisian master, he held that the centre of gravity within the terrestrial mass is constantly changing under the influence of erosion and that the Earth is continually moving so as to bring this centre of gravity to the centre of the World. These small, incessant motions eventually bring to the surface of the continents those portions of earth that once occupied the bed of the ocean and, to place this assertion of Albert of Saxony beyond the range of doubt, Vinci devoted himself to the study of fossils and to extremely cautious observations which made him the creator of Stratigraphy. In many passages in his notes Vinci asserts, like Nicholas of Cusa that the moon and the other wandering stars are worlds analogous to ours, that they carry seas upon their surfaces, and are surrounded by air; and the development of this opinion led him to talk of the gravity binding to each of these stars the elements that belonged to it. On the subject of this gravity he professed a theory similar to Oresme's. Hence it would seem that, in almost every particular, Vinci was a faithful disciple of the great Parisian masters of the fourteenth century, of Buridan, Albert of Saxony, and Oresme. XI. ITALIAN AVERROISM AND ITS TENDENCIES TO ROUTINE ATTEMPTS AT RESTORING THE ASTRONOMY OF HOMOCENTRIC SPHERES Whilst, through the anti-Peripatetic influence of the School of Paris, Vinci reaped a rich harvest of discoveries, innumerable Italians devoted themselves to the sterile worship of defunct ideas with a servility that was truly astonishing. The Averroists did not wish to acknowledge as true anything out of conformity with the ideas of Aristotle as interpreted by Averroës; with Pompanazzi (1462-1526), the Alexandrists, seeking their inspiration further back in the past, refused to understand Aristotle otherwise than he had been understood by Alexander of Aphrodisias; and the Humanists, solicitous only for purity of form, would not consent to use any technical language whatever and rejected all ideas that were not sufficiently vague to be attractive to orators and poets; thus Averroists, Alexandrists, and Humanists proclaimed a truce to their vehement discussions so as to combine against the "language of Paris", the "logic of Paris", and the "physics of Paris". It is difficult to conceive the absurdities to which these minds were led by their slavish surrender to routine. A great number of physicists, rejecting the Parisian theory of impetus, returned to the untenable dynamics of Aristotle, and maintained that the projectile was moved by the ambient air. In 1499 Nicolò Vernias of Chieti, an Averroist professor at Padua, taught that if a heavy body fell it was in consequence of the motion of the air surrounding it. A servile adoration of Peripateticism prompted many so-called philosophers to reject the Ptolemaic system, the only one which, at that time, could satisfy the legitimate exigencies of astronomers, and to readopt the hypothesis of homocentric spheres. They held as null and void the innumerable observations that showed changes in the distance of each planet from the Earth. Alessandro Achillini of Bologna (1463-1512), an uncompromising Averroist and a strong opponent of the theory of impetus and of all Parisian doctrines, inaugurated, in his treatise "De orbibus" (1498), a strange reaction against Ptolemaic astronomy; Agostino Nifo (1473-1538) laboured for the same end in a work that has not come down to us; Girolamo Fracastorio (1483-1553) gave us, in 1535, his book "De homocentricis", and Gianbattista Amico (1536), and Giovanni Antonio Delfino (1559) published small works in an endeavour to restore the system of homocentric spheres. XII. THE COPERNICAN REVOLUTION Although directed by tendencies diametrically opposed to the true scientific spirit, the efforts made by Averroists to restore the astronomy of homocentric spheres were perhaps a stimulus to the progress of science, inasmuch as they accustomed physicists to the thought that the Ptolemaic system was not the only astronomical doctrine possible, or even the best that could be desired. Thus, in their own way, the Averroists paved the way for the Copernican revolution. The movements forecasting this revolution were noticeable in the middle of the fourteenth century in the writings of Nicholas of Cusa, and in the beginning of the fifteenth century in the notes of Vinci, both of these eminent scientists being well versed in Parisian physics. Celio Calcagnini proposed, in his turn, to explain the daily motion of the stars by attributing to the Earth a rotation from West to East, complete in one sidereal day. His dissertation, "Quod c lum stet, terra vero moveatur", although seeming to have been written about 1530, was not published until 1544, when it appeared in a posthumous edition of the author's works. Calcagnini declared that the Earth, originally in equilibrium in the centre of the universe, received a first impulse which imparted to it a rotary motion, and this motion, to which nothing was opposed, was indefinitely preserved by virtue of the principle set forth by Buridan and accepted by Albert of Saxony and Nicholas of Cusa. According to Calcagnini the daily rotation of the Earth was accompanied by an oscillation which explained the movement of the precession of the equinoxes. Another oscillation set the waters of the sea in motion and determined the ebb and flow of the tides. This last hypothesis was to be maintained by Andrea Cesalpino (1519-1603) in his "Quæstiones peripateticæ" (1569), and to inspire Galileo, who, unfortunately, was to seek in the phenomena of the tides his favourite proof of the Earth's rotation. The "De revolutionibus orbium c lestium libri sex" were printed in 1543, a few months after the death of Copernicus (1473-1543), but the principles of the astronomic system proposed by this man of genius had been published as early as 1539 in the "Narratio prima" of his disciple, Joachim Rhæticus (1514-76). Copernicus adhered to the ancient astronomical hypotheses which claimed that the World was spherical and limited, and that all celestial motions were decomposable into circular and uniform motions; but he held that the firmament of fixed stars was immovable, as also the sun, which was placed in the centre of this firmament. To the Earth he attributed three motions: a circular motion by which the centre of the Earth described with uniform velocity a circle situated in the plane of the ecliptic and eccentric to the sun; a daily rotation on an axis inclined towards the ecliptic, and finally, a rotation of this axis around an axis normal to the ecliptic and passing through the centre of the Earth. The time occupied by this last rotation was a little longer than that required for the circular motion of the centre of the Earth which produced the phenomenon of the precession of the equinoxes. To the five planets Copernicus ascribed motions analogous to those with which the Earth was provided, and he maintained that the moon moved in a circle around the Earth. Of the Copernican hypotheses, the newest was that according to which the Earth moved in a circle around the sun. From the days of Aristarchus of Samos and Seleucus no one had adopted this view. Medieval astronomers had all rejected it, because they supposed that the stars were much too close to the Earth and the sun, and that an annual circular motion of the Earth might give the stars a perceptible parallax. Still, on the other hand, we have seen that various authors had proposed to attribute to the Earth one or the other of the two motions which Copernicus added to the annual motion. To defend the hypothesis of the daily motion of the Earth against the objections formulated by Peripatetic physics, Copernicus invoked exactly the same reasons as Oresme, and in order to explain how each planet retains the various parts of its elements, he adopted the theory of gravity proposed by the eminent master. Copernicus showed himself the adherent of Parisian physics even in the following opinion, enunciated accidently: the acceleration of the fall of heavy bodies is explained by the continual increase which impetus receives from gravity. XIII. FORTUNES OF THE COPERNICAN SYSTEM IN THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY Copernicus and his disciple Rhæticus very probably regarded the motions which their theory ascribed to the Earth and the planets, the sun's rest and that of the firmament of fixed stars, as the real motions or real rest of these bodies. The "De revolutionibus orbium cælestium libri sex" appeared with an anonymous preface which inspired an entirely different idea. This preface was the work of the Lutheran theologian Osiander (1498-1552), who therein expressed the opinion that the hypotheses proposed by philosophers in general, and by Copernicus in particular, were in no wise calculated to acquaint us with the reality of things: "Neque enim necesse est eas hypotheses esse veras, imo, ne verisimiles quidem, sed sufficit hoc unum si calculum observationibus congruentem exhibeant". Osiander's view of astronomical hypotheses was not new. Even in the days of Grecian antiquity a number of thinkers had maintained that the sole object of these hypotheses was to "save appearances", sozein ta phainomena; and in the Middle Ages, as well as in antiquity, this method continued to be that of philosophers who wished to make use of Ptolemaic astronomy whilst at the same time upholding the Peripatetic physics absolutely incompatible with this astronomy. Osiander's doctrine was therefore readily received, first of all by astronomers who, without believing the Earth's motion to be a reality, accepted and admired the kinetic combinations conceived by Copernicus, as these combinations provided them with better means than could be offered by the Ptolemaic system for figuring out the motion of the moon and the phenomena of the precession of the equinoxes. One of the astronomers who most distinctly assumed this attitude in regard to Ptolemy's system was Erasmus Reinhold (1511-53), who, although not admitting the Earth's motion, professed a great admiration for the system of Copernicus and used it in computing new astronomical tables, the "Prutenicæ tabulæ" (1551), which were largely instrumental in introducing to astronomers the kinetic combinations originated by Copernicus. The "Prutenicæ tabulæ" were especially employed by the commission which in 1582 effected the Gregorian reform of the calendar. Whilst not believing in the Earth's motion, the members of this commission did not hesitate to use tables founded on a theory of the precession of the equinoxes and attributing a certain motion to the earth. However, the freedom permitting astronomers to use all hypotheses qualified to account for phenomena was soon restricted by the exigencies of Peripatetic philosophers and Protestant theologians. Osiander had written his celebrated preface to Copernicus's book with a view to warding off the attacks of theologians, but in this he did not succeed. Martin Luther, in his "Tischrede", was the first to express indignation at the impiety of those who admitted the hypothesis of solar rest. Melanchthon, although acknowledging the purely astronomical advantages of the Copernican system, strongly combatted the hypothesis of the Earth's motion (1549), not only with the aid of arguments furnished by Peripatetic physics but likewise, and chiefly, with the assistance of numerous texts taken from Holy Writ. Kaspar Peucer (1525-1602), Melanchthon's son-in-law, whilst endeavouring to have his theory of the planets harmonize with the progress which the Copernican system had made in this regard, nevertheless rejected the Copernican hypotheses as absurd (1571). It then came to be exacted of astronomical hypotheses that not only, as Osiander had desired, the result of their calculations be conformable to facts, but also that they be not refuted "either in the name of the principles of physics or in the name of the authority of the Sacred Scriptures". This criterion was explicitly formulated in 1578 by a Lutheran, the Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe (1546-1601), and it was precisely by virtue of these two requirements that the doctrines of Galileo were to be condemned by the Inquisition in 1616 and 1633. Eager not to admit any hypothesis that would conflict with Aristotelean physics or be contrary to the letter of the Sacred Scriptures, and yet most desirous to retain all the astronomical advantages of the Copernican system, Tycho Brahe proposed a new system which virtually consisted in leaving the Earth motionless and in moving the other heavenly bodies in such a way that their displacement with regard to the Earth might remain the same as in the system of Copernicus. Moreover, although posing as the defender of Aristotelean physics, Tycho Brahe dealt it a disastrous blow. In 1572 a star, until then unknown, appeared in the constellation of Cassiopeia, and in showing accurate observations that the new astral body was really a fixed star, Tycho Brahe proved conclusively that the celestial world was not, as Aristotle would have had us believe, formed of a substance exempt from generation and destruction. The Church had not remained indifferent to the hypothesis of the Earth's motion until the time of Tycho Brahe, as it was amongst her members that this hypothesis had found its first defenders, counting adherents even in the extremely orthodox University of Paris. At the time of defending this hypothesis, Oresme was Canon of Rouen, and immediately after he was promoted to the Bishopric of Lisieux; Nicholas of Cusa was Bishop of Brixen and cardinal, and was entrusted with important negotiations by Eugenius IV, Nicholas V, and Pius II; Calcagnini was prothonotary Apostolic; Copernicus was Canon of Thorn, and it was Cardinal Schomberg who urged him to publish his work, the dedication of which was accepted by Paul III. Besides, Oresme had made clear how to interpret the Scriptural passages claimed to be opposed to the Copernican system, and in 1584 Didacus a Stunica of Salamanca found in Holy Writ texts which could be invoked with just as much certainty in favour of the Earth's motion. However, in 1595 the Protestant senate of the University of Tübingen compelled Kepler to retract the chapter in his "Mysterium cosmographicum", in which he had endeavoured to make the Copernican system agree with Scripture. Christopher Clavius (1537-1612), a Jesuit, and one of the influential members of the commission that reformed the Gregorian Calendar, seemed to be the first Catholic astronomer to adopt the double test imposed upon astronomical hypotheses by Tycho Brahe, and to decide (1581) that the suppositions of Copernicus were to be rejected, as opposed both to Peripatetic physics and to Scripture; on the other hand, at the end of his life and under the influence of Galileo's discoveries, Clavius appeared to have assumed a far more favourable attitude towards Copernican doctrines. The enemies of Aristotelean philosophy gladly adopted the system of Copernicus, considering its hypotheses as so many propositions physically true, this being the case with Pierre de La Ramée, called Petrus Ramus (1502-72), and especially with Giordano Bruno (about 1550-1600). The physics developed by Bruno, in which he incorporated the Copernican hypothesis, proceeded from Nicole, Oresme, and Nicholas of Cusa; but chiefly from the physics taught in the University of Paris in the fourteenth century. The infinite extent of the universe and the plurality of worlds were admitted as possible by many theologians at the end of the thirteenth century, and the theory of the slow motion which gradually causes the central portions of the Earth to work to the surface had been taught by Albert of Saxony before it attracted the attention of Vinci. The solution of Peripatetic arguments against the Earth's motion and the theory of gravity called forth by the comparison of the planets with the Earth would appear to have been borrowed by Bruno from Oresme. The apostasy and heresies for which Bruno was condemned in 1600 had nothing to do with the physical doctrines he had espoused, which included in particular Copernican astronomy. In fact it does not seem that, in the sixteenth century, the Church manifested the slightest anxiety concerning the system of Copernicus. XIV. THEORY OF THE TIDES It is undoubtedly to the great voyages that shed additional lustre on the close of the fifteenth century that we must attribute the importance assumed in the sixteenth century by the problem of the tides, and the great progress made at that time towards the solution of this problem. The correlation existing between the phenomenon of high and low tide and the course of the moon was known even in ancient times. Posidonius accurately described it; the Arabian astronomers were also familiar with it, and the explanation given of it in the ninth century by Albumazar in his "Introductorium magnum ad Astronomiam" remained a classic throughout the Middle Ages. The observation of tidal phenomena very naturally led to the supposition that the moon attracted the waters of the ocean and, in the thirteenth century, William of Auvergne compared this attraction to that of the magnet for iron. However, the mere attraction of the moon did not suffice to account for the alternation of spring and neap tides, which phenomenon clearly indicated a certain intervention of the sun. In his "Questions sur les livres des Météores", which appeared during the latter half of the fourteenth century, Themon, "Son of the Jew", introduced in a vague sort of way the idea of superposing two tides, the one due to the sun and the other to the moon. In 1528 this idea was very clearly endorsed by Federico Grisogone of Zara, a Dalmatian who taught medicine at Padua. Grisogone declared that, under the action of the moon exclusively, the sea would assume an ovoid shape, its major axis being directed towards the centre of the moon; that the action of the sun would also give it an ovoid shape, less elongated than the first, its major axis being directed towards the centre of the sun; and that the variation of sea level, at all times and in all places, was obtained by adding the elevation or depression produced by the solar tide to the elevation or depression produced by the lunar tide. In 1557 Girolamo Cardano accepted and briefly explained Grisogone's theory. In 1559 a posthumous work by Delfino gave a description of the phenomena of the tides, identical with that deduced from the mechanism conceived by Grisogone. The doctrine of the Dalmatian physician was reproduced by Paolo Gallucci in 1588, and by Annibale Raimondo in 1589; and in 1600 Claude Duret, who had plagiarized Delfino's treatise, published in France the description of the tides given in that work. XV. STATICS IN THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY STEVINUS When writing on statics Cardano drew upon two sources, the writings of Archimedes and the treatises of the School of Jordanus; besides, he probably plagiarized the notes left by Vinci, and it was perhaps from this source that he took the theorem: a system endowed with weight is in equilibrium when the centre of gravity of this system is the lowest possible. Nicolo Tartaglia (about 1500-57), Cardano's antagonist, shamelessly purloined a supposedly forgotten treatise by one of Jordanus's commentators. Ferrari, Cardano's faithful disciple, harshly rebuked Tartaglia for the theft, which nevertheless had the merit of re-establishing the vogue of certain discoveries of the thirteenth century, especially the law of the equilibrium of a body supported by an inclined plane. By another and no less barefaced plagiarism, Tartaglia published under his own name a translation of Archimedes's "Treatise on floating bodies" made by William of Moerbeke at the end of the thirteenth century. This publication, dishonest though it was, helped to give prominence to the study of Archimedes's mechanical labours, which study exerted the greatest influence over the progress of science at the end of the sixteenth century, the blending of Archimedean mathematics with Parisian physics, generating the movement that terminated in Galileo's work. The translation and explanation of the works of Archimedes enlisted the attention of geometricians such as Franeesco Maurolycus of Messina (1494-1575) and Federico Commandino of Urbino (1509-75), and these two authors, continuing the work of the great Syracusan, determined the position of the centre of gravity of various solids; in addition Coinmandin translated and explained Pappus's mathematical "Collection", and the fragment of "Mechanics" by Heron of Alexandria appended thereto. Admiration for these monuments of ancient science inspired a number of Italians with a profound contempt for medieval statics. The fecundity of the principle of virtual displacements, so happily employed by the School of Jordanus, was ignored; and, deprived of the laws discovered by this school and of the additions made to them by Vinci, the treatises on statics written by over-enthusiastic admirers of the Archimedean method were notably deficient. Among the authors of these treatises Guidobaldo dal Monte (1545-1607) and Giovanni Battista Benedetti (1530-90) deserve special mention. Of the mathematicians who, in statics, claimed to follow exclusively the rigorous methods of Archimedes and the Greek geometricians, the most illustrious was Simon Stevinus of Bruges (1548-1620). Through him the statics of solid bodies recovered all that had been gained by the School of Jordanus and Vinci, and lost by the contempt of such men as Guidobaldo del Monte and Benedetti. The law of the equilibrium of the lever, one of the fundamental propositions of which Stevinus made use, was established by him with the aid of an ingenious demonstration which Galileo was also to employ, and which is found in a small anonymous work of the thirteenth century. In order to confirm another essential principle of his theory, the law of the equilibrium of a body on an inclined plane, Stevinus resorted to the impossibility of perpetual motion, which had been affirmed with great precision by Vinci and Cardano. Stevinus's chief glory lay in his discoveries in hydrostatics; and the determining of the extent and point of application of the pressure on the slanting inner side of a vessel by the liquid contained therein was in itself sufficient to entitle this geometrician from Bruges to a foremost place among the creators of the theory of the equilibrium of fluids. Benedetti was on the point of enunciating the principle known as Pascal's Law, and an insignificant addition permitted Mersenne to infer this principle and the idea of the hydraulic press from what the Italian geometrician had written. Benedetti had justified his propositions by using as an axiom the law of the equilibrium of liquids in communicating vessels, and prior to this time Vinci had followed the same logical proceeding. XVI. DYNAMICS IN THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY The geometricians who, in spite of the stereotyped methods of Averroism and the banter of Humanism, continued to cultivate the Parisian dynamics of impetus, were rewarded by splendid discoveries. Dissipating the doubt in which Albert of Saxony had remained enveloped, Vinci had declared the velocity acquired by a falling body to be proportional to the time occupied by the fall, but he did not know how to determine the law connecting the time consumed in falling with the space passed over by the falling body. Nevertheless to find this law it would have sufficed to invoke the following proposition: in a uniformly varied motion, the space traversed by the moving body is equal to that which it would traverse in a uniform motion whose duration would be that of the preceding motion, and whose velocity would be the same as that which affected the preceding motion at the mean instant of its duration. This proposition was known to Oresme, who had demonstrated it exactly as it was to be demonstrated later by Galileo; it was enunciated and discussed at the close of the fourteenth century by all the logicians who, in the University of Oxford, composed the school of William of Heytesbury, Chancellor of Oxford in 1375; it was subsequently examined or invoked in the fifteenth century by all the Italians who became the commentators of these logicians; and finally, the masters of the University of Paris, contemporaries of Vinci, taught and demonstrated it as Oresme had done. This law which Vinci was not able to determine was published in 1545 by a Spanish Dominican, Domingo Soto (1494-1560), an alumnus of the University of Paris, and professor of theology at Alcalá de Henares, and afterwards at Salamanca. He formulated these two laws thus: The velocity of a falling body increases proportionally to the time of the fall. The space traversed in a uniformly varied motion is the same as in a uniform motion occupying the same time, its velocity being the mean velocity of the former. In addition Soto declared that the motion of a body thrown vertically upward is uniformly retarded. It should be mentioned that all these propositions were formulated by the celebrated Dominican as if in relation to truths generally admitted by the masters among whom he lived. The Parisian theory, maintaining that the accelerated fall of bodies was due to the effect of a continual increase of impetus caused by gravity, was admitted by Julius Cæsar Scaliger (1484-1558), Benedetti, and Gabriel Vasquez (1551-1604), the celebrated Jesuit theologian. The first of these authors presented this theory in such a way that uniform acceleration of motion seemed naturally to follow from it. Soto, Tartaglia, and Cardano made strenuous efforts, after the manner of Vinci, to explain the motion of projectiles by appealing to the conflict between impetus and gravity, but their attempts were frustrated by a Peripatetic error which several Parisian masters had long before rejected. They believed that the motion of the projectile was accelerated from the start, and attributed this initial acceleration to an impulse communicated by the vibrating air. Indeed, throughout the sixteenth century, the Italian Averroists continued to attribute to the ambient air the very transportation of the projectile. Tartaglia empirically discovered that a piece of artillery attained its greatest range when pointed at an angle of forty-five degrees to the horizon. Bruno insisted upon Oresme's explanation of the fact that a body appears to fall in a vertical line in spite of the Earth's motion; to obtain the trajectory of this body it is necessary to combine the action of its weight with the impetus which the Earth has imparted to it. It was as follows that Benedetti set forth the law followed by such an impetus. A body whirled in a circle and suddenly left to itself will move in a straight line tangent to the circle at the very point where the body happened to be at the moment of its release. For this achievement Benedetti deserves to be ranked among the most valuable contributors to the discovery of the law of inertia. In 1553 Benedetti advanced the following argument: in air, or any fluid whatever, ten equal stones fall with the same velocity as one of their number; and if all were combined they would still fall with the same velocity; therefore, in a fluid two stones, one of which is ten times heavier than the other, fall with the same velocity. Benedetti lauded the extreme novelty of this argument with which, in reality, many scholastics had been familiar, but which they had all claimed was not conclusive, because the resistance which the air offered to the heavier stone could certainly not be ten times that which it opposed to the lighter one. Achillini was one of those who clearly maintained this principle. That it might lead to a correct conclusion, Benedetti's argument had to be restricted to the motion of bodies in a vacuum, and this is what was done by Galileo. XVII. GALILEO'S WORK Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) had been in youth a staunch Peripatetic, but was later converted to the Copernican system, and devoted most of his efforts to its defence. The triumph of the system of Copernicus could only be secured by the perfecting of mechanics, and especially by solving the problem presented by the fall of bodies, when the earth was supposed to be in motion. It was towards this solution that many of Galileo's researches were directed, and to bring his labours to a successful issue he had to adopt certain principles of Parisian dynamics. Unfortunately, instead of using them all, he left it to others to exhaust their fecundity. Galilean statics was a compromise between the incorrect method inaugurated in Aristotle's "Mechanical Questions" and the correct method of virtual displacements successfully applied by the School of Jordanus. Imbued with ideas that were still intensely Peripatetic, it introduced the consideration of a certain impeto or momento, proportional to the velocity of the moving body and not unlike the impetus of the Parisians. Galilean hydrostatics also showed an imperfect form of the principle of virtual displacements, which seemed to have been suggested to the great Pisan by the effectual researches made on the theory of running water by his friend Benedetto Castelli, the Benedictine (1577-1644). At first Galileo asserted that the velocity of a falling body increased proportionally to the space traversed, and afterwards, by an ingenious demonstration, he proved the utter absurdity of such a law. He then taught that the motion of a freely falling body was uniformly accelerated; in favour of this law, he contented himself with appealing to its simplicity without considering the continual increase of impetus under the influence of gravity. Gravity creates, in equal periods, a new and uniform impetus which, added to that already acquired, causes the total impetus to increase in arithmetical progression according to the time occupied in the fall; hence the velocity of the falling body. This argument towards which all Parisian tradition had been tending and which, in the last place, had been broached by Scaliger, leads to our modern law: a constant force produces uniformly accelerated motion. In Galileo's work there is no trace either of the argument or of the conclusion deduced therefrom; however, the argument itself was carefully developed by Galileo's friend, Giambattista Baliani (1582-1666). From the very definition of velocity, Baliani endeavoured to deduce the law according to which the space traversed by a falling body is increased proportionally to the time occupied in the fall. Here he was confronted by a difficulty that had also baffled Vinci; however, he eventually anticipated its solution, which was given, after similar hesitation, by another of Galileo's disciples, Pierre Gassendi (1592-1655). Galileo had reached the law connecting the time occupied in the fall with the space traversed by a falling body, by using a demonstration that became celebrated as the "demonstration of the triangle". It was textually that given by Oresme in the fourteenth century and, as we have seen, Soto had thought of using Oresme's proposition in the study of the accelerated fall of bodies. Galileo extended the laws of freely falling bodies to a fall down an inclined plane and subjected to the test of experiment the law of the motion of a weight on an inclined plane. A body which, without friction or resistance of any kind, would describe the circumference of a circle concentric with the Earth would retain an invariable impeto or momento, as gravity would in no wise tend to increase or destroy this impeto: this principle which belonged to the dynamics of Buridan and Albert of Saxony, was acknowledged by Galileo. On a small surface, a sphere concentric with the Earth is apparently merged into a horizontal plane; a body thrown upon a horizontal plane and free from all friction would therefore assume a motion apparently rectilinear and uniform. It is only under this restricted and erroneous form that Galileo recognized the law of inertia and in this he was the faithful disciple of the School of Paris. If a heavy body moved by an impeto that would make it describe a circle concentric with the Earth is, moreover, free to fall, the impeto of uniform rotation and gravity are component forces. Over a small extent the motion produced by this impeto may be assumed to be rectilinear, horizontal, and uniform; hence the approximate law may be enunciated as follows: a heavy body, to which a horizontal initial velocity has been imparted at the very moment that it is abandoned to the action of gravity, assumes a motion which is sensibly the combination of a uniform horizontal motion with the vertical motion that it would assume without initial velocity. Galileo then demonstrated that the trajectory of this heavy body is a parabola with vertical axis. This theory of the motion of projectiles rests upon principles in no wise conformable to an exact knowledge of the law of inertia and which are, at bottom, identical with those invoked by Oresme when he wished to explain how, despite the Earth's rotation, a body seems to fall vertically. The argument employed by Galileo did not permit him to state how a projectile moves when its initial velocity is not horizontal. Evangelista Torricelli (1608-47), a disciple of Castelli and of Galileo, extended the latter's method to the case of a projectile whose initial velocity had a direction other than horizontal, and proved that the trajectory remained a parabola with a vertical axis. On the other hand Gassendi showed that in this problem of the motion of projectiles, the real law of inertia which had just been formulated by Descartes should be substituted for the principles admitted by the Parisian dynamics of the fourteenth century. Mention should be made of Galileo's observations on the duration of the oscillation of the pendulum, as these observations opened up to dynamics a new field. Galileo's progress in dynamics served as a defence of the Copernican system and the discoveries which, with the aid of the telescope, he was able to make in the heavens contributed to the same end. The spots on the sun's surface and the mountains, similar to those upon the Earth, that hid from view certain portions of the lunar disc, gave ample proof of the fact that the celestial bodies were not, as Aristotelean physics had maintained, formed of an incorruptible substance unlike sublunary elements; moreover, the rôle of satellite which, in this heliocentric astronomy, the moon played in regard to the Earth was carried out in relation to Jupiter by the two "Medicean planets", which Galileo had been the first to discover. Not satisfied with having defeated the arguments opposed to the Copernican system by adducing these excellent reasons, Galileo was eager to establish a positive proof in favour of this system. Inspired perhaps by Calcagnini, he believed that the phenomenon of the tides would furnish him the desired proof and he consequently rejected every explanation of ebb and flow founded on the attraction of the sun and the moon, in order to attribute the motion of the seas to the centrifugal force produced by terrestrial rotation. Such an explanation would connect the period of high tide with the sidereal instead of the lunar day, thus contradicting the most ordinary and ancient observations. This remark alone ought to have held Galileo back and prevented him from producing an argument better calculated to overthrow the doctrine of the Earth's rotation than to establish and confirm it. On two occasions, in 1616 and 1633, the Inquisition condemned what Galileo had written in favour of the system of Copernicus. The hypothesis of the Earth's motion was declared falsa in Philosophia et ad minus erronea in fide; the hypothesis of the sun being stationary was adjudged falsa in Philosophia et formaliter hæretica. Adopting the doctrine formulated by Tycho Brahe in 1578, the Holy Office forbade the use of all astronomical hypotheses that did not agree both with the principles of Aristotelean physics, and with the letter of the Sacred Scriptures. XVIII. INITIAL ATTEMPTS IN CELESTIAL MECHANICS GILBERT KEPLER Copernicus had endeavoured to describe accurately the motion of each of the celestial bodies, and Galileo had striven to show that the views of Copernicus were correct; but neither Copernicus nor Galileo had attempted to extend to the stars, what they knew concerning the dynamics of sublunary motions, or to determine thereby the forces that sustain celestial motions. They were satisfied with holding that the daily rotation of the Earth is perpetuated by virtue of an impetus given once for all; that the various parts of an element belonging to a star tend towards the centre of this star by reason of a gravity peculiar to each of the celestial bodies through which the body is enabled to preserve its entireness. Thus, in celestial mechanics, these two great scientists contributed scarcely anything to what had already been taught by Buridan, Oresme, and Nicholas of Cusa. About Galileo's time we notice the first attempts to constitute celestial mechanics, that is to say, to explain the motion of the stars by the aid of forces analogous to those the effects of which we feel upon earth; the most important of these initial attempts were made by William Gilbert (1540-1603), and Johann Kepler (1571-1631). To Gilbert we are indebted for an exhaustive treatise on magnetism, in which he systematically incorporated what was known in medieval times of electrical and magnetic phenomena, without adding thereto anything very essential; he also gave the result of his own valuable experiments. It was in this treatise that he began to expound his "Magnetic Philosophy", that is to say his celestial mechanics, but the work in which he fully developed it was not published until 1651, long after his death. Like Oresme and Copernicus, Gilbert maintained that in each star there was a particular gravity through which the material parts belonging to this star, and these only, tended to rejoin the star when they had been separated from it. He compared this gravity, peculiar to each star, to the action by which a piece of iron flies towards the magnet whose nature it shares. This opinion, held by so many of Gilbert's predecessors and adopted by a great number of his imitators, led Francis Bacon astray. Bacon was the enthusiastic herald of the experimental method which, however, he never practised and of which he had an utterly false conception. According to Gilbert, the Earth, sun, and the stars were animated, and the animating principle of each communicated to the body the motion of perpetual rotation. From a distance, the sun exerted an action perpendicular to the radius vector which goes from the centre of the sun to a planet, and this action caused the planet to revolve around the sun just as a horse turns the horse-mill to which it is yoked. Kepler himself admitted that in his first attempts along the line of celestial mechanics he was under the influence of Nicholas of Cusa and Gilbert. Inspired by the former of these authors, he attributed the Earth's rotation on its axis to an impetus communicated by the Creator at the beginning of time; but, under the influence of Gilbert's theory, he declared that this impetus ended by being transformed into a soul or an animating principle. In Kepler's earliest system, as in Gilbert's, the distant sun was said to exercise over each planet a power perpendicular to the radius vector, which power produced the circular motion of the planet. However, Kepler had the happy thought of submitting a universal attraction for the magnetic attraction that Gilbert had considered peculiar to each star. He assumed that every material mass tended towards every other material mass, no matter to what celestial body each one of them belonged; that a portion of matter placed between two stars would tend towards the larger and nearer one, although it might never have belonged to it; that, at the moment of high tide, the waters of the sea rose towards the moon, not because they had any special affinity for this humid star, but by virtue of the general tendency that draws all material masses towards one another. In the course of numerous attempts to explain the motion of the stars, Kepler was led to complicate his first celestial mechanics. He assumed that all celestial bodies were plunged into an ethereal fluid, that the rotation of the sun engendered a vortex within this fluid the reactions of which interposed to deflect each planet from the circular path. He also thought that a certain power, similar to that which directs the magnetic needle, preserved invariable in space the direction of the axis around which the rotation of each planet is effected. The unstable and complicated system of celestial mechanics taught by Kepler sprang from very deficient dynamics which, on many points, was more akin to that of the Peripatetics than to that of the Parisians. However, these many vague hypotheses exerted an incontestable influence on the attempts of scientists from Kepler to Newton to determine the forces that move the stars. If, indeed, Kepler prepared the way for Newton's work, it was mainly by the discovery of the three admirable laws that have immortalized his name; and, by teaching that the planets described ellipses instead of circles he produced in astronomy a revolution greater by far than that caused by Copernicus; he destroyed the last time-honoured principle of ancient physics, according to which all celestial motions were reducible to circular motion. XIX. CONTROVERSIES CONCERNING GEOSTATICS The "magnetic" philosophy adopted and developed by Gilbert was not only rejected by Kepler but badly abused in a dispute over the principles of statics. A number of the Parisian Scholastics of the fourteenth century, and Albert of Saxony in particular, had accepted the principle that in every body there is a fixed, determined point which tends to join the centre of the World, this point being identical with the centre of gravity as considered by Archimedes. From this principle various authors, notably Vinci, deduced corollaries that retained a place in statics. The Copernican revolution had modified this principle but little, having simply substituted, for the centre of the universe, a particular point in each star, towards which point tended the centre of gravity of each mass belonging to this star. Copernicus, Galileo, and Gilbert admitted the principle thus modified, but Kepler rejected it. In 1635 Jean de Beaugrand deduced from this principle a paradoxical theory on the gravity of bodies, and particularly on the variation in the weight of a body whose distance from the centre of the universe changes. Opinions similar to those proposed by Beaugrand in his geostatics were held in Italy by Castelli, and in France by Pierre Fermat (1608-65). Fermat's doctrine was discussed and refuted by Etienne Pascal (1588-1651) and Gilles Persone de Roberval (1602-75), and the admirable controversy between these authors and Fermat contributed in great measure to the clear exposition of a certain number of ideas employed in statics, amongst them, that of the centre of gravity. It was this controversy which led Descartes to revive the question of virtual displacements in precisely the same form as that adopted by the School of Jordanus, in order that the essential propositions of statics might be given a stable foundation. On the other hand, Torricelli based all his arguments concerning the laws of equilibrium on the axiom quoted above, viz.: a system endowed with weight is in equilibrium when the centre of gravity of all the bodies forming it is the lowest possible. Cardano and perhaps Vinci had derived this proposition from the doctrine of Albert of Saxony, but Torricelli was careful to use it only under circumstances in which all verticals are considered parallel to one another and, in this way he severed all connexion between the axiom that he admitted and the doubtful hypotheses of Parisian physics or magnetic philosophy. Thenceforth the principles of statics were formulated with accuracy, John Wallis (1616-1703), Pierre Varignon (1654-1722), and Jean Bernoulli (1667-1748) having merely to complete and develop the information provided by Stevinus, Roberval, Descartes, and Torricelli. XX. DESCARTES'S WORK We have just stated what part Descartes took in the building of statics by bringing forward the method of virtual displacements, but his active interest in the building up of dynamics was still more important. He clearly formulated the law of inertia as observed by Benedetti: every moving body is inclined, if nothing prevent it, to continue its motion in a straight line and with constant velocity; a body cannot move in a circle unless it be drawn towards the centre, by centripetal movement in opposition to the centrifugal force by which this body tends to fly away from the centre. Because of the similarity of the views held by Deseartes and Benedetti concerning this law, we may conclude that Descartes's discovery was influenced by that of Benedetti, especially as Benedetti's works were known to Marin Mersenne (1588-1648), the faithful friend and correspondent of Descartes. Descartes connected the following truth with the law of inertia: a weight constant in size and direction causes a uniformly accelerated motion. Besides we have seen how, with the aid of Descartes's principles, Gassendi was able to rectify what Galileo had taught concerning falling bodies and the motion of projectiles. In statics a heavy body can very often be replaced by a material point placed at its centre of gravity; but in dynamics the question arises whether the motion of a body be treated as if this body were entirely concentrated in one of these points, and also which point this is? This question relative to the existence and finding of a centre of impulsion had already engrossed the attention of Vinci and after him, of Bernardino Baldi (1553-1617). Baldi asserted that, in a body undergoing a motion of translation, the centre of impulsion does not differ from the centre of gravity. Now, is there a centre of impulsion and, if so, where is it to be found in a body undergoing a motion other than that of translation, for instance, by a rotation around an axis? In other words, is there a simple pendulum that moves in the same way as a given compound pendulum? Inspired, no doubt, by reading Baldi, Mersenne laid this problem before Roberval and Descartes, both of whom made great efforts to solve it but became unfriendly to each other because of the difference in their respective propositions. Of the two, Descartes came nearer to the truth, but the dynamic principles that he used were not sufficiently accurate to justify his opinion in a convincing manner; the glory was reserved to Christian Huygens. The Jesuits, who at the College of La Flèche had been the preceptors of Mersenne and Descartes, did not teach Peripatetic physics in its stereotyped integrity, but Parisian physics; the treatise that guided the instruction imparted at this institution being represented by the "Commentaries" on Aristotle, published by the Jesuits of Coimbra at the close of the seventeenth century. Hence it can be understood why the dynamics of Descartes had many points in common with the dynamics of Buridan and the Parisians. Indeed, so close were the relations between Parisian and Cartesian physics that certain professors at La Flèche, such as Etienne Noël (1581-1660), became Cartesians. Other Jesuits attempted to build up a sort of a combination of Galilean and Cartesian mechanics with the mechanics taught by Parisian Scholasticism, and foremost among these men must be mentioned Honoré Fabri (1606-88), a friend of Mersenne. In every moving body Descartes maintained the existence of a certain power to continue its motion in the same direction and with the same velocity and this power, which he called the quantity of motion, he measured by estimating the product of the mass of the moving body by the velocity that impels it. The affinity is close between the rôle which Descartes attributed to this quantity of motion, and that which Buridan ascribed to impetus. Fabri was fully aware of this analogy and the momentum that he discussed was at once the impetus of the Parisians, and Descartes's quantity of motion. In statics he identified this momentum with what Galileo called momento or impeto, and this identification was certainly conformable to the Pisan's idea. Fabri's synthesis was well adapted to make this truth clear, that modern dynamics, the foundations of which were laid by Descartes and Galileo, proceeded almost directly from the dynamics taught during the fourteenth century in the University of Paris. If the special physical truths demonstrated or anticipated by Descartes were easily traceable to the philosophy of the fourteenth century, the principles on which the great geometrician wished to base these truths were absolutely incompatible with this philosophy. In fact, denying that in reality there existed anything qualitative, Descartes insisted that matter be reduced to extension and to the attributes of which extension seemed to him susceptible, namely, numerical proportions and motion; and it was by combinations of different figures and motions that all the effects of physics could be explained according to his liking. Therefore the power by virtue of which a body tends to preserve the direction and velocity of its motion is not a quality distinct from motion, such as the impetus recognized by the scholastics; it is nothing else than the motion itself as was taught by William of Occam at the beginning of the fourteenth century. A body in motion and isolated would always retain the same quantity of motion, but there is no isolated body in a vacuum, because matter being identical with extension, vacuum is inconceivable, as is also compressibility. The only conceivable motions are those which can be produced in the midst of incompressible matter, that is to say, vortical motions confined within their own bulk. In these motions bodies drive one another from the place they have occupied and, in such a transmission of motion, the quantity of motion of each of these bodies varies; however, the entire quantity of motion of all the bodies that impinge on one another remains constant, as God always maintains the same sum total of motion in the world. This transmission of motion by impact is the only action that bodies can exert over one another and in Cartesian, as well as in Aristotelean physics, a body cannot put another in motion unless it touch it, immediate action at a distance being beyond conception. There are various species of matter, differing from one another only in the size and shape of the contiguous particles of which they are formed. The space that extends between the different heavenly bodies is filled with a certain subtile matter, the very fine particles of which easily penetrate the interstices left between the coarser constituents of other bodies. The properties of subtile matter play an important part in all Cartesian cosmology. The vortices in which subtile matter moves, and the pressure generated by these vortical motions, serve to explain all celestial phenomena. Leibniz was right in supposing that for this part of his work Descartes had drawn largely upon Kepler. Descartes also strove to explain, with the aid of the figures and motions of subtile and other matter, the different effects observable in physics, particularly the properties of the magnet and of light. Light is identical with the pressure which subtile matter exerts over bodies and, as subtile matter is incompressible, light is instantly transmitted to any distance, however great. The suppositions by the aid of which Descartes attempted to reduce all physical phenomena to combinations of figures and motions had scarcely any part in the discoveries that he made in physics; therefore the identification of light with the pressure exerted by subtile matter plays no part in the invention of the new truths which Descartes taught in optics. Foremost amongst these truths is the law of the refraction of light passing from one medium to another, although the question still remains whether Descartes discovered this law himself, or whether, as Huygens accused him of doing, he borrowed it from Willebrord Snellius (1591-1626), without any mention of the real author. By this law Descartes gave the theory of refraction through a prism, which permitted him to measure the indices of refraction; moreover, he greatly perfected the stud of lenses, and finally completed the explanation of the rainbow, no progress having been made along this line from the year 1300, when Thierry of Freiberg had given his treatise on it. However, the reason why the rays emerging from the drops of water are variously coloured was no better known by Descartes than by Aristotle; it remained for Newton to make the discovery. XXI. PROGRESS OF EXPERIMENTAL PHYSICS Even in Descartes's work the discoveries in physics were almost independent of Cartesianism. The knowledge of natural truths continued to advance without the influence of this system and, at times, even in opposition to it, although those to whom this progress was due were often Cartesians. This advancement was largely the result of a more frequent and skilful use of the experimental method. The art of making logically connected experiments and of deducing their consequences is indeed very ancient; in a way the works produced by this art were no more perfect than the researches of Pierre of Maricourt on the magnet or Thierry of Freiberg on the rainbow. However, if the art remained the same, its technic continued to improve; more skilled workmen and more powerful processes furnishing physicists with more intricate and better made instruments, and thus rendering possible more delicate experiments. The rather imperfect tests made by Galileo and Mersenne in endeavouring to determine the specific weight of air mark the beginning of the development of the experimental method, which was at once vigorously pushed forward by discussions in regard to vacuum. In Peripatetic physics the possibility of an empty space was a logical contradiction; but, after the condemnation pronounced at Paris in 1277 by Tempier, the existence of a vacuum ceased to be considered absurd. It was simply taught as a fact that the powers of nature are so constructed as to oppose the production of an empty space. Of the various conjectures proposed concerning the forces which prevent the appearance of a vacuum, the most sensible and, it would seem, the most generally received among sixteenth-century Parisians, was the following: contiguous bodies adhere to one another, and this adhesion is maintained by forces resembling those by which a piece of iron adheres to the magnet which it touches. In naming this force horror vacui, there was no intention of considering the bodies as animate beings. A heavy piece of iron detaches itself from the magnet that should hold it up, its weight having conquered the force by which the magnet retained it; in the same way, the weight of too heavy a body can prevent the horror vacui from raising this body. This very logical corollary of the hypothesis we have just mentioned was formulated by Galileo, who saw therein the explanation of a fact well-known to the cistern makers of his time; namely, that a suction-pump could not raise water higher than thirty-two feet. This corollary entailed the possibility of producing an empty space, a fact known to Torricelli who, in 1644, made the celebrated experiment with mercury that was destined to immortalize his name. However, at the same time, he anticipated a new explanation of this experiment; the mercury is supported in the tube not by the horror vacui that does not exist, but by the pressure which the heavy air exerts on the exterior surface of the basin. Torricelli's experiment quickly attracted the attention of physicists. In France, thanks to Mersenne, it called forth on his part, and on that of those who had dealings with him, many experiments in which Roberval and Pascal (1623-62) vied with each other in ingenuity, and in order to have the resources of technic more easily at his disposal, Pascal made his startling experiments in a glass factory at Rouen. Among the numerous inquirers interested in Torricelli's experiment some accepted the explanation offered by the "column of air", and advanced by the great Italian geometrician himself; whereas others, such as Roberval, held to the ancient hypothesis of an attraction analogous to magnetic action. At length, with a view to settling the difference, an experiment was made which consisted in measuring at what height the mercury remained suspended in Torricelli's tube; observing it first of all at the foot of a mountain and then at its summit. The idea of this experiment seemed to have suggested itself to several physicists, notably Mersenne, Descartes, and Pascal and through the instrumentality of the last named and the courtesy of Périer, his brother-in-law, it was made between the base and summit of Puy-de-Dôme, 19 Sept., 1648. The "Traité de l'équilibre de liqueurs et de la pesanteur de la masse de l'air", which Pascal subsequently composed, is justly cited as a model of the art of logically connected experiments with deductions. Between atomists and Cartesians there were many discussions as to whether the upper part of Torricelli's tube was really empty or filled with subtile matter; but these discussions bore little fruit. However, fortunately for physics, the experimental method so accurately followed by Torricelli, Pascal, and their rivals continued to progress. Otto von Guericke (1602-86) seems 'to have preceded Torricelli in the production of an empty space, since, between 1632 and 1638, he appears to have constructed his first pneumatic machine, with the aid of which instrument he made in 1654 the celebrated Magdeburg experiments, published in 1657 by his friend Caspar Schoot, S.J. (1608-60). Informed by Schoot of Guericke's researches, Robert Boyle (1627-91) perfected the pneumatic machine and, assisted by Richard Townley, his pupil, pursued the experiments that made known the law of the compressibility of perfect gases. In France these experiments were taken up and followed by Mariotte (1620-84). The use of the dilatation of a fluid for showing the changes of temperature was already known to Galileo, but it is uncertain whether the thermoscope was invented by Galileo or by some one of the numerous physicists to whom the priority is attributed, among these being Santorio, called Sanetorius (1560-1636), Fra Paolo Sarpi (1552-1623), Cornelis van Drebbel (1572-1634), and Robert Fludd (1574-1637). Although the various thermoscopes for air or liquid used in the very beginning admitted of only arbitrary graduation, they nevertheless served to indicate the constancy of the temperature or the direction of its variations, and consequently contributed to the discovery of a number of the laws of physics. Hence this apparatus was used in the Accademia del Cimento, opened at Florence 19 June, 1657, and devoted to the study of experimental physics. To the members of this academy we are especially indebted for the demonstration of the constancy of the point of fusion of ice and of the absorption of heat accompanying this fusion. Observations of this kind, made by means of the thermoscope, created an ardent desire for the transformation of this apparatus into a thermometer, by the aid of a definite graduation so arranged that everywhere instruments could be made which would be comparable with one another. This problem, one of the most important in physics, was not solved until 1702 when Guillaume Amontons (1663-1705) worked it out in the most remarkable manner. Amontons took as a starting-point these two laws, discovered or verified by him the boiling point of water under atmospheric pressure is constant. The pressures sustained by any two masses of air, heated in the same way in any two constant volumes, have a relation independent of the temperature. These two laws enabled Amontons to use the air thermometer under constant volume and to graduate it in such a way that it gave what we to-day call absolute temperature. Of all the definitions of the degree of temperature given since Amontons's time, he, at the first stroke, found the most perfect. Equipped with instruments capable of measuring pressure and registering temperature, experimental physics could not but make rapid progress, this being still further augmented by reason of the interest shown by the learned societies that had been recently founded. The Accademia del Cimento was discontinued in 1667, but the Royal Society of London had begun its sessions in 1663 and the Académie des Sciences at Paris was founded or rather organized by Colbert in 1666. These different academies immediately became the enthusiastic centres of scientific research in regard to natural phenomena. XXII. UNDULATORY THEORY OF LIGHT It was to the Académie des Sciences of Paris that, in 1678, Christian Huygens (1629-95) presented his "Treatise on Light". According to the Cartesian system, light was instantly transmitted to any distance through the medium of incompressible subtile matter. Deseartes did not hesitate to assure Fermat that his entire philosophy would give way as soon as it should be demonstrated that light is propagated with a limited velocity. In 1675 Ole Römer (1644-1710), the Danish astronomer, announced to the Académie des Sciences the extent of the considerable but finite velocity with which light traverses the space that separates the planets from one another, the study of the eclipses of Jupiter's satellites having brought him to this conclusion. Descartes's optical theory was destroyed, and Huygens undertook to build up a new theory of light. He was constantly guided by the supposition that, in the midst of compressible ether, substituted for incompressible subtile matter, light is propagated by waves exactly similar to those which transmit sound through a gaseous medium. This comparison led him to an explanation, which is still the standard one, of the laws of reflection and refraction. In this explanation the index of the refraction of light passing from one medium to another equals the ratio of the velocity of propagation in the first medium to the velocity of propagation in the second. In 1850 this fundamental law was confirmed by Foucault's experiments. However, Huygens did not stop here. In 1669 Erasmus Berthelsen, known as Bartholinus (1625-98), discovered the double refraction of Iceland spar. By a generalization, as ingenious as it was daring, of the theory he had given for non-crystallized media, Huygens succeeded in tracing the form of the surface of a luminous wave inside of a crystal such as spar or quartz, and in defining the apparently complex laws of the double refraction of light in the interior of these crystals. At the same time, he called attention to the phenomena of polarization which accompany this double refraction; he was, however, unable to draw from his optical theory the explanation of these effects. The comparison between light and sound caused Malebranche (1638-1715) to make some very effective conjectures in 1699. He assumed that light is a vibratory motion analogous to that produced by sound; the greater or less amplitude of this motion, as the case may be, generates a greater or less intensity but, whilst in sound each period corresponds to a particular note, in light it corresponds to a particular colour. Through this analogy Malebranche arrived at the idea of monochromatic light, which Newton was to deduce from admirably conducted experiments; moreover, he established between simple colour and the period of the vibration of light, the connexion that was to be preserved in the optics of Young and Fresnel. XXIII. DEVELOPMENTS OF DYNAMICS Both Cartesians and atomists maintained that impact was the only process by which bodies could put one another in motion; hence, to Cartesians and atomists, the theory of impact seemed like the first chapter of rational physics. This theory had already enlisted the attention of Galileo, Marcus Marci (1639), and Descartes when, in 1668, the Royal Society of London proposed it as the subject of a competition and, of the three important memoirs submitted to the criticism of this society by John Wallis, Christopher Wren (1632-1723), and Huygens, the last is the only one that we can consider. In his treatise Huygens adopted the following principle: if a material body, subject merely to the action of gravity, starts from a certain position, with initial velocity equal to zero, the centre of gravity of this body can at no time rise higher than it was at the outset of the motion. Huygens justified this principle by observing that, if it were false, perpetual motion would be possible. To find the origin of this axiom it would be necessary to go back to "De Subtilitate" by Cardano, who had probably drawn it from the notes of Vinci; the proposition on which Torricelli had based his statics was a corollary from this postulate. By maintaining the accuracy of this postulate, even in the case where parts of the system clash; by combining it with the law of the accelerated fall of bodies, taken from Galileo's works, and with another postulate on the relativity of motion, Huygens arrived at the law of the impact of hard bodies. He showed that the quantity the value of which remains constant in spite of this impact is not, as Descartes declared, the total quantity of motion, but that which Leibniz called the quantity of vis viva (living force). The axiom that had so happily served Huygens in the study of the impact of bodies he now extended to a body oscillating around a horizontal axis and his "Horologium oscillatorium", which appeared in 1673, solved in the most elegant and complete manner the problem of the centres of oscillation previously handled by Descartes and Roberval. That Huygens's axiom was the subversion of Cartesian dynamics was shown by Leibniz in 1686. If, like Descartes, we measure the efficiency of a force by the work that it does, and if, moreover, we admit Huygens's axiom and the law of falling bodies, we find that this efficiency is not measured by the increase in the quantity of motion of the moving body, but by the increase in half the product of the mass of the moving body and the square of its velocity. It was this product that Leibniz called vis viva. Huygens's "Horologium oscillatorium" not only gave the solution of the problem of the centre of oscillation but likewise a statement of the laws which, in circular motion, govern the magnitude of centrifugal force, and thus it was that the eminent physicist prepared the way for Newton, the lawgiver of dynamics. XXIV. NEWTON'S WORK Most of the great dynamical truths had been discovered between the time of Galileo and Descartes, and that of Huygens and Leibniz. The science of dynamics required a Euclid who would organize it as geometry had been organized, and this Euclid appeared in the person of Isaac Newton (1642-1727) who, in his "Philosophiæ naturalis principia mathematica", published in 1687, succeeded in deducing the entire science of motion from three postulates: inertia; the independence of the effects of previously acquired forces and motions; and the equality of action and reaction. Had Newton's "Principia" contained nothing more than this co-ordination of dynamics into a logical system, they would nevertheless have been one of the most important works ever written; but, in addition, they gave the grandest possible application of this dynamics in utilizing it for the establishment of celestial mechanics. In fact, Newton succeeded in showing that the laws of bodies falling to the surface of the earth, the laws that preside over the motion of planets around the sun, and of satellites around the planets which they accompany, finally, the laws that govern the form of the Earth and of the other stars, as also the high and low tides of the sea, are but so many corollaries from this unique hypothesis: two bodies, whatever their origin or nature, exert over each other an attraction proportional to the product of their masses and in inverse ratio to the square of the distance that separates them. The dominating principle of ancient physics declared the essential distinction between the laws that directed the motions of the stars -- beings exempt from generation, change, and death -- and the laws presiding over the motions of sublunary bodies subject to generation and corruption. From the birth of Christian physics and especially from the end of the thirteenth century, physicists had been endeavouring to destroy the authority of this principle and to render the celestial and sublunary worlds subject to the same laws, the doctrine of universal gravitation being the outcome of this prolonged effort. In proportion as the time approached, when Newton was to produce his system, attempts at cosmology were multiplied, so many forerunners, as it were, of this discovery. When in 1672 Guericke again took up Kepler's celestial mechanics, he made but one correction therein, which unfortunately caused the disappearance of the only proposition by which this work led up to Newton's discoveries. Kepler had maintained that two material masses of any kind attract each other, but, in imitation of Copernicus, Gilbert, and Galileo, Guerieke limited this mutual attraction to parts of the same star, so that, far from being attracted by the Earth, portions of the moon would be repelled by the Earth if placed upon its surface. But, in 1644, under the pseudonym of Aristarchus of Samos, Roberval published a system of celestial mechanics, in which the attraction was perhaps mutual between two masses of no matter what kind; in which, at all events, the Earth and Jupiter attracted their satellites with a power identical with the gravity with which they endow their own fragments. In 1665, on the pretence of explaining the motions of Jupiter's satellites, Giovanni Alfonso Borelli (1608-79) tried to advance a theory which simultaneously comprised the motions of the planets around the sun and of the satellites around the planets. He was the first of modern scientists (Plutarch having preceded him) to hold the opinion that the attraction which causes a planet to tend towards the sun and a satellite to tend towards the star which it accompanies, is in equilibrium with the centrifugal force produced by the circular motion of the planet or satellite in question. In 1674 Robert Hooke (1635-1702) formulated the same idea with great precision. Having already supposed the attraction of two masses to vary inversely as the square of their distance, he was in possession of the fundamental hypotheses of the theory of universal gravitation, which hypotheses were held by Wren about the same time. However, neither of these scientists was able to deduce therefrom celestial mechanics, as both were still unacquainted with the laws of centrifugal force, published just at this time by Huygens. In 1684 Edmund Halley (1656-1742) strove to combine Huygens's theories with Hooke's hypotheses, but, before his work was finished, Newton presented his "Principia" to the Royal Society, having for twenty years silently pursued his meditations on the system of the world. Halley, who could not forestall Newton, had the glory of broadening the domain of universal gravitation by making it include comets (1705). Not satisfied with creating celestial mechanics, Newton also contributed largely to the progress of optics. From ancient times the colouring of the spectrum, produced by the passage of white light through a glass prism, had elicited the wonder of observers and appealed to the acumen of physicists without, however, being satisfactorily explained. Finally, a complete explanation was given by Newton who, in creating a theory of colours, accomplished what all the philosophers from Aristotle down had laboured in vain to achieve. The theory advanced by the English physicist agreed with that proposed by Malebranche at the same time. However, Malebranehe's theory was nothing more than a hypothesis suggested by the analogy between light and sound, whereas Newton's explanation was drawn from experiments, as simple as they were ingenious, its exposition by the author being one of the most beautiful examples of experimental induction. Unfortunately Newton disregarded this analogy between sound and light that had furnished Huygens and Malebranche with such fruitful discoveries. Newton's opinion was to the effect that light is formed of infinitely small projectiles thrown off with extreme velocity by incandescent bodies. The particles of the medium in which these projectiles move exert over them an attraction similar to universal attraction; however, this new attraction does not vary inversely as the square of the distance but according to another function of the distance, and in such a way that it exercises a very great power between a material particle and a luminous corpuscle that are contiguous. Nevertheless this attraction becomes altogether insensible as soon as the two masses between which it operates are separated from each other by a perceptible interval. This action exerted by the particles of a medium on the luminous corpuscles pervading them changes the velocity with which these bodies move and the direction which they follow at the moment of passing from one medium to another; hence the phenomenon of refraction. The index of refraction is the ratio of the velocity of light in the medium which it enters, to the velocity it had in the medium which it leaves. Now, as the index of refraction so understood was precisely the reverse of that attributed to it by Huygens's theory, in 1850 Foucault submitted both to the test of experiment, with the result that Newton's theory of emission was condemned. Newton explained the experimental laws that govern the colouring of thin laminæ, such as soap bubbles, and succeeded in compelling these colours, by suitable forms of these thin laminæ, to assume the regular order known as "Newton's Rings". To explain this phenomenon he conceived that luminous projectiles have a form that may, at the surface of contact of two media, either pass easily or be easily reflected, according to the manner of their presentation at the moment of passage; a rotary motion causes them to pass alternately by "fits of easy transmission or of easy reflection". Newton thought that he had accounted for the principal optical phenomena by supposing that, besides this universal attraction, there existed an attraction, sensible only at a very short distance, exerted by the particles of bodies on luminous corpuscles, and naturally he came to believe that these two kinds of attraction would suffice to explain all physical phenomena. Action extending to a considerable distance, such as electric and magnetic action, must follow laws analogous to those which govern universal gravity; on the other hand, the effects of capillarity and cohesion, chemical decomposition and reaction must depend on molecular attraction extending only to extremely small distances and similar to that exerted over luminous corpuscles. This comprehensive hypothesis proposed by Newton in a "question" placed at the end of the second edition of his "Optics" (1717) gave a sort of outline of the programme which eighteenth-century physics was to attempt to carry out. XXV. PROGRESS OF GENERAL AND CELESTIAL MECHANICS IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY This programme made three demands: first, that general mechanics and celestial mechanics advance in the way indicated by Newton; secondly, that electric and magnetic phenomena be explained by a theory analogous to that of universal gravitation; thirdly, that molecular attraction furnish the detailed explanations of the various changes investigated by physics and chemistry. Many followed in the path outlined by Newton and tried to extend the domain of general and celestial mechanics, but there were three who seem to have surpassed all the others: Alexis-Claude Clairaut (1713-65), Jean-Baptiste le Rond d'Alembert (1717-83), and Leonhard Euler (1707-83). The progress which, thanks to these three able men, was made in general mechanics, may be summed up as follows: In 1743, by his principle of the equilibrium of channels, which was easily connected with the principle of virtual displacements, Clairaut obtained the general equations of the equilibrium of liquids. In the same year d'Alembert formulated a rule whereby all problems of motion were reduced to problems of equilibrium and, in 1744, applied this rule to the equation of hydrostatics given by Clairaut and arrived at the equations of hydrodynamics. Euler transformed these equations and, in his studies on the motion of liquids, was enabled to obtain results no less important than those which he had obtained by analysing the motion of solids. Clairaut extended the consequences of universal attraction in all directions, and, in 1743, the equations of hydrostatics that he had established enabled him to perfect the theory of the figure of the earth. In 1752 he published his theory of lunar inequalities, which he had at first despaired of accounting for by Newton's principles. The methods that he devised for the study of the perturbations which the planets produce on the path of a star permitted him, in 1758, to announce with accuracy the time of the return of Halley's Comet. The confirmation of this prediction in which Clairaut had received assistance from Lalande (1732-1807) and Mme. Lepaute, both able mathematicians, placed beyond doubt the applicability of Newton's hypotheses to comets. Great as were Clairaut's achievements in perfecting the system of universal attraction, they were not as important as those of d'Alembert. Newton could not deduce from his suppositions a satisfactory theory of the precession of the equinoxes, and this failure marred the harmony of the doctrine of universal gravitation. In 1749 d'Alembert deduced from the hypothesis of gravitation the explanation of the precession of the equinoxes and of the nutation of the earth's axis; and soon afterwards Euler, drawing upon the admirable resources of his mathematical genius, made still further improvements on d'Alembert's discovery. Clairaut, d'Alembert, and Euler were the most brilliant stars in an entire constellation of mechanical theorists and astronomers, and to this group there succeeded another, in which shone two men of surpassing intellectuality, Joseph-Louis Lagrange (1736-1813) and Pierre-Simon Laplace (1749-1827). Laplace was said to have been born to complete celestial mechanics, if, indeed, it were in the nature of a science to admit of completion; and quite as much could be said of Lagrange with regard to general mechanics. In 1787 Lagrange published the first edition of his "Mécanique analytique"; the second, which was greatly enlarged, was published after the author's death. Laplace s "Mécanique céleste" was published from 1799 to 1805, and both of these works give an account of the greater part of the mechanical conquests made in the course of the eighteenth century, with the assistance of the principles that Newton had assigned to general mechanics and the laws that he had imposed upon universal gravitation. However exhaustive and effective these two treatises are, they do not by any means include all the discoveries in general and celestial mechanics for which we are indebted to their authors. To do Lagrange even meagre justice his able researches should be placed on a par with his "Mécanique analytique"; and our idea of Laplace's work would be very incomplete were we to omit the grand cosmogonic hypothesis with which, in 1796, he crowned his "Exposition du système du monde". In developing this hypothesis the illustrious geometrician was unaware that in 1755 Kant had expressed similar suppositions which were marred by serious errors in dynamic theories. XXVI. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE THEORY OF ELECTRICITY AND MAGNETISM For a long time the study of electric action was merely superficial and, in the beginning of the eighteenth century, it was still in the condition in which Thales of Miletus had left it, remaining far from the point to which the study of magnetic attraction and repulsion had been carried in the time of Pierre of Maricourt. When, in 1733 and 1734, Charles-François de Cisternay du Fay distinguished two kinds of electricity, resinous and vitreous, and when he proved that bodies charged with the same kind of electricity repel one another, whereas those charged with different kinds attract one another, electrical science was brought up to the level that magnetic science had long before attained, and thenceforth these two sciences, united by the closest analogy, progressed side by side. They advanced rapidly as, in the eighteenth century, the study of electrical phenomena became a popular craze. Physicists were not the only ones devoted to it; men of the world crowded the salons where popularizers of the science, such as the Abbé Nollet (1700-70), enlisted as votaries dandified marquesses and sprightly marchionesses. Numberless experimentalists applied themselves to multiplying observations on electricity and magnetism, but we shall restrict ourselves to mentioning Benjamin Franklin (1706-90) who, by his logically-conducted researches, contributed more than any other man to the formation of the theories of electricity and magnetism. The researches of Henry Cavendish (1731-1810) deserve to be placed in the same rank as Franklin's, though they were but little known before his death. By means of Franklin's experiments and his own, Æpinus (Franz Ulrich Theodor Hoch, 1724-1802) was the first to attempt to solve the problem suggested by Newton and, by the hypothesis of attractive and repellent forces, to explain the distribution of electricity and magnetism over the bodies which they affect. His researches could not be pushed very far, as it was still unknown that these forces depend upon the distance at which they are exerted. Moreover, Æpinus succeeded in drawing still closer the connexion already established between the sciences of electricity and magnetism, by showing the polarization of each of the elements of the insulating plate which separates the two collecting plates of the condenser. The experiment he made in this line in 1759 was destined to suggest to Coulomb the experiment of the broken magnets and the theory of magnetic polarization, which is the foundation of the study of magnets; and was also to be the starting-point of an entire branch of electrical science, namely the study of dielectric bodies, which study was developed in the nineteenth century by Michael Faraday and James Clerk-Maxwell. Their analogy to the fertile law of universal gravitation undoubtedly led physicists to suppose that electrical and magnetic forces vary inversely as the square of the distance that separates the acting elements; but, so far, this opinion had not been confirmed by experiment. However, in 1780 it received this confirmation from Charles-Augustin de Coulomb with the aid of the torsion balance. By the use of this balance and the proof plane, he was enabled to make detailed experiments on the subject of the distribution of electricity over conductive bodies, no such tests having been previously made. Although Coulomb's experiments placed beyond doubt the elementary laws of electricity and magnetism, it still remained to be established by mathematical analysis how electricity was distributed over the surface of conductive bodies of given shape, and how a piece of soft iron was magnetized under given circumstances. The solution of these problems was attempted by Coulomb and also in 1787 by Haüy (q. v.), but neither of these two savants pushed his tests very far. The establishment of principles which would permit of an analysis of the distribution of electricity on conductors, and of magnetism on soft iron, required the genius of Simon-Denis Poisson (1781-1840). In 1812 Poisson showed how the investigation of the distribution of electricity in equilibrium on conductors belonged to the domaln of analysis, and he gave a complete solution of this problem in the case of two conductive spheres influencing each other, whether placed at given distances or in contact. Coulomb's experiments in connexion with contiguous spheres established the truth of Poisson's theory. In 1824 Poisson established on the subject of hollow conductors limited either interiorly or exteriorly by a spherical cavity, theorems which, in 1828, were extended by George Green (1793-1841) to all kinds of hollow conductors and which Faraday was subsequently to confirm through experimentation. Between 1813 and 1824 Poisson took up the study of magnetic forces and magnetization by impulsion and, in spite of a few inaccuracies which the future was to correct, the formulæ which he established remain at the basis of all the research of which magnetism has meanwhile been the object. Thanks to Poisson's memoirs, the theory of the forces exercised in inverse ratio to the square of the distance, by annexing the domain of static electricity and magnetism, markedly enlarged the field which at first included only celestial mechanics. The study of the action of the electric current was to open up to this theory a new and fertile territory. The discoveries of Aloisio Galvani (1737-98) and Alessandro Volta (1745-1827) enriched physics with the voltaic battery. It would be impossible to enumerate, even briefly, the researches occasioned by this discovery. All physicists have compared the conductor, the seat of a current, to a space in which a fluid circulates. In his works on hydrodynamics Euler had established general formulæ which apply to the motion of all fluids and, imitating Euler's method, Jean-Baptiste-Joseph Fourier (1768-1830) began the study of the circulation of heat-then considered a fluid and called caloric-within conductive bodies. The mathematical laws to which he had recourse once more showed the extreme importance of the mathematical methods inaugurated by Lagrange and Laplace in the study of universal attraction, and at the same time extended by Poisson to the study of electrostatics. In order to treat mathematically of the circulation of electric fluid in the interior of conductive bodies, it sufficed to take up Fourier's analysis almost textually, substituting the word electricity for the word heat, this being done in 1827 by Georg Simon Ohm (1789-1854). Meanwhile on 21 July, 1820, Hans Christian Oersted (1777-1851) had discovered the action of the electric current on the magnetic needle. To this discovery André-Marie Ampère (1775-1836) added that of the action exerted over each other by two conductors carrying electric currents and, to the study of electro-dynamic and electro-magnetic forces, he applied a method similar to that used by Newton when studying universal attraction. In 1826 Ampère gave the complete theory of all these forces in his "Mémoire sur la théorie mathématique des phénomènes électro-dynamiques uniquement déduite de l'expérience", a work that can stand the test of comparison with the "Philosophiæ naturalis principia mathematica" and not be found wanting. Not wishing to carry the history of electricity and magnetism beyond this date, we shall content ourselves with making another comparison between the two works we have just mentioned. As Newton's treatise brought about numerous discoveries on the part of his successors, Ampère's memoir gave the initial impetus to researches which have greatly broadened the field of electro-dynamics and electro-magnetism. Michael Faraday (1791-1867), an experimentalist whose activity, skill, and good fortune have perhaps never been equalled, established in 1831 the experimental laws of electro-dynamic and electro-magnetic induction, and, between 1845 and 1847, Franz Ernst Neumann (1798-1895) and Wilhelm Weber (1804-91), by closely following Ampère's method of studying electro-dynamic force, finally established the mathematical theory of these phenomena of induction. Michael Faraday was opposed to Newtonian doctrines, and highly disapproved the theory of action at a distance; in fact, when he applied himself to analysing the polarization of insulated media, which he called dielectrics, he hoped to eliminate the hypothesis of such action. Meantime by extending to dielectric bodies the formulæ that Poisson, Ampère, and Neumann had established for magnets and conductive bodies, James Clerk-Maxwell (1831-79) was enabled to create a new branch of electro-dynamics, and thereby bring to light the long-sought link connecting the sciences of electricity and optics. This wonderful discovery was not one of the least important conquests of the method defined and practised by Newton. XXVII. MOLECULAR ATTRACTION While universal attraction, which varies proportionally as the product of the masses and inversely as the square of the distance, was being established throughout the science of astronomy, and while, thanks to the study of other forces also varying inversely as the square of the distance, electricity and magnetism were being organized, other parts of physics received no less light from another Newtonian hypothesis, namely, the supposition that, between two material particles, there is an attraction distinct from universal attraction and extremely powerful, while the two particles are contiguous, but ceasing to be appreciable as soon as the two masses which it acts upon are separated by a sensible distance. Among the phenomena to be explained by such attractions, Newton had already signalized the effect of capillarity in connexion with which Francis Hauksbee (d. 1705) had made interesting experiments. In 1718 James Jurin (1684-1750) tried to follow Newton's idea but without any marked success, and it was Clairaut who, in 1743, showed how hydrostatic methods permitted the application of this idea to the explanation of capillary phenomena. Unfortunately his able reasoning led to no important result, as he had ascribed too great a value to the extent of molecular action. Chemical action also was one of the actions which Newton made subject to molecular attraction, and John Keill (1671-1721), John Freind (1675-1728), and Pierre-Joseph Macquer (1718-84) believed in the fruitfulness of this Newtonian opinion. The hypothesis of molecular attraction proved a great annoyance to a man whose scientific mediocrity had not prevented him from acquiring great influence, we mean Georges-Louis-Leclerc de Buffon (1707-88). Incapable of understanding that an attraction could be other than inversely proportional to the square of the distance, Buffon entered into a discussion of the subject with Clairaut, and fondly imagined that he had triumphed over the modest learning of his opponent. Ruggiero Giuseppe Boscovich, S.J. (1711-87), published a detailed exposition of the views attacked by Buffon and defended by Clairaut, and, inspired alike by the opinions of Newton and Leibniz, he conceived a cosmology in which the universe is composed solely of material points, these being attracted to each other in pairs. When these points are separated by a sensible distance, their attraction is reduced to mere universal attraction, whereas when they are in very close proximity it assumes a dominant importance. Boscovich's cosmology provided physical theory with a programme which the geometricians of the eighteenth century, and of a great portion of the nineteenth, laboured assiduously to carry out. The efforts of Johann Andreas von Segner (1704-77), and subsequently of Thomas Young (1773-1829) again drew attention to capillary phenomena, and with the assistance of the hypothesis of molecular attraction, as also of Clairaut's method Laplace advanced in 1806 and 1807 an admirable theory which Karl Friedrich Gauss (1777-1855) improved in 1829. Being a thoroughly-convinced partisan of Boscovich's cosmological doctrine, Laplace communicated his convictions to numerous geometricians, who surrendered to the ascendency of his genius; we shall only mention Claude-Louis-Marie Navier (1785-1836), Poisson, and Augustin Cauchy (1789-1857). In developing the consequences of the hypothesis of molecular attraction Navier, Poisson, and Cauchy succeeded in building up the theory of the equilibrium and small motions of elastic bodies, one of the finest and most fruitful theories of modern physics. The discredit into which the progress of present-day thermodynamics has brought Boscovich's cosmology has, however, affected scarcely anything of what Laplace, Gauss, Navier, Poisson, Cauchy, and many others have deduced from the principles of this cosmology. The theories which they established have always been readily justified with the assistance of new methods, the way of bringing about this justification having been indicated by Cauchy himself and George Green. After Macquer, many chemists used the hypothesis of molecular attraction in an attempt to disentangle the laws of reaction which they studied, and among these scientists we may mention Torbern Bergman (1735-1784), and above all Claude-Louis Berthollet (1784-1822). When the latter published his "Statique chimique" in 1803, he believed that the science of chemical equilibria, subject at last to Newton's method, had found its true direction; however, it was not to enter upon this direction until much later on, when it would be guided by precepts altogether different and which were to be formulated by thermodynamics. XXVIII. REVIVAL OF THE UNDULATORY THEORY OF LIGHT The emission theory of light not only led Newton to conceive the hypothesis of molecular attraction, but seemed to provide this hypothesis with an opportunity for further success by permitting Laplace to find, in the emission system, the laws of the double refraction of Iceland spar, which laws Huygens had discovered by the use of the undulatory theory. In this way Newton's optics appeared to rob Huygens's optics of the one advantage in which it glorified. However, at the very moment that Laplace's discovery seemed to ensure the triumph of the emission system, the undulatory theory carried off new and dazzling victories, won mainly through the efforts of Thomas Young and Augustin-Jean Fresnel (1788-1827). Between 1801 and 1803 Young made the memorable discoveries which provoked this revival of undulatory optics. The comparison of the ether that vibrates in a ray of light to the air that vibrates in a resonant tube led him to explain the alternately light and dark fringes that show in a place illumined by two equal beams slightly inclined to each other. The principle of interference, thus justified, allowed him to connect with the undulatory theory the explanation of the colours of thin laminæ that Newton had demanded of the "fits of easy transmission and easy reflection" of the particles of light. In 1815 Fresnel, who combined this principle of interference with the methods devised by Huygens, took up the theory of the phenomena of diffraction which had been discovered by Francesco Maria Grimaldi, S.J. (1618-63), and had remained a mystery to opticians. Fresnel's attempts at explaining these phenomena led him to draw up in 1818 a memoir which in a marked degree revealed the essential character of his genius, namely, a strange power of divination exercised independently of all rules of deductive reasoning. Despite the irregularity of his procedure, Fresnel made known very complicated formulæ, the most minute details of which were verified by experiment, and long afterwards justified according to the logical method of mathematicians. Never did physicist conquer more important and more unthought-of truths, and yet never was there employed a method more capable of leading the common mind into error. Up to this time the vibrations of ether in a ray of light had been supposed to be longitudinal, as it is in the air of a resonant tube, but in 1808 Etienne-Louis Malus (1775-1812) discovered the polarization of light when reflected on glass, and, in 1817, when studying this phenomenon, Young was led to suppose that luminous vibrations are perpendicular to the ray which transmits them. Fresnel, who had conceived the same idea, completed an experiment (1816) in collaboration with Arago (1786-1853), which proved the view that luminous vibrations are transverse to the direction of propagation. The hypothesis of transverse vibrations was, for Fresnel, the key to all the secrets of optics, and from the day that he adopted it he made discoveries with great rapidity. Among these discoveries were: (a) The complete theory of the phenomena of polarization accompanying the reflection or refraction of light on the surface of contact of two isotropic media. The peculiarities which accompany total reflection gave Fresnel an opportunity to display in a most striking manner his strange power of divination and thus throw out a veritable challenge to logic. This divination was no less efficient in the second discovery. (b) In studying double refraction, Huygens limited himself to determining the direction of luminous rays in the interior of crystals now called uniaxial, without, however, being able to account for the polarization of these rays; but with the aid of the wave-surface, Fresnel succeeded in giving the most elegant form to the law of the refraction of rays in biaxial crystals, and in formulating rules by which rays polarize in the interior of all crystals, uniaxial as well as biaxial. Although all these wonderful theories destroyed the theory of emission, the hypothesis of molecular attraction was far from losing ground. In fact Fresnel thought he could find in the elasticity of the ether, which transmits luminous vibrations, the explanation of all the optical laws that he had verified by experiment, and he sought the explanation of this elasticity and its laws in the attraction which he believed to exist between the contiguous particles of this fluid. Being too little of a mathematician and too little of a mechanician to go very far in the analysis of such a problem, he left its solution to his successors. To this task, so clearly defined by Fresnel, Cauchy devoted the most powerful efforts of his genius as an algebraist and, thanks to this pupil of Laplace, the Newtonian physics of molecular attraction became an active factor in the propagation of the theory of undulatory optics. Fresnel's discoveries did not please all Newtonians as much as they did Cauchy. Arago could never admit that luminous vibrations were transverse, notwithstanding that he had collaborated with Fresnel in making the experiment by which this point was verified, and Jean-Baptiste Biot (1774-1862), whose experimental researches were numerous and skilful, and who had furnished recent optics with very valuable matter, remained strongly attached to the system of emission by which he endeavoured to explain all the phenomena that Fresnel had discovered and explained by the undulatory system. Moreover, Biot would not acknowledge himself defeated, or regard the system of emission as condemned until Foucault (1819-68) proved that light is propagated much more quickly in air than in water. XXIX. THEORIES OF HEAT The idea of the quantity of heat and the invention of the calorimeter intended for measuring the amount of heat emitted or absorbed by a body under given circumstances are due to Joseph Black (1728-99) and Adair Crawford (1749-95), who, by joining calorimetry with thermometry, veritably created the science of heat, which science remained unborn as long as the only thing done was the comparison of temperatures. Like Descartes, Newton held that heat consisted in a very lively agitation of the smallest parts of which bodies are composed. By showing that a certain quantity of heat is furnished to ice which melts, without however raising the temperature of the ice, that this heat remains in a "latent state" in the water resulting from the melting and that it again becomes manifest when the water returns to ice, the experiments of Black and Crawford led physicists to change their opinion concerning the nature of heat. In it they beheld a certain fluid which combines with other matter when heat passes into the latent state, and separates from it when heat is liberated again, and, in the new nomenclature that perpetuated the revolution brought about by Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier (1743-94), this imponderable fluid was assigned a place among simple bodies and named caloric. Air becomes heated when it is compressed, and cools again when rarefied under the receiver of the pneumatic machine. Johann Heinrich Lambert (1728-77), Horace de Saussure (1740-79), and John Dalton (1766-1844) recognized the importance of this already old experiment, but it is to Laplace that we are indebted for a complete explanation of this phenomenon. The experiment proved to Laplace that, at a given temperature, a mass of air contains a quantity of caloric proportional to its volume. If we admit the accuracy of the law of compressibility enunciated by Boyle and Mariotte, this quantity of heat combined with a given mass of air, also of given temperature, is proportional to the volume of this air. In 1803 Laplace formulated these propositions in a short note inserted in Berthollet's "Statique chimique". In order to verify the consequences which Laplace deduced therefrom concerning the expansion of gases, Louis-Joseph Gay-Lussac (1778-1850) began researches on this subject, and in 1807 on the variations of temperature produced when a gas contained in a receiver enters another receiver previously empty. Laplace's views entail an evident corollary; to raise to a certain number of degrees the temperature of a gas of a fixed volume, the communication of less heat is required than if this gas were expanded under an invariable pressure. Hence a gas admits of two distinct kinds of specific heat which depend on whether it is heated at constant volume or under constant pressure; the specific heat being greater in the latter case than in the former. Through these remarks the study of the specific heat of gases was signalized as one of the most important in which experimenters could engage. The Institute made this study the subject of a competition which called forth two notable memoirs, one by Delaroche and Bérard on the measurement of the specific heats of various gases under constant pressure; and the other by Desormes and Clément, published in 1812, on the determination of the increase of heat due to a given compression in a given mass of air. The experiments of Desormes and Clément enabled Laplace to deduce, in the case of air, the ratio of specific heat under constant pressure to specific heat under constant volume, and hence to test the ideas he had formed on the propagation of sound. In applying to air the law of compressibility discovered by Boyle, Newton had attempted to calculate the velocity of the propagation of sound in this fluid, and the formula which he had established gave values very inferior to those furnished by experimental determination. Lagrange had already shown that, by modifying Boyle s law of compressibility, this disagreement could be overcome; however, the modification was to be justified not by what Lagrange said but by what Laplace discovered. When sound is propagated in air by alternate condensations and rarefactions, the temperature at each point instead of remaining unchanged, as Boyle's law supposed, is alternately raised and lowered about a mean value. Hence velocity of sound was no longer expressed by the formula Newton had proposed; this expression had to be multiplied by the square root of the ratio of specific heat under constant pressure to specific heat under constant volume. Laplace had this thought in mind in 1803 (Berthollet, "Statique chimique"); its consequences being developed in 1807 by Poisson, his disciple. In 1816 Laplace published his new formula; fresh experiments by Desormes and Clément, and analogous experiments by Gay-Lussac and Welter gave him tolerably exact values of the relation of the specific heats of gases. Henceforth the great geometrician could compare the result given by his formula with that furnished by the direct determination of the velocity of sound, the latter, in metres per second, being represented by the number 340-889, and the former by the number 337 715. This agreement seemed a very strong confirmation of the hypothesis of caloric and the theory of molecular action, to both of which it was attributable. It would appear that Laplace had a right to say: "The phenomena of the expansion of heat and vibration of gases lead back to the attractive and repellent forces sensible only at imperceptible distances. In my theory on capillary action, I have traced to similar forces the effects of capillarity. All terrestrial phenomena depend upon this species of force, just as celestial phenomena depend upon universal gravitation, and the study of these forces now seems to me the principal object of mathematical philosophy" (written in 1823). In 1824 a new truth was formulated from which was to be developed a doctrine which was to overturn, to a great extent, natural philosophy as conceived by Newton and Boscovich and carried out by Laplace and his disciples. However, Sadi Carnot (1796-1832), the author of this new truth, still assumed the correctness of the theory of caloric. He proposed to extend to heat-engines the principle of the impossibility of perpetual motion recognized for engines of unchanging temperature, and was led to the following conclusion: In order that a certain quantity of calorie may produce work of the kind that human industry requires, this caloric must pass from a hot to a cold body; when the quantity of caloric is given, as well as the temperatures to which these two bodies are raised, the useful work produced admits of a superior limit independent of the nature of the substances which transmit the caloric and of the device by means of which the transmission is effected. The moment that Carnot formulated this fertile truth, the foundations of the theory of caloric were shaken. However, in the hypothesis of caloric, how could the generation of heat by friction be explained? Two bodies rubbed together were found to be just as rich in caloric as they had been; therefore, whence came the caloric evolved by friction? As early as 1783 Lavoisier and Laplace were much troubled by the problem, which also arrested the attention of physicists; as in 1798 when Benjamin Thompson, Count Rumford (1753-1814) made accurate experiments on the heat evolved by friction, and, in 1799, when similar experiments were made by Sir Humphrey Davy (1778-1829). In 1803, beside the notes in which Laplace announced some of the greatest conquests of the doctrine of caloric, Berthollet, in his "Statique chimique", gave an account of Rumford's experiments, trying in vain to reconcile them with the prevailing opinion. Now these experiments, which were incompatible with the hypothesis that heat is a fluid contained in a quantity in each body, recalled to mind the supposition of Descartes and Newton, which claimed heat to be a very lively agitation of the small particles of bodies. It was in favour of this view that Rumford and Davy finally declared themselves. In the last years of his life Carnot consigned to paper a few notes which remained unpublished until 1878. In these notes he rejected the theory of caloric as inconsistent with Rumford's experiments. "Heat", he added, "is therefore the result of motion. It is quite plain that it can be produced by the consumption of motive power and that it can produce this power. Wherever there is destruction of motive power there is, at the same time, production of heat in a quantity exactly proportional to the quantity of motive power destroyed; and inversely, wherever there is destruction of heat, there is production of motive power". In 1842 Robert Mayer (1814-78) found the principle of the equivalence between heat and work, and showed that once the difference in two specific heats of a gas is known, it is possible to calculate the mechanical value of heat. This value differed little from that found by Carnot. Mayer's pleasing work exerted scarcely any more influence on the progress of the theory of heat than did Carnot's unpublished notes. However, in 1843 James Prescott Joule (1818-89) was the next to discover the principle of the equivalence between heat and work, and conducted several of the experiments which Carnot in his notes had requested to have made. Joule's work communicated to the new theory a fresh impetus. In 1849 William Thomson, afterwards Lord Kelvin (1824-1907), indicated the necessity of reconciling Carnot's principle with the thenceforth incontestable principle of the mechanical equivalent of heat; and in 1850 Rudolf Clausius (1822-88) accomplished the task; thus the science of thermodynamics was founded. When in 1847 Hermann von Helmholtz published his small work entitled "Ueber die Erhaltung der Kraft", he showed that the principle of the mechanical equivalent of heat not only established a bond between mechanics and the theory of heat, but also linked the studies of chemical reaction, electricity, and magnetism, and in this way physics was confronted with the carrying-out of an entirely new programme, whose results are at present too incomplete to be judged even by scientists. ALMAGIÀ, La dottrina della marea nell' antichità classica et nel media eno, taken from Memorie della Reale Accademia dei Lincei (Rome, 1905); CAVERNI, Storia del metodo sperimentale in Italia (Florence, 1891-8); DUHEM, Les théories de la Chaleur in Revue des Deux Mondes (1895), CXXIX, 869; CXXX, 380, 851; IDEM, L'évolution de la Mécanique (Paris, 1903); IDEM, Les origines de la Statique (2 vols., Paris, 1905-6); IDEM, Etudes sur Léonard de Vinci, ceux qu'il a lus et ceux gui l'ont lu (2 vols., Paris, 1906-9); IDEM, La théorie physique, son objet et sa structure (Paris, 1906); IDEM, Sozein ta phainomena. Essai sur la notation de Théorie physique de Platon à Galilée (Paris, 1908); DÜHRING, Kritische Gesch. d. allg. Mechanik (2nd ed., Leipzig, 1877); HELLER, Gesch. d. Physik v. Aristoteles bis auf d. neueste Zeit (2 vols., Stuttgart, 1882-4); HELLMANN, Neudrucke von Schriften u. Karten über Meteorologie u. Erdmagnetisnus (15 vols., Berlin, 1893-1904); JOUGUET, Lectures de Mécanique, La Mécanique enseignée par les auteurs originaux (2 vols., Paris, 1908-9); KLEIN, D. Principien d. Mechanik, historisch u. kritisch dargestellt (Leipzig, 1872); LASSWITZ, Gesch. d. Atomistik vom Mittelalter bis Newton (2 vols., Hamburg and Leipzig, 1890); LIBRI, Hist. des Sciences mathématiques en Italie, depuis la Renaissance des Lettres jusqu'à la fin du XVIIe siècle (4 vols., Paris, 1838-41); MACH, D. Mechanik in ihrer Entwickelung, histor. -- kritisch dargestellt (6th ed., Leipzig, 1908); PASCAL, uvres, ed. BRUNSCHVICG AND BOUTROUX (3 vols., Paris, 1908); ROUSE BALL, An Essay on Newton's Principia (London and New York, 1893); Mémoires sur l'Electrodynamique in Collection de Mémoires publiés par la Société française de Physique, II-III (Paris, 1885-7); SUE AINE, Hist. du Galvanisme et analyse des différens ouvrages publiés sur cette découverte, depuis son origine jusqu'à nos jours (4 vols., Paris), an X (1802) -- an XIII (1803); THIRION, Pascal, l'horreur du vide et la pression atmosphérique in Revue des Quest. scien., 3rd series; XII (1907), 384; XIII (1908), 149; XV (1909), 149; THUROT, Recherches histor. sur le Principe d'Archimède in Revue Archéologique (new Series, Paris), XVIII (1868), 389; XIX (1869), 42; III, 284, 345; XX (1869), 14; TODHUNTER, A Hist. of Mathematical Theories of Attraction and the Figure of the Earth from time of Newton to that of Laplace (2 vols., London, 1873); TODHUNTER AND PEARSON, A Hist. of the Theory of Elasticity (2 vols., Cambridge, 1886-93); VENTURI, Commentari sopra la Storica e le Teorie dell' Ottica (Bologna, 1814); VERDET, Introduction aux uvres d'Augustin Fresnel, I (Paris, 1866-70), pp. ix-xcix; WEIDEMANN, D. Lehre v. d. Elektricität, 2nd ed. (3 vols., Brunswick, 1893-5); WOHLWILL, D. Entdeckung d, Beharrungsgesetzes in Zeitschrift f. Völkerpsychologie u. Sprachwissenschaft (Berlin), XIV (1883), 365; XV (1884), 70, 337; IDEM, Galilei u. sein Kampf f.d. Copernicanische Lehre (Hamburg and Leipzig, 1909). PIERRE DUHEM Physiocrats Physiocrats ( physis, nature, kratein, rule) A school of writers on political and economic subjects that flourished in France in the second half of the eighteenth century, and attacked the monopolies, exclusive corporations, vexatious taxes, and various other abuses which had grown up under the mercantile system. Statesmen of the mercantile school in France and elsewhere had adopted a system of tutelage which often gave an artificial growth to industry but which pressed hardly upon agriculture. The physiocrats proposed to advance the interests of agriculture by adopting a system of economic freedom. Laissez faire et laissez passer was their watchword. François Quesnay (1694-1774), physician to Mme de Pompadour and Louis XV, founded the school (1758). The term "physiocracy" was probably used by Quesnay to convey the idea that the new system provides for the reign of the natural law. Quesnay and his disciples were called économistes by their contemporaries; the term physiocrates was not used until the beginning of the nineteenth century. Political Philosophy In metaphysics Quesnay was a follower of Descartes and borrowed from him the mathematical method used in his "Tableau Economique". He accepted a modified form of the natural rights theory which pervades eighteenth-century literature and gave it an optimistic interpretation. He emphasizes the distinction between the natural order (ordre naturel) and the positive order (ordre positif). The first is founded upon the laws of nature which are the creation of God and which can be discovered by reason. The second is man-made; when its laws coincide with those of the natural order the world will be at its best. He objected to the natural rights philosophers of his day that they concerned themselves only with the positive order to the neglect of the natural. He held that primitive man upon entering society does not give up any of his natural rights, thus taking issue with Rousseau's theory of the social contract. From his optimistic doctrines concerning the laws of the natural order he deduces his doctrine of laissez faire. Economic evils arise from the monopolies and restrictions of the positive order; statesmen should aim to harmonize the positive order with the natural by abolishing these excrescences. The state should withdraw its support from the attempts of special interests to bolster up industry artificially. In the language of the physiocrats, "He governs best who governs least". Although ultimately their principles proved favourable to the Revolution, Quesnay and his disciples were in favour of an absolute monarchy subject only to the laws of the "natural order". They considered that it would be easier to persuade a prince than a nation and that the triumph of their principles would be sooner secured by the sovereign power of a single man. Economic Doctrine Quesnay divides the citizens of a nation into three classes: the productive, which cultivates the soil and pays a rent to the landed proprietors, the proprietors (Turgot's classe disponible), who receive the rent or net product (produit net) of agriculture, and the barren (classe stérile), which comprises those engaged in other occupations than that of agriculture, and produces no surplus. For example, in a country producing five billions of agricultural wealth annually, two billions will go to the proprietors as rent. With this the proprietors will buy one billion's worth of agricultural products and one billion's worth of the manufactured products of the barren class. The productive class also will buy one billion's worth of the products of the barren class. The barren class will spend the two billions which it receives in buying one billion's worth of agricultural products upon which to subsist and one billion's worth of raw material to work up into its finished product. Thus the barren class receive two billions and spend two billions. The value of their product equals the cost of their subsistence plus the cost of the raw material. Thus industry and commerce are barren. Agriculture is productive, since it supports those who are engaged in it and produces in addition a surplus. The national welfare depends upon having this surplus production as large as possible. In other words, a nation will prosper not in proportion as it succeeds in getting foreign money in return for its manufactures, but in proportion to the amount of its net product. The mercantilists, therefore, made a mistake in encouraging manufactures and commerce at the expense of agriculture. The true policy is to encourage agriculture. Statesmen of the mercantile school thought it desirable to have cheap food so that the home industries could compete with the foreign and thus the nation might secure a favourable balance of trade which would bring money into the country. The physiocrats rejected the balance of trade argument and held that dear food was desirable because this meant the prosperity of agriculture and the swelling of the net product. Quesnay even held that under some circumstances it might be desirable to levy a duty on imported agricultural products or to grant an export bounty in order to keep up prices. Holding that the incomes received by the productive and sterile classes were just sufficient for their support, the physiocrats believed that any tax levied upon the members of either of these classes must be shifted until it finally fell upon the net product belonging to the proprietors. In the interest of economy of administration, therefore, they urged that a single tax be levied upon rent. This was their celebrated impôt unique. The proposal was somewhat similar to the more recent demands of Henry George for a single tax. The physiocrats sought to protect the landed proprietors, while George wished to expropriate them. The School Most of the ideas of the physiocratic school are found in earlier writings. The expression laissez faire is said to have been used by a French merchant, Legendre, in answering a question addressed by Colbert to a gathering of merchants concerning the needs of industry. The idea is developed in the writings of Bois-Guillebert (1712) and the policy was advocated by the Marquis d'Argenson in 1735. Gournay, a contemporary of Quesnay, seems to have originated the extended expression laissez faire et laissez passer. This formula called for freedom of internal commerce and manufacture. Some critics hold that Gournay is equally entitled with Quesnay to be called the founder of the physiocratic school on account of the currency which he gave to the doctrine of freedom of trade. Other sources are Hume's criticism of the balance of trade theory, and Cantillon, "Essai sur la Nature du Commerce en Général", in which the importance of agriculture is recognized and the doctrine of produit net developed. The elder Mirabeau was Quesnay's first disciple. His "Philosophie rurale" (1763) gained disciples. Dupont de Nemours, who later exerted considerable influence in the Constituent Assembly in the discussions on taxation, wrote several works in defence of the system. Other important writers were Baudeau, Mercier de la Rivière, and Letrosne. The most eminent of Quesnay's disciples was Turgot, who, as Intendant of Limoges and afterwards as minister of finance under Louis XVI, attempted to apply some of the physiocratic principles practically (Réflexions sur la formation et la distribution des richesses, 1766). Outside of France the school had not many disciples. The best known are the Swiss Iselin and the German Schlettwein. The latter was engaged by the Margrave Karl Friedrich of Baden, a friend of Mirabeau, to introduce the single tax in three villages of Baden. The experiment, made under unfavourable conditions, was soon abandoned. In Italy the physiocratic school had few followers. In England, on account of the advanced position of trade and industry, it had none. Criticism The principal service of the physiocrats to modern political economy was not the discovery of any one of their doctrines, but their attempt to formulate a science of society out of materials already at hand. It was from this system as a base that Adam Smith set out to give a new impetus to the study of economic phenomena. Another important contribution consisted in calling attention to the weaknesses of the mercantile system. Laissez faire was a good doctrine for the eighteenth century because there was need of a reaction, but it was a mistake to set it up as a universal principle applicable under all conditions, The chief weakness in the physiocratic teaching lay in its theory of value. While agriculture brings forth the raw material of production, commerce and manufactures are equally productive of wealth. In a sense, the physiocrats recognized this, but they held that in producing this wealth the manufacturing and commercial classes use up an equivalent amount of value. This is a gratuitous assumption, but even if true, the same thing could be said of the so-called productive class. Moreover, if wages were governed by the "iron law" both in agriculture and in manufactures and commerce, as the physiocrats assume, the "net product" would be made up of wealth created by the commercial and manufacturing classes as well as by the agricultural class. The theory of the impôt unique or single tax rested upon the assumption that all incomes, except those of the proprietors, were at the existence minimum. Since this is not true, it is also not true that all taxes levied upon the other classes will ultimately be paid by the proprietors. HIGGS, The Physiocrats (London, 1897); ONCKEN, OEuvres économiques et philosophiques de Fr. Quesnay (Frankfort, 1888); IDEM in Handwörterbuch d. Staatswissenschaften, s. v. Quesnay; HASBACH, D. allg. philosophischen. Grundlagen d. von F. Quesnay u. A. Smith begründeten politischen Oekonomie (Leipzig, 1890). FRANK O'HARA. Physiologus Physiologus An early Christian work of a popular theological type, describing animals real or fabulous and giving each an allegorical interpretation. Thus the story is told of the lion whose cubs are born dead and receive life when the old lion breathes upon them, and of the phoe;nix which burns itself to death and rises on the third day from the ashes; both are taken as types of Christ. The unicorn also which only permits itself to be captured in the lap of a pure virgin is a type of the Incarnation; the pelican that sheds its own blood in order to sprinkle therewith its dead young, so that they may live again, is a type of the salvation of mankind by the death of Christ on the Cross. Some allegories set forth the deceptive enticements of the Devil and his defeat by Christ; others present qualities as examples to be imitated or avoided. The book, originally written in Greek at Alexandria, perhaps for purposes of instruction, appeared probably in the second century, though some place its date at the end of the third or in the fourth century. In later centuries it was ascribed to various celebrated Fathers, especially St. Epiphanius, St. Basil, and St. Peter of Alexandria. Origen, however, had cited it under the title "Physiologus", while Clement of Alexandria and perhaps even Justin Martyr seem to have known it. The assertion that the method of the "Physiologus" presupposes the allegorical exegesis developed by Origen is not correct; the so-called "Letter of Barnabas" offers, before Origen, a sufficient model, not only for the general character of the "Physiologus" but also for many of its details. It can hardly be asserted that the later recensions, in which the Greek text has been preserved, present even in the best and oldest manuscripts a perfectly reliable transcription of the original, especially as this was an anonymous and popular treatise. "Physiologus" is not the original title; it was given to the book because the author introduces his stories from natural history with the phrase: "the physiologus says", that is, the naturalist says, the natural philosophers, the authorities for natural history say. About 400 the "Physiologus" was translated into Latin; in the fifth century into Æthiopic [edited by Hommel with a German translation (Leipzig, 1877), revised German translation in "Romanische Forschungen", V, 13-36]; into Armenian [edited by Pitra in "Spicilegium Solesmense", III, 374-90; French translation by Cahier in "Nouveaux Mélanges d'archéologie, d'histoire et de littérature" (Paris, 1874)]; into Syrian [edited by Tychsen, "Physiologus Syrus" (Rostock, 1795), a later Syrian and an Arabic version edited by Land in "Anecdota Syriaca", IV (Leyden, 1875)]. Numerous quotations and references to the "Physiologus" in the Greek and the Latin fathers show that it was one of the most generally known works of Christian antiquity. Various translations and revisions were current in the Middle Ages. The earliest translation into Latin was followed by various recensions, among them the "Dicta Johannis Chrysostomi de naturis bestiarum", edited by Heider in "Archiv für Kunde österreichischer Geschichtsquellen" (II, 550 sqq., 1850). A metrical Latin "Physiologus" was written in the eleventh century by a certain Theobaldus, and printed by Morris in "An Old English Miscellany" (1872), 201 sqq.; it also appears among the works of Hildebertus Cenomanensis in P. L., CLXXI, 1217-24. To these should be added the literature of the "Bestiaries" (q. v.), in which the material of "Physiologus" was used; the "Tractatus de bestiis et alius rebus", attributed to Hugo of St. Victor, and the "Speculum naturale" of Vincent of Beauvais. Translations and adaptations from the Latin introduced the "Physiologus" into almost all the languages of Western Europe. An eleventh-century German translation was printed by Müllenhoff and Scherer in "Denkmäler deutscher Poesie und Prosa" (No. LXXXI); a later translation (twelfth century) has been edited by Lauchert in "Geschichte des Physiologus" (pp. 280-99); and a rhymed version appears in Karajan, "Deutsche Sprachdenkmale des XII. Jahrhunderts" (pp. 73-106), both based on the Latin text known as "Dicta Chrysostomi". Fragments of a ninth-century Anglo-Saxon "Physiologus", metrical in form, still exist; they are printed by Thorpe in "Codex Exoniensis" (pp. 335-67), and by Grein in "Bibliothek der angelsächsischen Poesie" (I, 223- 8). About the middle of the thirteenth century there appeared an English metrical "Bestiary", an adaptation of the Latin "Physiologus Theobaldi"; this has been edited by Wright and Halliwell in "Reliquiæ antiquæ" (I, 208-27), also by Morris in "An Old English Miscellany" (1-25). Icelandic literature includes a "Physiologus" belonging to the early part of the thirteenth century, edited by Dahlerup (Copenhagen, 1889). In the twelfth and thirteenth century there appeared the "Bestiaires" of Philippe de Thaun, a metrical Old-French version, edited by Thomas Wright in "Popular Treatises on Science Written during the Middle Ages" (74-131), and by Walberg (Lund and Paris, 1900); that by Guillaume, clerk of Normandy, called "Bestiare divin", and edited by Cahier in his "Mélanges d'archéologie" (II-IV), also edited by Hippeau (Caen, 1852), and by Reinsch (Leipzig, 1890); the "Bestiare" of Gervaise, edited by Paul Meyer in "Romania" (I, 420-42); the "Bestiare" in prose of Pierre le Picard, edited by Cahier in "Mélanges" (II-IV). A singular adaptation is found in the old Waldensian literature, and has been edited by Alfons Mayer in "Romanische Forschungen" (V, 392 sqq.). As to the Italian bestiaries, a Tosco-Venetian "Bestiarius" has been edited (Goldstaub and Wendriner, "Ein tosco-venezianischer Bestiarius", Halle, 1892). Extracts from the "Physiologus" in Provençal have been edited by Bartsch, "Provenzalisches Lesebuch" (162-66). The "Physiologus" survived in the literatures of Eastern Europe in books on animals written in Middle Greek, among the Slavs to whom it came from the Byzantines, and in a Roumanian translation from a Slavic original (edited by Gaster with an Italian translation in "Archivio glottologico italiano", X, 273-304). Medieval poetical literature is full of allusions to the "Physiologus", and it also exerted great influence on the symbolism of medieval ecclesiastical art; symbols like those of the phoe;nix and the pelican are still well-known and popular. Lauchert, Gesch. d. Physiologus (Strasburg, 1889), supplemented in Romanische Forschungen, V, 3-12, and in Zeitschrift für katholische Theologie, XXXIII (1909), 177-79; Keppler, D. mittelalterliche Physiologus in Archiv für christ. Kunst, IX (1891), n. 2-4, pp. 14-16, 23-4, 32-6; Michael, Gesch. d. deutschen Volkes, III (Freiburg, 1903), 413-17; Pitra, in Spicilegium Solesmense, III (Paris, 1855), 338-73; Karnejev, D. Physiologus d. Moskauer Synodalbibliothek in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, III (1894), 26-63; Peters, D. griechische Physiologus u. seine orientalischen Uebersetzungen (Berlin, 1898); the Latin text has been edited by Cahier and Martin, Mélanges d'archéologie, d'hist. et de litt., II-IV (Paris, 1851- 56); Goldstaub, D. Physiologus u., seine Weiterbildung besonders in d. lateinischen u. byzantinischen Lit. in Philologus, supplementary vol. VIII (1901), 337-404; Krumbacher, Gesch. d. byzantinischen Lit. (2nd ed., Munich, 1897), 874-77; Strzygowski, D. Bilderkreis d. griechischen Physiologus in Byzantinischen Archiv, II (Leipzig, 1899); Leitschuh, Gesch. d. karolingischen Malerei (Berlin, 1894), 405 sq.; Schmid, Christ. Symbole aus alter u. neuer Zeit (2nd ed., Freiberg, 1909); Dreves, D. Jagd d. Einhorns in Stimmen aus Maria-Lauch, XLIII (1892), 66-76. Friederich Lauchert Piacenza Piacenza DIOCESE OF PIACENZA (PLACENTINENSIS) Piacenza is a diocese in Emilia, central Italy. The city is situated on the right of the Po, near its junction with the Trebbia, in an important strategic position. Agriculture is the chief industry. The cathedral is of the ninth century; it was remodelled by Santa da Sambuceto and others (1122-1223) in beautiful Lombard style. The campanile, over 216 feet high, is surmounted by an angel, in brass; the cupola is a more recent part of the edifice; there are frescoes by Guercino and by Morazzone, Ludovico Carracci, Procaccino, and others. Its Cappella del Crocifisso has an arch with statues of Nero and of Vespasian; the Cappella di S. Corrado has an admirable Madonna by Zitto di Tagliasacchi, and contained once a picture of St. Conrad by Lanfranco, but it was taken to France. Among the churches is S. Antonio (fourth century), many times restored; until 877 it was the cathedral; in 1183 the preliminaries of the Peace of Constance were concluded in this church; here also are paintings by Procaccino, Mulinaretto, Novoloni etc.; the sacristy contains a triptych with the gesta of S. Antonio. In the pastor's residence of S. Andrea there is an ancient mosaic. S. Bartolommeo, formerly a church of the Jesuits, contains besides its beautiful paintings two crucifixes, one very ancient, the other dating from 1601. S. Francesco (1278) has beautiful columns, but has been disfigured by incongruous restorations; it contains a Pietà by Bernardo Castelli, a Madonna by Francia, and the tomb of the famous Franciscan, Francesco Mairone (1477). S. Giovanni in Canali (1220), formerly of the Templars, and later of the Dominicans, has also been disfigured by its restorations; it contains statues of Pius V and Benedict XI, the tomb of the Scotti family and of the physician Gulielmo da Saliceto. S. Savino (903) was restored several times and entirely transformed in the eighteenth century; formerly there was a monastery annexed to it; in its recent restorations, paintings of the fourteenth century were discovered, and also pillars and other sculptures of the original construction, as well as mosaics, a crucifix carved in wood, and other objects. Outside the city the monastery of the Cassinesi Benedictines, S. Sisto, founded in 874 by Queen Angilberga, is a veritable sanctuary of art; the famous Sistine Madonna by Raphael, was first here, but was sold by the monks, to obtain funds for repairs. Santa Maria in Campagna contains a very ancient statue in marble of Our Lady, four statues in wood by Hermann Geernaert, and paintings by Procaccino, Pordenone, Guercino, and others. The Palazzo Ducale, a work of Vignola (1558), has since 1800 served as a barracks. The Palazzo Anguissola da Grazzano contains fine paintings. The Palazzo Brandini has a gallery of paintings by Correggio, Reni, Guercino, Andrea del Sarto, and Murillo. The Palazzo Landi contains paintings by Van Dyck. The Palazzo Palastrelli has a library of works on the history of Piacenza. Cardinal Alberoni established in this town a famous college. Its church has paintings by Paolo Veronese, Guido Reni, and others. The Piazza de Cavalli has equestrian statues of Alessandro and of Ranuccio I, Farnese, by Mocchi da Montevarchi. Placentia, with Cremona, was founded in 218 B. C., to hold in check the Gauls after their defeat near Clastidium. The Via Æmilia terminated there. Scipio, defeated near the Trebbia, retreated to this town. In 206 it was besieged in vain by Hasdrubal and burned by the Gauls in 200. There Emperor Otho defeated Vitellius (69) and then Aurelian was defeated by the Alamanni (271); there also Emperor Orestes was decapitated (467). The Lombards took possession of it, at the beginning of their invasion, and thereafter it remained in their power. From the ninth century the temporal power was in the hands of the bishops, until the twelfth century, when the town became a commune, governed by consuls, and later (1188), by a podestà. In the wars between the Lombard cities and with the emperors, Piacenza was an ally of Milan, on account of its hatred of Cremona and of Pavia; wherefore it was Guelph and a party to both of the Lombard leagues. Twice, Uberto Palavicino made himself lord of the city (1254 and 1261), but the free commune was re-established. From 1290 to 1313, Alberto Scotti was lord of Piacenza; his rule had many interruptions, as in 1308, by Guido della Torre of Milan, in 1312, by Henry VII. The latter's vicar, Galeazzo Visconti, was expelled by the pontifical legate Bertrando del Poggetto (1322-35). In 1336 Piacenza came again under the rule of the dukes of Milan; between 1404 and 1418 they were compelled to retake the city on various occasions. In 1447 there was a new attempt to re-establish independent government. The fortunes of war gave Piacenza to the Holy See in 1512; in 1545 it was united to the new Duchy of Parma. After the assassination of Pier Luigi Farnese, which occurred at Piacenza (1547), the city was occupied by the troops of the imperial governor of Milan and was not restored to the Duchy of Parma for ten years. In 1746 the Austrians obtained a great victory there over the French and Spaniards, and in 1799 the Russians and Austrians defeated the French. Napoleon made Lebrun Duke of Piacenza. St. Antonius, who is said to have belonged to the Theban Legion, suffered martyrdom at Piacenza, in the second or third century. The first known bishop is St. Victor, present at the Council of Sardica (343); St. Savinus, present at Aquileia (381), was probably the Savinus to whom St. Ambrose wrote several letters. Other bishops were St. Maurus, St. Flavianus, St. Majorianus (451). Whether the emperor of this name intended to become Bishop of Piacenza is uncertain; he was not its bishop, having been killed soon after his abdication. Joannes was a contemporary of St. Gregory the Great; Thomas (737) was very influential with King Luitprand; Podo (d. 839) was honoured with a metrical epitaph; Guido (904), a man of arms rather than of the Church; Boso (940) freed himself from the jurisdiction of the metropolitan See of Ravenna (re-established by Gregory V), and became the antipope John XVI; Pietro (1031) was exiled to Germany by Conrad II; Dionisio was deposed in 1076 by Gregory VII; St. Bonizo (1088), who had been Bishop of Sutri and a great supporter of Gregory VII, was killed in 1089; during the incumbency of Aldo (1096), Emilia was temporarily taken from the jurisdiction of Ravenna; Arduino (1118) founded the new cathedral; Ugo (1155), a nephew of Anacletus II, was driven from his diocese by the schismatics; under Ardizzone (1192) and Grumerio (1199) grave contentions began between the clergy and the consuls, and Grumerio was driven from the diocese; Orlando da Cremona, O.P., was mortally wounded by a Catharist while preaching (1233); P. Alberto Pandoni (1243), an Augustinian; Pietro Filargo (1386) became Pope Alexander V; Pietro Maineri (1388) was formerly the physician of Galeazzo II; Branda Castiglione (1404) was a professor of law at Pavia, and took part in the conciliabulum of Pisa and in the Council of Constance, and became a cardinal; Alessio da Siregno (1412) was a famous preacher; Fabrizio Marliani (1476) was very zealous for the reform of morals in the clergy and in the people; Cardinal Scaramuzza Trivulzio (1519); Catalano Trivulzio (1525); Cardinal Giovanni Bernardino Scotti (1559) was a very learned Theatine; the Bl. Paolo Burali (1570), a Theatine, became a cardinal; Cardinal Filippo Sega (1578); Alessandro Scappi (1627) was obliged to leave the duchy for having excommunicated the duke, Odoardo; Alessandro Pisani's election (1766) was one of the causes of dissension with the Holy See; Stefano Fallot de Beaumont (1807) was present at the national council of Paris (1810). Bl. Corrado (d. at Noto in 1351) was from Piacenza. The councils of Piacenza were those of 1076 (concerning the schismatics against Gregory VII), 1090 (Urban II against the concubinage of the clergy, and in favour of the crusade), 1132 (Innocent II against Anacletus II). There were ten synods under Bishop Marliani (1476-1508). In 1582 the diocese was made a suffragan of Bologna; it is now immediately dependent upon the Holy See. It has 350 parishes, with 310,000 inhabitants, 11 religious houses for men, and 29 for women, 5 educational establishments for male students, and 18 for girls, 1 daily paper, and 1 monthly periodical. The diocese has a house of missionaries for emigrants established by the late bishop, Mgr. Scalabrini. UNIVERSITY OF PIACENZA Piacenza was the first Italian city to apply for a Bull erecting its town-schools into a studium generale, which Bull was granted by Innocent IV in 1248, and conferred all the usual privileges of other studia generalia; by it the power of giving degrees was vested in the Bishop of Piacenza. But no practical work was done here until 1398, when Gian Galeazzo Visconti, Duke of Milan and Pavia, refounded the university in his capacity of Vicar of the Empire. The University of Pavia was suppressed, as he did not wish to have a university in either of his capitals. Gian Galeazzo liberally endowed Piacenza, organizing a university of jurists as well as a university of arts and medicine, each with an independent rector. Between 1398 and 1402 seventy-two salaried professors are recorded as having lectured, including not only the usual professors of theology, law, medicine, philosophy, and grammar, but also the new chairs of astrology, rhetoric, Dante, and Seneca. But this endeavour to establish a large university in a small town which had no natural influx of students was doomed to failure, and little or no work was done after Gian Galeazzo's death in 1402. In 1412 Pavia had its university restored, and the subjects of the duchy were forbidden to study elsewhere. Piacenza then obtained an unenviable notoriety as a market for cheap degrees. This traffic was still flourishing in 1471, though no lectures had been given for sixty years. A college of law and a college of arts and medicine, however, maintained a shadowy existence for many years later. Among the famous teachers at Piacenza may be named the jurist Placentinus, founder of the law-school at Montpellier (d. there 1192); and Baldus (b. 1327), the most famous jurist of his day (Muratori, "Rer. It. SS.", XX, 939). DIOCESE.--CAPPELLETTI, Le Chiese d'Italia, XV; CAMPI, Historia ecclesiastica di Piacenza; POGGIALI, Memorie storiche di Piacenza (12 vols., 1757-66); GIARELLI, Storia di Piacenza (2 vols., 1889); MURATORI, Rerum italicarum Scr., XX; MALCHIODI (and others), La regia basilica di S. Savino in Piacenza (Piacenza, 1903). See also PARMA. UNIVERSITY.--CAMPI, Hist. Univers. delle cose eccl. come seculari di Piacenza, II (Piacenza, 1651), 187 sq.; RASHDALL, Univ. of Europe in the Middle Ages, II, pt. I (Oxford, 1895), 35. U. BENIGNI & C.F. WEMYSS BROWN Giambattista Pianciani Giambattista Pianciani Scientist, b. at Spoleto, 27 Oct., 1784; d. at Rome, 23 March, 1862. He entered the Society of Jesus on 2 June, 1805; after having received the ordinary Jesuit training he was sent to various cities in the Papal States to teach mathematics and physics and finally was appointed professor in the Roman College, where he lectured and wrote on scientific subjects for twenty-four years. He was an active member of the Accademia d'Arcadia, his academical pseudonym being "Polite Megaride", of the Accademia de' Lincei, and of other scientific societies. His scientific labours were abruptly brought to an end by the Revolution of 1848; he succeeded, however, in making his escape from Rome and having come to America he taught dogmatic theology during the scholastic year 1849-50 at the Jesuit theologate then connected with Georgetown College, Washington, D. C. When peace was restored in Rome he returned thither and from 1851 till his death was engaged chiefly in administrative duties and in teaching philosophy both in the Roman College and in the Collegio Filosofico in the University of Rome, of which latter college he was president during the last two years of his life. Besides numerous articles on scientific subjects, especially on electricity and magnetism, and on philosophico-religious subjects, he published the following works: "Istituzioni fisico-chemiche" (4 vols., Rome, 1833-4); "Elementi di fisico-chimica" (2 vols., Naples, 1840-41); "In historiam creationis mosaicam commentarius" (Naples, 1851), which he wrote whilst at Georgetown and of which there is a German translation by Schöttl (Ratisbon, 1853); "Saggi filosfici" (Rome, 1855); "Nuovi saggi filosofici" (Rome, 1856); "Cosmogonia naturale comparata col Genesi" (Rome, 1862). SOMMERVOGEL, Bibl. de la C. de J., VI (Brussels, 1895). EDWARD C. PHILLIPS Piano Carpine, Giovanni Da Giovanni da Pianô Carpine Born at Pian di Carpine (now called della Magione), near Perugia, Umbria, 1182; died probably in 1252. Having entered the Franciscan Order he was a companion of Cæsar of Spires, the leader of the second mission of the Franciscans to Germany in 1221. He took a leading part in founding various new establishments of the order, and was several times provincial in Saxony and once in Spain. In 1245 Innocent IV, in compliance with the resolutions passed at the first council of Lyons, entrusted Carpine with an embassy to the princes and people of Mongolia or Tatary with a view to checking the invasions of these formidable hordes and eventually effecting their conversion. Carpine set out early in 1246; among his companions were Brothers Stephen of Bohemia and Benedict of Poland, who were to act as interpreters. They were hospitably entertained by Duke Vasilico in Russia, where they read the pope's letters to the assembled schismatic bishops, leaving them favourably disposed towards reunion. They reached Kanieff, a town on the Tatar frontier, early in February. The Tatar officials referred them to Corenza, commander of the advance guards, who in his turn directed them to Batu, Khan of Kipchak etc., then encamped on the banks of the Volga. Batu commissioned two soldiers to escort the papal envoys to Karâkorum, the residence of the Great Khan. They reached their destination in the middle of July after a journey of indescribable hardships. The death of the Great Khan Okkodai made it necessary to defer negotiations till the end of August when Kuyuk, his successor, ascended the throne. After much delay Kuyuk finally demanded a written statement of the pope's propositions. His letter in reply is still preserved. Its tone is dignified and not unfriendly, but independent and arrogant. In it he says in substance: "If you desire peace, come before me! We see no reason why we should embrace the Christian religion. We have chastised the Christian nations because they disobeyed the commandments of God and Jenghiz Khan. The power of God is manifestly with us." The superscription reads; "Kuyuk, by the power of God, Khan and Emperor of all men -- to the Great Pope!" Carpine procured a translation of the letter in Arabic and Latin. On their homeward journey the envoys halted at the former stations, arriving at Kieff (Russia) in June, 1247. They were enthusiastically received everywhere, especially by the Dukes Visilico and Daniel, his brother, Carpine's proposals for reunion had been accepted in the meantime, and special envoys were to accompany him to the papal Court. From a political and religious aspect the mission to Tatary proved successful only in a remote sense, but the ambassadors brought with them invaluable information regarding the countries and peoples of the Far East. Carpine's written account, the first of its kind and remarkable for its accuracy, was exhaustively drawn upon by such writers as Cantù and Huc ("Travels in Tatary, Thibet and China", 2 vols., 1852). It has been published by d'Azevac: "Jean de Plan de Carpin, Relation des Mongols ou Tartares" in "Recueil de voyages", IV (Paris, 1839), and later by Külb: "Geschichte der Missionsreisen nach der Mongolei", I (Ratisbon, 1860), 1-129. Salimbene, who met Carpine in France, found him "a pleasant man, of lively wit, eloquent, well-instructed, and skilful in many things". Innocent IV bestowed upon him every mark of esteem and affection. Having been sent as papal legate to St. Louis, King of France, Carpine was shortly afterwards named Archbishop of Antivari in Dalmatia. Chronica Fr. Jordani dà Jano in Analecta Franciscana (Quaracchi, 1885-), I, 8-18; II, 71; III, 266; WADDING, Scriptores (Rome, 1906), s. v.; SBARALEA, Supplementum (Rome, 1806), s. v.; DA CIVEZZA, Storia universale della missione francescane, I (Rome, 1857), 324 sqq.; IV (Rome, 1860), 186; EUBEL. Gesch. der oberdeutschen Minoritenprovinz (Würzburg, 1886), 4, 6, 9, 20, 206; IDEM, Die Bischöfe aus dem Minoritenorden in Röm. Quartalschrift, IV, 207, n. 9; VOIGY in Abhandlungen der philolog,-histor. Klasse der königl. sächs. Gesellsch. d. Wissensch., V (Leipzig, 1870). 465 sqq.; HUC, Christianity in China, Tatary and Thibet, I, (tr., New York, 1897), v; DA MALIGNANO, The Life of St. Francis of Assisi and a Sketch of the Franciscan Order (tr., New York, 1887), 444 sqq.; VIATOR in Etudes franciscaines, V (1901), 505 sqq., 600 sqq.; GOLUBOVICH, Biblioteca bio-bib, delia Terra Santa, I (Quaracchi, 1906), 190 sqq. SCHLAGER, Mongotenfahrten der Franziskaner in Aus allen Zonen (Bilder aus den Missionen der Franziskaner in Verg. u. Gegenw.), II, 1-43. THOMAS PLASSMANN. Piatto Cardinalizio Piatto Cardinalizio An allowance granted by the pope to cardinals residing in curia or otherwise employed by the Church, to enable them to maintain their dignity with decorum. It was not given to cardinals supported in Rome by their sovereign, nor is it accepted by cardinals of noble family. The entire allowance was not always granted. If the cardinal had other revenues, he received enough to make up the amount of the allowance. This designation piatto was first used in the conclave of 1458. Paul II fixed the sum at 100 gold florins a month for cardinals whose revenues were not more than 4000 florins. This sum was called "the poor cardinal's plate". Leo XI intended to provide otherwise for the needful revenues. Paul V raised the piatto to 1500 scudi a year for cardinals whose ecclesiastical revenues were less than 6000 scudi. Then the custom was introduced of giving 6000 scudi annually to cardinals without ecclesiastical revenues. This sum was reduced in 1746 to 4000 scudi, as determined in 1464, and 1484, the amount allowed to-day, the cardinals renouncing their ecclesiastical benefices. For some distinguished cardinals the amount was larger. The piazzo cardinalizio is reckoned today at 4000 Roman scudi (about $4000). It is reduced according to the other revenues of the cardinal. MORONI, Dizionario, LII, 274 sqq. U. BENIGNI Piauhy, Diocese of Diocese of Piauhy (DE PIAUHY, PIAHUNENSIS) Suffragan of the Archdiocese of Belem do Para, in the State of Piauhy, north-eastern Brazil, The state is bounded on the north by the Atlantic, west by Maranhao, south by Bahia, east by Pemambuco and Ceara. It takes its name from the river Piauhy. Its area is 116,218 sq. miles, and it has a coast line of ten miles. Piauhy is one of the poorest of the Brazilian states. It has a small trade in cotton and cattle, Frequent periods of drought, followed by famine and typhus, add to the disadvantages of its unhealthful climate. Except in mountainous districts, vegetation is scanty; even the agricultural products -- sugar-cane, coffee, tobacco -- barely support the population. Therezina is the capital and Parnahyba the chief port. Emigration is making heavy drains on the population, and attempts to colonize by immigration have proved unsuccessful. The Diocese of Piauhy, formerly included in the Diocese of São Luiz do Maranhao, was, on 11 August, 1902, erected by Leo XIII into a separate diocese. Its jurisdiction comprises the Piauhy State, and its population (1911) is 425,000, with 32 parishes. Its first bishop, Mgr de Aranjo Pereira (born at Limolira, 4 Nov., 1853), was consecrated on 9 Nov., 1903, and the present bishop Mgr Joachim Antonio de Almeida (born 7 Aug., 1868) on 14 December, 1905. J. MORENO-LACALLE. Piazza Armerina, Diocese of Diocese of Piazza Armerina (PLATIENSIS) Located in the province of Caltanissetta, Sicily. The city of Piazza Armerina is situated on a high hill in a very fertile district. Its origin is obscure. Gulielmo il Malo destroyed it in 1166 on account of a rebellion, and Gulielmo il Buono rebuilt it, together with the church of l'Asunta, now the cathedral, and in which there is an admirable picture of the Assumption by Paladino. The church of the priory of S. Andrea also has fine paintings and frescoes. The diocese, taken from that of Catania was created in 1817, its first prelate was Girolamo Aprile e Benzi; it is a suffragan of Syracuse, has 23 parishes, with 184,500 inhabitants, 7 religious houses of men and 19 of women, 1 school for boys and 7 for girls, and 1 Catholic weekly. CAPPELLEITTI, Le Chiese d'Italia, XXI. U. BENIGNI. Piazzi Giuseppe Piazzi Astronomer, b. at Ponte in Valtellina, 16 July, 1746; d. at Naples, 22 July, 1826. He took the habit of the Theatines at Milan and finished his novitiate at the convent of San Antonio. Studying at colleges of the order at Milan, Turin, Rome, and Genoa, under such preceptors as Tiraboschi, Beccaria, Le Seur, and Jacquier, he acquired a taste for mathematics and astronomy. He taught philosophy for a time at Genoa and mathematics at the new University of Malta while it lasted. In 1779, as professor of dogmatic theology in Rome, his colleague was Chiaramonti, later Pius VII. In 1780 he was called to the chair of higher mathematics at the academy of Palermo. There he soon obtained a grant from Prince Caramanico, Viceroy of Sicily, for an observatory. As its director he was charged to get the necessary instruments. He went to Paris in 1787 to study with Lalande, to England in 1788 to work with Maskelyne and the famous instrument-maker Ramsden. A large vertical circle with reading microscopes, a transit, and other apparatus were sent to Palermo in 1789, where they were placed on top of a tower of the royal palace. Observations were started in May, 1791, and the first reports were published as early as 1792. Soon he was able to correct errors in the estimation of the obliquity of the ecliptic, of the aberration of light, of the length of the tropical year, and of the parallax of the fixed stars. He saw the necessity for a revision of the existing catalogues of stars and for the exact determination of their positions. In 1803 he published a list of 6784 stars and in 1814 a second catalogue containing 7646 stars. Both lists were awarded prizes by the Institute of France. While looking for a small star mentioned in one of the earlier lists he made his great discovery of the first known planetoid, 1 Jan., 1801. Locating a strange heavenly body of the eighth magnitude and repeating the observation several nights in succession, he found that this star had shifted slightly. Believing it to be a comet, he announced its discovery. These few but exact measurements enabled Gauss to calculate the orbit and to find that this was a new planet, between Mars and Jupiter. Kepler and Bode had called attention to the apparent gap between these two, so that the placing of this new body within that space caused great excitement among astronomers. Piazzi proposed the name of Ceres Ferdinandea, in honour of his king. Over 600 of these so-called planetoids have since been located within the same space. The king desired to strike a gold medal with Piazzi's effigy, in commemoration, but the astronomer requested the privilege of using the money for the purpose of a much-needed equatorial telescope. In 1812 he received the commission to reform the weights and measures of Sicily in accordance with the metric system. In 1817 as director-general of the observatories of the Two Sicilies he was charged with the plans of the new observatory which Murat was establishing in Naples. He was a member of the Academies of Naples, Turin, Göttingen, Berlin, and St. Petersburg, foreign associate of the Institute of Milan etc. Besides the numerous memoirs published in the proceedings of the various academies, the following works may be mentioned: "Della specula astronomica di Palermo libri quatro" (Palermo, 1792); "Sull' orologio Italiano e l'Europeo" (Palermo, 1798); "Della scoperta del nuovo planeta Cerere Ferdinandea" (Palermo, 1802); "Præcipuarum stellarum inerrantium positiones mediæ ineunte seculo XIX ex obsrvationibus habitis in specula Panormitana at 1793 ad 1802" (Palermo, 1803, 1814); "Codice metrico siculo" (Catane, 1812); "Lezioni di astronomia" (Palermo, 1817; tr. Westphal, Berlin, 1822); "Raggnaglio dal reale osservatorio d'Napoli" (Naples, 1821). Wolf, Geschichte der Astronomie (Munich, 1871); Maineri, L'Astronomo Giovanni Piazzi (Milan, 1871); Cosmos (Paris, 2 March, and 15 June, 1901); Kneller, Das Christentum (Freiburg, 1904), 75-80. WILLIAM FOX John Pibush Ven. John Pibush English martyr, born at Thirsk, Yorkshire; died at St Thomas's Waterings, Camberwell, 18 February, 1600-1. According to Gillow he was probably a son of Thomas Pibush, of Great Fencott, and Jane, sister to Peter Danby of Scotton. He came to Reims on 4 August, 1580, received minor orders and subdiaconate in September, and diaconate in December, 1586, and was ordained on 14 March, 1587. He was sent on the English mission on 3 January, 1588-9, arrested at Morton-in-Marsh, Gloucestershire, in 1593, and sent to London, where he arrived before 24 July. The Privy Council committed him to the Gatehouse at Westminster, where he remained a year. He was then tried at the Gloucester Assizes under 27 Eliz., c. 2, for being a priest, but not sentenced, and was returned to Gloucester gaol, whence he escaped on 19 February (1594-5). The next day he was recaptured at Matson and taken back to Gloucester gaol, whence he was sent to the Marshalsea, London, and again tried under the same statute at Westminster on 1 July, 1595. He was sentenced to suffer the penalties of high treason at St. Thomas's Waterings, and in the meantime was to be returned to the Marshalsea. However, by the end of the year he was in the Queen's Bench prison, where he remained for more than five years. The sentence was carried out after one day's notice. Knox, Douay Diaries (London, 1878), 169, 179, 198, 212, 214, 222; Pollen, Acts of the English Martyrs (London, 1901), 333-6; English Martyrs, 1584- 1603 (London Cath. Rec. Soc., 1908), 337-40; Gillow, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., s. v.; Challoner, Missionary Preists, I, n. 123; Dasent, Acts of the Privy Council (London, 1880-1907) xxiv, 421. JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT Jean Picard Jean Picard Astronomer, b. at La Flêche, 21 July, 1620; d. at Paris, 12 Oct., 1682. He was a priest and prior of Rillé in Anjou. As a pupil of Gassendi he observed with him the solar eclipse of 25 Aug., 1645. In 1655 he succeeded his master as professor of astronomy at the College de France. His principal achievement was the accurate measurement of an arc of a meridian of the earth, the distance from Sourdon, near Amiens, to Malvoisine, south of Paris, in 1669-70. His result, 57060 toises (a toise = about 6.4 ft.) for the degree of arc, has been found to be only 14 toises too small. He applied telescopes and micrometers to graduated astronomical and measuring instruments as early as 1667. The quadrant he used had a radius of 38 inches and was so finely graduated that he could read the angles to one quarter of a minute. The sextant employed for determining the meridian was 6 feet in radius. In 1659 he was able to observe stars on the meridian during day-time and to measure their position with the aid of cross-wires at the focus of his telescope. In order to make sure that his standard toise should not be lost, like those used by others before him, he conceived the idea of comparing it with the length of the simple pendulum beating seconds at Paris, and thus made it possible to reproduce the standard at any time. Picard is regarded as the founder of modern astronomy in France. He introduced new methods, improved the old instruments, and added new devices, such as the pendulum clock. As a result of Picard's work, Newton was able to revise his calculations and announce his great law of universal gravitation. The discovery of the aberration of light also became a possibility on account of Picard's study of Tycho Brahe's observations. In 1671 he received from Bartholinus at Copenhagen an exact copy of Tycho's records and then went with Bartholinus to the Island of Hveen in order to determine the exact position of Tycho's observatory at Uranienborg. He was modest and unselfish enough to recommend the rival Italian astronomer Cassini to Colbert and Louis XIV for the direction of the new observatory at Paris. Cassini, on the contrary, proved envious, ignoring Picard's insistent recommendations of a mural circle for accurate meridional observations, until after the latter's death. Picard was among the first members of the Academy. He also started the publication of the annual "Connaissance des temps" in 1679 (Paris, 1678), and continued the same until 1683. Since then it has been published continuously. His "Mesure de la terre" was brought out in 1671, Paris. Wolf, Geschichte der Astronomie (Munich, 1879); Delambre, Hist. de l'astr. mod., II (Paris, 1821), 567-632. WILLIAM FOX Alessandro Piccolomini Alessandro Piccolomini Littérateur, philosopher, astronomer, b. 13 June, 1508; d. 12 March, 1578. He passed his youth in the study of literature and wrote several comedies ("Amor costante", "Alessandro", "Ortensio"), translated into Italian verse Ovid's "Metamorphoses", part of the "Æneid", Aristotle's "Poetics" and "Rhetoric", composed a hundred sonnets (Rome, 1549), and other rhyme. He repudiated in later years "Raffaello" or "Dialogo della creanza donne" as too licentious. In 1540 he became professor of philosophy at Padua, where he wrote "Istituzione di tutta la vita dell' uomo nato nobile e in città libera", "Filosofia naturale" in which he followed the theories of ancient and medieval philosophers, while in his "Trattato della grandezza della terra e dell' acqua" (Venice, 1558), he combatted the Aristotelean and Ptolemaic opinion that water was more extensive than land, thereby provoking, with Antonio Berga, professor at Mondovi, a controversy, in which he was assisted by Giambattista Bennedetti. In astronomy ("Sfera del mondo", "Delle stelle fisse", "Speculazioni de' pianeti") he adhered to the Ptolemaic theory. He also wrote on the reform of the calendar (1578), and a commentary on the mechanics of Aristotle. To counteract "Raffaella" he wrote his "Orazione in lode delle donne" (Rome, 1549). His fame extended beyond Italy. Gregory XIII, in 1574, appointed him titular Bishop of Patræ and coadjutor to Francesco Bandini, Archbishop of Siena, who survived him. FABIANI, Vita di Alessandro Piccolomini (Siena, 1749 and 1759); TIRABOSCHI, Storia della letteratura italiana, VII, pt. i. U. BENIGNI Jacopo Piccolomini-Ammannati Jacopo Piccolomini-Ammannati A cardinal, born in the Villa Basilica near Lucca, 1422; died at San Lorenzo near Bolsena, 10 Sept., 1479. He was related to the Piccolomini of Siena. His literary and theological education he acquired in Florence. Under Nicholas V he went to Rome, where, for a while, he lived in extreme penury. In 1450 he became private secretary to Cardinal Domenico Capranica; later Calistus III appointed him secretary of Briefs. He was retained in this office by Pius II, who also made him a member of the pontifical household, on which occasion he assumed the family name of Piccolomini. In 1460 he was made Bishop of Pavia by Pius II, and throughout the pontificate of the latter was his most trusted confidant and adviser. He exhibited paternal solicitude in the government of his diocese, and during his prolonged absences entrusted its affairs to able vicars, with whom he remained in constant touch, On 18 December, 1461, he was made cardinal, and was commonly known as the Cardinal of Pavia. He accompanied Pius II to Ancona, and attended him in his last illness. In the subsequent conclave he favoured the election of Paul II, whose displeasure he afterward incurred by insisting on the full observance of the ante-election capitulations that the pope had signed. The imprisonment of his private secretary by Paul II on a charge of complicity in the conspiracy of the "Accademici' offended Piccolomini still more, and his open defence of the secretary aggravated the pope's ill-will. The disfavour in which he was held by Paul II did not exempt his episcopal revenues from sequestration by the Duke of Milan, Galeazzo Maria. It was due to his insistence that Paul II took energetic measures against George Podiebrad, King of Bohemia. Sixtus IV was scarcely more favourable towards Piccolomini than Paul II. He was the friend of students and scholars, and protected Jacopo de Volterra. In 1470 he was transferred to the See of Lucca and was named papal envoy to Umbria. He wrote a continuation in seven books of the "Commentarii" of Pius II. His style is elegant, but he is not always impartial, especially apropos of Paul II or Sixtus IV. His Commentaries, nevertheless, remain an important source for contemporary history and his valuable letters have been collected and published. Ammannati is one of the most sympathetic personalities of the Italian Renaissance. He enjoyed the friendship of noted prelates and humanists, among others, Cardinals Bessarion, Carvajal, Roverella etc. Bessarion (Pastor, "Geschichte der Päpste", II, 731), praises his executive ability and readiness, his charity and zeal. Epistoloe et commentarii Jacobi Piccolomini cardinalis Papiensis (Milan, 1506), added also to the Frankfort ad. of the Commentarii of Pius II (Frankfort, 1614); PAULI, Disquisizione istorica della patria e compendio della vita del Card. Jacopo Ammannati (Lucca, 1712); CARDELLA, Vite del' Cardinali, III, 153. U. BENIGNI Pichler Pichler A renowned Austrian family of gem-cutters who lived and died in Italy. ANTONIO (JOHANN ANTON) born at Brixen, Tyrol, 12 April, 1697; died in Rome, 14 Sept., 1779. He was the son of a physician and had been a merchant until, travelling in Italy, he resolved to devote himself to art, He went to work in Naples with a goldsmith and engraver of precious stones. In 1743, proficient in his new calling, he moved to Rome and copied many antiques. He attained excellence and fame, but was somewhat limited in his field for want of early training and grounding in design. GIOVANNI (JOHANN ANTON), the son of the foregoing, was born at Naples, 1 Jan., 1734; died in Rome, 25 Jan., 1791. He was a painter, gem-cutter, and experimenter in encaustic and mosaic, a pupil of his father, and of the painter Corvi. His scholarship and knowledge of the fine arts gave him unusual advantages. Early in life he executed a series of historical paintings for the Franciscans at Orioli, and the Augustinians at Braccian; also a St. Michael for the Pauline nuns in Rome. Later he devoted himself wholly to intaglio; he wrought gems of great beauty and finish, which resembled the classic so closely in style and execution that Winckelmann is said to have thought them antiques. He was held in high regard and received innumerable honours and lucrative commissions. Works: Hercules strangling the Lion; Leander crossing the Hellespont; Nemesis, Leda, Galatea, Venus, Dancers, the Vestal Tuccia, Arethusa, Ariadne Antinous, Sappho; portraits of Pius VI and the Emperor Joseph II; and many other subjects. His son GIACOMO was trained to be a gem-cutter and executed many works in Milan, whither he had gone to be near his sister Theresa, married to the poet Vincenzo Monti. He died in early manhood. GIUSEPPE (JOHANN JOSEPH), born in Rome, 1760; died there, 1820. He was a son of Antonio by a second marriage and half brother to Giovanni, who taught him the family art. Among his works are the portrait of Alexander I of Russia; the Three Graces after Canova; Achilles, Bacchus, Ceres, Io, Medusa, Perseus etc. He signs in Greek, like the older Pichlers IIIHLER, using the initial F. LUIGI, the most distinguished of the Pichler family, was born in Rome 31 Jan., 1773, of the second marriage of Antonio; died 13 March, 1854. Losing his father while very young, he was indebted to his half-brother, Giovanni, for his careful education under a private tutor and for four years of art training with the painter De Angelis. Almost in childhood the boy had taken to himself the tools of the gem-cutter and, as he grew older, showed a special liking for cameo. Giovanni taught him their common art, and connoisseurs esteem that Luigi's incisions have even more finish, clearness, and light-gathering quality than those of his brother. He received many commissions from the Vatican and the Courts of France and Austria, and kept a splendid house where music and masques were frequently given. He made several trips to Vienna and was asked to found a school there. In 1818 he copied in enamel five hundred gems of the Vienna Cabinet which the emperor wished to present to the pope. For the same city he made a complete collection of copies of the intaglios of his father and brother, adding a set of his own, thus bringing the historical collection of 1400 antiques up to modern times. Venus, Cupid and Psyche, Apollo, Head of Julius Cæsar, Mars, Iris, the Day and Night of Thorwaldsen; and two exquisite heads of Christ are some of his subjects; besides many originals and portraits, including Giovanni Pichler's, Winckelmann's, Joseph II, Pius VII, and Gregory XVI. Luigi received innumerable honours from the popes and sovereigns of his day. His last gem, a head of Ajax, which he wished to present to Pius IX, was placed by the pope in a gold case in the Vatican collection with the signature II. L or IIIHLER, L. The tomb of the Pichlers is in S. Lorenzo in Lucina, Rome. ROSSI, Vita del Cav, Giov, Pichler (Rome, 1792); MUGNA, I tre Pichler (Vienna. 1844); ROLLETT, Die drei Meister der Gemmoglyptik, Antonio, Giovanni und Luigi Pichler (Vienna, 1874); NAGLER in Neues allgemeines Künstler Lex. (Munich, 1841); BOCCARDO in Nuova Enciclopedia Italiana (Turin, 1884). M. L. HANDLEY. Vitus Pichler Vitus Pichler Distinguished canonist and controversial writer, b. at Grosberghofen, 24 May, 1670; d. at Munich, 15 Feb., 1736. He studied for the secular priesthood, but after ordination entered the Society of Jesus, 28 Sept., 1696. For four years he was professor of philosophy at Briggs and Dillingen. He was then advanced to the chair of philosophy, controversial and scholastic, at Augsburg. He acquired fame in the field of canon law, which he taught for nineteen years at Dillingen, and at Ingolstadt, where he was the successor of the illustrious canonist, Fr. Schmalzgrueber. His latest appointment was as prefect of higher studies at Munich. His first important literary work was, "Lutheranismus constanter errans" (1709); "Una et vera fides" (1710); "Theologia polemica paticularis" (1711). In his "Cursus theologiæ polemicæ universæ" (1713), Pichler devotes the first part to the fundamentals of polemical theology and the second part to the particular errors of the reformers. It is said that he is the first writer to lay down, clearly and separately, the distinction between fundamental theology and other divisions of the science. He also wrote an important work on papal infallibility, "Papatus nunquan errans in proponendis fidei articulis" (1709). Although widely renown as a polemical theologian, Pichler is better known as a canonist. He published his "Candidatus juris prudentiæ sacræ" in 1722; this was followed by "Summa jurisprudentiæ sacræ universæ" in 1723 sqq. He also issued "Manipulus casuum jiridicorum" and several epitomes of his larger canonical treatises. Pichler's controversial works were in great vogue during the eighteenth century, while his books on canon law were used as textbooks in many universities. His solutions to difficult cases in jurisprudence gave a decided impetus to the study of the canons and afforded a key to the intricate portions of the "Corpus juris canonici". Fourteen of Pichler's works, excluding the many editions and alterations, are enumerated. HURTER, Nomenclator literarius, III (Innsbruck, 1895); SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliothèque de la Compagnie de Jésus, VI (Brussels, 1895); de BACKER, Bibliothèque des éscrevains S. J. (Liège, 1853-76). WILLIAM H.W. FANNING Pickering Ven. Thomas Pickering Lay brother and martyr, a member of an old Westmoreland family, b. c. 1621; executed at Tyburn, 9 May, 1679. He was sent to the Benedictine monastery of St. Gregory at Douai, where he took vows as a lay brother in 1660. In 1665 he was sent to London, where, as steward or procurator to the little community of Benedictines who served the queen's chapel royal, he became known personally to the queen and Charles II; and when in 1675, urged by the parliament, Charles issued a proclamation ordering the Benedictines to leave England within a fixed time, Pickering was allowed to remain, probably on the ground that he was not a priest. In 1678 came the pretended revelations of Titus Oates, and Pickering was accused of conspiring to murder the king. No evidence except Oates's word was produced and Pickering's innocence was so obvious that the queen publicly announced her belief in him, but the jury found him guilty, and with two others he was condemned to be hanged, drawn, and quartered. The king was divided between the wish to save the innocent men and fear of the popular clamour, which loudly demanded the death of Oates's victims, and twice within a month the three prisoners were ordered for execution and then reprieved. At length Charles remitted the execution of the other two, hoping that this would satisfy the people and save Pickering from his fate. The contrary took place, however, and 26 April, 1679, the House of Commons petitioned for Pickering's execution. Charles yielded and the long-deferred sentence was carried out on the ninth of May. A small piece of cloth stained with his blood is preserved among the relics at Downside Abbey. The Tryals of William Ireland, Thomas Pickering and John Grove for conspiring to murder the king ... (London, 1678); An exact abridgment of all the Trials ... relating to the popish and pretended protestant plots in the reigns of Charles II and James II (London, 1690), 464; Dodd, Church History of England, III (Brussels, 1742), 318; Challoner, Memoirs of Missionary Priests, II (London, 1742), 376; Oliver, Collections illustrating the History of the Catholic Religion in Cornwall, Devon, etc. (London, 1847), 500; Corker, Remonstrance of piety and innocence (London, 1683), 178; Weldon, Chronological Notes on the English Congregation of the Order of St. Benedict, ed. Dolan (Worcester, 1881), 219; Downside Review, II (London, 1883), 52-60. G. ROGER HUDLESTON Piconio, Bernardine A Bernadine a Piconio (HENRI BERNARDINE DE PICQUIGNY) Born at Picquigny, Picardy, 1633; died in Paris, 8 December, 1709; was educated at Picquigny, and joined the Capuchins in 1649. As professor of theology he shed great lustre upon his order; his best-known work is his "Triplex expositio epistolarum sancti Pauli" (Paris, 1703 [French], 1706 [English, tr. Prichard], London, 1888), which has ever been popular among Scriptural scholars. Piconio also wrote "Triplex expositio in sacrosancta D. N. Jesu Christi Evangelia" (Paris, 1726), and a book of moral instructions, A complete edition of his works, "Opera omnia Bernardini a Piconio", was published at Paris (1870-2). HURTER, Nomenclator literarius, II, 788. WILLIAM C. NEVILS. Francois Picquet François Picquet A celebrated Sulpician missionary in Canada, b. at Bourg, Bresse, France, 4 Dec., 1708; d. at Verjon, Ain, France, in 1781. He entered the seminary of Lyons (1727), where he was ordained deacon in 1731. At the Seminary of St. Sulpice in Paris, after winning his doctorate at the Sorbonne, he was raised to the priesthood, and became a Sulpician. The same year he begged to be sent to Canada, and in the month of July arrived at Montreal, where for five years (1734-9) he was engaged in the ministry. On the Indian mission of the Lac-des-Deux-Montagnes (now Oka), he acquired the Algonquin and Iroquois tongues so perfectly that he surpassed the ablest orators of these tribes. His influence enabled him to win a large number of these savages to the true Faith. The Lake mission became very populous: Nipissings, Outaouois, Mohawks, and Hurons crowded alongside the Algonquins and Iroquois. Picquet fortified this Catholic centre against pagan tribes, and erected the Calvary which still exists, with its well-built stations stretching along the mountain side facing the lake. In the intercolonial war between France and England (1743-8), the Indian allies of these two powers came to arms. Due to the influence of their missionary the Five Nations, hitherto allies of the English, remained neutral, while the other savages carried on a guerilla war in New England or served as scouts for the French troops. When peace was restored, Picquet volunteered to establish an Indian post on the Presentation River, whence he spread the Gospel among the Iroquois nations, as far as the Indians of the West. Founded on 1 June, 1749, this post became the Fort of the Presentation in the following year; from it arose the town of Ogdensburg, New York. In 1751 Picquet travelled round lake Ontario to gather into his mission as many Iroquois as possible, and succeeded in establishing 392 families at the Presentation. In 1752 Mgr. de Pontbriand, the last French Bishop of Quebec, baptized 132 of them. A banner, preserved in the church of Oka, perpetuates the souvenir of this event, and the memory of the fidelity of the Five Nations to the cause of France, for, in the course of the Seven years' War, it floated side by side with the Fleur-de-lis on many a battlefield. In1753 Picquet went to France and presented to the minister of the Navy a well-documented memorandum concerning Canada, in which he pointed out the best means for preserving that colony for the French Crown. Hardly had he returned to Canada (1754) when hostilities were resumed. He directed his savages against the English, whom he considered as much the enemies of Catholicism as of France, and for six years accompanied them on their expeditions and into the field of battle. "Abbe Picquet was worth several regiments", said Governor Duquesne of him. The English set a price on his head. When all hope of the cause was lost, by the order of his superiors who feared he might fall into the hands of the English, Picquet returned to France, passing thither through Louisiana (1760). He was engaged in the ministry in Paris till 1772. He then returned to his homeland, Bresse, and was named canon of the cathedral of Bourg, where he died. "Lettres edificantes et curieuses (Memoires des Indes). XXVI (Paris, 1783), 1-63; GOSSELIN, "Le fondateur de la Presentation, l'abbe Picquet" in "Memoires et Comptes-rendus de la Societe royale du Canada, XII, sect. 1, (1894); BERTRAND, "Bibliotheque sulpicienne ou Histoire litteraire di la Compagnie de Saint-Sulpice, I (Paris, 1900), 394-401; CHAGNY, "Un defenseur de la Nouvelle-France, François Picquet 'le Canadien'" (Lyons, 1911). A. FOURNET Louis-Edouard-Desire Pie Louis-Edouard-Désiré Pie Cardinal, born at Pontgouin, Diocese of Chartres, 1815; died at Angouleme, 1880. He studied at the Seminary of Chartres and at St. Sulpice, was ordained 1839, became Vicar-General of Chartres, 1844, and Bishop of Poitiers 1849. He created many parishes, established in his Seminary a canonical faculty of theology, founded for the missions of the diocese the Oblates of St. Hilary and brought the Jesuits to Poitiers and the Benedictines to Solesmes and Ligugé. To his initiative were largely due the resumption of the provincial synods in France, the promotion of St. Hilary's cultus and the erection of the national shrine of the Sacred Heart at Montmartre. He is however, best known for his opposition to modern errors, and his championship of the rights of the Church. Regarding as futile the compromises accepted by other Catholic leaders, he fought alike all philosophical theories and political arrangements that did not come up to the full traditional Christian standard. His stand in matters philosophical was indicated as early as 1854-55 in two synodal instructions against "the errors of the present day and of philosophy". In politics a staunch follower of the Comte de Chambord, he trusted but little the other regimes under which he lived. To Napoleon III who had declared untimely certain measures suggested by the bishop, Pie said one day: "Sire, since the time has not come for Christ to reign, then the time has not come for government to last". Such was the vigour with which he stigmatized the imperial insincerity regarding the independence of the Papal States that he was denounced to both the Council of State and the Holy See. The former pronounced him guilty of abuse of power, but Cardinal Antonelli valiantly stood by him. At the Vatican Council he did not sign the postulation petitioning for the definition of papal infallibilty, but once it was placed on the programme of the council, he proved one of the best exponents and defenders of it. As a reward for his loyal services, Leo XIII made him Cardinal, 1879. Sincerely attached to his diocese, Mgr. Pie had refused all offers of preferment: a seat at the national Assembly, the Archbishopric of Tours, and even the primatial See of Lyons. His works, full of doctrine and unction, were published serially during his lifetime at Poitiers, but were later collected into "Oeuvres épiscopales", 10 vols., Paris, s.d., and "Oeuvres sacerdotales", 2 vols., paris, s.d. J.F. SOLLIER Piedmont Piedmont (Ital. Piemonte). A part compartimento of northern Italy, bounded on the north by Switzerland, on the west by France, on the south by Liguria, and on the east by Lombardy. It includes the plain of the Upper Po, and the Alpine valleys that descend towards the plain from the south side of the Pennine Alps, from the east side of the Graiian and Cottian, and from the north side of the Maritime Alps. Its name, pedes montium, from which arose Pedimontium, came from its geographical position, enclosed on three sides by high mountains. At the present time it includes the four Italian provinces of Turin, Novara, Alessandria, and Cuneo. In the Middle Ages and in antiquity the country was important chiefly because it contained the passes over the Alps which led from Italy to Gaul. Until the beginning of the fourth century Christianity had made little progress. However, in the course of the fourth and fifth centuries Christianity spread rapidly among the people, now completely Romanized. The earliest episcopal sees were established in this era, namely Turin, Asti, and Aosta. In the early Middle Ages various petty feudal states were formed in the Piedmontese country, the most important of which were the Marquessates of Ivrea, Suso, Saluzzo, Montferrat, and the Countship of Turin. The counts of Savoy early made successful attempts to establish their authority in this region. At the beginning of the eleventh century Aosta and the territory under its control belonged to Count Humbert I of Savoy. His son Oddo (Otto, d. 1060) married the Marchioness Adelaide of Turin, and in this way became possessed of the Marquessate of Susa, with the towns of Turin and Pinerolo, the foundation of the later Piedmont. After the death (1232) of Thomas I, Count of Savoy, this marquessate went to a younger branch, the descendants of Thomas II (d. 1259), son of Thomas I; Amadeus V, son of Thomas II, is the ancestor of the present Italian royal family. These rulers called themselves Counts of Piedmont. On account of the position of their territories the Dukes of Savoy had a large share in the wars for supremacy in northern Italy. Besides extending their authority into Switzerland in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, they also gained new domains in Italy: the lordships of Vercelli, Asti, and Cava, and the feudal suzerainty over Montferrat. In the wars between the Emperor Charles V and Francis I of France, Duke Charles III (d. 1553) of Piedmont lost the greater part of his duchy. In the Peace of Câteau-Cambresis (1559), however, his son Emmanuel Philibert (d. 1580) regained nearly all of his father's possessions, and obtained, in exchange for other territories, the Marquessate of Tenda and the Principality of Oneglia. Emmanuel Philibert's successor, Charles Emmanuel I (1580-1630), acquired the Marquessate of Saluzzo and a large part of Montferrat, which his son Victor Amadeus I (1630-37) was able to retain by conceding two other lordships to France. During the regency of the widow of Victor Amadeus I, the French Princess Christine, the influence of France in the Duchy of Savoy was greatly increased. Her son Charles Emmanuel II (d. 1675) sought in vain to escape this dominating control. Victor Amadeus II (1675-1730) joined the great alliance against France in the War of the Spanish Succession. By the victory of Turin in 1706 Prince Eugene drove out the French troops that had made a sudden descent upon Piedmont, thus ridding the duke of his enemies. As a reward for joining the alliance the duke received by the Peace of Utrecht of 1713 the Marquessate of Montferrat, the City of Alessandria, and the Districts of Val Sesia and Lomellina, so that the part of his territories situated in Italy had essentially the same extent as the present Department of Piedmont. Outside of these new territories he was granted the Island of Sicily, which, however, he lost again when Spanish troops attacked the island in 1718. In 1720 as compensation for this loss he received the island of Sardinia. He now assumed the title of King of Sardinia; besides the island, the kingdom included Savoy and Piedmont on the mainland. In the Polish and Austrian wars of succession the next king, Charles Emmanuel III (as king, Charles Emmanuel I, 1730-73), acquired the additional Italian districts of Tortona and Novara, also Anghiera, Bobbio, and a part of the principality of Pavia. His son Victor Amadeus III (1773-96) was a weak man of little importance. During his reign the storms caused by the French Revolution swept over his kingdom. Napoleon's victories obliged him in 1796 to cede Savoy and Nice to France, and his son and successor Charles Emmanuel II (1796-1802) lost all his territories on the mainland, which, together with Liguria and Parma, were united to Fance. The king abdicated, entered the Society of Jesus, and in 1802 resigned the crown to his brother Victor Emmanuel I. At first the latter resided in Sardinia. Until the seventeenth century the position of the Church in Piedmont was a satisfactory one; no restriction was placed upon its activities. The country contained numerous dioceses; of these Aosta was a suffragan of Tarentaise, Nice of Embrun, and the other dioceses on Italian soil were suffragans of Milan. In 1515 Turin, where the Dukes of Savoy lived, was made an archdiocese with the two suffragan sees of Ivrea and Mondovi. As lord chancellor and first secretary of state the Archbishop of Turin was by law a member of the council of state. The ducal family was very religious, and until the end of the seventeenth century maintained close relations with the Papal See, which had established a permanent nunciature at Turin in the sixteenth century, while an agent of the Government of Piedmont resided at Rome. For some of their domains the dukes were vassals of the Holy See, but this relation caused no difficulties. There was a large body of clergy, and monasteries were numerous. There were also two religious orders of knights, that of St. Lazarus, an order of hospitallers for the care of the sick, especially lepers, and that of St. Mauritius, which had been founded by Amadeus VIII in 1434 and confirmed in 1572 by Gregory XII. The same pope confirmed the union of the two orders, of which the duke was the perpetual grand master. The original purpose of these knightly orders was, however, very soon lost sight of; in recent times they have been changed into a secular decoration. Duke Charles Emmanuel I was very zealous in the struggle against Protestantism, and both he and his two successors took energetic measures against the growth of the Waldensians. However, Emmanuel Philibert made the execution of the judgments of the ecclesiastical Inquisition dependent on the consent of the senate and judicial investigation by the Government. Towards the end of the seventeenth century the dukes, who had become absolute rulers, and their administrative officials began to suppress the liberties of the Church in imitation of France. They even interfered in the purely ecclesiastical government of the Church. Thus during the administration of Victor Amadeus, who was the actual ruler from 1684, violent dissensions with the Holy See arose and seriously injured religious life, especially because large numbers of dioceses and higher ecclesiastical benefices remained vacant for a long period. Lengthy negotiations were carried on with Rome. An edict issued by Victor Amadeus in 1694 for the benefit of the Waldensians was rejected at Rome, because it annulled the old law for the protection of the Catholic Church. The duke took the most severe measures against this Roman decree. The senate forbade its publication under heavy penalties, so that it could not be executed, and the tribunal of the Inquisition of Piedmont lost nearly all its importance. The Dioceses of Casale, Acqui, and Ventimiglia included parts of the territory of Piedmont, although the bishops did not rside in the duchy; this was regarded as a great grievance. The duke wished to force these bishops to appoint episcopal vicars for the supervision of those of his subjects belonging to their dioceses; this the bishops refused to do. Whereupon the landed property in Piedmont belonging to the Diocese of Nice was sequestrated; this led the bishop, after three years of unsuccessful negotiations, to excommunicate the secular officials who had carried out the ducal decree. The senate forbade the recognition of the sentence of excommunication under the severest penalties, for the laity the penalty of death, and commanded the priests to grant the sacraments to the excommunicated. This last command, however, was recalled by the duke as too extreme a measure against ecclesiastical authority. Victor Amadeus now claimed the entire right of presentation to all the sees and to all the abbeys in his territories granted by the pope in consistory, on ground of a privilege conferred by Pope Nicholas V in 1451 upon Duke Louis of Savoy, whereby the pope, before filling sees and abbacies, would ask for the opinion and consent of the duke in regard to the persons nominated. This privilege had been confirmed on various occasions during the sixteenth century. Rome was not willing to acknowledge the privilege in this enlarged form. The duke had also issued an edict by which a secular judge was not to grant permission to those desiring to enter the clergy until he had fully informed himself concerning the ability of the candidate, the number of parishes in the locality, and of the priests and monks there, and the nature of the property to be assigned to the candidate for his support. In 1700 a bitter dispute arose between the Archbishop of Turin and the ducal delegation, when the archbishop by a decree declared invalid the ecclesiastical arrangements proposed by the laity against the decrees of the Apostolic See. However, the bishops, supported by the nuncio, followed the instructions of the pope in all ecclesiastical questions. Further disputes also arose concerning the testamentary competency of regulars, a right which was denied the regular clergy by the Government, and as to the rights of the pope in the fiefs of the Roman Church that were possessed by the dukes. These questions were exhaustively examined at Rome, and the advocate of the consistory, Sardini, was sent to Turin to negotiate the matters; but the agreement adjusting the difficulty that was obtained by him was not accepted at Rome. New troubles constantly arose when the duke confiscated the revenues of benefices accruing during their vacancy and abrogated the spolia (property of ecclesiastics deceased intestate) of ecclesiastical benefices. The Government appointed an administrator of its own for the care and administration of the estates of vacant benefices, but he was not recognized by the bishops. Secular approval of ecclesiastical acts and ordinances was made necessary in a continually increasing number of cases. New negotiations, undertaken in 1710 at Rome by Count de Gubernatis, produced no results. The only agreement reached was in regard to the administrator of vacant benefices, who was also appointed the Apostolic administrator for this purpose. In this form the office of the Apostolic-royal steward continued to exist. When the Island of Sardinia was granted to Piedmont in 1720 a new conflict arose, as the pope claimed to be the sovereign of the island. The basis of this was that Boniface VIII had invested the King of Aragon with the island under the condition that it should never be separated from the crown of Aragon. Consequently the demand was made upon the new King of Sardinia that he should seek papal investiture. As Victor Amadeus refused to do this, the pope rejected the arrangements for filling the episcopal sees and ecclesiastical benefices made by the king, who also claimed all the rights of patronage exercised by the Spanish sovereign. As a consequence most of the sees on the islands were without incumbents, which increased the difficulties. Benedict XIII (1724-30) sought to bring about a reconciliation in order to put an end to the injury inflicted on religious life. In Turin the necessity of an accommodation was also realized, and the king sent the adroit and skillful Marquese d'Ormea to Rome to prepare the way for the negotiations. The peace-loving pope made large concessions, although the king made still further encroachments upon the rights of the Church. The negotiations were carried on by a congegation composed of four cardinals and the prelate Merlini. Several points were adjusted, especially the king's right of presentation to the bishoprics and abbacies, while others were discussed, particularly the immunity of the Church, the right of the pope to claim the spolia, also the right to charge ecclesiastical revenues with pensions. Most of the difficulties were finally adjusted, and an agreement was signed in 1727, so that the vacant sees could now be filled and ecclesiastical administration resumed. King Charles Emmanuel III (1730-73) made new conventions with Benedict XIV (1740-59), who had formerly supported the Marquess d'Ormea in his negotiations, and had always maintained friendly relations with him. By two conventions made in 1741 the King of Sardinia was granted the Apostolic vicariate for the papal fiefs on condition of paying a quit-rent, and the questions of the ecclesiastical benefices, the revenues of benefices during vacancy, and the administration of these vacant benefices were adjusted. Notwithstanding his friendliness, the papal commissioner had a very difficult position to maintain in his relations with the president of the senate, Caissotti. Finally on 6 Jan., 1742, the pope issued instructions to the bishops, in which both sides had concurred; in these it was made the duty of foreign bishops to appoint vicars for the parts of their dioceses in the territory of Piedmont, ecclesiastical jurisdiction was curtailed, and the landed property of the Church that had been obtained after 1620 was made subject to the ordinary civil taxes. In 1750 the pope resigned various revenues that the Apostolic See derived from Piedmont in return for a very small indemnity. Charles Emmanuel III now remained on the best of terms with Rome notwithstanding isolated difficulties and disputes which still arose. Merlini was once more received at Turin as nuncio, and the piously- inclined king sought to promote the interests of religion, to protect Christian discipline, and to support the rights of the Church in other countries. The last period of the history of the Kingdom of Sardinia began after the Napoleonic era. In 1814- 15 Victor Emmanuel I regained Piedmont with the territories of Genoa (Liguria) and Grenoble. The Government again sought to base the administration on the old political principles of the period before the French Revolution, while a large part of the citizens of the country were filled with ideas of political independence and Liberalism, and the revolutionary secret society, the Carbonari, was at work. When in 1821 a military insurrection broke out, the king abdicated in favour of his brother Charles Felix (1821-31). Before Charles Felix arrived the country was administered by Charles Albert, the heir- presumptive to the throne, who was a member of the Savoy-Carignan branch of the family. Charles at once established the Spanish constitution of 1812 and summoned a Liberal minisstry. However, Charles Felix crushed the Liberal opposition with the aid of Austrian troops and reestablished former administrative conditions. At his death the direct line of the dynasty of Savoy was extinct, and he was succeeded by Charles Albert of Savoy- Carignan (1821-49). The king gave the country a constitution in 1848, summoned a Liberal ministry, and assumed the leadership of the movement for the national unity of Italy. This led to a war with Austria in which he was defeated at Novara, and consequently was obliged to abdicate on 4 Nov., 1849, in favour of his son Victor Emmanuel II (1849-78). Count Camillo de Cavour (d. 6 June, 1861) was soon made the head of the administration. Journeys in France and England had imbued Cavour with ideas of political and parliamentary freedom; from 1848 he had sought to spread his opinions by publishing with the aid of Balbo, Santa Rosa, and others the journal "Il Risorgimento". On 4 Nov., 1852, he was made president of the ministry; he now sought by the economic development of the country and by diplomatic relations, especially on the occasion of the Crimean War, and at the Congress of Paris in 1856, where the "Italian" question was raised, to prepare for war with Austria. In a second agreement with Napoleon III made at Plombières on 20 July, 1858, he gained the support of the French emperor by promising to cede Savoy and Nice to France. In this way Victor Emmanuel II was able in 1859 to begin war against Austria with the aid of Napoleon, and the two allies defeated the Austrian army at Magenta (4 June) and at Solferino (24 June). At the same time a revolution broke out in central Italy that had been planned by the followers of Mazzini, and the national union founded by him in Piedmont. Tuscany, the duchies, and the districts ruled by delegation received Piedmontese administrators. In his choice of means the only principle followed by Cavour was to use whatever might prove advantageous to him. His connexion with men like Mazzini, Garibaldi, and others shows the lack of principle in his conduct. Piedmont adopted the cause of the revolution. In the Peace of Zurich, 10 Nov., 1859, it was stipulated that Lombardy would be given to Piedmont. In 1860 the people of Savoy and Nice voted for union with France, so that these territories now became a part of France, and the royal dynasty of Piedmont resigned its native land of Savoy. As compensation for this loss Piedmont received Tuscany and Emilia. On 2 April, 1860, the "National Parliament" was opened at Turin; the parliament, asserting the principle of nationality, demanded "Italy for the Italians". Soon other Italian domains were absorbed, and on 17 March, 1861, Victor Emmanuel II assumed the title of King of Italy (see Italy), whereby Piedmont and the Kingdom of Italy were merged into the united Kingdom of Italy. On 29 March, 1861, Cavour announced that Rome was the future capital of united Italy. After the readjustment of ecclesiastical conditions in 1817 there were seven Church provinces in the Kingdom of Sardinia that had been formed and enlarged in the period following the Napoleonic era. These archdioceses were: in Piedmont, Turin with 10 suffragans, to which in 1860 an eleventh, Aosta (which had belonged to Chambéry), was added; Vercelli with 5 suffragans; in Luguria, Genoa with 6 suffragans; in Savoy, Chambéry with 4 suffragans (after the withdrawal of Aosta only 3); on the Island of Sardinia the three Archdioceses of Cagliari, Oristano, and Sassari, with 8 suffragans. Both the Liberal movement and the intrigues of the revolutionary party in Piedmont were in every way inimical to the Church. In March, 1848, the expulsion of the Jesuits was begun in the harshest manner. In October a law regarding instruction was issued that was adverse to the Church. In the next year began the hostilities directed against Archbishop Luigi Franconi of Turin and other bishops. The Archbishops of Turin and Sassari were even imprisoned. In 1850 the ecclesiastical immunities were suppressed and ecclesiastical jurisdiction was limited. In 1851 the Government regulated theological instruction without the concurrence of the Church; in 1852 civil marriage was introduced; in 1853 the office of the Apostolic royal-steward was completely secularized; in 1854 laws were issued directed against the monasteries; in 1855 the ecclesiastical academy of Superga was suppressed; in 1856 and the following years oppressive measures were issued against parish priests and parish administration, such as confiscation of the greater part of the lands of the Church. Using the party cry of a "free Church in a free state", Cavour and his confederates robbed the Church in many directions of its essential rights and freedom, as well as of its rightful possessions. The same spirit of hostility to the Church was shown towards the papacy; the nunciature at Turin was suppressed. Thus the union of Italy was carried on, even by Piedmont, that had allied itself to revolutionary elements hostile to the Church, in a manner inimical throughout to the Church and religion. This hostility continued to control the official measures as well as the entire course of the Italian Government. Monumenta historiæ patriæ, I sqq. (Turin, 1836); Carutti, Regesta comitum Sabaudiæ, marchionum in Italia, usque ad an. 1258 (Turin, 1889); Dibrario, Operette e frammenti storici (Florence, 1856); Idem, Origini e progresso delle istituzioni della monarchia di Savoia (2nd ed., 2 vols., Florence, 1869); Carutti, Storia del regno di Vittorio Amadeo II (Turin, 1856); Ricotti, Storia della monarchia Piemontese (6 vols., Florence, 1851-60); Gabotto, Storia del Piemonte 1292-1349 (Rome, 1894); Gallenga, History of Piedmont (3 vols., London, 1854-55); Brofferio Storia del Piemonte dal 1814 a giorni nostri (5 vols, Turin, 1849-52); Vallauri, Storia delle Università degli studi in Piemonte (Turin, 1845); Savio, Gli antichi vescovi d'Italia: I. Il Piemonte (Turin, 1898); Meyranesius, Pedemontium sacrum, I sq. (Turin, 1834-); HergenrÖther, Piemonts Unterhandlungen mit dem hl. Stuhle im 18. Jahrh. in Katholische Studien, III (Würzburg, 1876); Colomiatti, Msgre. Luigi dei marchesi Franconi, archivescove di Torino 1832-1862 (Turin, 1902); Bianchi, Il conte Camillo Cavour (3rd ed., Turin, 1863); Kraus, Cavour. Die Erhebung Italiens im 19. Jahrh. in Weltgeschichte in Charakterbildern (Mainz, 1902); Manno, Bibliografia storica degli stati della monarchia di Savoia (8 vols., Turin, 1884- 1908). J. P. KIRSCH Piel Peter Piel A pioneer in the movement for reform of church music, b. at Kessewick, near Bonn, 12 Aug., 1835; d. at Boppard, on the Rhine, 21 Aug., 1904. Educated in the seminary for teachers at Kempen, he was instructed in music by Albert Michael Jopken (1828-78), and became professor of music at the Seminary of Boppard in 1868, a position which he held until his death. During all the years of his incumbency Piel displayed extraordinary activity as composer, teacher, and critic. He wrote a number of masses, both for equal and mixed voices, numerous motets, antiphons in honour of the Blessed Virgin Mary for four and eight voices, Magnificats in the eight Gregorian modes, and a Te Deum, all of which have enjoyed great vogue. Piel's compositions reveal the resourceful contrapuntist, and are of classic purity of style. His trios, preludes, and postludes for the organ are models of finish and smoothness. It is as a teacher, however, and through the large number of distinguished musicians whom he formed that Piel exerted the greatest influence. His "Harmonielehre" has passed through a number of editions and is a standard book of instruction in liturgical music. In 1887 he received from the German Government the title of Royal Director of Music. Hoeveler, Peter Piel (Düsseldorf, 1907); Cäcilienverein's Catalog (Ratisbon, 1870). JOSEPH OTTEN Pie Pelicane, Jesu, Domine Pie Pelicane, Jesu, Domine The sixth quatrain of Adoro Te Devote, sometimes used as a separate hymn at Benediction of the Most Blessed Sacrament. Pierius Pierius A priest and probably head master of the catechetical school at Alexandria conjointly with Achillas, flourished while Theonas was bishop of that city; died at Rome after 309. His skill as an exegetical writer and as a preacher gained for him the appellation, "Origen the Younger". Philip of Side, Photius, and others assert that he was a martyr. However, since St. Jerome assures us that he survived the Diocletian persecution and spent the rest of his life at Rome, the term "martyr" can only mean that he underwent sufferings, not death, for his Faith, The Roman Martyrology commemorates him on 4 November. He wrote a work (biblion) comprising twelve treatises or sermons (logoi), in some of which he repeats the dogmatic errors attributed by some authors to Origen, such as the subordination of the Holy Ghost to the Father and the Son, and the pre-existence of human souls. His known sermons are: one on the Gospel of St. Luke (eis to kata Loukan); an Easter sermon on Osee (eis to pascha kai ton Osee); a sermon on the Mother of God (peri tes theotokou); a few other Easter sermons; and a eulogy on St. Pamphilus, who had been one of his disciples (eis ton bion tou hagiou Pamphilou). Only some fragments of his writings are extant. They were edited by Routh in "Reliquiæ Sacræ", III, 423-35, in P.G., X, 241-6, and, with newly discovered fragments, by Boor in "Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur", V, ii ((Leipzig, 1888), 165-184. For an English translation see Salmond in "Ante-Nicene Fathers" (New York, 1896), 157. RADFORD, Three Teachers of Alexandria (Cambridge, 1908); BARDENHEWER, Gesch. der altchrist. Lit., II (Freiburg, 1903), 198-203; IDEM, Patrologie, tr. SHAHAN (Freiburg, 1908), 158; HARNACK, Gesch. der altchrist. Lit., I (Leipzig, 1893), 439-44; Acta SS., II Nov., 254-64. MICHAEL OTT Blessed Pierre de Castelnau Blessed Pierre de Castelnau Born in the Diocese of Montpellier, Languedoc, now Department of Hérault, France; died 15 Jan., 1208. He embraced the ecclesiastical state, and was appointed Archdeacon of Maguelonne (now Montpellier). Pope Innocent III sent him (1199) with two Cistercians as his legate into the middle of France, for the conversion of the Albigenses. Some time later, about 1202, he received the Cistercian habit at Fontfroide, near Narbonne. He was again confirmed as Apostolic legate and first inquisitor. He gave himself untiringly to his work, strengthening those not yet infected with error, reclaiming with tenderness those who had fallen but manifested good will, and pronouncing ecclesiastical censures against the obdurate. Whilst endeavouring to reconcile Raymond, Count of Toulouse, he was, by order of the latter, transpierced with a lance, crying as he fell, "May God forgive you as I do." His feast is celebrated in the Cistercian order, by one part on 5 March, and by the other on 14 March. He is also honoured as a martyr in the Dioceses of Carcassonne and Treves. His relics are interred in the church of the ancient Abbey of St-Gilles. Breviarium cisterciense (5 March); CHALEMOT, Series sanctorum et Beatorum s.o.c. (Paris, 1670); Annus cisterciensis (Wettingen, 1682); HENRIQUEZ, Menologium cisterciense (Antwerp, 1630); CAUVET, Etude historique sur Fontfroide (Montpellier, 1875); CARETTO, Santorale cisterciense, II (Turin, 1708). EDMOND M. OBRECHT Pierre de Maricourt Pierre de Maricourt Surnamed PETER THE PILGRIM (Petrus Peregrinus) A physician of the Middle Ages. Under the name of "Magister Petrus de Maharne-curia, Picardus", he is quoted by Roger Bacon in his "Opus Majus" as the only author of his time who possessed an exact knowledge of perspective. According to Bacon he came from Picardy, and the village of Maricourt is situated in the Department of the Somme, near Péronne. He has left a remarkable treatise on the magnet, "Epistola Petri Peregrini de Maricourt ad Sygerum de Foucaucourt, militem, de magnete"; Syger de Foucaucourt was a friend and neighbour of the author, his domain bordering on that of Maricourt, It is dated 8 August, 1269, and bears the legend: Actum in castris, in obsidione Lucerioe (done in camp during the siege of Luceria), whence we know that the author was in the army of Charles of Anjou, who, in 1269, laid siege to the city of Lucera or Nocera, the only detail of his life known. The sobriquet "Pilgrim" would lead us to suppose, in addition, that he was a crusader, The "Epistola de magnete" is divided into two parts. The first, a model of inductive reasoning based on definite experiences correctly interpreted, sets forth the fundamental laws of magnetism. His part seems to have been, not the discovery of these laws, but their presentation in logical order. In the second division less admirable, an attempt is made to prove that with the help of magnets it is possible to realize perpetual motion, From medieval times the work was exceedingly popular; in 1326 Thomas Bradwardine quotes it in his "Tractatus de proportionibus", and after his time the masters of Oxford University make frequent use of it. The manuscripts containing it are very numerous, and it has been printed a number of times. The first edition was issued at Augsburg, 1558, by Achilles Gasser. In 1572 Jean Taisner or Taisnier published from the press of Johann Birkmann of Cologne a work entitled "Opusculum perpetua memoria dignissimum, de natura magnetis et ejus effectibus, Item de motu continuo", In this celebrated piece of plagiarism Taisnier presents, as though from his own pen, the "Epistola de magnete" of Pierre de Maricourt and a treatise on the fall of bodies by Gianbattista Benedetti, The "Epistola de magnete" was later issued by Libri (Histoire des sciences mathématiques en Italie, II, Paris, 1838; note v, pp. 487-505), but this edition was full of defects; correct editions were published by P. D. Timoteo Bertelli (in "Bulletino di bibliografia e di storia delle scienze matematiche e fisiche pubblicata da B. Boncampagni", I, 1868, pp. 70-80) and G. Hellmann ("Neudrucke von Schriften und Karten über Meteorologie und Erdmagnetismus, No. 10, Rara magnetica", Berlin, 1898). A translation into English has been made by Silvanus P. Thompson ("Peter Peregrinus of Maricourt, Epistle to Sygerus of Foucaucourt, Soldier, concerning the Magnet", Chiswick Press, s. d.), also by Brother Arnold ("The Letter of Petrus Peregrinus on the Magnet, a.d. 1269", with introductory note by Brother Potamian, New York, 1904). BERTELLI, Sopra Pietro Peregrino di Maricourt e la sua Epistola de Magnete in Bulletino publicata da B. Boncompagni, I (1868), 1-32; IDEM, Sulla Epistola di Pietro Peregrino di Maricourt e sopra alcuni trovati e teorie magnetiche del secolo XIII, ibid., 65-99, 319-420; IDEM, Intorno a due codici Vaticani della Epistola de magnete di Pietro Peregrino di Maricourt ed alle prime osservazioni della declinazione magnetica, ibid., IV (1871), 303-31; BONCOMPAGNI, Intorno alle edizioni della Epistola de magnete di Pietro Peregrino de Maricourt, ibid., 332-39. PIERRE DUHEM. Jean Pierron Jean Pierron A missionary, born at Dun-sur-Meuse, France, 28 Sept., 1631; date and place of death unknown. He entered the Jesuit novitiate at Nancy, 21 Nov., 1650, and after studying at Pont-à-Mousson he became an instructor at Reims and Verdun; he completed the curriculum in 1665 and spent two years more as an instructor at Metz. On his arrival in Canada in June, 1667, he was sent to the Iroquois mission of Sainte-Marie. in a letter written the same year he described his impressions of the country, the characteristics and customs of the savages, and expressed an admiration for the Iroquois language, which reminded him of Greek. He arrived at Tionontoguen, the principal village of the Mohawks, on 7 Oct., 1668, where he replaced Father Fremin. These people were one of the most flourishing of the Iroquois nations, valiant and proud warriors, and difficult to convert. Father Pierron made use of pictures which he painted himself in order to make his teachings more impressive, and invented a game by means of which the indians learned the doctrines and devotions of the Church; he taught the children to read and write. He spent one winter in Acadia to ascertain if it were possible to re-establish the missions which had been expelled in 1655, and travelled through New England, Maryland (which at that time had a Catholic governor, Charles Calvert), and Virginia; returning to the Iroquois, he worked among them until 1677 and went to France in the following year. He was a man of rare virtue, and during all his missionary career fought against a natural repugnance to the Iroquois. Ed. THWAITES, Jesuit Relations (Cleveland, 1896-1901); CAMPBELL, Pioneer Priests of North America (New York, 1909). J. ZEVELY. Philippe Pierson Philippe Pierson Born at Ath, Hainaut (Belgium), 4 January, 1642; died at Lorette, Quebec, 1688. At the age of eighteen he entered the Jesuit novitiate at Tournai, and pursued his studies at Louvain, Lille, and Douay. He was an instructor at Armentières and Bethune before he went to Canada in 1666, where he taught grammar in the college at Quebec, and presented a successful Latin play on the Passion of Our Lord. After studying theology for two years he was ordained in 1669, then worked among the Indians at Prairie de la Madeleine and Sillery. From 1673 to 1683 he did excellent work by spreading Christianity among the Hurons of the Makinac mission. In a letter from St. Ignace he described how his church increased in numbers and grew strong in faith. Later, from 1683 he was a missionary among the Sioux west of Lake Superior, and remained as such until his death. Ed. THWAITES, Jesuit Relations (Cleveland, 1896-1901). J. ZEVELY. Pietism Pietism Pietism is a movement within the ranks of Protestantism, originating in the reaction against time fruitless Protestant orthodoxy of the seventeenth century, and aiming at the revival of devotion and practical Christianity. Its appearance in the German Lutheran Church, about 1670, is connected with the name of Spener. Similar movements had preceded it in the Reformed Church of the Netherlands (Gisbert Voetius, Jodocus von Lodensteyn) and on the German Lower Rhine (Gerhard Tersteegen). Among German Lutherans the mystics Valentin Weigel and Johannes Arndt and the theologians Johann Gerhard, Johann Matthias Meyfart, and Theophilus Grossgebauer may be regarded as precursors of Spener. Philipp Jakob Spener, born in 1635 at Rappoltsweiler in Alsace, had been from his earliest years, under the influence of the pious Countess Agathe von Rappoltstein, familiar with such ascetical works as Arndt's "Sechs Bücher vom wahren Christenthum". At Geneva, whither he went as student in 1660, he was profoundly impressed by Jean de Labadie, then active as a Reformed preacher, but later a separatist fanatic. Spener found his first sphere of practical work at Frankfort on the Main, where he was appointed pastor and senior in 1666. His sermons, in which he emphasized the necessity of a lively faith and the sanctification of daily life, brought him many adherents among the more serious of his hearers; but recognizing the impossibility of leading the people at large to the desired degree of perfection, he conceived the idea of an ecclesiola in ecclesia, established in 1670 the so-called "Collegia pietatis" (whence the name Pietists), i. e. private assemblies in his own house for pious reading and mutual edification, and wrote "Pia desideria oder herzliches Verlangen nach gottgefälliger Besserung der wahren evangelischen Kirche" (1675). After criticizing the prevalent abuses, he makes six suggestions for the improvement of ecclesiastical conditions: In view of the inadequacy of sermons for the purpose, private gatherings should be held to secure among the people a more thorough acquaintance with the Word of God; the idea of a universal priesthood, which had not attained its rightful significance in the previous development of the Lutheran Church, was to be more fully realized; with the knowledge of Christianity was to be closely joined the exercise of Charity and the spirit of forgiveness; the attitude towards unbelievers should be determined upon not by a controversial spirit, but by the charitable desire of winning these souls; the theological course should be reformed in order to spur the students not only to diligence, but also to a devout life, in which the professors should set the example; in preaching, rhetoric should be abandoned and stress laid upon inculcating faith and a living, practical Christianity. Spener further defended his ideas of a universal priesthood in "Das geistliche Priesterthum, aus göttlichem Wort kürzlich beschrieben" (1677). His "Pia Desideria" won him many adherents, but also aroused violent opposition among Lutheran theologians. A wider sphere of activity opened to Spener in 1686 when he was appointed court preacher at Dresden. During the same year, August Hermann Francke, Paul Anton, and Johann Kaspar Sehade established at Leipzig, along the line of Spener's ideas, the "Collegia philobiblica", for the practical and devotional explanation of Holy Scripture, which attracted large numbers of masters and students. The Pietist movement at Leipzig, however, came to an end a few years later owing to the opposition of the theological faculty, headed by Professor Johann Benedict Carpzov. The Pietists were accused of false doctrines, contempt for public worship and the science of theology, and separatistic tendencies. The "Collegia philobiblica" was dissolved in 1690 and the leaders of the movement, forbidden to lecture on theology, left Leipzig. Spener, who had fallen into disfavour with the Elector of Saxony, removed in 1691 to Berlin, where he was appointed provost to the church of St. Nicholas and counsellor to the consistory. Pietism was also attacked in Carpzov's Easter programme of 1691 and the anonymous treatise "Imago Pietismi" (1691), probably the work of Pastor Roth of Halle. A lively exchange of controversial pamphlets ensued. Spener's call to Berlin was of great significance for Pietism, as he here enjoyed the full confidence of Prince Frederick III (later King Frederick I of Prussia) and wielded a decisive influence in the selection of professors for the theological faculty of the recently founded University of Halle. Francke, who had been working at Erfurt since his departure from Leipzig, went to Halle as professor and pastor in January, 1692; his friend, Joachim Justus Breithaupt, had preceded him in October, 1691, as first professor of theology and director of the theological seminary. Somewhat later Paul Anton, formerly a colleague of Francke's at Leipzig, also received a chair at Halle. Professors in other faculties, like the celebrated jurist Christian Thomasius, organizer of the new university, were at least on friendly terms with the Pietist theologians, even if they did not share their religious beliefs. Thus Hale became the centre of the Pietistic movement in Lutheran Germany. Francke ranks high also in the history of education, owing to the establishment (1695) of his orphan asylum, around which he grouped various institutions suited to the needs of teachers and pupils. He also turned his attention to foreign missions; the Pietists promoted the dissemination of the Bible through the establishment (1710), by Freiherr von Canstein, of a bible house at the Halle orphan asylum. The Pietists on the whole preserved the doctrinal content of Lutheran dogma, but treated systematic theology and philosophy as quite secondary. in preaching against the prevalent laxity of morals they relegated to the background the Lutheran dogma of justification by faith alone and insisted on a life of active devotion, and the doctrine of repentance, conversion, and regeneration. The Pietist conventicles sought to further the "penitential conflict" leading to regeneration by prayer, devout reading, and exhortations. The so-called "adiaphora", theatres, dancing, etc., were regarded as sinful. After the foundation of the University of Halle the campaign against Pietism was pursued with increased vigour by the orthodox Lutherans, notably Samuel Schelwig at Danzig, Valentin Alberti at Leipzig, and the theological faculty of Wittenberg, with Johann Deutschmann at its head. Later came Valentin Ernst Löscher (died 1747), against whom Pietism was defended by Joachim Lange, professor at Halle. During these struggles the founders of Pietism had passed away, Spener in 1705, Francke in 1727, Breithaupt in 1732, and then followed the period of decline. Meanwhile, despite opposition, the influence of Pietism had spread, and its prestige, with the support of King Frederick I and Frederick William I, survived Francke's death. Frederick William I decreed (1729) that all theologians desiring appointments in Prussia should study at Halle for two years; but the favour shown the Pietists ceased with the accession of Frederick II. Besides Halle, the Universities of Königsberg and Giessen aided in the spread of Pietism. It had also a powerful patron in Frederick IV, King of Denmark, who encouraged the movement in his country, sent Danish students of theology to Halle, and requested Francke to recommend missionaries for the Danish East Indian possessions. At Würtemberg Pietism took on a special character; while holding in essentials to the ideas of Spener and Francke, it was more moderate, adhered more closely to the organization and theology of the Lutheran Church, kept clear of eccentricities, had more scholarly interests, and flourished longer than the Pietism of Northern Germany. Francke, who had travelled through Würtemberg in 1717, was held in great veneration, while there was no intercourse at all with the later representatives of Pietism in Northern Germany. The leader of the movement at Würtemberg was Johann Albrecht Bengel (died 1752), who, like many other Würtemberg theologians, had studied at Halle; with him were associated Eberhard Weismann and Friedrich Christoph Oetinger. A separatistic community which grew out of Pietism was the "Herrnhüter, whose founder, Count von Zinzendorf, had been educated in Francke's institutions at Halle. In Switzerland, Pietism was widespread, especially in the cantons of Bern, Zurich, Basle, and Waadt. So far as it followed the paths traced by Spener and Francke, Pietism produced some beneficial results. In the subjective bias of the whole movement, however, there lay from the beginning the danger of many abuses. It often degenerated into fanaticism, with alleged prophecies, visions, and mystical states (e. g., bloody sweats). This decadent Pietism led to the formation of various independent communities, some fanatic (Nillenarians, etc.), others criminal, indulging in lewd orgies (e. g. the Wittgenstein scandals and the Buttlar gang). Among the theologians who, starting as Pietists, advanced to an independent position, quite at variance with organized Protestantism, the most conspicuous were Gottfried Arnold (died 1714), representative of a fanatical mysticism, and his disciple, Johann Konrad Dippel, who attacked all forms of orthodox Christianity. Though the founders of Pietism had no idea of forsaking the basis of Lutheran dogma, the Pietistic movement, with its treatment of dogma as a secondary matter and its indifference to variations in doctrine, prepared the ground for the theological rationalism of the period of enlightenment. Johann Salomo Semler, the father of rationalism, came from the Halle school of Pietism, and his appointment as professor of theology at the University of Halle in 1752 opened the way to the ascendancy of rationalism, against which the devout Pietists were as powerless as the representatives of Protestant orthodoxy. Pietism revived in Protestant Germany and Protestant Switzerland, early in the nineteenth century, as a reaction against the rationalistic enlightenment and a response to more deeply felt religious needs. A far-reaching activity along these lines was exerted in many parts of Germany and Switzerland by Freifrau von Krüdener by means of her sermons on penance. Tract societies and associations for propagating home missions did much to promote the spirit of Pietism, On the other hand, along with good results, this movement again degenerated into mystical fanaticism and sectarianism (e. g., the "sanctimonious hypocrites" at Königsberg about 1835; the adherents of Schönherr, Ebel, and Diestel). There are also connecting links between the subjectivism of the Pietists and the theological liberalism of Albrecht Ritschl and his school, whose insistence on interior religious experience in the form of feeling is a basic idea of Pietism, although the Ritschlian school is opposed by devout Pietists as well as by Orthodox Lutherans. SCHMID, Die Gesch. des Pietismus (Nördlingen, 1863); THOLUCK, Gesch. des Rationalismus. I. Gesch. des Pietismus u. des ersten Stadiums der Aufklärung (Berlin, 1865); RITSCHL, Gesch. des Pietismus (Bonn, 1880-86); SACHSSE, Ursprung u. Wesen des Pietismus (Wiesbaden, 1884); HÜBENER, Ueber den Pietismus in Verhandlungen der 25. Jahresversammlung der Synode der ev.-luth. Freikirche in Sachsen (Zwickau, 1901), 17-156; HADORN, Gesch. des Pietismus in den schweizerischen reformierten Kirchen (Constance, 1901); RENNER, Lebensbilder aus der Pietistenzeit (Bremen, 1886); HOSSBACH, Ph. J. Spener u. seine Zeit (Berlin, 1828; 2nd ed., 1853); GRÜNBERG, Ph. J. Spener (Göttingen, 1893-1906); NIEMEYER, A. H. Francke (Halle, 1794); GUERICKE, A. H. Francke (Halle, 1827); KRAMER, A. H. Francke (Halle, 1880-2); HARTMANN, A. H. Francke (Calw and Stuttgart, 1897); OTTO, A. H. Francke (Halle, 1902); KAYSER, Christian Thomasius u. der Pietismus, supplement to Jahresbericht des Wilhelm Gymnasiums in Hamburg (Hamburg, 1900). FRIEDRICH LAUCHERT. Albert Pighius Albert (Pigghe) Pighius A theologian, mathematician, and astronomer, born at Kampen, Overyssel, Holland, about 1490; died at Utrecht, 26 Dec., 1542. He studied philosophy and began the study of theology at Louvain, where Adrian of Utrecht, later Pope Adrian VI, was one of his teachers. Pighius completed his studies at Cologne and received in 1517 the degree of Doctor of Theology. He then followed his teacher Adrian to Spain, and, when the latter became pope, to Rome, where he also remained during the reigns of Clement VII and Paul III, and was repeatedly employed in ecclesiastico-political embassies. He had taught mathematics to Cardinal Alessandro Farnese, afterwards Paul III; in 1535 Paul III appointed him provost of St. John's at Utrecht, where he had held a canonry since 1524. At the religious disputation of Ratisbon in 1541 he was on the Catholic side. Among his writings the following belong to the sphere of his mathematico-astronomical studies: "Astrologiæ defensio adversus prognosticatorum vulgus, qui annuas prædictiones edunt et se astrologos mentiuntur" (Paris, 1518); also the treatise addressed to Leo X upon the reform of the calendar, "De æquinoctiarum solstitiorumque inventione et de ratione paschalis celebrationis deque restitutione ecclesiastici Calendarii (Paris, 1520); also "Apologia adversus novam Marci Beneventani astronomiam" (Paris, 1522); and "Defensio Apologiæ adversus Marci Beneventani astronomiam" (Paris, 1522). As a theologian he zealously defended the authority of the Church against the Reformers. His most important theological work is a rejoinder to Henry VIII of England and is entitled: "Hierarchiæ ecclesiasticæ assertio" (Cologne, 1538, dedicated to Paul III; later editions, 1544, 1558, 1572). In reply John Leland wrote his "Antiphilarchia"; of. "Dict. Nat. Biog." (new ed., London, 1909), XI, 893. Pighius also wrote: "Apologia indicti a Paulo III. Concilii, adversus Lutheranas confederationes" (Cologne, 1537; Paris, 1538); "De libero hominis arbitrio et divina gratia libri X" (Cologne, 1542), against Luther and Calvin; "Controversiarum præcipuarum in Comitiis Ratisponensibus tractatarum . . . explicatio (Cologne, 1542). To this were added the two treatises: "Quæstio de divortiatorum novis coniugiis et uxorum pluralitate sub lege evangelica" and "Diatriba de actis VI. et VII. Synodi". Other theological works were: "Ratio componendorum dissidiorum et sarciendæ in religione concordiæ" (Cologne, 1542), and his last work, "Apologia adversus Martini Buceri calumnias" (Mainz, 1543). A treatise "Adversus Græcorum errores", dedicated to Clement VII, is preserved in manuscript in the Vatican Library. Pighius was in his convictions a faithful adherent of the Church and a man of the best intentions, but on some points he advanced teachings which are not in harmony with the Catholic position. One was his opinion that original sin was nothing more than the sin of Adam imputed to every child at birth, without any inherent taint of sinfulness being in the child itself. In the doctrine of justification also he made too many concessions to Protestants. He originated the doctrine of the double righteousness by which man is justified, that has justly been characterized as "semi-Lutheranism". According to this theory, the imputed righteousness of Christ is the formal cause of the justification of man before God, while the individual righteousness inherent in man is always imperfect and therefore insufficient. These opinions of Pighius were adopted by Johannes Gropper and Cardinal Contarini; during the discussion at the Council of Trent of the "Decretum de Justificatione" they were maintained by Seripando, but the Council, with due regard for the ideas that were justifiable in themselves, rejected the untenable compromise theory itself. LINSENMANN, Albertus Pighius und sein theologischer Standpunkt in Theol. Quartalschrift, XLVIII (1866), 571-644; PASTOR, Die kirchlichen Reunionsbestrebungen während der Regierung Karls V. (Freiburg im Br., 1879), 167 sq.; DITTRICH, Gasparo Contarini (Braunsberg, 1885), 660-69; HEFELE-HERGENRÖTHER, Conciliengesch., IX (Freiburg im Br., 1890), 936-38; HEFNER, Die Entstehungsgesch. des Trienter Rechtfertigungsdecretes (Paderborn. 1909), 165 sq. His correspondence was published by FRIEDENSBURG, Beiträge sum Briefwechsel der kathol. Gelehrten Deutschlands im Reformationszeitalter in Zeitschrift für Kirchengesch., XXIII (1902), 110-55. FRIEDRICH LAUCHERT. Ven. Giuseppe Maria Pignatelli Ven. Giuseppe Maria Pignatelli Born 27 December, 1737, in Saragossa, Spain; died 11 November, 1811. His family was of Neapolitan descent and noble lineage. After finishing his early studies in the Jesuit College of Saragossa, he entered the Society of Jesus (8 May, 1753) notwithstanding his family's opposition. On concluding his ecclesiastical studies he was ordained, and taught at Saragossa. In 1766 the Governor of Saragossa was held responsible for the threatened famine, and so enraged was the populace against him that they were about to destroy his palace by fire. Pignatelli's persuasive power over the people averted the calamity. Despite the letter of thanks sent by Charles III the Jesuits were accused of instigating the above-mentioned riot. Pignatelli's refutation of the calumny was followed by the decree of expulsion of the Fathers of Saragossa (4 April, 1767). Minister Aranda offered to reinstate Nicola and Giuseppe Pignatelli, providing they abandon their order, but in spite of Giuseppe's ill-health they stood firm. Not permitted by Clement III to land at Civita Vecchia, with the other Jesuits of Aragon, he repaired to St. Boniface in Corsica where he displayed singular ability for organization in providing for five hundred fathers and students. His sister, the Duchess of Acerra, aided him with money and provisions. He organized studies and maintained regular observance. When France assumed control of Corsica, he was obliged to return to Genoa. He was again detailed to secure a location in the legation of Ferrara, not only for the fathers of his own province of Aragon, but also for those of Peru and Mexico, but the community was dissolved in August, 1773. The two Pignatelli brothers were then obliged to betake themselves to Bologna, where they lived in retirement (being forbidden to exercise the sacred ministry). They devoted themselves to study and Pignatelli himself collected books and manuscripts bearing on the history of the Society. On ascertaining from Pius IV that the Society of Jesus still survived in White Russia, he desired to be received there. For various reasons he was obliged to defer his departure. During this delay he was invited, on the instance of Ferdinand, Duke of Parma, to re-establish the Society in his States; and in 1793, having obtained through Catharine II a few fathers from Russia, with other Jesuits, an establishment was made. On 6 July, 1797, Pignatelli there renewed his vows. In 1799 he was appointed master of novices in Colerno. On the decease of the Duke of Parma, the States of Parma were placed under allegiance of France. Notwithstanding this fact, the Jesuits remained undisturbed for eighteen months, during which period Pignatelli was appointed Provincial of Italy. After considerable discussion he obtained the restoration of the Jesuits in Naples. The papal Brief (30 July, 1804) was much more favourable than that granted for Parma. The older Jesuits soon asked to be received back; many, however, engaged in various ecclesiastical callings, remained at their posts. Schools and a college were opened in Sicily, but when this part of the kingdom fell into Napoleon's power, the dispersion of the Jesuits were ordered; but the decree was not rigorously executed. Pignatelli founded colleges in Rome, Tivoli, and Orvieto, and the fathers were invited to other cities. During the exile of Pius VII and the French occupation the Society continued unmolested, owing largely to the prudence and the merits of Pignatelli; he even managed to avoid the oaths of allegiance to Napoleon. He also secured the restoration of the Society in Sardinia (1807). Under Gregory XVI the cause of his beatification was introduced. Nonell, El V.P. Jose M. Pignatelli y la C. de J. en su estinction y restablecimiento (3 vols., Manresa, 1893-4; Boero, Istoria del V. Padre Gius. M. Pignatelli (Rome, 1856). U. BENIGNI William Pike Ven. William Pike Martyr, born in Dorsetshire; died at Dorchester, dec., 1591. He was a joiner, and lived at West Moors, West Parley. On his way from Dorchester to his home, he fell in with the venerable martyr Thomas Pilchard, who converted him, probably in 1586. At his trial for being reconciled with the See of Rome "the bloody question about the Pope's supremacy was put to him, and he frankly confessed that he maintained the authority of the Roman See, for which he was condemned to die a traitor's death". When they asked him to recant in order to save his life and his family, "he boldly replied that it did not become a son of Mr. Pilchard to do so". "Until he died, Mr. Pilchard's name was constantly on his lips." Being asked at death what had moved him to that resolution etc., he said "Nothing but the smell of a pilchard". The date of his death is not recorded, but in the Menology his name is under 22 Dec. Pollen, Acts of the English Martyrs (London, 1901), 267; English Martyrs 1584-1603 (London, 1908), 289; Challoner, Missionary Priests, I, no. 89; Stanton, Menology of England and Wales (London, 1887), 606, 689. JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT Nuestra Senora Del Pilar Nuestra Señora Del Pilar "Our Lady of the Pillar", a celebrated church and shrine, at Saragossa, Spain, containing a miraculous image of the Blessed Virgin, which is the object of very special devotion throughout the kingdom. The image, which is placed on a marble pillar, whence the name of the church, was crowned in 1905 with a crown designed by the Marquis of Griñi, and valued at 450,000 pesetas (£18,750, 1910). The present spacious church in Baroque style was begun in 1681. According to an ancient Spanish tradition, given in the Roman Breviary (for 12 October, Ad. mat., lect. vi), the original shrine was built by St. James the Apostle at the wish of the Blessed Virgin, who appeared to him as he was praying by the banks of the Ebro at Saragossa. There has been much discussion as the truth of the tradition. Mgr L. Duchesne denies, as did Baronius, the coming of St. James to Spain, and reproduces arguments founded on the writings of the Twelfth Ecumenical Council, discovered by Loaisa, but rejected as spurious by the Jesuit academician Fita and many others. Those who defend the tradition adduce the testimony of St. Jerome (PL XXIV, 373) and that of the Mozarabic Office. The oldest written testimony of devotion to the Blessed Virgin in Saragossa usually quoted is that of Pedro Librana (1155). Fita has published data of two Christian tombs at Saragossa, dating from Roman days, on which the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin is represented. J.M. MARCH Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate After the deposition of the eldest son of Herod, Archelaus (who had succeeded his father as ethnarch), Judea was placed under the rule of a Roman procurator. Pilate, who was the fifth, succeeding Valerius Gratus in A.D. 26, had greater authority than most procurators under the empire, for in addition to the ordinary duty of financial administration, he had supreme power judicially. His unusually long period of office (A.D. 26-36) covers the whole of the active ministry both of St. John the Baptist and of Jesus Christ. As procurator Pilate was necessarily of equestrian rank, but beyond that we know little of his family or origin. Some have thought that he was only a freedman, deriving his name from pileus (the cap of freed slaves) but for this there seems to be no adequate evidence, and it is unlikely that a freedman would attain to a post of such importance. The Pontii were a Samnite gens. Pilate owed his appointment to the influence of Sejanus. The official residence of the procurators was the palace of Herod at Caearea; where there was a military force of about 3,000 soldiers. These soldiers came up to Jerusalem at the time of the feasts, when the city was full of strangers, and there was greater danger of disturbances, hence it was that Pilate had come to Jerusalem at the time of the Crucifixion. His name will be forever covered with infamy because of the part which he took in this matter, though at the time it appeared to him of small importance. Pilate is a type of the worldly man, knowing the right and anxious to do it so far as it can be done without personal sacrifice of any kind, but yielding easily to pressure from those whose interest it is that he should act otherwise. He would gladly have acquitted Christ, and even made serious efforts in that direction, but gave way at once when his own position was threatened. The other events of his rule are not of very great importance. Philo (Ad Gaium, 38) speaks of him as inflexible, merciless, and obstinate. The Jews hated him and his administration, for he was not only very severe, but showed little consideration for their susceptibilities. Some standards bearing the image of Tiberius, which had been set up by him in Jerusalem, caused an outbreak which would have ended in a massacre had not Pilate given way. At a later date Tiberius ordered him to remove certain gilt shields, which he had set up in Jerusalem in spite of the remonstrances of the people. The incident mentioned in St. Luke, xiii, 1, of the Galilaeans whose blood Pilate mingled with the sacrifices, is not elsewhere referred to, but is quite in keeping with other authentic events of his rule. He was, therefore, anxious that no further hostile reports should be sent to the emperor concerning him. The tendency, already discernible in the canonical Gospels, to lay stress on the efforts of Pilate to acquit Christ, and thus pass as lenient a judgment as possible upon his crime, goes further in the apocryphal Gospels and led in later years to the claim that he actually became a Christian. The Abyssinian Church reckons him as a saint, and assigns 25 June to him and to Claudia Procula, his wife. The belief that she became a Christian goes back to the second century, and may be found in Origen (Hom., in Mat., xxxv). The Greek Church assigns her a feast on 27 October. Tertullian and Justin Martyr both speak of a report on the Crucifixion (not extant) sent in by Pilate to Tiberius, from which idea a large amount of apocryphal literature originated. Some of these were Christian in origin (Gospel of Nicodemus), others came from the heathen, but these have all perished. His rule was brought to an end through trouble which arose in Samaria. An imposter had given out that it was in his power to discover the sacred vessels which, as he alleged, had been hidden by Moses on Mount Gerizim, whither armed Samaritans came in large numbers. Pilate seems to have thought the whole affair was a blind, covering some other more important design, for he hurried forces to attack them, and many were slain. They appealed to Vitellius, who was at that time legate in Syria, saying that nothing political had been intended, and complaining of Pilate's whole administration. He was summoned to Rome to answer their charges, but before he could reach the city the Emperor Tiberius had died. That is the last we know of Pilate from authentic sources, but legend has been busy with his name. He is said by Eusebius (H.E., ii, 7), on the authority of earlier writers, whom he does not name, to have fallen into great misfortunes under Caligula, and eventually to have committed suicide. Other details come from less respectable sources. His body, says the "Mors Pilati", was thrown into the Tiber, but the waters were so disturbed by evil spirits that the body was taken to Vienne and sunk in the Rhone, where a monument, called Pilate's tomb, is still to be seen. As the same thing occurred there, it was again removed and sunk in the lake at Lausanne. Its final disposition was in a deep and lonely mountain tarn, which, according to later tradition, was on a mountain, still called Pilatus, close to Lucerne. The real origin of this name is, however, to be sought in the cap of cloud which often covers the mountain, and serves as a barometer to the inhabitants of Lucerne. The are many other legends about Pilate in the folklore of Germany, but none of them have the slightest authority. ARTHUR S. BARNES Venerable Thomas Pilchard Venerable Thomas Pilchard (Or PILCHER). Martyr, born at Battle, Sussex, 1557; died at Dorchester, 21 March 1586-7. He became a Fellow of Balliol College, Oxford, in 1576, and took the degree of M.A., in 1579, resigning his fellowship the following year. He arrived at Reims 20 November, 1581, and was ordained priest at Laon, March, 1583, and was sent on the mission. He was arrested soon after, and banished; but returned almost immediately. He was again arrested early in March, 1586-7, and imprisoned in Dorchester Gaol, and in the fortnight between committal to prison and condemnation converted thirty persons. He was so cruelly drawn upon the hurdle that he was fainting when he came to the place of execution. When the rope was cut, being still alive he stood erect under the scaffold. The executioner, a cook, carried out the sentence so clumsily that the victim, turning to the sheriff, exclaimed "Is this then your justice, Mr. Sheriff?" According to another account "the priest raised himself and putting out his hands cast forward his own bowels, crying 'Miserere mei'". Father Warford says: "There was not a priest in the whole West of England, who, to my knowledge, was his equal in virtue." JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT Pilgrimage of Grace Pilgrimage of Grace The name given to the religious rising in the north of England, 1536. The cause of this great popular movement, which extended over five counties and found sympathizers all over England, was attributed to Robert Aske, the leader of the insurgents, to "spreading of heretics, suppression of houses of religion and other matters touching the commonwealth". And in his "Narrative to the King", he declared: In all parts of the realm men's hearts much grudged with the suppression of abbeys, and the first fruits, by reason the same would be the destruction of the whole religion in England. And their especial great grudge is against the lord Crumwell. The movement broke out on 13 October, 1536, immediately following the failure of the Lincolnshire Rising; and Robert Aske, a London barrister of good Yorkshire family, who had been to some extent concerned in the Lincolnshire rising, putting himself at the head of nine thousand insurgents, marched on York, which he entered. There he arranged for the expelled monks and nuns to return to their houses; the king's tenants were driven out and religious observance resumed. The subsequent success of the rising was so great that the royal leaders, the Duke of Norfolk and Earl of Shrewsbury, opened negotiations with the insurgents at Doncaster, where Aske had assembled between thirty and forty thousand men. As a result of this, Henry authorized Norfolk to promise a general pardon and a Parliament to be held at York within a year. Aske then dismissed his followers, trusting in the king's promises. But these promises were not kept, and a new rising took place in Cumberland and Westmoreland, and was spreading to Yorkshire. Upon this, the king arrested Aske and several of the other leaders, who were all convicted of treason and executed. The loss of the leaders enabled Norfolk to crush the rising. The king avenged himself on Cumberland and Westmoreland by a series of massacres under the form of martial law. Though Aske had tried to prevent the rising he was put to death. Lord Darcy, Sir Henry Percy, and several other gentlemen, together with the four Abbots of Fountains, Jervaulx, Barlings, and Sawley, who were executed at Tyburn, have been reckoned by Catholic writers as martyrs for the Faith, and their names inserted in martyrologies, but they have not included in the cause of beatification of English martyrs. EDWIN BURTON Pilgrimages Pilgrimages (Mid. Eng., pilgrime, Old Fr., pelegrin, derived from Lat. peregrinum, supposed origin, per and ager-with idea of wandering over a distance). Pilgrimages may be defined as journeys made to some place with the purpose of venerating it, or in order to ask there for supernatural aid, or to discharge some religious obligation. ORIGIN The idea of a pilgrimage has been traced back by some (Littledale in "Encycl. Brit.", 1885, XIX, 90; "New Internat. Encyc.", New York, 1910, XVI, 20, etc.) to the primitive notion of local deities, that is, that the divine beings who controlled the movements of men and nature could exercise that control only over certain definite forces or within set boundaries. Thus the river gods had no power over those who kept away from the river, nor could the wind deities exercise any influence over those who lived in deserts or clearings or on the bare mountain-side. Similarly there were gods of the hills and gods of the plains who could only work out their designs, could only favour or destroy men within their own locality (III Kings, xx, 23). Hence, when some man belonging to a mountain tribe found himself in the plain and was in need of divine help, he made a pilgrimage back again to the hills to petition it from his gods. It is therefore the broken tribesmen who originate pilgrimages. Without denying the force of this argument as suggesting or extending the custom, for it has been admitted as plausible by distinguished Catholics (cf. Lagrange, "Etudes sur les relig. sémit., VIII, Paris, 1905, 295, 301), we may adhere to a less arbitrary solution by seeking its cause in the instinctive notion of the human heart. For pilgrimages properly so called are made to the places where the gods or heroes were born or wrought some great action or died, or to the shrines where the deity had already signified it to be his pleasure to work wonders. Once theophanies are localized, pilgrimages necessarily follow. The Incarnation was bound inevitably to draw men across Europe to visit the Holy Places, for the custom itself arises spontaneously from the heart. It is found in all religions. The Egyptians journeyed to Sekket's shrine at Bubastis or to Ammon's oracle at Thebes; the Greeks sought for counsel from Apollo at Delphi and for cures from Asclepius at Epidaurus; the Mexicans gathered at the huge temple of Quetzal; the Peruvians massed in sun-worship at Cuzco and the Bolivians in Titicaca. But it is evident that the religions which centered round a single character, be he god or prophet, would be the most famous for their pilgrimages, not for any reason of tribal returns to a central district where alone the deity has power, but rather owing to the perfectly natural wish to visit spots made holy by the birth, life, or death of the god or prophet. Hence Buddhism and Mohammedanism are especially famous in inculcating this method of devotion. Huge gatherings of people intermittently all the year round venerate Kapilavastu where Gaukama Buddha began his life, Benares where he opened his sacred mission, Kasinagara where he died; and Mecca and Medina have become almost bywords in English as the goals of long aspirations, so famous are they for their connexion with the prophet of Islam. Granting then this instinctive movement of human nature, we should expect to find that in Christianity God would Himself satisfy the craving He had first Himself created. The story of His appearance on earth in bodily form when He "dwelt amongst us" could not but be treasured up by His followers, and each city and site mentioned became a matter of grateful memory to them. Then again the more famous of His disciples, whom we designate as saints, themselves began to appeal to the devotion of their fellows, and round the acts of their lives soon clustered a whole cycle of venerated shrines. Especially would this be felt in the case of the martyrs; for their passion and death stamped more dramatically still the exact locality of their triumph. Moreover, it seems reasonable to suppose that yet another influence worked to the same end. There sprang up in the early Church a curious privilege, accorded to dying martyrs, of granting the remission of canonical penances. No doubt it began through a generous acceptance of the relation of St. Stephen to St. Paul. But certain it is that at an early date this custom had become so highly organized that there was a libellus, or warrant of reconciliation, a set form for the readmittance of sinners to Christian fellowship (Batiffol, "Etudes d'hist. et de théol. posit.", I, Paris, 1906, 112- 20). Surely then it is not fanciful to see how from this came a further development. Not only had the martyrs in their last moments this power of absolving from ecclesiastical penalties, but even after their deaths, their tombs and the scenes of their martyrdom were considered to be capable also-if devoutly venerated-of removing the taints and penalties of sin. Accordingly it came to be looked upon as a purifying act to visit the bodies of the saints and above all the places where Christ Himself had set the supreme example of a teaching sealed with blood. Again it may be noted how, when the penitential system of the Church, which grouped itself round the sacrament of the confessional, had been authoritatively and legally organized, pilgrimages were set down as adequate punishments inflicted for certain crimes. The hardships of the journey, the penitential garb worn, the mendicity it entailed made a pilgrimage a real and efficient penance (Beazley, "Dawn of Modern Geography", II, 139; Furnival, "The Stacions of Rome and the Pilgrim's Sea Voyage", London, 1867, 47). To quote a late text, the following is one of the canons enacted under King Edgar (959-75): "It is a deep penitence that a layman lay aside his weapons and travel far barefoot and nowhere pass a second night and fast and watch much and pray fervently, by day and by night and willingly undergo fatigue and be so squalid that iron come not on hair or on nail" (Thorpe, "Ancient Laws", London, 1840, 411-2; cf. 44, 410, etc.). Another witness to the real difficulties of the wayfaring palmer may be cited from "Syr Isenbras", an early English ballad:- "They bare with them no maner of thynge That was worth a farthynge Cattell, golde, ne fe; But mekely they asked theyre meate Where that they myght it gette. For Saynct Charyte." (Uterson, "Early Popular Poetry", I, London, 1817, 83). And the Earl of Arundel of a later date obtained absolution for poaching on the bishop's preserves at Hoghton Chace only on condition of a pilgrimage to the shrine of St. Richard of Chichester ("Archæologia", XLV, 176; cf. Chaucer, "Works", ed. Morris, III, 266). And these are but late descriptions of a practice of penance which stretches back beyond the legislation of Edgar and the organization of St. Theodore to the sub-Apostolic age. Finally a last influence that made the pilgrimage so popular a form of devotion was the fact that it contributed very largely to ease the soul of some of its vague restlessness in an age when conditions of life tended to cramp men down to certain localities. It began to be looked upon as a real help to the establishment of a perfectly controlled character. It took its place in the medieval manuals of psychology. So John de Burg in 1385 (Pupilla oculi, fol. LXII), "contra acediam, opera laboriosa bona ut sint peregrinationes ad loca sancta." HISTORY IN GENERAL In a letter written towards the end of the fourth century by Sts. Paula and Eustochium to the Roman matron Marcella, urging her to follow them out to the Holy Places, they insist on the universality of the custom of these pilgrimages to Palestine:-"Whosoever is noblest in Gaul comes hither. And Britain though divided from us yet hastens from her land of sunset to these shrines known to her only through the Scriptures." They go on to enumerate the various nationalities that crowded round these holy places, Armenians, Persians, Indians, Ethiopians, and many others (P. L., XXII; Ep. xlvi, 489-900). But it is of greater interest to note how they claim for this custom a continuity from Apostolic days. From the Ascension to their time, bishops, martyrs, doctors, and troops of people, say they, had flocked to see the sacred stones of Bethlehem and of wherever else the Lord had trod (489). It has been suggested that this is an exaggeration, and certainly we can offer no proof of any such uninterrupted practice. Yet when the first examples begin to appear they are represented to us without a word of astonishment or a note of novelty, as though people were already fully accustomed to like adventures. Thus in Eusebius, "History" (tr. Crusé, London, 1868, VI, xi, 215), it is remarked of Bishop Alexander that "he performed a journey from Cappadocia to Jerusalem in consequence of a vow and the celebrity of the place." And the date given is also worthy of notice, a.d. 217. Then again there is the story of the two travellers of Placentia, John and Antoninus the Elder (Acta SS., July, II, 18), which took place about 303-4. Of course with the conversion of Constantine and the visit to Jerusalem of the Empress St. Helena the pilgrimages to the Holy Land became very much more frequent. The story of the finding of the Cross is too well known to be here repeated (cf. P. L., XXVII, 1125), but its influence was unmistakable. The first church of the Resurrection was built by Eustathius the Priest (loc. cit., 1164). But the flow of pilgrimages began in vigour four years after St. Helena's visit (Acta SS., June, III, 176; Sept., III, 56). Then the organization of the Church that partly caused and partly resulted from the Council of Nicæa continued the same custom. In 333 was the famous Bordeaux Pilgrimage ("Palestine Pilgrim Text Society", London, 1887, preface and notes by Stewart). It was the first of a whole series of pilgrimages that have left interesting and detailed accounts of the route, the peoples through which they passed, the sites identified with those mentioned in the Gospels. Another was the still better-known "Peregrinatio Silviæ" (ed. Barnard, London, 1891, Pal. Pilg. Text Soc.; cf. "Rev. des quest. hist." 1903, 367, etc.). Moreover, the whole movement was enormously increased by the language and action of St. Jerome whose personality at the close of the fourth century dominated East and West. Slightly earlier St. John Chrysostom emphasized the efficacy in arousing devotion of visiting even the "lifeless spots" where the saints had lived (In Phil., 702-3, in P. G., LXII). And his personal love of St. Paul would have unfailingly driven him to Rome to see the tomb of the Apostles, but for the burden of his episcopal office. He says ("In Ephes. hom. 8, ii, 57, in P. G., LXII), "If I were freed from my labours and my body were in sound health I would eagerly make a pilgrimage merely to see the chains that had held him captive and the prison where he lay." While in another passage of extraordinary eloquence he expresses his longing to gaze on the dust of the great Apostle, the dust of the lips that had thundered, of the hands that had been fettered, of the eyes that had seen the Master; even as he speaks he is dazzled by the splendour of the metropolis of the world lit up by the glorious tombs of the twin prince Apostles (In Rom. hom. 32, iii, 678, etc., in P. G., LX). Nor in this is he advocating a new practice, for he mentions without comment how many people hurried across the seas to Arabia to see and venerate the dunghill of Job (Ad pop. Antioch. hom. 5, 69, in P. G., XLIX). St. Jerome was cramped by no such official duties as had kept St. Chrysostom to his diocese. His conversion, following on the famous vision of his judgment, turned him from his studies of pagan classics to the pages of Holy Writ, and, uniting with his untiring energy and thoroughness, pushed him on to Palestine to devote himself to the Scriptures in the land where they had been written. Once there the actual Gospel scenes appealed with supreme freshness to him, and on his second return from Rome his enthusiasm fired several Roman matrons to accompany him and share his labours and his devotions. Monasteries and convents were built and a Latin colony was established which in later times was to revolutionize Europe by inaugurating the Crusades. From the Holy Land the circle widens to Rome, as a centre of pilgrimages. St. Chrysostom, as has been shown, expressed his vehement desire to visit it. And in the early church histories of Eusebius, Zosimus, Socrates, and others, notices are frequent of the journeyings of celebrated princes and bishops of the City of the Seven Hills. Of course the Saxon kings and royal families have made this a familiar thing to us. The "Ecclesiastical History" of St. Bede is crowded with references to princes and princesses who laid aside their royal diadems in order to visit the shrine of the Apostles; and the "Anglo-Saxon Chronicle" after his death takes up the same refrain. Then from Rome again the shrines of local saints begin to attract their votaries. In the letter already cited in which Paula and Eustochium invite Marcella to Palestine they argue from the already established custom of visiting the shrines of the martyrs: "Martyrum ubique sepulchra veneramur" (Ep. xlvi, 488, in P. L., XXII). St. Augustine endeavours to settle a dispute by sending both litigants on a pilgrimage to the tomb of St. Felix of Nola, in order that the saint may somehow or other make some sign as to which party was telling the truth. He candidly admits that he knows of no such miracle having been performed in Africa, but argues to it from the analogy of Milan where God had made known His pleasure through the relics of Sts. Gervasius and Protasius (Ep. lxxvii, 269, in P. L., XXXIII). Indeed, the very idea of relics, which existed as early as the earliest of the catacombs, teaches the essential worth of pilgrimages, i. e., of the journeying to visit places hallowed by events in the lives of heroes or of gods who walked in the guise of men (St. Aug., "De civ. Dei", XXII, 769, in P. L., XXXVIII). At first a mere question of individual travelling, a short period was sufficient to develop into pilgrimages properly organized companies. Even the "Peregrinatio Silviæ" shows how they were being systematized. The initiators were clerics who prepared the whole route beforehand and mapped out the cities of call. The bodies of troops were got together to protect the pilgrims. Moreover, Christian almsgiving invented a method of participation in the merits of a pilgrimage for those unable actually to take part in them; it established hospices along the line (Ordericus Vitalis, "Hist. eccles.", ed. Le Prévost, Suc. hist. France, II, 64, 53; Toulmin Smith, "English Guilds", passim). The conversion of the Hungarians amplified this system of halts along the road; of St. Stephen, for example, we read that "he made the way very safe for all and thus allowed by his benevolence a countless multitude both of noble and common people to start for Jerusalem" (Glaber, "Chron.", III, C. I. Mon. Germ. Hist., VII, 62). Thus these pious journeys gradually harden down and become fixed and definite. They are allowed for by laws, civil and ecclesiastical. Wars are fought to insure their safety, crusades are begun in their defence, pilgrims are everywhere granted free access in times alike of peace and war. By the "Consuetudines" of the canons of Hereford cathedral we see that legislation was found to be necessary. No canon was to make more than one pilgrimage beyond the seas in his own lifetime. But each year three weeks were allowed to enable any that would to visit shrines within the kingdom. To go abroad to the tomb of St. Denis, seven weeks of absence was considered legal, eight weeks to the body of St. Edmund at Pontigny, sixteen weeks to Rome, or to St. James at Compostella, and a year to Jerusalem (Archæol., XXXI, 251-2 notes). Again in another way pilgrimages were being regarded as part of normal life. In the registers of the Inquisition at Carcassone (Waterton, "Pictas Mariana Britannica", 112) we find the four following places noted as being the centres of the greater pilgrimages to be imposed as penances for the graver crimes, the tomb of the Apostles at Rome, the shrine of St. James at Compostella, St. Thomas's body at Canterbury, and the relics of the Three Kings at Cologne. Naturally with all this there was a great deal of corruption. Even from the earliest times the Fathers perceived how liable such devotions were to degenerate into an abuse. St. John Chrysostom, so ardent in his praise of pilgrimages, found it necessary to explain that there was "need for none to cross the seas or fare upon a long journey; let each of us at home invoke God earnestly and He will hear our prayer" (Ad pop. Antioch, hom. iii, 2, 49, in P. G., XLIX; cf. hom. iv, 6, 68). St. Gregory Nazianzen is even stronger in his condemnation. He has a short letter in which he speaks of those who regard it as an essential part of piety to visit Jerusalem and see the traces of the Passion of Christ. This, he says, the Master has never commanded, though the custom is not therefore without merit. But still he knows that in many cases the journey has proved a scandal and caused serious harm. He witnesses, therefore, both to the custom and the abuse, evidently thinking that the latter outweighed the former (Ep. ii, 1009, in P. G., XLVI). So again St. Jerome writes to Paulinus (Ep. lxviii in P. L., XXII) to explain, in an echo of Cicero's phrase, that it is not the fact of living in Jerusalem, but of living there well, that is worthy of praise (579); he instances countless saints who never set foot in the Holy Land; and dares not tie down to one small portion of the Earth Him whom Heaven itself is unable to contain. He ends with a sentence that is by now famous, "et de Hierusolymis et de Britannia æqualiter patet aula coe;lestis" (581). Another well-quoted passage comes from a letter of St. Augustine in which he expounds in happy paradox that not by journeying but by loving we draw nigh unto God. To Him who is everywhere present and everywhere entire we approach not by our feet but by our hearts (Ep. clv, 672, in P. L. XXXII). For certainly pilgrimages were not always undertaken for the best of motives. Glaber (ed. Prou, Paris, 1886, 107) thinks it necessary to note of Lethbald that he was far from being one of those who were led to Jerusalem simply from vanity, that they might have wonderful stories to tell, when they came back. Thus, as the centuries pass, we find human nature the same in its complexity of motives. Its noblest actions are found to be often caused by petty spites or vanity or overvaulting ambition; and even when begun in good faith as a source of devotion, the practices of piety at times are degraded into causes of vice. So the author of the "Imitation of Christ' raises his voice against overmuch pilgrimage-making: "Who wander much are but little hallowed." Now too the words of the fifteenth-century English Dominican, John Bromyard ("Summa Prædicantium", Tit. Feria n. 6, fol. 191, Lyons, 1522):-"There are some who keep their pilgrimages and festivals not for God but for the devil. They who sin more freely when away from home or who go on pilgrimage to succeed in inordinate and foolish love-those who spend their time on the road in evil and uncharitable conversation may indeed say peregrinamur a Domino-they make their pilgrimage away from God and to the devil." But the most splenetic scorn is to be found in the pages of that master of satire, Erasmus. His "Religious Pilgrimage" ("Colloquies" ed. Johnson, London, 1878, 11, 1-37) is a terrible indictment of the abuses of his day. Exaggerated no doubt in its expressions, yet revealing a sufficient modicum of real evil, it is a graphic picture from the hand of an intelligent observer. There is evident sign that pilgrimages were losing in popularity, not merely because the charity of many was growing cold, but because of the excessive credulity of the guardians of the shrines, their overwrought insistence on the necessity of pilgrimage-making, and the fact that many who journeyed from shrine to shrine neglected their domestic duties. These three evils are quaintly expressed in the above mentioned dialogue, with a liberty of speech that makes one astonished at Rome's toleration in the sixteenth century. With all these abuses Erasmus saw how the spoiler would have ready to hand excuses for suppressing the whole system and plundering the most attractive treasures. The wealth might well be put, he suggested, to other uses; but the idea of a pilgrimage contained in it nothing opposed to the enlightened opinions of this prophet of "sweet reasonableness". "If any shall do it of their own free choice from a great affection to piety, I think they deserve to be left to their own freedom" (op. cit., 35). This was evidently the opinion also of Henry VIII, for, though in the Injunctions of 1536 and 1538 pilgrimages were to be discouraged, yet both in the bishop's book (The Institution of the Christian Man, 1537) and the king's book (The Necessary Doctrine and Erudition of the Christian Man, 1543), it is laid down that the abuse and not the custom is reprehensible. What they really attack is the fashion of "putting differences between image and image, trusting more in one than in another" (cf. Gairdner, "Lollardy and the Reformation", II, London, 1908, IV, ii, 330, etc.). All this shows how alive Christendom has been to evils which Reformers are forever denouncing as inseparable from Catholicism. It admits the danger but does not allow it to prejudice the good use ("Diayloge of Syr Thomas More", London,1529). Before dealing with each pilgrimage in particular one further remark should be made. Though not properly included under a list of abuses, a custom must be noted of going in search of shrines utterly at haphazard and without any definite notion of where the journey was to end (Waterton, "Piet. Mar. Britt.", London, 1879, III, 107; "Anglo-Sax. Chron.", tr. Thorpe in R. S., London, 1861, II, 69; Beazley, "Dawn of Mod. Geog.", London, 1897-1906, I, 174-5; Tobl. Bibl. Geog. Pal. 26, ed. of 1876). HISTORY IN PARTICULAR It will be necessary to mention and note briefly the chief places of Catholic pilgrimage, in early days, in the Middle ages, and in modern times. Aachen, Rhenish Prussia.-This celebrated city owes its fame as a centre of pilgrimage to the extraordinary list of precious relics which it contains. Of their authenticity there is no need here to speak, but they include among a host of others, the swaddling clothes of the child Jesus, the loin-cloth which Our Lord wore on the Cross, the cloth on which the Baptist's head lay after his execution, and the Blessed Virgin's cloak. These relics are exposed to public veneration every seven years. The number of pilgrims in 1881 was 158,968 (Champagnac, "Dict. des pèlerinages", Paris, 1859, I, 78). Alet, Limoux, France, contains a shrine of the Blessed Virgin dating traditionally from the twelfth century. The principal feast is celebrated on 8 September, when there is still a great concourse of pilgrims from the neighbourhood of Toulouse. It is the centre of a confraternity of the Immaculate Heart of Mary founded for the conversion of sinners, the members of which exceed several thousands (Champagnac, II, 89). Ambronay, Burgundy, France, an ancient shrine of the Blessed Virgin, dating back to the seventh century. It is still a centre of pilgrimage. Amorgos, or Morgo, in the Greek Archipelago, has a quaint picture of the Blessed Virgin painted on wood, which is reputed to have been profaned and broken at Cyprus and then miraculously rejoined in its present shrine. Near by is enacted the pretended miracle of the Urne, so celebrated in the Archipelago (Champagnac, I, 129). Ancona, Italy.-The Cathedral of St. Cyriacus contains a shrine of the Blessed Virgin which became famous only in 1796. On 25 June of that year, the eyes of the Madonna were seen filled with tears, which was later interpreted to have prefigured the calamities that fell on Pius VI and the Church in Italy owing to Napoleon. The picture was solemnly crowned by Pius VII on 13 May, 1814, under the title "Regina Sanctorum Omnium" (Champagnac, I, 133; Anon., "Pèlerinages aux sanct. de la mère de Dieu", Paris, 1840). Anges, Seine-et-Oise, France.-The present chapel only dates from 1808; but the pilgrimage is really ancient. In connexion with the shrine is a spring of miraculous water (Champagnac, I, 146). Arcachon, Gironde, France.-It is curious among the shrines of the Blessed Virgin as containing an alabaster statue of the thirteenth century. Pius IX granted to this statue the honour of coronation in 1870, since which time pilgrimages to it have greatly increased in number and in frequency. Ardilliers, Saumur, France.-A chapel of the Blessed Virgin founded on the site of an ancient monastery. It has been visited by famous French pilgrims such as Anne of Austria, Louis XIII, Henrietta Maria, etc. The sacristy was built by Cesare, Duke of Vendôme, and in 1634 Cardinal Richelieu added a chapel (Champagnac, I, 169). Argenteuil, Seine-et-Oise, France, is one of the places which boasts of possessing the Holy Coat of Jesus Christ. Its abbey was also well known as having had as abbess the famous Héloïse. Whatever may be thought of the authenticity of the relic, the antiquity of pilgrimages drawn to its veneration dates from its presentation to St. Louis in 1247. From the pilgrimage of Queen Blanche in 1255 till our own day there has been an almost uninterrupted flow of visitors. The present châsse was the gift of the Duchess of Guise in 1680 (Champagnac, I, 171-223). Aubervilles, Seine, France, an ancient place of pilgrimage from Paris. It is mentioned in the Calendars of that diocese under the title of Notre-Dame-des- Vertus, and its feast was celebrated annually on the second Tuesday in May. An early list of miraculouos cures performed under the invocation of this Madonna was printed at Paris in 1617 (Champagnac, I, 246). Auriesville, Montgomery Co., New York, U. S. A., is the centre of one of the great pilgrimages of the New World. It is the scene of martyrdom of three Jesuit missionaries by Mohawk Indians; but the chapel erected on the spot has been dedicated to Our Lady of Martyrs, presumably because the cause of the beatification of the three fathers is as yet uncompleted. 15 August is the chief day of pilgrimage; but the practice of visiting Auriesville increases yearly in frequency, and lasts intermittently throughout the whole summer (Wynne, "A Shrine in the Mohawk Valley", New York, 1905; Gerard in "The Month", March, 1874, 306). Bailleul-le-Soc, Oise, France, possesses a chapel dedicated to the Blessed Virgin, dating from the reign of Louis XIV. It has received no episcopal authorization, and in fact was condemned by the Bishop of Beauvais, Mgr de Saint-Aignan, 24 February, 1716. This was in consequence of the pilgrimage which sprang up, of visiting a well of medicinal waters. Owing to its health-giving properties, it was called Saine-Fontaine, but, by the superstition of the people, who at once invented a legend to account for it, this was quickly changed to Sainte-Fontaine. It is still a place of veneration; and pilgrims go to drink the waters of the so-called holy well (Champagnac, I, 264). Bétharram, Basses-Pyrénées, France, one of the oldest shrines in all France, the very name of which dates from the Saracenic occupation of the country. A legend puts back the foundation into the fourth century, but this is certainly several hundred years too early. In much more recent times a calvary, with various stations, has been erected and has brought back the flow of pilgrims. The Basque population round about knows it as one of its most sacred centres (Champagnac, I, 302-11). Boher, near Leith Abbey, King's Co., Ireland, contains the relics of St. Manchan, probably the abbot who died in 664. The present shrine is of twelfth- century work and is very well preserved considering its great age and the various calamities through which it has passed. Pilgrimages to it are organized from time to time, but on no very considerable scale (Wall, "Shrines of British Saints", 83-7). Bonaria, Sardinia, is celebrated for its statue of Our Lady of Mercy. It is of Italian workmanship, probably about 1370, and came miraculously to Bomaria, floating on the waters. Every Saturday local pilgrimages were organized; but to-day it is rather as an object of devotion to the fisherfolk that the shrine is popular (Champagnac, I, 1130-1). Boulogne, France, has the remains of a famous statue that has been a centre of pilgrimage for many centuries. The early history of the shrine is lost in the legends of the seventh century. But whatever was the origin of its foundation there has always been a close connexion between this particular shrine and the seafaring population on both sides of the Channel. In medieval France the pilgrimage to it was looked upon as so recognized a form of devotion that not a few judicial sentences are recorded as having been commuted into visits to Notre-Dame-de-Boulogne-sur-mer. Besides several French monarchs, Henry III visited the shrine in 1255, the Black Prince and John of Gaunt in 1360, and later Charles the Bold of Burgundy. So, too, in 1814 Louis XVIII gave thanks for his restoration before this same statue. The devotion of Our Lady of Boulogne has been in France and England increased by the official recognition of the Archconfraternity of Our Lady of Compassion, established at this shrine, the object of which is to pray for the return of the English people to the Faith (Champagnac, I, 342-62; Hales in "Academy", 22 April, 1882, 287). Bruges, Belgium, has its famous relic of the Holy Blood which is the centre of much pilgrimage. This was brought from Palestine by Thierry of Alsace on his return from the Second Crusade. From 7 April, 1150, this relic has been venerated with much devotion. The annual pilgrimage, attended by the Flemish nobility in their quaint robes and thousands of pilgrims from other parts of Christendom, takes place on the Monday following the first Sunday in May, when the relic is carried in procession. But every Friday the relic is less solemnly exposed for the veneration of the faithful (Smith, "Bruges", London, 1901, passim; cf. "Tablet", LXXXIII, 817). Buglose, Landes, France, was for long popular as a place of pilgrimage to a statue of the Blessed Virgin; but it is perhaps as much visited now as the birthplace of St. Vincent de Paul. The house where he was born and where he spent his boyhood is still shown (Champagnac, I, 374-90). Canterbury, Kent, England, was in medieval times the most famous of English shrines. First as the birthplace of Saxon Christianity and as holding the tomb of St. Augustine; secondly as the scene of the martyrdom of St. Thomas Becket, it fitly represented the ecclesiastical centre of England. But even from beyond the island, men and women trooped to the shrine of the "blissful martyr", especially at the great pardons or jubilees of the feast every fifty years from 1220 to 1520; his death caused his own city to become, what Winchester had been till then, the spiritual centre of England (Belloc, "The Old Road", London, 1904, 43). The spell of his name in his defence of the spirituality lay so strongly on the country that Henry VIII had to make a personal attack on the dead saint before he could hope to arrogate himself full ecclesiastical authority. The poetry of Chaucer, the wealth of England, the crown jewels of France, and marble from ruins of ancient Carthage (a papal gift) had glorified the shrine of St. Thomas beyond compare; and the pilgrim signs (see below) which are continually being discovered all over England and even across the Channel ("Guide to Mediæval Room, British Museum", London, 1907, 69-71) emphasize the popularity of this pilgrimage. The precise time of the year for visiting Canterbury seems difficult to determine (Belloc, ibid., 54), for Chaucer says spring, the Continental traditions imply winter, and the chief gatherings of which we have any record point to the summer. It was probably determined by the feasts of the saint and the seasons of the year. Thle place of the martyrdom has once more become a centre of devotion mainly through the action of the Guild of Ransom (Wall, "Shrines", 152-171; Belloc, op. cit.; Danks, "Canterbury", London, 1910). Carmel, Palestine, has been for centuries a sacred mountain, both for the Hebrew people and for Christians. The Mohammedans also regard it with devotion, and from the eighteenth century onwards have joined with Christians and Jews in celebrating the feast of Elias in the mountain that bears his name. Ceylon may be mentioned as possessing a curious place of pilgrimage, Adam Peak. On the summit of this mountain is a certain impression which the Mohammedans assert to be the footprint of Adam, the Brahmins that of Rama, the Buddhists that of Buddha, the Chinese that of Fu, and the Christians of India that of St. Thomas the Apostle (Champagnac, I, 446). Chartres is in many respects the most wonderful sanctuary in Europe dedicated to the Blessed Virgin, as it boasts of an uninterrupted tradition from the times of the druids who dedicated there a statue of virgini parituræ. This wonder statue is said to have been still existing in 1793, but to have been destroyed during the Revolution. Moreover, to enhance the sacredness of the place a relic was preserved, presented by Charlemagne, viz., the chemise or veil of the Blessed Virgin. Whatever may be the history or authenticity of the relic itself, it certainly is of great antiquity and resembles the veils now worn by women in the East. A third scource of devotion is the present stone image of the Blessed Virgin inaugurated with great pomp in 1857. The pilgrimages to this shrine at Chartres have naturally been frequent and of long continuance. Amongst others who have taken part in these visits of devotion were popes, kings of France and England, saints like Bernard of Clairvaux, Anselm of Canterbury, Thomas Becket, Vincent de Paul, and Francis de Sales, and the hapless Mary Queen of Scots. There is, moreover, an annual procession to the shrine on 15 March (Champagnac, I, 452-60; Northcote, "Sanct. of the Madonna", London, 1868, IV, 169-77; Chabarmes, "Hist. de N.-D. de Chartres", Chartres, 1873). Chichester, Sussex, England, had in its cathedral the tomb of St. Richard, its renowned bishop. The throng of pilgrims to this shrine, made famous by the devotion of Edward I, was so great that the body was dismembered so as to make three separate stations. Even then, in 1478, Bishop Storey had to draw up stringent rules so that the crowd should approach in a more seemly manner. Each parish was to enter at the west door in the prescribed order, of which notice had to be given by the parish priests in their churches on the Sunday preceding the feast. Besides 3 April, another pilgrimage was made on Whit-Saturday (Wall, 126-31). Cologne, Rhenish Germany, as a city of pilgrimage centres round the shrine of the Three Kings. The relics are reputed to have been brought by St. Helena to Constantinople, to have been transferred thence to Milan, and evidently in the twelfth century to have been carried in triumph by Frederick Barbarossa to Cologne. The present châsse is considered the most remarkable example extant of the medieval goldsmith's art. Though of old reckoned as one of the four greater pilgrimages, it seems to have lost the power of attracting huge crowds out of devotion; though many, no doubt, are drawn to it by its splendour (Champagnac, I, 482). Compostella, Spain, has long been famous as containing the shrine of St. James the Greater (q. v., where the authenticity of the relics etc. is discussed at some length). In some senses this was the most renowned medieval pilgrimage; and the custom of those who bore back with them from Galicia scallop shells as proofs of their journey gradually extended to every form of pilgrimage. The old feast-day of St. James (5 August) is still celebrated by the boys of London with their grottos of oyster shells. The earliest records of visits paid to this shrine date from the eighth century; and even in recent years the custom has been enthusiastically observed (cf. Rymer, "Foe;dera", London, 1710, XI, 371, 376, etc.). Concepción, Chile, has a pilgrimage to a shrine of the Blessed Virgin that is perhaps unique, a rock-drawn figure of the Mother of God. It was discovered by a child in the eighteenth century and was for long popular among the Chilians. Cordova, Spain, possesses a curious Madonna which was originally venerated at Villa Viciosa in Portugal. Because of the neglect into which it had fallen, a pious shepherd carried it off to Cordova, whence the Portuguese endeavoured several times to recover it, being frustrated each time by a miraculous intervention (Champagnac, I, 525). Cracow, Poland, is said to possess a miraculous statue of the Blessed Virgin brought to it by St. Hyacinth, to which in times past pilgrimages were often made (Acta SS., Aug., III, 317-41). Croyland, Lincolnshire, England, was the centre of much pilgrimage at the shrine of St. Guthlac, due principally to the devotion of King Wiglaf of Mercia (Wall, 116-8). Czenstochowa, Poland, is the most famous of Polish shrines dedicated to the Mother of God, where a picture painted on cypress wood and attributed to St. Luke is publicly venerated. This is reputed to be the richest sanctuary in the world. A copy of the picture has been set up in a chapel of St. Roch's church by the Poles in Paris (Champagnac, I, 540). Downpatrick, County Down, Ireland, is the most sacred city of Ireland in that the bodies of Ireland's highest saints were there interred. "In the town of Down, buried in one grave Bridget, Patrick, and the pious Columba." Nothing need be said here about the relics of these saints; it is sufficient merely to hint at the pilgrimages that made this a centre of devotion (Wall, 31-2). Drumlane, Ireland, was at one time celebrated as containing the relics of S. Moedoc in the famous Breac Moedoc. This shrine was in the custody of the local priest till 1846, when it was borrowed and sold to a Dublin jeweller, from whom in turn it was bought by Dr. Petrie. It is now in the museum of the Royal Irish Academy (Wall, 80-3). Dumfermline, Fife, Scotland, was the resort of countless pilgrims, for in the abbey was the shrine of St. Margaret. She was long regarded as the most popular of Scottish saints and her tomb was the most revered in all that kingdom. Out of devotion to her, Dumfermline succeeded Iona as being the burial place of the kings (Wall, 48-50). Durham, England, possessed many relics which drew to it the devotion of many visitors. But its two chief shrines were those of St. Cuthbert and St. Bede. The former was enclosed in a gorgeous reliquary, which was put in its finished state by John, Lord Nevill of Raby, in 1372. Some idea may be had of the number of pilgrims from the amount put by the poorer ones into the money-box that stood close by. The year 1385-6 yielded £63 17s. 8d. which would be equivalent in our money to £1277 13s. 4d. A dispute rages round the present relics of St. Cuthbert, and there is also some uncertainty about the body of St. Bede (Wall, 176-107, 110-6). Edmundsbury, Suffolk, England, sheltered in its abbey church the shrine of St. Edmund, king and martyr. Many royal pilgrims from King Canute to Henry VI knelt and made offerings at the tomb of the saint; and the common people crowded there in great numbers because of the extraordinary miracles worked by the holy martyr (Wall, 216-23; Mackinlay, "St. Edmund King and Martyr", London, 1893; Snead-Cox, "Life of Cardinal Vaughan", London, 1910, II, 287-94). Einsiedeln, Schwyz, Switzerland, has been a place of pilgrimage since Leo VIII in 954. The reason of this devotion is a miraculous statue of the Blessed Virgin brought by St. Meinrad from Zurich. The saint was murdered in 861 by robbers who coveted the rich offerings which already at that early date were left by the pilgrims. The principal days for visiting the shrine are 14 Sept. and 13 Oct.; it is calculated that the yearly number of pilgrims exceeds 150,000. Even Protestants from the surrounding cantons are known to have joined the throng of worshippers (Northcote, "Sanctuaries", 122-32). Ely, Cambridgeshire, England, was the centre of a pilgrimage to the shrine of St. Etheldreda. One of her hands is still preserved in a shrine in the (pre-Reformation) Catholic church dedicated to her in London (Wall, 55-6). Ephesus, Asia Minor, is the centre of two devotions, one to the mythical Seven Sleepers, the other to the Mother of God, who lived here some years under the care of St. John. Here also it was that the Divine maternity of Our Lady was proclaimed, by the Third OEcumenical Council, a.d. 491 ("Pélerinages aux sanct. de la mère de Dieu", Paris, 1840, 119-32; Champagnac, I, 608- 19). Evreux, Eure, France, has a splendid cathedral dedicated to the Blessed Virgin, but the pilgrimage to it dates only from modern times (Champagnac, I, 641). Faviers, Seine-et-Oise, France, is the centre of a pilgrimage to the church of St. Sulpice, where there are relics of the saint. St. Louis IX paid his homage at the shrine; and even now, from each parish of St. Sulpice (a common dedication among French churches) deputies come here annually on pilgrimage for the three Sundays following the feast which occurs on 27 August (Champagnac, I, 646-7). Garaison, Tarbes, France, was the scene of an apparition of Our Lady of Good Counsel to a shepherdess of twelve years old, Aglèse de Sagasan, early in the sixteenth century. The sanctuary was dedicated afresh after the Revolution and is once more thronged with pilgrims. The chief festival is celebrated on 8 September (Champagnac, I, 95-9). Genezzano, Italy, contains the miraculous picture of Our Lady of Good Counsel which is said to have been translated from Albania. It has, since its arrival 25 April, 1467, been visited by popes, cardinals, kings, and by countless throngs of pilgrims; and devotion to the shrine steadily increases (Northcote, "Sanctuaries", 15-24). Glastonbury, Somerset, England, has been a holy place for many centuries and round it cluster legends and memories, such as no other shrine in England can boast. The Apostles, St. Joseph of Arimathea, Sts. Patrick and David, and King Arthur begin the astonishing cycle which is continued by names like St. Dunstan, etc. The curious thorn which blossomed twice yearly, in May and at Christmastide, also proved an attraction for pilgrims, though the story of its miraculous origin does not seem to go back much before the sixteenth century. A proof of the devotion which the abbey inspired is seen in the "Pilgrim's Inn," a building of late fifteenth century work in the Perpendicular style yet standing in the town (Marson, "Glastonbury. The English Jerusalem", Bath, 1909). Grace, Lot-et-Garonne, France, used to be the seat of an ancient statue of the Blessed Virgin which entered the town in a miraculous fashion. It was enshirined in a little chapel perched on the bridge that spans the river Lot. Hence its old name, Nostro Damo del cap del Pount. Even now some pilgrimages are made to the restored shrine (Champagnac, I, 702-5). Grottaferrata, Campagna, Italy, a famous monastery of the Greek Rite, takes its name (traditionally) from a picture of the Madonna found, protected by a grille, in a grotto. It is still venerated in the abbey church, and is the centre of a local pilgrimage (Champagnac, I, 714-15). Guadalupe, Estramadura, Spain, is celebrated for its wonder-working statue of the Blessed Virgin. But it has been outshone by another shrine of the same name in Mexico, which has considerably gained in importance as the centre of pilgrimage. As a sanctuary the latter takes the place of one dedicated to an old pagan goddess who was there worshipped. The story of the origin of this shrine (see Guadalupe, Shrine of) is astonishing. Hal, Belgium, contains a wooden statue of the Blessed Virgin which is decorated with a golden crown. It has been described by Justus Lipsius in his "Diva Virgo Hallensis" ("Omnia Opera", Antwerp, 1637, III, 687- 719); as a place of pilgrimage, it has been famous in all Europe and has received gifts from many noble pilgrims. The monstrance given by Henry VIII was lent for use during the Eucharistic Congress in London in 1909. The miracles recorded are certainly wonderful. Holywell, North Wales, still draws large bodies of pilgrims by its wonderful cures. It has done so continuously for over a thousand years, remaining the one active example of what were once very common (Holy Wells, Chalmers, "Book of Days", II, 6-8). The well is dedicated to St. Winefride and is said to mark the spot of her martyrdom in 634 (Maher, "Holywell in 1894" in "The Month", February, 1895, 153). Iona, Scotland, though not properly, until recently, a place of pilgrimage, can hardly be omitted with propriety from this list. The mention of it is sufficient to recall memories of its crowded tombs of kings, chieftains, prelates, which witness to the honour in which it was held as the Holy Island (Trenholme, "Story of Iona", Edinburgh, 1909). Jerusalem, Palestine, was in many ways the origin of all pilgrimages. It is the first spot to which the Christian turned with longing eyes. The earliest recorded pilgrimages go back to the third century with the mention of Bishop Alexander; then, in the fourth century came the great impulse given by the Empress Helena who was followed by the Bordeaux Pilgrims and the "Peregrinatio Silviæ" and others (cf. Acta SS., June, III, 176; Sept., III, 56). The action of St. Jerome and his aristocratic lady friends made the custom fashionable and the Latin colony was established by them which made it continuous (Gregory of Tours, "Hist. Franc.", Paris, 1886, ed. by Omont, II, 68; V, 181; etc.). So too comes the visit of Arnulf, cited by St. Bede ("Eccl. Hist.", V, xv, 263, ed. Giles, London, 1847) from the writings of Adamnan; of Cadoc the Welsh bishop mentioned below (cf. St. Andrews); of Probus sent by Gregory I to establish a hospice in Jerusalem (Acta SS., March, II, § 23, 150, 158a, etc.). There are also the legendary accounts of King Arthur's pilgrimage, and that of Charlemagne (Paris, "Romania", 1880, 1-60; 1902, 404, 616, 618). A few notices occur of the same custom in the tenth century (Beazley, II, 123), but there is a lull in these visits to Jerusalem till the eleventh century. Then, at once, a new stream begins to pour over to the East at times in small numbers, as Foulque of Nerra in 1011, Meingoz took with him only Simon the Hermit, and Ulric, later prior of Zell, was accompanied by one who could chant the psalms with him; at times also in huge forces as in 1026 under Richard II of Normandy, in 1033 a record number (Glaber, Paris, 1886, IV, 6, 106, ed. Prou), in 1035 another under Robert the Devil (ibid., 128), and most famous of all in 1065 that under Gunther, Bishop of Bamberg, with twelve thousand pilgrims (Lambert of Gersfield, "Mon. Germ. Hist.", Hanover, 1844, V, 169). This could only lead to the Crusades which stamped the Holy Land on the memory and heart of Christendom. The number who took the Cross seems fabulous (cf. Girandus Cambrensis, "Itin. Cambriæ", II, xiii, 147, in R. S., ed. Dimock, 1868); and many who could not go themselves left instructions for their hearts to be buried there (cf. Hovenden, "Annals", ed. Stubbs, 1869, in R. S., II, 279; "Chron. de Froissart", Bouchon, 1853, Paris, 1853, I, 47; cf. 35-7). So eager were men to take the Cross, that some even branded or cut its mark upon them ("Miracula s. Thomæ", by Abbot Benedict, ed. Giles, 186) or "with a sharpe knyfe he share, A crosse upon his shoulder bare" ("Syr Isenbras" in Utterson, "Early Pop. Poetry", London, 1817, I, 83). From the twelfth century onwards the flow is uninterrupted, Russians (Beazley, II, 156), Northerners (II, 174), Jews (218-74), etc. And the end is not yet ("Itinera hierosolymitana sæculi IV-VIII", ed. Geyer in the "Corp. script. eccl. lat.", 39, Vienna, 1898; Palestine Pilg. Text Soc., London, 1884 sqq.; "Deutsche Pilgerreisen nach dem heiligen Lande", II, Innsbruck, 1900, etc.; Bréhier, "L'église et l'Orient au moyen-âge", Paris, 1907, 10-15, 42-50). Kavelaer, Guelders, is a daughter-shrine to the Madonna of Luxemburg, a copy of which was here enshrined in 1642 and continues to attract pilgrims (Champagnac, I, 875). La Quercia, Viterbo, Italy, is celebrated for its quaint shrine. Within the walls of a church built by Bramante is a tabernacle of marble that enfolds the wonder-working image, painted of old by Batiste Juzzante and hung up for protection in an oak. A part of the oak still survives within the shrine, which boasts, as of old, its pilgrims (Mortier, "Notre Dame de la Quercia", Florence, 1904). La Salette, Dauphiney, France, is one of the places where the Blessed Virgin is said to have appeared in the middle of the nineteenth century. This is no place to discuss the authenticity of the apparition. As a place of pilgrimage it dates from 19 Sept., 1846, immediately after which crowds began to flock to the shrine. The annual number of visitors is computed to be about 30,000 (Northcote, "Sanctuaries", 178-229). La Sarte, Huy, Belgium, boasts a shrine of the Blessed Virgin that dominates the surrounding country. Perched on the top of a hill, past a long avenue of wayside chapels, is the statue found by chance in 1621. Year by year during May countless pilgrims organized in parishes climb the steep ascent in increasing numbers (Halflants, "Hist. de N.-D. de la Sarte", Huy, 1871). Laus, Hautes-Alpes, France, is one of the many seventeenth-century shrines of the Blessed Virgin. There is the familiar story of an apparition to a shepherdess with a command to found a church. So popular has this shrine become that the annual number of pilgrims is said to be close on 80,000. The chief pilgrimage times are Pentecost and throughout October (Northcote, "Sanctuaries", 146-59). Le Puy, Haute-Loire, France, boasts the earliest scene of any of the Blessed Virgin's apparitions. The legend begins about the year 50. After the Crusades had commenced, Puy-Notre-Dame became famous as a sanctuary of the Blessed Virgin throughout all Christendom. Its great bishop, Adhemar of Montheil, was the first to take the Cross, and he journeyed to Jerusalem with Godfrey de Bouillon as legate of the Holy See. The "Salve Regina" is by some attributed to him, and was certainly often known as the "Anthem of Puy". Numberless French kings, princes, and nobles have venerated this sanctuary; St. Louis IX presented it with a thorn from the Sacred Crown. The pilgrimages that we read of in connexion with the shrine must have been veritable pageants, for the crowds, even as late as 1853, exceeded 300,000 in number (Northcote, "Sanctuaries", 160-9). Lichfield, Staffordshire, England, is one of the places of pilgrimage which has ceased to be a centre of devotion; for the relics of St. Chad, cast out of their tomb by Protestant fanaticism, have now found a home in a Catholic church (the Birmingham cathedral), and it is to the new shrine that the pilgrims turn (Wall, 97-102). Liesse, Picardy, France, was before the rise of Lourdes the most famous centre in France of pilgrimage to the Blessed Virgin. The date of its foundation is pushed back to the twelfth century and the quaint story of its origin connects it with Christian captives during the Crusades. Its catalogue of pilgrims reads like an "Almanach de Gotha"; but the numberless unnamed pilgrims testify even more to its popularity. It is still held in honour (Champagnac, I, 918- 22). Lincoln, Lincolnshire, England, in its splendid cathedral guarded the relics of its bishop, St. Hugh. At the entombment in 1200, two kings and sixteen bishops, at the translation in 1280, one king, two queens, and many prelates took part. The inflow of pilgrims was enormous every year till the great spoliation under Henry VIII (Wall, 130-40). Loges, Seine-et-Oise, France, was a place much frequented by pilgrims because of the shrine of St. Fiacre, an Irish solitary. In 1615 it became, after a lapse of some three centuries, once more popular, for Louis XIII paid several visits there. Among other famous worshippers were James II and his queen from their place of exile at St.-Germain. The chief day of pilgrimage was the feast of St. Stephen, protomartyr (26 December). It was suppressed in 1744 (Champagnac, I, 934-5). Loreto, Ancona, Italy, owing to the ridicule of one half of the world and the devotion of the other half, is too well-known to need more than a few words. Nor is the authenticity of the shrine to be here at all discussed. As a place of pilgrimage it will be sufficient to note that Dr. Stanley, an eyewitness, pronounced it to be "undoubtedly the most frequented shrine in Christendom" (Northcote, "Sanctuaries", 65-106; Dolan in "The Month", August, 1894, 545; cf. ibid., February, 1867, 178-83). Lourdes, Pyrénées, France, as a centre of pilgrimage is without rival in popularity throughout the world. A few statistics are all that shall be recorded here. From 1867 to 1903 inclusively 4271 pilgrimages passed to Lourdes numbering some 387,000 pilgrims; the last seven years of this period average 150 pilgrimages annually. Again within thirty-six years (1868 to 1904) 1643 bishops (including 63 cardinals) have visited the grotto; and the Southern Railway Company reckon that Lourdes station receives over a million travellers every yeard (Bertrin, "Lourdes", tr. Gibbs, London, 1908; "The Month":, October, 1905, 359; February, 1907, 124). Luxemburg possesses a shrine of the Blessed Virgin under the title of "Consoler of the Afflicted". It was erected by the Jesuit Fathers and has become much frequented by pious pilgrims from all the country round. The patronal feast is the first Sunday of July, and on that day and the succeeding octave the chapel is crowded. Whole villages move up, headed by their parish priests; and the number of the faithful who frequent the sacraments here is sufficient justification for the numerous indulgences with which this sanctuary is enriched (Champagnac, I, 985-97). Lyons, Rhône, France, boasts a well-known pilgrimage to Notre-Dame-de-Fourvières. This shrine is supposed to have taken the place of a statue of Mercury in the forum of Old Lugdunum. But the earliest chapel was utterly destroyed by the Calvinists in the sixteenth century and again during the Revolution. The present structure dates from the reinauguration by Pius VII in person, 19 April, 1805. It is well to remember that Lyons was ruled by St. Irenæus who was famed for his devotion to the Mother of God (Champagnac, I, 997-1014). Malacca, Malay Peninsula, was once possessed of a shrine set up by St. Francis Xavier, dedicated under the title Our Lady of the Mount. It was for some years after his death (and he was buried in this chapel, before the translation of his relics to Goa, cf. "The Tablet", 31 Dec., 1910, p. 1055), a centre of pilgrimage. When Malacca passed from Portuguese to Dutch rule, the exercise of the Catholic religion was forbidded, and the sanctuary became a ruin (Champagnac, I, 1023-5). Mantua, Lombardy, Italy, has outside the city walls a beautiful church, S. Maria della Grazie, dedicated by the noble house of Gonzaga to the Mother of God. It enshrines a picture of the Madonna painted on wood and attributed to St. Luke. Pius II, Charles V, the Constable of Bourbon are among the many pilgrims who have visited this sanctuary. The chief season of pilgrimage is about the feast of the Assumption (15 August), when it is computed that over one hundred thousand faithful have some years attended the devotions (Champagnac, I, 1042). Maria-Stein, near Basle, Switzerland, is the centre of a pilgrimage. An old statue of the Blessed Virgin, no doubt the treasure of some unknown hermit, is famed for its miracles. To it is attached a Benedictine monastery-a daughter-house to Einsiedeln (Champagnac, I, 1044). Mariazell, Styria, a quaint village, superbly situated but badly built, possesses a tenth- century statue of the Madonna. To it have come almost all the Habsburgs on pilgrimage, and Maria Theresa left there, after her visit, medallions of her husband and her children. From all the country round, from Carinthia, Bohemia, and the Tyrol, the faithful flock to the shrine during June and July. The Government used to decree the day on which the pilgrims from Vienna were to meet in the capital at the old Cathedral of St. Stephen and set out in ordered bands for their four days' pilgrimage (Champagnac, I, 1045-7). Marseilles, France, as a centre of pilgrimage has a noble shrine, Notre-Dame-de-la-Garde. Its chapel, on a hill beyond the city, dominates the neighbourhood, where is the statue, made by Channel in 1836 to take the place of an older one destroyed during the Revolution (Champagnac, I, 1062). Mauriac, Cantal, France, is visited because of the thirteenth-century shrine dedicated to Notre-Dame-des-Miracles. The statue is of wood, quite black. The pilgrimage day is annually celebrated on 9 May (Champagnac, I, 1062). Messina, Sicily, the luckless city of earthquake, has a celebrated shrine of the Blessed Virgin. It was peculiar among all shrines in that it was supposed to contain a letter written or rather dictated by the Mother of God, congratulating the people of Messina on their conversion to Christianity. During the destruction of the city in 1908, the picture was crushed in the fallen cathedral (Thurston in "The Tablet", 23 Jan., 1908, 123-5). Montaigu, Belgium, is perhaps the most celebrated of Belgian shrines raised to the honour of the Blessed Virgin. All the year round pilgrimages are made to the statue; and the number of offerings day by day is extraordinary. Montmartre, Seine, France, has been for centuries a place of pilgrimage as a shrine of the Mother of God. St. Ignatius came here with his first nine companions to receive their vows on 15 Aug., 1534. But it is famous now rather as the centre of devotion to the Sacred Heart, since the erection of the National Basilica there after the war of 1870 (Champagnac, I, 1125-46). Montpellier, Herault, France, used to possess a famous statue of black wood-Notre- Dame-des-Tables. Hidden for long within a silver statue of the Blessed Virgin, life-size, it was screened from public view, till it was stolen by the Calvinists and has since disappeared from history. From 1189 the feast of the Miracles of Mary was celebrated with special Office at Montpellier on 1 Sept., and throughout an octave (Champagnac, I, 1147). Mont St-Michel, Normandy, is the quaintest, most beautiful, and interesting of shrines. For long it was the centre of a famous pilgrimage to the great archangel, whose power in times of war and distress was earnestly implored. Even to-day a few bands of peasants, and here and there a devout pilgrim, come amid the crowds of visitors to honour St. Michael as of old (Champagnac, I, 1151). Montserrat, Spain, lifts itself above the surrounding country in the same way as it towers above other Spanish centres of pilgrimage to the Blessed Virgin. Its existence can be traced to the tenth century, but it was not a centre of much devotion till the thirteenth. The present church was only consecrated on 2 Feb., 1562. It is still much sought after in pilgrimage (Champagnac, I, 1152-73). Naples, Italy, is a city which has been for many centuries and for many reasons a centre of pilgrimage. Two famous shrines there are the Madonna del Carmine and Santa Maria della Grotta (Northcote, "Sanctuaries", 1007-21; see also Januarius, Saint.) Oostacker, Ghent, Belgium, is one of the famous daughter-shrines of Lourdes. Built in imitation of that sanctuary and having some of the Lourdes water in the pool of the grotto, it has almost rivalled its parent in the frequency of its cures. Its inauguration began with a body of 2000 pilgrims, 29 July, 1875, since which time there has been a continuous stream of devout visitors. One has only to walk out there from Ghent on an ordinary afternoon to see many worshippers, men, women, whole parishes with their curés, etc., kneeling before the shrine or chanting before the Blessed Sacrament in the church (Scheerlinck, "Lourdes en Flandre", Ghent, 1876). Oxford, England, contained one of the premier shrines of Britain, that of St. Frideswide. Certainly her relics were worthy of grateful veneration, especially to Oxford dwellers, for it is to her that the city and univerrsity alike appear to owe their existence. Her tomb (since restored at great pains, 1890) was the resort of many pilgrims. Few English kings cared to enter Oxford at all; but the whole university, twice a year, i.e. mid-Lent and Ascension Day, headed by the chancellor, came in solemn procession to offer their gifts. The Catholics of the city have of late years reorganized the pilgrimage on the saint's feast-day, 19 Oct. (Wall, 63-71). Padua, Italy, is the centre of a pilgrimage to the relics of St. Anthony. In a vast choir behind the sanctuary of the church that bears his name is the treasury of St. Anthony; but his body reposes under the high altar. Devotion to this saint has increased so enormously of late years that no special days seem set apart for pilgrimages. They proceed continuously all the year round (Chérancé, "St. Anthony of Padua", tr. London, 1900). Pennant Melangell, Montgomery, Wales, to judge from the sculptured fragments of stone built into the walls of the church and lych gate, was evidently a place of note, where a shrine was built to St. Melangell, a noble Irish maiden. The whole structure as restored stands over eight feet high and originally stood in the Cell-y-Bedd, or Cell of the Grave, and was clearly a centre of pilgrimage (Wall, 48). Pontigny, Yvonne, France, was for many centuries a place of pilgrimage as containing the shrine of St. Edmund of Canterbury. Special facilities were allowed by the French king for English pilgrims. The Huguenots despoiled the shrine, but the relics were saved to be set up again in a massive châsse of eighteenth-century workmanship. In spite of the troubles in France the body remains in its old position, and is even carefully protected by the Government (Wall, 171-5). Puche, Valencia, Spain, is the great Spanish sanctuary dedicated to Our Lady of Mercy, in honour of wom the famous Order of Mercy came into being through Spanish saints. The day of pilgrimage was the feast of Our Lady of Mercy, 24 Sept. (Champagnac, II, 488-92). Rocamadour, Lot, France, was the centre of much devotion as a shrine of the Blessed Virgin. Amongst its pilgrims may be named St. Dominic; and the heavy mass of from iron hanging outside the chapel witnesses to the legendary pilgrimage of Roland, whose good sword Durendal was deposited there till it was stolen with the other treasures by Henry II's turbulent eldest son, Henry Court Mantel (Drane, "Hist. of St. Dominic", London, 1891, 301-10; Laporte, "Guide du pèlerin à Rocamadour", Rocamadour, 1862). Rocheville, Toulouse, France.-The legend of the origin fixes the date of its apparition of the Blessed Virgin as 1315. Long famous, then long neglected, it has once more been restored. During the octave of the Nativity of Our Lady (8-15 Sept.) it is visited by quite a large body of devout pilgrims (Champagnac, II, 101). Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, contains a sanctuary dedicated to Our Lady of Travel. This statue is in a convent of nuns situated just outside the city, on the east of the bay. It is devoutly venerated by the pious people of Brazil, who invoke the protection of the Blessed Virgin on their journeys (Champagnac, II, 517-8). Rome, Italy, has had almost as much influence on the rise of Christian pilgrimages as the Holy Land. The sacred city of the Christian world, where lay the bodies of the twin prince Apostles, attracted the love of every pious Christian. We have quoted the words of St. Chrysostom, who yearned to see the relics of St. Paul; and his desire has been expressed in action in every age of Christian time. The early records of every nation (of the histories of Eusebius, Zosimus, Socrates, Bede, etc. passim) give name after name of bishop, king, noble, priest, layman who have journeyed to visit as pilgrims the limina Apostolorum. Full to repletion as the city is with relics of Christian holiness, the "rock on which the Church is built" has been the chief attraction; and Bramante has well made it the centre of his immortal temple. Thus St. Marcius came with his wife Martha and his two sons all the way from Persia in 269; St. Paternus from Alexandria in 253; St. Maurus from Africa in 284. Again Sts. Constantine and Victorian on their arrival at Rome went straight to the tomb of St. Peter, where soldiers caught them and put them to death. So also St. Zoe was found praying at the tomb of St. Peter and martyred. Even then in these early days the practice of pilgrimages was in full force, so that the danger of death did not deter men from it (Barnes, "St. Peter in Rome", London, 1901, 146). Then to overleap the centuries we find records of the Saxon and Danish kings of England trooping Romewards, so that the very name of Rome has become a verb to express the idea of wandering (Low Lat., romerus; Old Fr., romieu; Sp., romero; Port., romeiro; A. S., romaign; M. E. romen; Modern, roam). And of the Irish, the same uninterrupted custom has held good till our own day (Ulster Archæolog. Jour., VII, 238-42). Of the other nations there is no need to speak. It is curious, however, to note that though the chief shrine of Rome was undoubtedly the tomb of the Apostles-to judge from all the extant records-yet the pilgrim sign (see below) which most commonly betokened a palmer from Rome was the "vernicle" or reproduction of St. Veronica's veil. Thus Chaucer (Bell's edition, London, 1861, 105) describes the pardoner:- "That strait was comen from the Court of Rome A vernicle had he served upon his cappe". However, there was besides a medal with a reproduction of the heads of Sts. Peter and Paul and another with the crossed keys. These pilgrimages to Rome, of which only a few early instances have been given, have increased of late years, for the prisoner of the Vatican, who cannot go out to his children, has become, since 1870, identified with the City of the Seven Hills in a way that before was never for long experienced. Hence the pope is looked upon as embodying in his person the whole essence of Rome, so that to-day it is the pope who is the living tomb of St. Peter. All this has helped to increase the devotion and love of the Catholic world for its central city and has enormously multiplied the annual number of pilgrims. Within the city itself, mention must just be made of the celebrated pilgrimage to the seven churches, a devotion so dear to the heart of St. Philip (Capecelatro, "Life of St. Philip", tr. Pope, London, 1894, I, 106, 238, etc.). His name recalls the great work he did for the pilgrims who came to Rome. He established his Congregation of the Trinità dei Pellegrini (ibid., I, 138-54), the whole work of which was to care for and look after the thronging crowds who came every year, more especially in the years of jubilee. Of course, many such hospices already existed. The English College had originally been a home for Saxon pilgrims; and there were and are many others. But St. Philip gave the movement a new impetus. St. Albans, Hertford, England, was famous over Europe in the Middle Ages. This is the more curious as the sainted martyr was no priest or monk, but a simple layman. The number of royal pilgrims practically includes the whole list of English kings and queens, but especially devoted to the shrine were Henry III, Edward I, Edward II, Richard II. During the last century the broken pieces of the demolished shrine (to the number of two thousand fragments) were patiently fitted together, and now enable the present generation to picture the beauty it presented to the pilgrims who thronged around it (Wall, II, 35-43). St. Andrews, Fife, Scotland.-Though more celebrated as a royal burgh and as the seat of Scotland's most ancient university, its earlier renown came to it as a centre of pilgrimage. Even as far back as the year 500 we find a notice of the pilgriimages made by the Welsh bishop, Cadoc. He went seven times to Rome, thrice to Jerusalem, and once to St. Andrews (Acta SS., Jan., III, 219). St. David's, Pembrokeshire, Wales, was so celebrated a place of pilgrimage that William I went there immediately after the conquest of England. The importance of this shrine and the reverence in which the relics of St. David were held may be gathered from the papal Decree that two pilgrimages here were equal to one to Rome (Wall, 91-5). St. Anne d'Auray, Vannes, Brittany, a centre of pilgrimage in one of the holiest cities of the Bretons, celebrated for its pardons in honour of St. Anne. The principal pilgrimages take place at Pentecost and on 26 July. Ste Anne de Beaupré, Quebec, Canada, has become the most popular centre of pilgrimage in all Canada within quite recent years. A review, or pious magazine, "Les Annales de la Bonne S. Anne", has been founded to increase the devotion of the people; and the zeal of the Canadian clergy has been displayed in organizing parochial pilgrimages to the shrine. The Eucharistic Congress, held at Montreal in 1910, also did a great deal to spread abroad the fame of this sanctuary. Sainte-Baume.-S. Maximin, Toulouse, France, is the centre of a famous pilgrimage to the supposed relics of St. Mary Magdalene. The historical evidence against the authentication of the tombs is extraordinarily strong and has not been really seriously answered. The pilgrimages, however, continue; and devout worshippers visit the shrine, if not of, at least, dedicated to, St. Mary Magdalene. The arguments against the tradition have been marshalled and fully set out by Mgr Duchesne ("Fastes épiscopaux de l'ancienne Gaul", Paris, 1894-1900) and appeared in English form in "The Tablet", XCVI (1900), 88, 282, 323, 365, 403, 444. St. Patrick's Purgatory, Donegal, Ireland, has been the centre of a pilgrimage from far remote days. The legends that describe its foundation are full of Dantesque episodes which have won for the shrine a place in European literature. It is noticed by the medieval chroniclers, found its way into Italian prose, was dramatized by Calderón, is referred to by Erasmus, and its existence seems implied in the remark of Hamlet, concerning the ghost from purgatory: "Yes by St. Patrick but there is, Horatio" (Act I, sc. V). Though suppressed even before the Reformation, and of course during the Penal Times, it is still extraordinarily popular with the Irish people, for whom it is a real penitential exercise. It seems the only pilgrimage of modern times conducted like those of the Middle Ages (Chambers, "Book of Days", London, I, 725-8, Leslie in "The Tablet", 1910). Saragossa, Aragon, Spain, is celebrated for its famous shrine dedicated to the Blessed Virgin under the title Nuestra Señora del Pilar. Tradition asserts that the origin of this statue goes back to the time of St. James, when, in the lifetime of the Mother of God, it was set up by order of the Apostle. This was approved by Callistus III in 1456. It is glorious on account of the many miracles performed there, and is the most popular of all the shrines of the Blessed Virgin in the Peninsula and the most thronged with pilgrims (Acta SS., July, VII, 880-900). Savona, Genoa, Italy, claims to possess the oldest sanctuary dedicated to the Blessed Virgin in all Italy, for to it Constantine is said to have gone on pilgrimage. The statue was solemnly crowned by Pius VII, not while spending his five years of captivity in the city, but later, i. e., on 10 May, 1815, assisted by King Victor Emmanuel and the royal family of Savoy (Champagnac, II, 852-7). Teneriffe, Canary Islands, has a statue of the Blessed Virgin which tradition asserts was found by the pagan inhabitants and worshipped as some strange deity for a hundred years or so. For some time after the conversion of the islanders it was a centre of pilgrimage (Champagnac, II, 926-7). Toledo, New Castile, Spain, in its gorgeous cathedral enshrines a statue of the Blessed Virgin in a chapel of jasper, ornamented with magnificent and unique treasures. This centre of devotion to the Blessed Virgin which draws to it annually a great number of pilgrims, is due to the tradition of the apparition to St. Ildephonsus (Champagnac, II, 944-6). Tortosa, Syria, was in the Middle Ages famous for a shrine of the Blessed Virgin, which claimed to be the most ancient in Christendom. There is a quaint story about a miracle there told by Joinville who made a pilgrimage to the shrine, when he accompanied St. Louis to the East (Champagnac, II, 951). Tours, Indre-et-Loire, France, has long been celebrated for the tomb of St. Martin, to which countless pilgrims journeyed before the Revolution (Goldie in "The Month", Nov., 1880, 331). Trier, Rhenish Prussia, has boasted for fifteen centuries of the possession of the Holy Coat. This relic, brought back by St. Helena from the Holy Land, has been the centre of pilgrimage since first date. It has been several times exposed to the faithful and each time has drawn countless pilgrims to its veneration. In 1512 the custom of an exposition taking place every seven years was begun, but it has been often interrupted. The last occasion on which the Holy Coat was exhibited for public veneration was in 1891, when 1,900,000 of the faithful in a continual stream passed before the relic (Clarke, "A Pilgrimage to the Holy Coat of Treves", London, 1892). Turin, Piedmont, Italy, is well known for its extraordinary relic of the Holy Winding-Sheet or Shroud. Whatever may be said against its authenticity, it is an astonishing relic, for the impression which it bears in negative of the body of Jesus Christ could with difficulty have been added by art. The face thereon impressed agrees remarkably with the traditional portraits of Christ. Naturally the exposition of the sacred relic are the occasions of numerous pilgrimages (Thurston in "The Month", January, 1903, 17 February, 162). Vallambrosa, Tuscany, Italy, has become a place of pilgrimage, even though the abbey no longer contains its severe and picturesque throng of monks. Its romatic site has made it a ceaseless attraction to minds like those of Dante, Ariosto, Milton, etc.; and Benvenuto Cellini tells us that he too made a pilgrimage to the shrine of the Blessed Virgin there to thank her for the many beautiful works of art he had composed; and as he went he sang and prayed (Champagnac, II, 1033-7). Walsingham, Norfolk, England, contained England's greatest shrine of the Blessed Virgin. The chapel dates from 1061, almost from which time onward it was the most frequented Madonna sanctuary in the island, both by foreigners and the Englsih. Many of the English kings went to it on pilgrimage; and the destruction of it weighed most heavily of all his misdeeds on the conscience of the dying Henry VIII. Erasmus in his "Religious Pilgrimage" ("Colloquies", London, 1878, II, 1-37) has given a most detailed account of the shrine, though his satire on the whole devotion is exceptionally caustic. Once more, annually, pilgrimages to the old chapel have been revived; and the pathetic "Lament of Walsingham" is ceasing to be true to actual facts ("The Month", Sept., 1901, 236; Bridgett, "Dowry of Mary", London, 1875, 303-9). Westminster, London, England, contained one of the seven incorrupt bodies of saints of England (Acta SS., Aug., I, 276), i. e., that of St. Edward the Confessor, the only one which yet remains in its old shrine and is still the centre of pilgrimage. From immediately after the king's death, his tomb was carefully tended, especially by the Norman kings. At the suggestion of St. Thomas Becket a magnificent new shrine was prepared by Henry II in 1163, and the body of the saint there translated on 13 Oct. At once pilgrims began to flock to the tomb for miracles, and to return thanks for favours, as did Richard I, after his captivity (Radulph Coggeshall, "Chron. Angl.", in R. S., ed. Stevenson, 1875, 63). So popular was this last canonized English king, that on the rebuilding of the abbey by Henry III St. Edward's tomb really overshadowed the primary dedication to St. Peter. The pilgrim's sign was a king's head surmounting a pin. The step on which the shrine stands was deeply worn by the kneeling pilgrims, but it has been relaid so that the hollows are now on the inner edge. Once more this sanctuary, too, has become a centre of pilgrimage (Stanley, "Mem. of Westminster", London, 1869, passim; Wall, 223-35). GARB In older ages, the pilgrim had a special garb which betokened his mission. This has been practically omitted in modern times, except among the Mohammedans, with whom ihram still distinguishes the Hallal and Hadj from the rest of the people. As far as one can discover, the dress of the medieval pilgrim consisted of a loose frock or long smock, over which was thrown a separate hood with a cape, much after the fashion of the Dominican and Servite habit. On his head, he wore a low-crowned, broad-brimmed hat, such as is familiar to us from the armorial bearings of cardinals. This was in wet and windy weather secured under his chin by two strings, but strings of such length that when not needed the hat could be thrown off and hang behind the back. Across his breast passed a belt from which was suspended his wallet, or script, to contain his relics, food, money, and what-not. In some illuminations it may be noted as somehow attached to his side (cf. blessing infra). In one hand he held a staff, composed of two sticks swathed tightly together by a withy band. Thus in the grave of Bishop Mayhew (d. 1516), which was opened a few years ago in Hereford cathedral, there was found a stock of hazel-wood between four and five feet long and about the thickness of a finger. As there were oyster shells also buried in the same grave, it seems reasonable to suppose that this stick was the bishop's pilgrim staff; but it has been suggested recently that it represents a crosier of a rough kind used for the burial of prelates (Cox and Harvey, "Church Furniture", London, 1907, 55). Occasionally these staves were put to uses other than those for which they were intended. Thus on St. Richard's day, 3 April, 1487, Bishop Story of Chichester had to make stringent regulations, for there was such a throng of pilgrims to reach the tomb of the saint that the struggles for precedence led to blows and the free use of the staves on each other's heads. In one case a death had resulted. To prevent a recurrence of this disorder, banners and crosses only were to be carried (Wall, 128). Some, too, had bells in their hands or other instruments of music: "some others pilgrimes will have with them baggepipes; so that everie towne that they came through, what with the noice of their singing and with the sound of their piping and with the jangling of their Canterburie bells, and with the barking out of dogges after them, that they make more noice then if the King came there away with all his clarions and many other minstrels" (Fox, "Acts", London, 1596, 493). This distinctive pilgrim dress is described in most medieval poems and stories (cf. "Renard the Fox", London, 1886, 13, 74, etc.; "Squyr of Lowe Degree", ed. Ritson in "Metrical Romanceës", London, 1802, III, 151), most minutely and, of course, indirectly, and very late by Sir Walter Raleigh:- "Give me my scallop-shell of quiet. My staff of faith to walk upon, My scrip of joy, immortal diet, My bottle of Salvation, My gown of glory (hope's true gage), And then I'll take my pilgrimage." (Cf. Furnivall, "The Stacions of Rome and the Pilgrim's Sea Voyage".) In penance they went alone and barefoot. Æneas Sylvius Piccolomini tells of his walking without shoes or stockings through the snow to Our Lady of Whitekirk in East Lothian, a tramp of ten miles; and he remembered the intense cold of that pilgrimage to his life's end (Paul, "Royal Pilgrimages in Scotland" in "Trans. of Scottish Ecclesiological Soc.", 1905), for it brought on a severe attack of gout (Boulting, "Æneas Sylvius", London, 1908, 60). Pilgrim Signs A last part of the pilgrim's attire must be mentioned, the famous pilgrim signs. These were badges sewn on to the hat or hung round the neck or pinned on the clothes of the pilgrim. "A bolle and a bagge He bar by his syde And hundred ampulles; On his hat seten Signes of Synay, And Shelles of Galice, And many a conche On his cloke, And keys of Rome, And the Vernycle bi-fore For men sholde knowe And se bi hise signes Whom he sought hadde" (Piers Plowman, ed. Wright, London, 1856, I, 109). There are several moulds extant in which these signs were cast (cf. British Museum; Musée de Lyon; Musée de Cluny, Paris; etc.), and not a few signs themselves have been picked up, especially in the beds of rivers, evidently dropped by the pilgrims from the ferry-boats. These signs protected the pilgrims from assault and enabled them to pass through even hostile ranks ("Paston Letters", I, 85; Forgeais, "Coll. de plombs historiés", Paris, 1863, 52-80; "Archæol. Jour.", VII, 400; XIII, 105), but as the citation from Piers Plowman shows, they were also to show "whom he sought hadde". Of course the cross betokened the crusader (though one could also take the cross against the Moors of Spain, Simeon of Durham, "Hist. de gestis regum Angliæ", ed. Twysden, London, 1652, I, 249), and the colour of it the nation to which he belonged, the English white, the French red, the Flemish green (Matthew Paris, "Chron. majora", ed. Luard, London, 1874, II, 330, an. 1199, in R. S.); the pilgrim to Jerusalem had two crossed leaves of palm (hence the name "palmer"); to St. Catherine's tomb on Mount Sinai, the wheel; to Rome, the heads of Sts. Peter and Paul or the keys or the vernicle (this last also might mean Genoa where there was a rival shrine of St. Veronica's veil); to St. James of Compostella the scallop or oyster shell; to Canterbury, a bell or the head of the saint on a brooch or a leaden ampulla filled with water from a well near the tomb tinctured with an infinitesimal drop of the martyr's blood ("Mat. for Hist. of Thomas Beckett", 1878 in R. S., II, 269; III, 152, 187); to Walsingham, the virgin and child; to Amiens, the head of St. John the Baptist, etc. Then there was the horn of St. Hubert, the comb of St. Blaise, the axe of St. Olave, and so on. And when the tomb was reached, votive offerings were left of jewels, models of limbs that had been miraculously cured, spears, broken fetters. etc. (Rock, "Church of our Fathers", London, 1852, III, 463). EFFECTS Among the countless effects which pilgrimages produced the following may be set down: Towns-Matthew Paris notes ("Chron. major." in R. S., I, 3, an. 1067) that in England (and the same thing really applies all over Europe) there was hardly a town where there did not lie the bodies of martyrs, confessors, and holy virgins, and though no doubt in very many cases it was the importance of the towns that made them the chosen resting-places of the saint's relics, in quite as many others the importance of the saint drew so many religious pilgrims to it that the town sprang up into real significance. So it has been noted that Canterbury, at least, outshone Winchester, and since the Reformation has once more dwindled into insignificance. Bury Saint Edmunds, St. Albans, Walsingham, Compostella, Lourdes, La Salette have arisen, or grown, or decayed, accordingly as the popularity among pilgrims began, advanced, declined. Roads were certainly made in many cases by the pilgrims. They wore out a path from the sea- coast to Canterbury and joined Walsingham to the great centres of English life and drove tracks and paths across the Syrian sands to the Holy City. And men and women for their soul's sake made benefactions so as to level down and up, and to straighten out the wandering ways that led from port to sanctuary and from shrine to shrine (Digby, "Compitum", London, 1851, I, 408). Thus they hoped to get their share also in the merits of the pilgrim. The whole subject has been illuminated in a particular instance by a monograph of Hillaire Belloc in the "Old Road" (London, 1904). Geography too sprang from the same source. Each pilgrim who wrote an account of his travels for the instruction and edification of his fellows was unconsciously laying the foundations of a new science; and it is astonishing how very early these written accounts begin. The fourth century saw them rise, witnessed the publication of many "Peregrinationes" (cf. Palestine Pilg. Text Soc., passim), and started the fashion of writing these day-to-day descriptions of the countries through which they journeyed. It is only fair to mention with especial praise the names of the Dominicans Ricaldo da Monte Cruce (1320) and Bourchard of Mount Sion (Beazley, II, 190, 383), the latter of whom has given measurements of several Biblical sites, the accuracy of which is testified to by modern travellers. Again we know that Roger of Sicily caused the famous work "The Book of Roger, or the Delight of whoso loves to make the Circuit of the World" (1154) to be compiled, from information gathered from pilgrims and merchants, who were made to appear before a select committee of Arabs (Symonds, "Sketches in Italy", Leipzig, 1883, I, 249); and we even hear of a medieval Continental guidebook to the great shrines, prefaced by a list of the most richly indulgenced sanctuaries and containing details of where money could be changed, where inns and hospitals were to be found, what roads were safest and best, etc. ("The Month", March, 1909, 295; "Itineraries of William Wey", ed. for Roxburgh Club, London, 1857; Thomas, "De passagis in Terram Sanctam", Venice, 1879; Bounardot and Longnon, "Le saint voyage de Jhérusalem du Seigneur d'Auglure", Paris, 1878). Crusades also naturally arose out of the idea of pilgrimages. It was these various peregrinationes made to the Sepulchre of Jesus Christ that at all familiarized people with the East. Then came the huge columns of devout worshippers, growing larger and larger, becoming more fully organized, and well protected by armed bands of disciplined troops. The most famous pilgrimage of all, that of 1065, which numbered about 12,000, under Gunther, Bishop of Bamberg, assisted by the Archbishop of Mainz, and the Bishops of Ratisbon and Utrecht, was attacked by Bedouins after it had left Cæsarea. The details of that Homeric struggle were brought home to Europe (Lambert of Gersfield, "Mon. Germ. Hist.", 1844, V, 169) and at once gave rise to Crusades. Miracle Plays are held to be derived from returning pilgrims. This theory is somewhat obscurely worked out by Père Monestrier (Représentations en musique anc. et modernes; cf. Champagnac, I, 9). But he bases his conclusions on the idea that the miracle plays begin by the story of the Birth or Death of Christ and holds that the return to the West of those who had visited the scenes of the life of Christ naturally led them to reproduce these as best they could for their less fortunate brethren (St. Aug., "De civ. Dei" in P. L., XXXVIII, 764). Hence the miracle plays that deal with the story of Christ's Passion were imported for the benefit of those who were unable to visit the very shrines. But the connexion between the pilgrimages and these plays comes out much more clearly when we realize that the scene of the martyrdom of the saint or some legend concerning one of the miracles was not uncommonly acted before his shrine or during the pilgrimage that was being made to it. It was performed in order to stimulate devotion, and to teach the lessons of his life to those who probably knew little about him. It was one way and the most effective way of seeing that the reason for visiting the shrine was not one of mere idle superstition, but that it had a purpose to achieve in the moral imporvement of the pilgrim. International Communications owed an enormous debt to the continued interchange of pilgrims. Pilgrimages and wars were practically the only reasons that led the people of one country to visit that of another. It may safely be hazarded that an exceedingly large proportion of the foreigners who came to England, came on purpose to venerate the tomb of the "Holy blissful Martyr", St. Thomas Becket. Special enactments allowed pilgrims to pass unmolested through districts that were in the throes of war. Again facilities were granted, as at Pontigny, for strangers to visit the shrines of their own saints in other lands. The result of this was naturally to increase communications between foreign countries. The matter of road-making has been already alluded to and the establishment of hospices along the lines of march, as the ninth-century monastery at Mount Cenis, or in the cities most frequented by pilgrims, fulfilled the same purpose (Acta SS., March, II, 150, 157; Glaber, "Chron." in Mon. Germ. Hist.: Script, VII, 62). Then lastly it may be noted that we have distinct notices, scattered, indirect, and yet all the more convincing, that pilgrims not unfrequently acted as postmen, carrying letters from place to place as they went; and that people even waited with their notes written till a stray pilgrim should pass along the route (Paston Letters, II, 62). Religious Orders began to be founded to succour the pilgrims, and these even the most famous orders of the medieval Church. The Knights Hospitallers, or Knights of St. John, as their name implies, had as their office to guard the straggling bands of Latin Christians; the Knights of Rhodes had the same work to carry out; as also had the Knights Templars. In fact the seal of these last represented simply a knight rescuing a helpless pilgrim (compare also the Trinità dei Peregrini of St. Philip). Scandals effected by this form of devotion are too obvious and were too often denounced by the saints and other writers from St. Jerome to Thomas a Kempis to need any setting out here. The "Canterbury Tales" of Chaucer are sufficient evidence. But the characteristic ones: (i) excessive credulity of the guardian of the shrine; (ii) insistence upon the obligation of pilgrimages as though they were necessary for salvation; (iii) the neglect on the part of too many of the pilgrims of their own duties at home in order to spend more time in passing from one sanctuary to another; (iv) the wantonness and evil-living and evil-speaking indulged in by the pilgrims themselves in many cases. Not as though these abuses invalidated the use of pilgrimages. Erasmus himself declares that they did not; but they certainly should have been more stringently and rigorously repressed by the church rulers. The dangers of these scandals are evidently reduced to a minimum by the speed of modern travel; yet from time to time warnings need to be repeated lest the old evils should return. BLESSING To complete this article, it will be well to give the following blessings taken from the Sarum Missal (London, 1868, 595-6). These should be compared with Mohammedan formularies (Champagnac, II, 1077-80, etc.):- Blessing of Scrip and Staff V. The Lord be with you. R. And with thy spirit. Let us pray. O Lord Jesus Christ who of Thy unspeakable mercy at the bidding of the Father and by the Co-operation of the Holy Ghost wast willing to come down from Heaven and to seek the sheep that was lost by the deceit of the devil, and to carry him back on Thy shoulders to the flock of the Heavenly Country; and didst commend the sons of Holy Mother Church by prayer to ask, by holy living to seek, by persevering to knock that so they may the more speedily find the reward of saving life; we humbly call upon Thee that Thou wouldst be pleased to bless these scrips (or this scrip) and these staves (or this staff) that whosoever for the love of Thy name shall desire to wear the same at his side or hang it at his neck or to bear it in his hands and so on his pilgrimage to seek the aid of the Saints with the accompaniment of humble prayer, being protected by the guardianship of Thy Right Hand may be found meet to attain unto the joys of the everlasting vision through Thee, O Saviour of the World, Who livest and reignest in the unity of the Holy Spirit, God for ever and ever. Amen. Here let the scrip be sprinkled with Holy Water and let the Priest put it round each pilgrim's neck, saying: In the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ receive this scrip, the habit of thy pilgrimage, that after due chastisement thou mayest be found worthy to reach in safety the Shrine of the Saints to which thou desirest to go; and after the accomplishment of thy journey thou mayest return to us in health. Through, etc. Here let him give the Staff to the Pilgrim, saying: Receive this staff for thy support in the travail and toil of thy pilgrimage, that thou mayest be able to overcome all the hosts of the enemy and reach in safety the Shrine of the Saints whither thou desirest to go; and having obediently fulfilled thy course mayest return again to us with joy. Through, etc. The Blessing of the Cross for one on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem V. The Lord be with you. R. And with thy spirit. Let us pray. O God, whose power is invincible and pity cannot be measured, the aid and sole comfort of pilgrims; who givest unto Thy servants armour which cannot be overcome; we beseech Thee to be pleased to bless this dress which is humbly devoted to Thee, that the banner of the venerated Cross, the figure whereof is upon it, may be a most mighty strength to Thy servants against the wicked temptations of the old enemy; a defence by the way, a protection in Thy house, and a security to us on every side. Through, etc. Here let the garment marked with the Cross be sprinkled with Holy Water and given to the pilgrim, the priest saying: Receive this dress whereupon the sign of the Cross of the Lord Our Saviour is traced, that through it safety, benediction and strength to journey in prosperity, may accompany thee to the Sepulchre of Him, who with God the Father and the Holy Ghost, liveth and reigneth one God, world without end. Amen. Marx, Das Wallfahren in der katholischen Kirche (Trier, 1842); Sivry and Champagnac, Dictionn. des pèlerinages (Paris, 1859); Rock, The Church of Our Fathers (London, 1852); Le Roy, Hist. des pèler. de la sainte Vierge en France (Paris, 1875); Waterton, Pietas Mariana Britannica (London, 1879); Chambers, Book of Days (London, s. d.); Jusserand, tr. Smith, English Wayfaring Life in the Middle Ages (London, 1892); Itinéraires français XI ^e-XIII ^e siecles, ed. Michelant and Raynaud (1882-); Palestine Pilgrim Text Society (London, 1884-); Deutsche Pilgerreisen nach dem heiligen Lands (Innsbruck, 1900); Beazley, Dawn of Modern Geography (London, 1897-1906); Wall, Shrines of British Saints (London, 1905); BrÉhier, L'eglise et l'Orient au moyen-âge (Paris, 1907); Camm, Forgotten Shrines (London, 1910); Revue de l'Orient latin (Paris, 1883-); Messenger of the Sacred Heart (New York, 1892-9), passim. BEDE JARRETT Piligrim Piligrim Bishop of Passau, date of birth unknown; died 20 May, 991. He was educated at the Benedictine monastery of Niederaltaich, and was made bishop in 971. To him are attributed some, if not all, of the ""Forgeries of Lorch", a series of documents, especially Bulls of Popes Symmachus, Eugene II, Leo VII, and Agapetus II, fabricated to prove that Passau was a continuation of a former archdiocese named Lorch. By these he attempted to obtain from Benedict VI the elevation of Passau to an archdiocese, the re-erection of those dioceses in Pannonia and Moesia which had been suffragans of Lorch, and the pallium for himself. While Piligrim was ambitious, he also had at heart the welfare of the captive Christians in Hungary and the Christianization of that country. There is extant an alleged Bull of Benedict VI granting Piligrim's demands; but this is also the work of Piligrim, possibly a document drawn up for the papal signature, which it never received. Apart from these forgeries, common enough at the time, Piligrim was a good and zealous bishop, and converted numerous heathens in Hungary, built many schools and churches, restored the Rule of St. Benedict in Niederaltaich, transferred the relics of St. Maximilian from Oetting to Passau, and held synods (983-91) at Ennsburg (Lorch), Mautern, and Mistelbach. In the "Niebelungenlied" he is lauded as a contemporary of the heroes of that epic. DÜMMLER, Piligrim von Passau und das Erzbisthum Lorch (Leipzig, 1854); IDEM in Berliner Sitzungsberichte (1898), 758-75; UHLIRZ, Die Urkundenfälschung zu Passau im zehnten Jahrhundert in Mittheilungen des Instituts für österreichische Geschichtsforschung, III (Vienna, 1882), 177-228; IDEM, ibid., supplementary vol., II (1888), 548 sq.; HEUWIESER, Sind die Bischöfe von Passau Nachfolger der Bischöfe von Lorch? in Theologisch-praktische Monats-Schrift, XXI (Passau, 1910), 13-23, 85-90; MITTERMÜLLER, War Bischof Piligrim von Passau ein Urkundenfälscher? in Der Katholik, XLVII (Mainz, 1867), 337-62. MICHAEL OTT. Pillar of Cloud (Pillar of Fire) Pillar of Cloud (Pillar of Fire). A cloud which accompanied the Israelites during their wandering. It was the same as the pillar of fire, as it was luminous at night (cf. Ex., xiv, 19, 20, 24; Num., ix, 21, 22). The name "pillar" is due to the columnar form which it commonly assumed. It first appeared while the Israelites were marching from Succoth to Etham, and vanished when they reached the borders of Chanaan (Ex., xiii, 20-22; xl, 36). It was a manifestation of God's presence among His people (Ex., xiv, 24 sqq.; xxxiii, 9; Num., xi, 25; xii, 5; Deut., xxxi, 15; Ps. xcviii, 7). During encampment it rested over the tabernacle of the covenant, after it was built, and before that time probably over the centre of the camp. It rose as a signal that camp was to be broken, and during the march it preceded the people, stopping when they were to pitch their tents (Ex., xl, 34, 35; Num., ix, 17 sqq.; Deut., i, 33). At the crossing of the Red Sea it rested between the Israelites and the Egyptians, being bright on the side of the former and dark on the other (Ex., xiv, 19, 20). During the marches it lit the way at night, and by day protected the people from the heat of the sun (Num., x, 34; Deut., i, 33; II Esd., ix, 12; Wis., x, 17; xviii, 3; Ps. civ, 39). It may be doubted whether it covered the camp by day, as many commentators maintain. Num., x, 34, speaks only of the march, and Wis., xix, 7, does not necessarily refer to the whole camp. St. Paul (I Cor., x, 1, 2, 6) considers it as a type of baptism, and the Fathers regard it as the figure of the Holy Ghost leading the faithful to the true Promised Land. The rationalistic explanation which sees in the pillar only a torch carried on a pole, such as is used even now by caravans in Arabia, fails to take the data of the Bible into consideration. Palis, in Vigouroux, Dict. de la Bib., s. v. Colonne de Nuée; and commentaries on the texts cited. F. BECHTEL Pima Indians Pima Indians An important tribe of Southern Arizona, centering along the middle Gila and its affluent, the Salt River. Linguistically they belong to the Piman branch of the widely extended Shoshonean stock, and their language, with dialectic variation, is the same as that spoken also by the Pápago and extinct Sobaipuri of southern Arizona, and by the Navome of Sonora, Mexico. In Spanish times the tribes of the Arizona group were known collectively as Pimas Altos (Upper Pima), while those of Senora were distinguished as Pimas Bajos (Lower Pima), the whole territory being known as the Pimería. The tribal name Pima is a corruption of their own word for "no", mistaken by the early missionaries for a proper name. They call themselves simply 'Aàtam, "people", or sometimes for distinction 'Aàtam-akimûlt, "river people". Notwithstanding their importance as a tribe, the Pima have not been prominent in history, owing to their remoteness from military and missionary activity during the Spanish period, and to their almost unbroken peaceable attitude towards the whites. It was at one time claimed that they were the authors of the ruined pueblos in their country, notably the celebrated Casa Grande, but later investigation confirms the statement recorded by Father Garcés as early as 1780 that they were built by a previous people connected with the Hopi. The real history of the Pima may be said to begin with the German Jesuit missionary explorer, Father Eusebio Keno (Kühn), who in 1687 established a missionary headquarters at Dolores, near the present Cucurpe, northern Senora, Mexico, from which point until his death in 1711 he covered the whole Pimería in his missionary labours. In 1694, led by Indian reports of massive ruins in the far north, he penetrated along along the Gila, and said Mass in the Casa Grande. In 1697 he accompanied a military exploration of the Pima country, under Lieutenant Bernal, and Captain Mange, baptizing nearly a hundred Indians. In 1701 he made the earliest map of the Gila region. He found the Pima and their cousins the Pápago most anxious for teachers. "They were,. above all, desirous of being formed into regular mission communities, with resident padres of their own; and at many rancherías they built rude but neatly cared-for churches, planted fields, and tended herds of livestock in patient waiting for the missionaries, who, in most cases, never came " (Bancroft). From 1736 to 1750 Fathers Keller and Sedelmair several times visited the Pima, but no missions were established in their country, although a number of the tribe attached themselves to the Pápago missions. The revolt of the southern tribes in 1750 caused a suspension of the work, but the missions were resumed some years later and continued under increasing difficulties until the expulsion of the Jesuits in 1767, at which time the whole number of neophytes in Arizona, chiefly Pápago, was about 1200. In the next year the Arizona missions were turned over to Franciscans of the College of Queretaro, who continued the work with some success in spite of constant inroads of the Apache. Although details are wanting, it is probable that the number of neophytes increased. The most noted of these latter workers was Father Francisco Garcés, in charge of the Pápago at San Xavier del Bac (1768-76). In 1828, by decree of the revolutionary government of Mexico, all the missions were confiscated, the Spanish priests expelled, and all Christianizing effort came to an end. About 1840 the Pima were strengthened by the Maricopa from the lower Gila, who moved up to escape the attacks of the Yuma, the common enemy of both. Both tribes continue to live in close alliance, although of entirely different language and origin. Their relations with the United States Government began in 1846, when General Kearney's expedition entered their territory, and met with a friendly reception. Other expeditions stopped at their villages within the next few years, all meeting with kind treatment. With the influx of the California gold hunters about 1850, there set in a long period of demoralization, with frequent outrages by the whites which several times almost provoked an outbreak. In 1850 and 1857 the hostile Yuma were defeated. The Apache raids were constant and destructive until the final subjugation of that tribe by the Government. In all the Apache campaigns since 1864 the Pima have served as willing and efficient scouts. In 1857 a non-resident agent was appointed, and in 1859 a reservation was surveyed for the two tribes, and $10,000 in goods distributed among them as a recognition of past services. In 1870 the agency was established at Sacaton on the reservation, since which time they have been regularly under government supervision. The important problem of irrigation, upon which the future prosperity of the tribes depends, is now in process of satisfactory solution by the Government. As a body the Indians are now civilized, industrious as farmers and labourers, and largely Christian, divided between Presbyterian and Catholic. Presbyterian work was begun in 1870. The Catholics re-entered the field shortly afterwards, and have now a flourishing mission school, St. John the Baptist, at Gila Crossing, built in 1899, in charge of Franciscan Fathers, with several small chapels, and total Catholic population of 600 in the two tribes, including fifty Maricopa. The 5000 or more Pápago attached to the same agency have been practically all Catholic from the Jesuit period. In their primitive condition the Pima were agricultural and sedentary, living in villages of lightly-built dome-shaped houses, occupied usually by a single family each, and cultivating by the help of irrigation large crops of corn, beans, pumpkins and native cotton, from which the women spun the simple clothing, consisting of a breech-cloth and head-band for the man, and a short skirt for the women, with sandals or moccasin for special occasion and a buckskin shirt in extreme cold weather. They also prepared clothing fabrics from the inner bark of the willow. The heavier labour of cultivation was assumed by the men. Besides their cultivated foods, they made use of the fruits of the saguaro cactus, from which they prepared the intoxicating tizwin, and mesquite bean, besides the ordinary game of the country. They painted and tattooed their faces and wore their hair at full length. Their women were not good potters, but they excelled as basket makers. Their arms were the bow, the club, and the shield, fighting always on foot. Their allies were the Pápago and Maricopa, their enemies the Apache and Yuma. The killing of an enemy was followed by an elaborate purification ceremony, closing with a victory dance. There was a head tribunal chief, with subordinate village chiefs. Polygamy was allowed, but not frequent. Descent was in the male line. Unlike Indians generally, they had large families and welcomed twins. And unlike their neighbours, they buried in the ground instead of cremating their dead. Deformed infants were killed at birth, as were at later times the infants born of white or Mexican fathers. They had, and still retain, many songs of ceremony, war, hunting, gaming, love, medicine, and of childhood. According to their elaborate genesis myth, the earth was formed by "Earth Doctor", who himself evolved from a dense cloud of darkness. He made the plants and animals, and a race of never-dying humans, who by their increase so crowded the earth that he destroyed his whole creation and made a new world with a new race subject to thinning out by death. Another hero god is "Elder Brother", and prominent place is assigned to Sun, Moon, Night, and Coyote. The myth also includes a deluge story. Although the linguistic relations of the Oima are well known, all that is recorded in the language is comprised chiefly in a few vocabularies, none exceeding two hundred words, several of which in manuscript are in the keeping of the Bureau of American Ethnology (See KINO; PÁPAGO INDIANS.) BANCROFT, Hist. Arizona and New Mexico (San Francisco, 1889); Idem, Hist. Mexican States and Texas (2 vols., San Francisco, 1886); BARTLETT, Personal Narrative XX of Boundary Commission (2 vols., New York, 1854); BROWN, Adventures in the Apache Country (New York, 1869); Catholic Indian Missions, Bureau of, annual reports of Director of (Washington); Diary and Itinerary of Francisco Garcés, ed. CONES (2 vols., New York, 1900); Documentos para Historia de México (20 vols., Mexico, 1853-57); includes BERNAL, Relación de la Pimería, MANGE, Hist. Pimería, etc; EMERY, Notes of a Military Reconnaissance (Washington, 1848); RUSSELL, The Pima Indians in Twenty-sixth Rept. Bur. Am. Ethnology (Washington, 1908); WHIPPLE, Rept. of Expedition from San Diego to the Colorado (one of official Pacific Railroad Repts., Ex. Doc. 19, 31st Cong., 2nd sess., Washington, 1891). JAMES MOONEY Pinara Pinara A titular see in Lycia, suffragan of Myra. Pinara was one of the chief cities of the Lycian confederation. The Lycian hero, Pandarus, was held there in great honour. It was supposed to have been founded by Pinarus, who embarked with the first Cretans. According to another tradition, it was a colony of Kanthus and was first called Artymnessus. As in Lycian Pinara signifies "round hill", the city being built on a hill of this nature would have derived its new name from this fact. It is now the village of Minara or Minareh in the vilayet of Koniah. It contains magnificent ruins: walls, a theatre, an acropolis, sarcophagi and tombs, rare inscriptions (often Lycian), and the remains of a church. Five bishops of Pinara are known: Eustathius, who signed the formula of Acacius of Cæsarea at the Council of Selencia in 359; Heliodorus, who signed the letter from the bishops of Lycia to the Emperor Leo (458); Zenas, present at the Trullan Council (692); Theodore, at the Council of Nicæa (787); Athanasius, at the Photian Council of Constantinople (879). LE QUIEN, Oriens christ., I, 975; SMITH, Dict, of Greek and Roman geog., s. v.; FELLOWS, Lycia, 139; SPRATT AND FORBES, Travels in Lycia, I, 1 sqq. S. PÉTRIDÈS. Pinar Del Rio, Diocese of Diocese of Pinar del Rio (Pinetensis ad Flumen) Located in Cuba, erected by the Brief "Actum præclare" of Leo XIII, 20 Feb., 1903. The boundaries of the diocese are those of the civil province; it occupies the western part of the island and has an area of 2867 square miles. Its first bishop was Braulio de Orne y Vivanco, consecrated at Havana, 28 October, 1903, died the following year. The present bishop is Manuel Ruiz y Rodriguez, consecrated at Cienfuegos, 11 June, 1907. The diocese contains 27 parishes with 19 secular priests. There is a boys' school conducted by the Piarist Fathers, and a girls' school under the care of religious women. FERMIN FRAGA BARRO. Ippolito Pindemonte Ippolito Pindemonte An Italian poet of noble birth, born at Verona, 13 Nov., 1753; died there, 18 Nov., 1828. He received his training at the Collegio di San Carlo in Modena. As a result of much travelling in Italy and foreign lands he acquired a wide acquaintance, and formed close relations with many men of letters, He witnessed the beginnings of the Revolution in Paris, and poetized thereupon in his "Francia". Thence he went to London, Berlin, and Vienna. In 1791 he returned to Verona, with health impaired and saddened at the failure of his hopes for the regeneration and aggrandizement of Italy, and devoted his last years to study and religious practices. The chief poetical works of Pindemonte are the "Poesie" and "Prose campestri", the "Sepolcri" and his version of the Odyssey. The "Poesie" and "Prose campestri" were published between 1788 and 1794; the most admired portions are those entitled "Alla Luna", "Alla Salute", "La Melanconia", and "La Giovinezza". They evince his reading of the English descriptive poets. The "Sepolcri" is in the form of a letter and is largely a response to the similarly named poem of Foscolo, with whose views, respecting the patriotic and other emotions evoked by the aspect of the tombs of the well-deserving, he sympathizes; he rebukes Foscolo, however, for having neglected to recount, among the other emotions, that of the comfort brought to us by religious considerations. The influence of the English poet Gray is noticeable in this work. Upon his version of the Odyssey he seems to have laboured fifteen years, and is quite faithful to the letter and spirit of the original. It appeared in print in 1822. His lesser works include among others several tragedies, the "Ulisse", the "Geta e Caracalla" the "Eteocle e Polinice", and especially the "Arminio", composed in 1804 and revealing the influence exerted upon him by the Ossianic matter. In prose he produced the "Clementina", and a short story, "Abaritte", which imitates Johnson's "Rasselas". He left a large correspondence exchanged with noted persons of his time and a few minor documents. Poesie originali di I. Pindemonte (Florence, 1858-9); Odissea, ed. LONZOGUS, SANSONI; TORRACA, I. Sepolcri di I. Pindemonte in Discussioni (Leghorn, 1888); MONTANARI, Storia della vita de opere di I. P. (Venice, 1855); ZANELLA, I. Pindemonte e gli Inglesi in Paralleli letterari (Verona, 1885). J. D. M. FORD. John de Pineda John de Pineda Born in Seville, 1558; died there, 27 Jan., 1637. He entered the Society of Jesus in 1572, taught philosophy and theology five years in Seville and Cordova, and specialized in Scripture, which he taught for eighteen years in Cordova, Seville, and Madrid. He held the posts of Provost of the professed house and rector of the college of Seville. He was consultor to the Spanish Inquisition, and, in this capacity, visited the chief libraries of Spain. The results of his visits was the "Index Prohibitorum Librorum" (1612), which won the appreciation of the Inquisition and of the chief inquisitor, Cardinal Sandoval, Archbishop of Toledo; it was re-edited (1632) for Cardinal Zapata. His learning is evidenced by the nineteen printed works and six manuscripts, chiefly of exegetical subjects, which remain to us of his writings: (1) "Commentariorum in Job libri tredecim" (Madrid, 1597-1601). Each chapter is paraphrased and fully commented upon. These two folios were often re-issued in Madrid, Cologne, Seville, Venice, and Paris. Seven indices served as guides to the student. Both Catholic and Protestant exegetes still praise this colossal storehouse of erudition. The archeology, textual criticism, comparison of various interpretations, use of historical data from profane writers, all show Pineda to have been far ahead of his time in scientific criticism of the Bible; (2) "Prælectio sacra in Cantico Canticorum" (Seville, 1602), issued as a greeting to Cardinal de Guevara, archbishop of Seville, on the occasion of his visit to the Jesuit college there; (3) "Salomon prævius, sive de rebus Salomonis regis libri octo" (fol, pp. 587; Lyons 1609; Mainz, 1613). The life, kingdom, wisdom, wealth, royal buildings, character, and death of Solomon are treated in a scholarly fashion; five indices are added as helps to the student. (4) De C. Plinii loco inter eruditos controverso ex lib. VII. Atque etiam morbus est aliquis per sapientiam mori". Considerable controversy resulted from his interpretation of Pliny (see Sommervogel, infra). (5). "Commentarii in Ecclesiasten, liber unus" (folio, pp. 1224; Seville, 1619), appeared in various editions, as did the commentary on Solomon. The fame he won by his erudition and sanctity is attested in many ways. On a visit to the University of Evora, he was greeted by a Latin speech, and a memorial tablet was set up with the legend, Hic Pineda fuit. What astounds one most in the writings of this exegete of the old school is his vast knowledge, not merely of Latin, but of Greek and Hebrew. NIEREMBERG, Varones Ilustres de la C. de J. VII (Bilbao, 1891), 195; SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliothèque de la C. de J., (Paris, 1895), VI, 796; IX, 772; GILHERME, Menologé de la C. de J. Assistance d'Espagne, I (Paris, 1902, 172. WALTER DRUM Diocese of Pinerolo Diocese of Pinerolo (PINEROLIENSIS) Located in the province of Turin, in Piedmont, Northern Italy, suffragan of Turin. In the Middle Ages the city of Pinerolo was one of the keys of Italy, and was therefore one of the principal fortresses of the dukes of Savoy. It is now the seat of a military school. Those of its churches deserving mention are the cathedral (which dates from the ninth century, and has a beautiful campanile) and San Maurizio, a beautiful Gothic church, from the belfry of which there is a superb view of the Alps and of the sub-Alpine plain. The earliest mention of Pinerolo is in the tenth century; it belonged to the Marca di Torino (March of Turin) and was governed by the abbots of Pinerolo, even after the city had established itself as a commune (1200). From 1235, however, Amadeus IV of Savoy exercised over the town a kind of protectorate which, in 1243, became absolute, and was exercised thereafter either by the house of Savoy, or of Savoy-Acaia. When the French invaded Piedmont (1536), Pinerolo fell into their hands and they remained in possession until 1574. However, by the treaty of Cherasco it again fell to France (1630), and it remained under French rule until restored by the treaty of Turin to Savoy. The latter state, at the same time, withdrew from the league against Louis XIV. Pinerolo was originally an abbey nullius. It was founded in 1064 by Adelaide, Princess of Susa, and was made a diocese, in 1748, at the request of Charles Emmanuel, its first prelate being G. B. d'Orlié. In 1805, conformably with the wish of Napoleon, the diocese was united with that of Saluzzo, but, in 1817, was re-established as an independent see. Within its territory is the famous fortress of Fenestrelle. It has 58 parishes, 16,200 inhabitants, 3 religious houses of women, and 3 educational institutes for girls. CAPPELLETTI, Le Chiese d'Italia (Venice, 1857); CARUTTI, Storia di Pinerolo (Pinerolo, 1893). U. BENIGNI. Alexandre Guy Pingre Alexandre Guy Pingré Born in Paris 11 September, 1711; died 1 May, 1796. He was educated in Senlis at the college of the Genovefan fathers, Regulars of the Order of St. Augustine, which he entered at sixteen. In 1735 he was made professor of theology there. About 1749 he accepted the professorship of astronomy in the newly-founded academy at Rouen. Already famous for detecting an error of four minutes in Lacaille's calculation of the lunar eclipse of 23 December, 1749, in 1753 he further distinguished himself by the observation of the transit of Mercury and was consequently appointed corresponding member of the Académie des Sciences. Later he was made librarian of Ste-Geneviève and chancellor of the university. He built an observatory in the Abbey of Ste-Geneviève and there spent forty years of strenuous labour. He compiled in 1753 the first nautical almanac for the year 1754, and subsequently for 1755-57, when Lalande was charged with the publication. Lacaille had calculated for his treatise, "L'art de vérifier les dates", the eclipses of the first nineteen centuries of the Christian era; Pingré in a second edition took up his calculations and extended them over ten centuries before Christ. In 1760 he joined an unsuccessful expedition to the Island Rodriguez in the Pacific to observe the transit of Venus on 6 June, 1761. More satisfactory results were obtained from an expedition to the French Cape on Haiti where the next transit was observed on 3 June, 1769. About 1757 he became engrossed in the history of comets, and in his "Cométographie ou Traité historique et théorique des comètes" (2 vols., Paris, 1783-4), the material contained in all the ancient annals and more recent publications is methodically arranged and critically sifted. In 1756 he published a "Projet d'une histoire d'astronomie du dix-septième siècle", completed in 1786. Through Lalande's influence the National Assembly granted three thousand francs to defray the expenses of publication, but it proceeded slowly and at Pingé's death was discontinued. In 1901 the whole work was re-edited by Bigourdan under the title: "Annales célestes du dix-septième siècle". Pingré also published "Manuale Astronomicon libri quinque et Arati Phænomena, cum interpretatione Gallica et notis" (2 vols., 1786), and numerous astronomical observations in the "Mémoires de l'Institut" (1753-87), in the "Journal de Trévoux", in the "Phil. Trans." etc. In encyclopedic works it is commonly asserted that Pingré took an active part in Jansenistic quarrels, and hence was relegated to provincial towns and colleges. Consequently he is often said to have fallen a victim to Roman intolerance. The fact is that during his earlier career Pingré seems to have been imbued with Jansenistic views, as is borne out by the "Nouvelles Ecclésiastiques", the great Jansenist organ. In 1737 Mgr de Salignac, Bishop of Pamiers, active against Jansenism, summoned Pingré, who was severely rebuked and finally had to submit to an examen by some Jesuit fathers. He expressed himself willing to condemn the five propositions, de cæur et d'esprit, at the same time maintaining that he could not condemn them as propositions of Jansenius, as they were not to be found in his works. (It should be remembered that in 1653 and 1656 the popes had declared repeatedly that the propositions were de facto contained in the "Augustinus".) In 1745 a general chapter of the fathers of Ste-Geneviève was convened; by order of the king Father Chambroy was elected superior general. Strict orders had been issued to the superiors of the conventual establishments that only such members should be deputed as were willing to subscribe to the papal Bulls and especially "Unigenitus". This measure excited opposition. Father Pingré, then living at Senlis, and some of his fellow religious entered a vehement protest against the proceedings of the chapter. Father Scoffier, one of the most determined opponents of the election, was removed from Senlis. A similar disciplinary punishment was inflicted on Pingré, then professor of theology. According to an introductory notice prefaced to the memoirs of the Jansenist Abbé Arnauld d'Andilly, in the collection "Mémoires sur l'histoire de France de Michaud et Poujoulat" (2nd series, IX), Pingré is their editor (Leyden, 1756). He was therefore an active Jansenist, at least until 1747; his influence, however, never became serious nor lasting. In the ecclesiastical history of the eighteenth century, especially in the "Mémoires pour servir à l'histoire ecclésiatique pendant le 18e siècle" of Picot, his name is not mentioned. PRONY, Notice sur la vie et les ouvrages d'Alexandre Gui Pingré in Mémoires de l'Institut, I; LALANDE, Hist. de l'Astronomie 1796, pp. 773-8; DELAMBRE, Hist. de l'Astronomie au XVIIIe. siècle, pp. 664-87; VENTENAT, Notice sur la vie du citoyen Pingré, lue à la séance publique du Lycée des Arts in Magasin Encyclopédique, I, 342; Table raisonnée et alphabétique des nouvelles Ecclésiastiques depuis 1728 jusqu'en 1760 inclusivement (1767), s. vv. Pingré; Salignac; Chanoines Réguliers de Ste-Geneviève. J. STEIN Pinna Da Encarnacao, Mattheus Mattheus Pinna da Encarnaçao A writer and theologian, born at Rio de Janeiro, 23 Aug., 1687; died there, 18 Dec., 1764. On 3 March, 1703, he became a Benedictine at the Abbey of Nossa Senhora do Montserrate at Rio de Janeiro, where he also studied the humanities and philosophy under the learned José da Natividade. After studying theology at the monastery of Bahia he was ordained priest 24 March, 1708, and appointed professor of philosophy and theology. Along with Gaspar da Madre de Deus (died about 1780), Antonio de São Bernardo (died 1774) and a few others, he was the most learned Benedictine of his province and his contemporaries considered him the greatest theologian in Brazil. He was likewise highly esteemed for his piety and charity towards the poor, the sick, and the neglected. In 1726 he was elected abbot of the monastery at Rio de Janeiro, but Soon after his election incurred the displeasure of Luiz Vahia Monteiro, the Governor of Brazil, who banished him from his monastery in 1727. Soon afterwards he escaped to Portugal, became very influential at Court and was restored to his monastery by Cardinal Motta in 1729. He held the office of abbot repeatedly thereafter; both at Rio de Janeiro (1729-31 and 1739) and at Bahia in 1746. In 1732 he was elected provincial abbot, in which capacity he visited even the most distant monasteries of Brazil, despite the great difficulty of travel. He was again elected provincial abbot in 1752, but this time he declined the honour, preferring to spend his old age in prayer and retirement. His works are: "Defensio S. Matris Ecclesiæ" (Lisbon, 1729), an extensive treatise on grace and free will against Quesnel, Baius, Jansenius, etc.; "Viridario Evangelico" (Lisbon, 1730-37), four volumes of sermons on the Gospels; "Theologia Scholastica Dogmatica", in six volumes, which he did not complete entirely nor was it published. Dietario do Mosteiro de N. S. do Montserrate do Rio de Janeiro, preserved in Manuscript at the Monastery Library of Rio de Janeiro, 69-74, 312-18; RAMIZ GALVÃO, Apontamentos historicos sobre a Ordem Benedictino em general, e em particular sobre o Mosteiro de N. S. do Monserrate do Rio de Janeiro in Revista Trimensal do Instituto historico, geographico e ethnographico do Brasil (Rio de Janeiro, 1872), 249 sq. MICHAEL OTT. Pinto, Fernao Mendes Fernão Mendes Pinto A Portuguese traveller, born at Montemor-o-Velho near Coimbra, c. 1509; died at Almada near Lisbon, 8 July, 1583. After serving as page to the Duke of Coimbra, he went to the East Indies in 1537, and, for twenty-one years, travelled, chiefly in the Far East. In the course of his adventurous career at sea, he was, as he tells on the title page of his book, several times shipwrecked, taken prisoner many times and sold as a slave. He was the first to make known the natural riches of Japan, and founded the first settlement near Yokohama, in 1548. In 1558, tired of wandering, he returned to Portugal where he married, settling in the town of Almada. The first account of his travels is to be found in a collection of Jesuit letters published in Venice in 1565, but the best is his own "Peregrinaçäo", the first edition of which appeared in Lisbon in 1614. The work is regarded as a classic in Portugal, where Pinto is considered one of their best prose writers. In other countries, it has been enthusiastically read by some, by others characterized as a highly coloured romance. But it has an element of sincerity which is convincing, and its substantial honesty is now generally admitted. It is probable that, having written it from memory, he put down his impressions, rather than events as they actually occurred. The Spanish edition by Francisco de Herrara appeared in 1620, reprinted in 1627, 1645, 1664. The French translation is by Figuier (Paris, 1628, and 1630). There are three English editions by Cogan (London, 1663, 1692, and 1891), the last abridged and illustrated. COGAN, Travels of Fernando Mendes Pinto, tr. (London, 1891). V. FUENTES. Pinturicchio Pinturicchio (BERNARDINO DI BETTO, surnamed PINTURICCHIO) Born at Verona, about 1454; died at Siena, 11 December, 1513. He studied under Fiorenzo di Lorenzo; and his fellow students, perhaps because of his great facility, surnamed him Pinturicchio (the dauber). Pinturicchio did an immense amount of work. His principal easel pictures are : "St. Catherine" (National Gallery, London); a "Madonna" (Cathedral of Sanseverino), with the prothonotary, Liberato Bartello, kneeling; "Portrait of a Child" (Dresden Gallery); "Apollo and Marsyas" (the Louvre), attributed to Perugino, Francia, and even Raphael; the "Madonna enthroned between saints", an altar-piece (Pinacotheca of Perugia); the "Madonna of Monteoliveto" (communal palace of San Gimignano); a "Coronation of the Virgin" (Pinacotheca of the Vatican); the "Return of Ulysses" (National Gallery, London); the "Ascent of Calvary", a splendid miniature (Borromeo Palace, Milan). He was Chiefly a frescoist, following principally the process of distemper (tempera). There are frescoes of his in the Sistine Chapel, in the decoration of which he assisted Perugino in 1480, Ara Coeli, the Appartamento Borgia, Spello, Siena, and Sta Maria del Popolo. Modern critics agree in recognizing as his two frescoes in the Sistine Chapel, the "Baptism of Jesus" and "Moses journeying to Egypt". The Bufalini commissioned him to paint the life of St. Bernardine for the chapel at the Ara Coeli; but his chief work was the decoration of the Borgia apartment entrusted to him by Alexander VI. In the Hall of Saints, the most beautiful of all, he has outlined with much grace and brilliancy the histories of various martyrs: St. Susanna, St. Barbara, Disputation of St. Catherine, Visit of St. Anthony to St. Paul the Hermit, and the Martyrdom of St. Sebastian. The next hall is devoted to the representation of the Liberal Arts. Critics generally deny that the decoration of the last two rooms is the work of Pinturicchio, but the three large rooms which he certainly decorated form an exquisite museum. Following the Sienese school Pinturicchio enlivened his paintings by making use of sculptured reliefs glistening with gold which he mixed with his frescoes. In 1501 he decorated the chapel of the Blessed Sacrament in St. Mary Major at Spello. On the ceiling he painted four Sibyls and on the walls the Annunciation, the Adoration of the Shepherds and the Arrival of the Magi, and Jesus in the midst of the Doctors. He had a special love for these pictures for in them he placed his own portrait. In 1502 Cardinal Francisco Piccolomini commissioned him to depict the life of his uncle, Pius II, in ten large compositions on the side walls of the Piccolomini library at Siena. These frescoes are fifteenth-century tableaux vivants in which people of all conditions are represented. Above the altar erected at the entrance to the Library is seen the Coronation of Pius III. Pinturicchio, again summoned to Rome by Julius II, painted on the ceiling of the choir of Sta Maria del Popolo splendid Sibyls and Doctors of the Church, in stucco frames separated by graceful arabesques. CROWE AND CAVALCASELLE, A new history of painting in Italy, III, (London, 1866), 256; BURCKHARDT AND BODE, Le Cicerone, tr. GÉRARD, II (Paris, 1892), 588-91; EHRLE AND STEVENSON, Gli affreschi del Pinturicchio nell'appartamento Borgia (Rome, 1897); STEIMANN, Pinturicchio (Bielefeld, 1898); BOYER D'AGEN, Pinturicchio in Siena (Berlin, 1903); RICCI, Pinturicchio, tr. into French (Paris, 1903); SORTAIS, Pinturicchio et l'Ecole ombrienne in Excursions artistiques et littéraires (Paris, 1903); 2nd series, 1-89; GOFFIN, Pinturicchio (Paris, 1906); PÉRATÉ, Pinturicchio in Hist. de l'Art d'André Michel, IV, (Paris, 1909), 317-29. GASTON SORTAIS Martin Alonso Pinzon Martín Alonso Pinzón Spanish navigator and companion of Columbus on his first voyage to the New World, b. at Palos de Moguer, 1441; d. there at the convent of La Rábida, 1493. Sprung from a family of seamen, he became a hardy sailor and skilful pilot. According to Parkman and other historians, he sailed under Cousin, a navigator from Dieppe, to the eastern coast of Africa, whence they were carried far to the south-west. They there discovered an unknown land and a mighty river. Pinzón's conduct on this voyage was so mutinous that Cousin entered a complaint to the admiralty on their return home, and had him dismissed from the maritime service of Dieppe. Returning to Spain Pinzón became acquainted with Columbus through Fray Juan Perez de Marchina, prior of the convent of La Rábida, and became an enthusiastic promoter of the scheme of the great navigator. Other historians account differently for the origin of Pinzón's interest in Columbus's project. According to these, he heard of the scheme several years after he had retired from active life as a sailor, and established with his brothers a shipbuilding firm in his native town. During a visit to Rome he learned from the Holy Office of the tithes which had been paid from the beginning of the fifteenth century from a country named Vinland, and examined the charts of the Norman explorers. On his return home he supported the claims of Columbus, when his opinion was sought by Queen Isabella's advisers concerning the proposed voyage. It was he who paid the one-eighth of the expense demanded from Columbus as his share, and built the three vessels for the voyage. Through his influence also Columbus secured the crews for the transatlantic journey. Pinzón commanded the "Pinta", and his brother Vicente Yañez the "Niña". On 21 November, 1492, he deserted Columbus off Cuba, hoping to be the first to discover the imaginary island of Osabeque. He was the first to discover Haiti (Hispaniola), and the river where he landed (now the Porto Caballo) was long called after him the River of Martin Alonso. He carried off thence four men and two girls, intending to steal them as slaves, but he was compelled to restore them to their homes by Columbus, whom he rejoined on the coast of Haiti on 6 January, 1493. It was during this absence that the flagship was driven ashore, and Columbus compelled to take to the "Niña". In excuse for his conduct, Pinzón afterwards alleged stress of weather. Off the coast of the Azores he again deserted, and set sail with all speed for Spain, hoping to be the first to communicate the news of the discovery. Driven by a hurricane into the port of Bayonne in Galicia, he sent a letter to the king asking for an audience. The monarch refusing to receive anyone but the admiral, Pinzón sailed for Palos, which he reached on the same day as Columbus (15 March, 1493). Setting out immediately for Madrid to make a fresh attempt to see the king, he was met by a messenger who forbade him to appear at court. Anger and jealousy, added to the privations of the voyage, undermined his health, and led to his death a few months later. In addition to the various biographies of Columbus, consult especially Ascensio, Martin Alonso Pinzón, estudio historico (Madrid, 1892); Fernandez Duro, Colón, Pinzón (Madrid, 1883). THOMAS KENNEDY Sebastiano Del Piombo Sebastiano del Piombo More correctly known as Sebastiano Luciani. Venetian portrait painter, b. at Venice, 1485; d. in Rome, 1547. He was known as del Piombo, from the office, conferred upon him by Clement VII, of keeper of the leaden seals. He was a pupil of Giovanni Bellini, and later on of Giorgione. His first idea was to become a religious or an ecclesiastic, and it is probable that he took minor orders and had every intention of proceeding to the priesthood, but he was strongly interested in music, devoted considerable time to studying that art, and in so doing became acquainted with Giorgione, a clever musician, who it appears induced him to delay his procedure towards the priesthood and give some attention to painting. It was on Giorgione's recommendation that he entered the studio of Bellini and, later, worked with Giorgione in his own studio. From the time of his acquaintance with him, we hear no more of his intention to embrace an ecclesiastical career. His earlier paintings were executed in Venice, but he was invited to Rome by Agostino Chigi, who was then building the Farnesina Palace, and some of the decoration of the rooms was put in the hands of Luciani. His work attracted the attention of Michelangelo, and the two men became warm friends. A little later Raphael saw his work and praised it highly, but they were never friends because of the jealousy existing between Michelangelo and Raphael and the friendship between Luciani and Michelangelo. The works which Luciani executed in Rome and at Viterbo betrayed the strong influence of Michelangelo. Their grandeur of composition could have come from no other artist of the time, but their magnificence of colour has nothing to do with the great sculptor, and is the result of Luciani's genius. A special event in Luciani's career is connected with the commission given to Raphael to paint the picture of the Transfiguration. Cardinal de' Medici, who commissioned the picture, desired at the same time to give an altar-piece to his titular cathedral at Narbonne, and commissioned a painting to be called the "Raising of Lazarus", and to be of the same size as Raphael's "Transfiguration". The two works were finished at about the same time, and were exhibited. It was perfectly evident that Luciani owed a great deal to the influence and the assistance of Michelangelo, but the colouring was so magnificent, and the effect so superb, that it created great excitement in Rome; notwithstanding that the "Transfiguration" by Raphael was regarded as the greater picture, Luciani's work was universally admired. The picture is now in the English National Gallery. Luciani painted a great many portraits, one of Cardinal de' Medici, another of Aretino, more than one portrait of members of the Doria family, of the Farnese, and of the Gonzaga families, and a clever one of Baccio Bandinelli the painter. His painting was marked by vigour of colouring, sweetness, and grace; his portraits are exceedingly true and lifelike, the draperies well painted, and well drawn, but the feature of his work is the extraordinary quality of his colour and the atmosphere with all the delicate subtleties of colour value which it gives. In many of his pictures the colouring is as clear and fresh to-day as it was when it was first painted, and this more especially applies to the carnations, in other men's work the first to fade. After the death of Raphael, he was regarded as the chief painter in Rome, and it was then that he acquired his position as keeper of the lead seals, an office which was lucrative and important, and which enabled him to have more leisure than hitherto had been at his disposal. His death took place at the time that he was painting the chapel of the Chigi family, a work which was to be finished by Salviati. His pictures can be studied in Florence, Madrid, Naples, Parma, St. Petersburg, and Travesio, three of his most notable portraits being those at Naples and Parma, and the fine portrait of Cardinal Pole, now at St. Petersburg. See VASARI's Lives of the Painters, various editions; and a work by CLAUDIO TOLOMEI, cited by LANZI, and known as Pitturi di Lendinara. GEORGE CHARLES WILLIAMSON St. Pionius St. Pionius Martyred at Smyrna, 12 March, 250. Pionius, with Sabina and Asclepiades, was arrested on 23 February, the anniversary of St. Polycarp's martyrdom. They had passed the previous night in prayer and fasting. Knowing of his impending arrest, Pionius had fastened fetters round the necks of himself and his companions to signify that they were already condemned. People seeing them led off unbound might suppose that they were prepared, like so many other Christians in Smyrna, the bishop included, to sacrifice. Early in the morning, after they had partaken of the Holy Bread and of water, they were conducted to the forum. The place was thronged with Greeks and Jews, for it was a great Sabbath and therefore a general holiday in the city == an indication of the importance of the Jews in Smyrna. Pionius harangued the multitude. He begged the Greeks to remember what Homer had said about not mocking the corpse of an enemy. Let them refrain therefore from mocking those Christians who had apostatized. He then turned to the Jews and quoted Moses and Solomon to the same effect. He ended with a vehement refusal to offer sacrifice. Then followed the usual interrogatories and threats, after which Pionius and his companions were relegated to prison, to await the arrival of the proconsul. Here they found other confessors, among them a Montanist. Many pagans visited them, and Christians who had sacrificed, lamenting their fall. The latter Pionius exhorted to repentance. A further attempt before the arrival of the proconsul was made to force Pionius and his companions into an act of apostasy. They were carried off to a temple where every effort was made to compel them to participate in a sacrifice. On 12 March, Pionius was brought before the proconsul who first tried persuasion and then torture. Both having failed, Pionius was condemned to be burnt alive. He suffered in company with Metrodorus, a Marcionite priest. His feast is kept by the Latins ion 1 Feb.; by the Greeks on 11 March. The true day of his martyrdom, according to the Acts, was 12 March. Eusebius ("H.E.", IV, xv; "Chron.", p. 17, ed. Schoene) places the martyrdom in the reign of Antoninus. His mistake was probably due to the fact that he found the martyrdom of Pionius in a volume containing the Acts of Martyrs of an earlier date. Possibly his MS. lacked the chronological note in our present ones. For the life of Polycarp by Pionius, see Polycarp, Saint. Did Pionius before his martyrdom celebrate with bread and water? We know from St. Cyprian (Ep. 63) that this abuse existed in his time. But note (1) the bread is spoken of as Holy, but not the water; (2) it is unlikely that Pionius would celebrate with only two persons present. It is more likely therefore that we have an account, not of a celebration, but of a private Communion (see Funk, "Abhandlungen", I, 287). J.F. BACCHUS The Pious Fund of the Californias The Pious Fund of the Californias (Fondo Piadoso de las Californias) The Pious Fund of the Californias had its origin, in 1697, in voluntary donations made by individuals and religious bodies in Mexico to members of the Society of Jesus, to enable them to propagate the Catholic Faith in the area then known as California. The early contributions to the fund were placed in the hands of the missionaries, the most active of whom were Juan Maria Salvatierre and Francisco Eusebio Kino. The later and larger donations took the form of agreements by the donors to hold the property donated for the use of the missions, and to devote the income therefrom to that purpose. In 1717 the capital sums of practically all the donations were turned over to the Jesuits, and from that year until the expulsion of the Society of Jesus from Mexico the Pious Fund was administered by them. In 1768, with the expulsion of all the members of the Society from Spanish territory by the Pragmatic Sanction of Charles III of Spain, the crown of Spain assumed the administration of the fund and retained it until Mexican independence was achieved in 1821. During this period (1768-1821) missionary labours in California were divided, the territory of Upper California being confided to the Franciscans, and that of lower California to the Dominicans. Prior to the expulsion of the Jesuits, thirteen missions had been founded in Lower California, and by the year 1823 the Franciscans had established twenty-one missions in Upper California. In 1821 the newly established Government of Mexico assumed the administration of the fund and continued to administer it until 1840. In 1836 Mexico passed an Act authorizing a petition to the Holy See for the creation of a bishopric in California, and declaring that upon its creation "the property belonging to the Pious Fund of the Californias shall be placed at the disposal of the new bishop and his successors, to be by them managed and employed for its objects, or others similar ones, always respecting the wishes of the founders". In response to this petition, Gregory XVI, in 1840, created the Californias into a diocese and appointed Francisco Garcia Diego (then president of the missions of the Californias) as the first bishop of the diocese. Shortly after his consecration, Mexico delivered the properties of the Pious Fund to Bishop Diego, and they were held and administered by him until 1842, when General Santa Ana, President of Mexico, promulgated a decree repealing the above-mentioned provision of the Act of 1836, and directing that the Government should again receive charge of the fund. The properties of the fund were surrendered under compulsion to the Mexican Government in April, 1842, and on 24 October of that year a decree was promulgated by General Santa Ana directing that the properties of the fund be sold, and the proceeds incorporated into the national treasury, and further provided that the sale should be for a sum representing the annual income of the properties capitalized at six per cent per annum. The decree provided that "the public treasuries will acknowledge a debt of six percent per annum on the total proceeds of the sale", and specially pledged the revenue from tobacco for the payment of that amount "to carry on the objects to which said fund is destined". By the treaty of Guadalupe Hildago, 2 Feb., 1848, Upper Mexico was ceded to the United States by Mexico, and all claims of citizens of the United States against the Republic of Mexico which had theretofore accrued were discharged by the terms of the treaty. After the treaty of Guadalupe Hildago (and indeed for some years before) Mexico made no payments for the benefit of the missions. The archbishop and bishops of California claimed that, as citizens of the United States, they were entitled to demand and receive from Mexico for the benefit of the missions within their diocese a proper proportion of the sums which Mexico had assumed to pay in its legislative decree of 24 October, 1842. By a convention between the United States and Mexico, concluded 4 July, 1868, and proclaimed 1 Feb., 1869, a Mexican and American Mixed Claims Commission was created to consider and adjudge the validity of claims held by citizens of either country against the Government of the other which had arisen between the date of the treaty of Guadalupe Hildago and the date of the convention creating the commission. To this commission the prelates of Upper California, in 1869, presented their claims against Mexico for such part of twenty-one years' interest on the Pious Fund (accrued between 1848 and 1869) payable under the terms of the Santa Ana decree of 1842, as was properly apportionable to the missions of Upper California (Lower California having remained Mexican territory). Upon the submission of this claim for decision the Mexican and American commissioners disagreed as to its proper disposition, and it was referred to the umpire of the commission, Sir Edward Thornton, then British Ambassador at Washington. On 11 Nov., 1875, the umpire rendered an award in favour of the archbishop and bishops of California. By that award the value of the funds at the time of its sale in 1842 was finally fixed at $1,435,033. The annual interest on this sum at six per cent (the rate being fixed by the decree of 1842) amounted to $86,101.98 and for the twenty-one years between 1848 and 1869 totalled $1,808,141.58. The umpire held that of this amount, one-half should equitably be held apportionable to the missions of Upper California, located in American territory, and therefore awarded to the United States for the account of the archbishop and bishops of California $904,070.79. This judgment was paid in gold by Mexico in accordance with the terms of the convention of 1868, in thirteen annual installments. Mexico, however, then disputed its obligation to pay any interest accruing after the period covered by the award of the Mixed Claims Commission (that is, after 1869), and diplomatic negotiations were opened by the Government of the United States with the Government of Mexico, which resulted, after some years, in the signing of a protocol between the two Governments on 22 May, 1902, by which the question of Mexico's liability was submitted to the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague. This was the first International controversy submitted to the tribunal. By the terms of the protocol, the Arbitral court was to decide first whether the liability of Mexico to make annual payments to the United States for the account of the Roman Catholic bishops of California had been rendered res judicata by the award of the Mixed Claim Commission, and second, if not, whether the claim of the United States, that Mexico was bound to continue such payments, was just. On 14 October, 1902, the tribunal at The Hague mad an award judging that the liability of Mexico was established by the principal of res judicata, and by virtue of the arbitral sentence of Sir Edward Thornton, as umpire of the Mixed Claim Commission; that in consequence the Mexican Government was bound to pay the United States, for the use of the Roman Catholic archbishop and bishops of California the sum of $1,402,682.67, in extinguishment of the annuities which had accrued from 1869 to 1902, and was under the further obligation to pay "perpetually" an annuity of $43,050.99, in money having legal currency in Mexico. The Government of Mexico has since the date of The Hague award complied with its provisions, and annually pays to the Government of the United States, in Mexican silver, for the use of the Catholic prelates of California, the sum adjudged to be due from it as a "perpetual" annuity. Transcript of Record of Proceedings before the Mexican and American Mixed Claims Commission with Relation to. . . .. . . . . .Claim No. 439, American Docket (Washington, 1902); Diplomatic Correspondence Relative to the Pious Fund of the Californias (Washington, 1902); United States vs. Mexico. . . .. . . . . .Senate Document No, 28, 57th Congress, Second Session (Washington, 1902). GARRET W. McENERNY The Pious Society of Missions The Pious Society of Missions Founded by Ven. Vincent Mary Pallotti in 1835. The members of the society are generally called Pallottini Fathers. Its object is to preserve the Faith among Catholics, especially among emigrants, who are exposed to many grave dangers, and to propagate the Faith among non-Catholics and infidels. The Society of Missions embraces three classes: (1) priests, clerics, and lay-brothers; (2) sisters, who help the priests in their missionary works as teachers and catechists, and who care for the temporal necessities of their churches and houses; (3) affiliated ecclesiastics and lay people. The sisters live a community life, and follow the Rule of St. Francis. They dedicate themselves to the spiritual and temporal welfare of their sex. They are especially engaged in missionary work among the emigrants in America, and the infidels in Africa and Australia. The third class consists of both the secular and regular clergy and the laity who are affiliated with the Society of Missions and help by their prayers, works, and financial aid the propagation of the Faith. The founder prescribed that his society should be a medium between the secular and the regular clergy. He desired to foster the work of the Catholic Apostolate. This desire of his was strikingly symbolized by the annual celebration of the octave (which he inaugurated in 1836) and the feast of Epiphany in Rome (see PALLOTTI, VINCENT MARY, VENERABLE). He gave to his society the name of "Catholic Apostolate", afterwards changed by Pius IX to the "Pious Society of Missions". The word Pious is to be taken in the sense of the Latin pia, i.e., devoted or dedicated to God. On 9 Jan., 1835, Pallotti conceived the plan of his institute and submitted it to the Apostolic See, and received the required approbation through the cardinal vicar, Odescalchi, on 4 April, 1835, as again by another rescript on 29 May, and finally by Pope Gregory XVI on 14 July of the same year. Nearly all religious orders and communities favoured the newly-created institute with a share in all their spiritual works and indulgences. In the first years of its existence the Pious Society of Missions had among its affiliated members, twenty-five cardinals, many bishops, Roman princes, and religious communities and societies, as also men known in that time as great apostles, Blessed Caspar del Buffalo, the founder of the Congregation of the Most Precious Blood and Maria Clausi of the Order of St. Francis of Paula. For a time the Society of the Propagation of Faith in Lyons feared that the new society would interfere with its special work. Pallotti satisfied the Holy See that the purpose of his society was different from that of the Propagation. As the name, "Catholic Apostolate", occasioned objections in some quarters, it was changed to the "Pious Society of Missions". At the Camaldolese convent near Frascati, he wrote the constitution and rules for the society, which Pius IX approved ad tempus, 1846. According to them, the members of the society should, after two years' novitiate, promise four things, poverty, chastity, obedience, and refusal of any ecclesiastical dignity, except by obedience to the Holy See. Pope Pius X approved ad experiendum the newly-revised rules and constitutions, December, 1903, for six years, and gave the final approbation on 5 Nov., 1909. The mother-house is in the Via Pettinari 57, Rome, attached to the church of San Salvatore. Pallotti sent his first missionary fathers to London in 1844, to take care of Italian emigrants in the Sardinian Oratory. Rev. D. Marquese Joseph Fa? di Bruno built the church of St. Peter in Hatton Garden which is the principal church of the Italians in London. He was one of the generals of the society, and wrote "Catholic Belief", a clear and concise exposition of Catholic doctrine, especially intended for non-Catholics. Over one million copies of this book were sold, and it was translated into Italian by the author. Under his generalate, the society extended its activities beyond Rome, Rocca Priora, and London to other countries. He received from Leo XIII the church of S. Silvestre in Capite in Rome for the use of the English-speaking colony there. In Masio in northern Italy, he established an international college, a mission at Hastings, England, and in London (St. Boniface's) for the German colony; in Limburg, Ehrenbreitstein, and Vallemdar there are flourishing colleges for the missions in Kamerun, West Africa. These missions have now a vicar Apostolic and 12 houses, with 70 schools belonging to it. In South America there are establishments at Montevideo, Mercedes, Saladas, and Suipacha; 14 missions of the society in Brazil embrace a territory three times the size of the State of New York. Rev. Dr. E. Kirner started the first Italian Mission in New York City in 1883, afterwards one in Brooklyn, N.Y., Newark, N.J., Hammondton, N.J., and Baltimore, Md. In North America the Pallottini Fathers have at present over 100,000 Italian emigrants under their spiritual care. The society, in the year 1909, was divided into four provinces, the Italian, American, English, and German. JOHN VOGEL Giambattista Piranesi Giambattista Piranesi An Italian etcher and engraver, b. at Venice, 1720; d. in Rome, 9 Nov., 1778. His uncle Lucchesi gave him lessons in drawing, until in 1738 his father, a mason, sent him to Rome to study architecture under Valeriani and engraving under Vasi. He did not return except for a brief visit to his family. In 1741 he brought out a work on arches, bridges, and other remains of antiquity, a notable monument of black and white art; thereafter he opened a gallery for the sale of prints, chiefly his own. He was a rapid and facile worker and etched more than 2000 large plates, full of detail, vigour, and brilliancy. As a rule he drew directly on copper, and hence his work is bold, free, and spirited to a marked degree; his shadows are luminous, but at times there is too much chiaroscuro. The result is a dramatic alternation of black and white, and of light and shade, which deservedly won for him the name of "the Rembrandt of architecture". Skilful and artistic printing lent an added charm to his proofs, and the poor impressions that exist in western Europe come from plates that were captured by British warships during the Napoleonic wars. Some of the etchings in his twenty-nine folio volumes are on double-elephant paper, ten feet in length. While he achieved a work of magnitude in pictorial records of Roman monuments of antiquity and of the Renaissance, and gave immense archæological, antiquarian, and topographical value to this work, the artistic quality always predominates. He was fond of peopling his ruins with Callot-like figures, and "like Callot makes great use of the swelling line" (Hind). His plates ultimately came into the possession of the pope. Although not eminent as an architect he repaired among other edifices the church of S. Maria del Popolo, and the Priory of Malta, in which is a life-size statue to his memory. Piranesi married a peasant, and his children, Francesco and Laura, were of great assistance to him towards the end of his laborious life. Laura's touch strongly resembles that of her father. He was decorated with the Order of Christ and was made a member of the London Society of Antiquaries. His works are: "Roman Antiquities" (220 plates); Views of Rome (130 plates); Antique Statues, Vases and Busts (350 plates); Magnificence of the Romans (47 plates). DELABORDE, La Gravure (tr. London, 1886); HIND, A Short History of Engraving and Etching (London, 1908); HUNEKER, Promenades of an Impressionist (New York, 1910). LEIGH HUNT Pirhing, Ernricus Ernricus Pirhing Born at Sigarthin, near Passau, 1606; died between 1678 and 1681. At the age of twenty-two he entered the Society of Jesus, where he gave instruction in the Sacred Sciences. He taught canon law and Scripture for twelve years at Dillingen, where he was still living in 1675. His "Jus canonicum in V libros Decretalium distributum" (5 vols., Dillingen, 1674-77; 4 vols., Dillingen, 1722; 5 vols., Venice, 1759) marks a progress in canonical science in Germany, for although he maintains the classical divisions of the "Corpus Juris", he gives a complete and synthetic explanation of the canonical legislation of the matters which he treats. He published also, under the form of theses, seven pamphlets on the titles of the first book of the Decretals, which were resumed in his "Jus Canonicum"; and an "Apologia" against two sermons of the Protestant Balduinus (Ingolstadt, 1652; Munich, 1653). After his death one of his colleagues published a "Synopsis Pirhingana", or résumé of his "Jus Canonicum" (Dillingen, 1695; Venice, 1711). DE BACKER-SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliothèque des écrivains de la C. de J. (Liège, 1872), II, 1999; SCHULTE, Die Gesch. der Quellen u. Literatur des kanonischen Rechts (Stuttgart, 1880), III, 143. A. VAN HOVE. Pirkheimer Pirkheimer Charitas Pirkheimer Abbess of the Convent of St. Clara, of the Poor Clares, in Nuremberg, and sister of the celebrated Humanist Willibald Pirkheimer, b. in Nuremberg, 21 March, 1466; d. there 19 August, 1532. At the age of twelve she obtained a remarkable spiritual formation in the cloister of St. Clara. It is not known when she entered the religious life. She found a friend in Apollonia Tucher, whom her nephew, Christoph Scheurl, entitles "The crown of her convent, a mirror of virtue, a model of the sisterhood," and who became prioress in 1494. She also, toward the end of the century, became a friend of the cousin of Apollonia, the provost, Sixtus Tucher. This friendship finds expression in thirty-four letters of Tucher addressed to the two nuns, treating principally of spiritual subjects and of the contemplative life. Charitas, who in 1500 was a teacher and perhaps also mistress of novices, was chosen on 20 December, 1503, as abbess. The first twenty years of her tenure of office she passed in the peace of contemplative life. She was able to read the Latin authors, and thereby acquired a classic style. The works of the Fathers of the Church, especailly of St. Jerome, were her favourite reading. In her studies her brother Willibald was her guide and teacher. He dedicated to her in 1513 his Latin translation of Plutarch's Treatise "On the Delayed Vengeance of the Deity" and praises in the preface her education and love for study, against which Charitas, "more disturbed than astonished", protested, claiming that she was not a scholar, but only the friend of learned men. In 1519 he dedicated to his sisters, Charitas and Clara, who since 1494 had also been a Poor Clare, the work of St. Fulgentius, and in 1521 he translated for them the sermons of St. Gregory of Nazianzus. Several of Pirkheimer's humanist friends became acquainted with the highly cultivated abbess. Conrad Celtes presented her with his edition of the works of the nun Hrosvit (Roswitha) of Gandersheim, and his own poems, and, in a eulogy, praises her as a rare adornment of the German Fatherland. Charitas thanked him, but advised him frankly to rise from the study of pagan writings to that of the Sacred Books, from earthly to heavenly pursuits. Christoph Scheurl dedicated to her in 1506 his "Utilitates missæ" (Uses of the Mass); in 1515 he published the letters of Tucher to Charitas and Apollonia. She was highly esteemed by Georg Spalatin, Kiliam Leib, Johannes Butzbach, and the celebrated painter, Dürer. But all the praise she received excited no pride in Charitas; she remained simple, affable, modest and independent, uniting in perfect harmony high education and deep piety. It was thus she resisted the severe temptations which hung over the last ten years of her life. When the Lutheran doctrines were brought into Nuremberg, the peace of the convent ceased. Charitas had already made herself unpopular by a letter to Emser (1522) in which she thanked him for his valiant actions as "The Powerful Defender of the Christian Faith". Since 1524 the governor had sought to reform the cloister and to acquire possession of its property. He assigned to the convent of the Poor Clares Lutheran preachers to whom the nuns were forced to listen. The acute and bigoted inspector, Nützel, tirelessly renewed his attempts at perversion, while outside the people rioted, threw stones into the church and sang scandalous songs. Three nuns, at the request of their parents and in spite of their resistance, were taken out of the convent by violence. On the other hand Melanchthon, during his residence in Nuremberg in 1525, was very friendly to them, and the diminution of the persecution is attributable to him. Nevertheless, the convent was deprived of the care of souls, was highly taxed and, in fine, doomed to a slow death. With constant courage and resourceful superiority, Charitas defended her rights against the attacks and wiles of the town-council, the abusive words of the preachers, and the shameful slanders of the people. Her memoirs illuminate this period of suffering as far as 1528. Her last experience of earthly happiness was the impressive celebration of her jubilee at Easter, 1529. At last a peaceful death freed her from bodily sufferings and attacks of the enemies of her convent. Her sister, Clara, and her niece, Katrina, daughter of Willibald, succeeded her as abbess. The last abbess was Ursula Muffel. Towards the end of the century the convent was closed. Willibald Pirkheimer German Humanist, b. at Eichstätt, 5 December, 1470; d. at Nuremberg, 22 December, 1530. He was the son of the episcopal councillor and distinguished lawyer, Johannes Pirkheimer, whose family came from Nuremberg, which Willibald regarded as his active place. He studied jurisprudence, the classics, and music at the Universities of Padua and Pavia (1489-95). In 1495 he married Crescentia Rieter (d. 1504), by whom he had five daughters. >From 1498 to 1523, when he voluntarily retired, he was one of the town councillors of Nuremberg, where he was the centre of the Humanistic movement, and was considered one of the most distinguished representatives of Germany. His house stood open to everyone who sought intellectual improvement, and was celebrated by Celtis as the gathering place of scholars and artists. His large correspondence shows the extent of his literary connexions. In 1499, with the aid of a capable soldier, he led the Nuremberg contingent in the Swiss war, his classical history of which appeared in 1610 and won for him the name of the German Xenophon. Maximilian appointed him imperial councillor. He owes his fame to his many-sided learning, and few were as widely read as he in the Greek and Latin literatures. He translated Greek classics, e. g., Euclid, Xenophon, Plato, Ptolemy, Plutarch, Lucian, and the Church Fathers into Latin. Like Erasmus, he paid less attention to a literal rendering than to the sense of his translations, and thus produced works which can be compared with the best of the translated literature of that period. He also wrote a work on the earliest history of Germany, and was interested in astronomy, mathematics, the natural sciences, numismatics, and art. Albert Dürer was one of his friends and has painted his characteristic portrait. He defended Reuchlin in the latter's dispute with the theologians of Cologne. At the beginning of the Reformation he took sides with Luther, whose able opponent, Johann Eck, he attacked in the coarse satire "Eckius dedolatus" (Eck planed down). On behalf of Luther he also wrote a second bitter satire, in an unprinted comedy, called "Schutzschrift". Consequently his name was included in the Bull of excommunication of 1520, and in 1521 he was absolved "not without painful personal humiliation", was requred to acknowledge Luther's doctrine to be heresy, and denounce it formally by oath. Nevertheless, up to 1525 his sympathies were with the Reformation, but as the struggtle went on, like many other Humanists, he turned aside from the movement and drew towards the Church, with which he did not wish to break. In Luther, whom he had at first regarded as a reformer, he saw finally a teacher of false doctrines, "completely a prey to delusion and led by the evil fiend". Luther's theological ideas had never been matters of conscience to him, hence the results of the changes, the decay of the fine arts, the spread of the movement socially and economically, the religious quarrels, and the excesses of zealots repelled him as it did his friend Erasmus who was in intellectual sympathy with him. His sister, Charitas, was the Abbess of the Convent of St. Clara at Nuremberg, where another sister, Clara, and his daughters, Katharina and Crescentia, were also nuns. From 1524 they were troubled by the petty annoyances and "efforts at conversion" of the city council that had become Lutheran. This affected him deeply and aided in extinguishing his enthusiasm for the Reformation. His last literary labour, which he addressed to the council in 1530, was on behalf of the convent; this was the "Oratio apologetica monialium nomine", a master-piece of its kind. CHARITAS -- Charitas Pirkheimer, Denkwürdigkeiten, ed. HÖfler (Bamberg, 1852); Loose, Aus dem Leben der Charitas Pirkheimer (Dresden, 1870); Binder, Charitas Pirkheimer (2nd ed., Freiburg, 1878). WILLIBALD -- Pirkheimer, Opera (Frankfort, 1619); Roth, Willibald Pirkheimer (Halle, 1887); Hagen, Pirkheimer in seinem Verhältnis zum Humanismus und zur Reformation (Nuremberg, 1882); Drews, Pirkheimers Stellung zur Reformation (Leipzig, 1887); Reimann, Pirkheimerstudien (Berlin, 1900). KLEMENS LÖFFLER. Piro Indians Piro Indians A tribe of considerable importance, ranging by water for a distance of three hundred miles along the upper Ucayali (Tambo) River, and its affluents, the Apurimac and Urubamba, Department of Loretto, in northeastern Peru. Their chief center in the last century was the mission town of Santa Rosa de los Piros, at the confluence of the Tambo and Urubamba (Santa Ana). To the Quicha-speaking tribes of Peru they are known as Chantaquiro, nearly equivalent to "Black Teeth", from their former custom of staining their teeth and gums with a black dye from the chonta or black-wood palm (peperonia tinctorioides). They are also known as Simiriches. They belong to the great Arawakan linguistic stock, to which along belong the warlike Campa of the extreme upper Ucayali and the celebrated Moxos (q. v.) of Bolivia, whose main territory was about the lower Orinoco, and in the West Indies. The Piro excel all tribes of the Ucayali both in its strength and vitality, a fact which may be due to the more moderate temperature and superior healthfulness of their country. As contrasted with their neighbours they are notably jovial and versatile, but aggressively talkative, inclined to bullying, and not always dependable. They are of quick intelligence and have the Indian gift for languages, many of them speaking Quicha, Spanish, and sometimes Portuguese, in addition to their own. Like most of the tribes of the region they are semi-agricultural, depending chiefly upon the plantain or banana, and the maguey (manhiot), which produce abundantly almost without care. The preparation from these of the intoxicating masato or chicha, to which they are given to excess, forms the principal occupation of the women in all of the tribes of the Ucayali. They also make use of fish and the oil from turtle eggs. Their houses are light, open structures, thatched with palm leaves, with sleeping hammocks, hand-made earthen pots, and the wooden masato trough for furniture. Their dress is a short of shirt for the men, and a short skirt for the women, both of their own weaving from native cotton and died black. They wear silver nose pendants and paint their faces black. The men are splendid and daring boatmen, in which capacity their services are in constant requisition. In their primitive condition the Piro used the bow, lance, and blowgun with poisoned arrows. They were polygamous and made constant raids upon the weaker tribes for the purpose of carrying off women. They buried their dead, without personal belongings, in canoes in the earthen floor of the house. Their principal divinities were a benevolent creative spirit or hero-god called Huyacali, and an evil spirit, Saminchi, whom they greatly feared. They had few dances or other ceremonies. The first missions on the upper Ucayali were undertaken in 1673 under Father Biedma, of the Franciscan Convent of the Twelve Apostles in Peru, who had already been at work in the Huallaga since 1631. In 1674 the warlike Campa attacked and destroyed the mission established among them and massacred four missionaries together with an Indian neophyte. In 1687 Father Biedma himself was killed by the Piro. Others were murdered or sank under the climate, until in 1694, when Frs. Valero, Huerta, and Zavala were killed, the Ucayali mission was abandoned. They were renewed after some years with a fair degree of success, but in 1742 were again wiped out and all the missionaries brutally butchered in a terrible rising headed by the Campa, under the leadership of an apostate Indian, Juan Santos, who took the name of Atahualpa, claiming to be a descendant of the last of the Incas. In 1747 Fr. Manuel Albaran, descending the Apurimac, was killed by the Piro. In 1767 another general rising resulted in the death of all but one of the sixteen missionaries of the Franciscan College of Ocopa, Peru, which had taken over the work in 1754. In 1790 the Franciscans again had eighteen missions in operation on the upper Ucayali and Huallaga region, with a total population of 3494 souls. In 1794 an attempt to gather the Piro into a mission was defeated by an epidemic, which caused them to scatter into the forests. In 1799 (or 1803 -- Raimond) the attempt was successfully carried out by Father Pedro Garcia at the mission of Nuestra Señora del Pilar de Bepuano. In 1815 the principal and last mission for the tribe was established by Father Manuel Plaza under the name Santa Rosa de Lima de los Piros. After the revolution, which made Peru a separate government, the missions were neglected, most of the missionaries were withdrawn, the neophytes sought employment at the river ports or in the rubber forests, or rejoined their wild kindred, and in 1835, only one mission station, Sarayuca, remained upon the Ucayali. The Piro, however, still rank among the important tribes, although, on account of their wandering habit, their true number is unknown. Hervas gives the Piro language three dialects, and states that Fr. Enrique Richter (c. 1685) prepared a vocabulary and catechism in it and in several other languages. Castelnau and Marcoy also give vocabularies. BRINTON, The American Race (New York, 1891); CASTELNAU, Expédition, dans les parties centrales l'Amérique du Sud, IV (6 vols., Paris, 1850-1); GALT, Indians of Peru in Smithsonian Rept. for 1877 (Washington, 1878); HERNDON, Exploration of the Valley of the Amazon (Washington, 1853); HERVAS, Catalogo de las Lenguas, I (Madrid, 1800); Labre report in Scottish Geog. Mag. VI (Edinburgh, 1890); MARKHAM, Tribes in the Valley of the Amazon in Jour. Anth. Inst., XXIV (London, 1895); MARCOY, Voyage à travers l'Amérique du Sud (2 vols, Paris, 1869); ORDINAIRE, Les Sauvages du Pérou in Revue d'Ethnographie, VI (Paris, 1887); ORTON, The Andes and the Amazon (3rd ed., New York, 1876); RAIMONDI, Apuntes sobre la Provincia litoral de Loreto (Lima, 1862), in part tr. by BOLLEART in Anthropological Review I (London, 1863); RECLUS, South America, I (New York, 1894); SMYTH and LOWE, Journey from Lima to Pará (London, 1836). JAMES MOONEY Pisa Pisa ARCHDIOCESE OF PISA (PISÆ) Archdiocese in Tuscany, central Italy. The city is situated on the Arno, six miles from the sea, on a fertile plain, while the neighbouring mountains yield marble, alabaster, copper, and other mineral products; mineral waters abound in the province. The famous duomo, or cathedral, begun (1063) by Buschetto and consecrated by Gelasius II (1118), is a basilica in the shape of a Latin cross, with five naves, the columns of which are of oriental granite. The upper portion of the façade is formed by five rows of columns, one above the other; the bas-reliefs of the four bronze doors were executed by Domenico Partegiani and Augusto Serrano, after the designs of Giambologna and others. The cupola was painted by Orazio Riminaldi and Michele Cinganelli; the altars are all of Luna marble. Among the notable objects in this cathedral are the octagonal pulpit, the urn of St. Ranieri, and the lamp of Possenti da Pietrasanta, under which Galileo studied the isochronism of the pendulum. In front of the duomo is the baptistery, a round structure, with a cupola surmounted by a statue of St. John the Baptist; it was erected in 1152. Beside the duomo is the celebrated leaning campanile. The camposanto (begun in 1278, completed in 1464) is a real museum of painting and of medieval sculpture; its architect was Giovanni Pisano, by whom also are six statues placed over one of the entrances. The frescoes are by Giotto, Orcagna, Benozzo Gozzoli, Spinello Aretino, Simone Memmi, and Pietro Laurati. It contains the tomb of the Emperor Henry VII. Other churches are Santa Maria della Spina (1230; 1323); San Nicola, dating from about 1000; the church of the Knights of S. Stefano (1555), a work of Vasari; S. Francesco (thirteenth century); S. Caterina (1253), which belongs to the seminary and contains the mausoleums of Bishop Saltarelli and of Gherardo Compagni; S. Anna has two canvasses by Ghirlandajo; S. Michele (1018); S. Frediano (ninth century); S. Sepolcro (1150); S. Paolo (805?) called the old duomo; S. Pietro in Grado, which dates from the fifth century, and was restored in the ninth. The episcopal residence, of the twelfth century, has important archives. Other buildings of interest are the Loggia dei mercanti, by Bountalenti, and the university (1105-1343), with which were united several colleges, as the Puteano, Ferdinando, Vittoriano, and Ricci. Outside the city are the Certosa di Calci, the Bagni di Pisa, ancient baths which were restored by Countess Matilda, and the Villa Reale di S. Rossore. Pisa is the ancient Pisæ, in antiquity held to be a colony of Pisæ in Elis. Later, it probably belonged to the Etruscans, though often troubled by the Ligurians. The people devoted themselves to commerce and to piracy. From 225 B.C., they were in amicable relations with the Romans, who used the port of Pisæ in the Punic War, and against the Ligurians, in 193. By the Julian law, if not earlier, the town obtained Roman citizenship. Little mention is made of it in the Gothic War. In 553 it submitted to Narses, of its own accord; after the Lombard invasion, it seems to have enjoyed a certain independence, and it was not until the eighth century that Pisa had a Lombard dux, while, in the ninth century, it alternated with Lucca as the seat of the Marquis of Tuscany. The war between Pisa and Lucca (1003) was the first war between two Italian cities. In 1005, the town was sacked by the Saracens, under the famous Musetto (Mugheid al Ameri), who, in turn, was vanquished by the Pisans and Genoese, in Sardinia. In 1029, the Pisans blockaded Carthage; and in 1050, Musetto having again come to Sardinia, they defeated him with the assistance of Genoa and of the Marquis of Lunigiana; but the division of the conquered island became a source of dissension between the allied cities, and the discord was increased when Urban II invested the Pisans with the suzerainty of Corsica, whose petty lords (1077) had declared their wish to be fiefs only of the Holy See. In 1126, Genoa opened hostilities by an assault on Porto Pisano, and only through the intervention of Innocent II (1133) was peace re-established. Meanwhile, the Pisans, who for centuries had had stations in Calabria and in Sicily, had extended their commerce to Africa and to Spain, and also to the Levant. The Pisans obtained great concessions in Palestine and in the principality of Antioch by lending their ships for the transportation of crusaders in 1099, and thereafter people of all nations were to be found in their city. In 1063 they had made an attempt against Palermo, and in 1114 led by the consul, Azzo Marignani, conquered the Balearic Islands. Pisa supported the emperors at an early date, and Henry IV, in 1084, confirmed its statutes and its maritime rights. With its fleet, it supported the expedition of Lothair II to Calabria, destroying in 1137 the maritime cities of Ravello, La Scala, la Fratta, and above all, Amalfi, which then lost its commercial standing. The Pisans also gave their assistance to Henry IV in the conquest of Sicily, and as reward lost the advantages that they had then enjoyed. The reprisals of Innocent III in Sardinia led the Pisans to espouse the cause of Otto IV and that of Frederick II, and Pisa became the head and refuge of the Ghibellines of Tuscany, and, accordingly, a fierce enemy of Florence. The victory of Montaperti (1260) marks the culmination of Pisan power. Commercial jealousy, political hatred, and the fact that Pisa accorded protection to certain petty lords of Corsica, who were in rebellion against Genoa, brought about another war, in which one hundred and seven Genoese ships defeated one hundred and three ships of the Pisans, at La Meloria, the former taking ten thousand prisoners. All would have been lost, if Ugolino della Gherardesca, capitano del popolo and podestà, had not providently taken charge of the Government. But as he had protected the Guelphs, Archbishop Ruggieri degli Ubaldini took up arms against him, and shut him up (1288) in the tower of the Gualdini, where with his sons he starved to death (Inferno, XXXIII, 13). At the peace of 1290, Pisa was compelled to resign its rights over Corsica and the possession of Sassari in Sardinia. The Pisans hoped to retrieve themselves by inviting Henry VII to establish himself in their city, offering him two million florins for his war against Florence, and their fleet for the conquest of Naples; but his death in 1313 put an end to these hopes. Thereupon they elected (1314) Uguccione della Fagiuola of Lucca as their lord; but they rid themselves of him in the same year. At the approach of Louis the Bavarian, they besought that prince not to enter Pisa; but Castruccio degli Antelminelli incited Louis to besiege the city, with the result that Pisa surrendered in 1327, and paid a large sum of money to the victor. In 1329 Louis resided there again, with the antipope, Pietro di Corvara. Internal dissensions and the competition of Genoa and Barcelona brought about the decay of Pisan commerce. To remedy financial evils, the duties on merchandise were increased, which, however, produced a greater loss, for Florence abandoned the port of Pisa. In 1400 Galeazzo Visconti bought Pisa from Gherardo Appiani, lord of the city. In 1405, Gabriele M. Visconti having stipulated the sale of Pisa to the Florentines, the Pisans made a supreme effort to oppose that humiliation; the town, however, was taken and its principal citizens exiled. The expedition of Charles VIII restored its independence (1494-1509); but the city was unable to rise again to its former prosperity. Under Cosimo de' Medici, there were better times, especially for the university. Among the natives of Pisa were: B. Pellegrino (seventh century); B. Chiara (d. in 1419), and B. Pietro, founder of the Hermits of St. Jerome (d. in 1435); B. Giordano da Pisa, O. P., (d. in 1311); and Gregory X. Connected with the church of San Pietro in Grado there is a legend according to which St. Peter landed at Pisa, and left there his disciple St. Pierinus. The first known bishop was Gaudentius, present at the Council of Rome (313). Other bishops were St. Senior (410), who consecrated St. Patrick; Joannes (493); one, name unknown, who took part in the schism of the Three Chapters (556); Alexander (648); Maurianus (680); one, name unknown, taken prisoner by Charlemagne at the siege of Pavia (774); Oppizo (1039), the founder of the Camaldolite convent of S. Michele; Landulfus (1077), sent by Gregory VII as legate to Corsica; Gerardus (1080), an able controversialist against the Greeks; Diabertus (1085), the first archbishop, to whom Urban II gave the sees of Corsica as suffragans in 1099, the first Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem; Pietro Moriconi (1105). In 1121, on account of the jealousy of Genoa, the bishops of Corsica were made immediately dependent upon the Holy See, but Honorius II (1126) restored the former status of Pisa as their metropolitan; in 1133, however, Innocent II divided them between Pisa and Genoa, which was then made an archdiocese. Thereafter, Pisa received for suffragans also Populonia and two sees in Sardinia. Other bishops were: Cardinal Uberto Lanfranchi (1132), who often served as pontifical legate; Cardinal Villano Gaetani (1145), compelled to flee from the city on account of his fidelity to Alexander III (1167); Lotario Rosari (1208), also Patriarch of Jerusalem (1216); Federico Visconti (1254), who held provincial synods in 1258, 1260, and 1262; Oddone della Sala (1312) had litigations with the republic, and later became Patriarch of Alexandria; Simone Saltorelli; Giovanni Scarlatti (1348), who had been legate to Armenia and to the emperor at Constantinople; Lotto Gambacorta (1381), compelled to flee after the death of his brother Pietro, tyrant of Pisa (1392); Alamanno Adinari (1406), a cardinal who had an important part in the conciliabulum of Pisa and in the Council of Constance; Cardinal Francesco Salviati Riario (1475), hung at Florence in connexion with the conspiracy of the Pazzi; in 1479 he was succeeded by his nephew, Rafaele Riario, who narrowly escaped being a victim of the same conspiracy; Cesare Riario (1499); Cardinal Scipione Rebita (1556); Cardinal Giovanni de' Medici (1560), a son of Cosimo; Cardinal Angelo Niccolini (1564); Cardinal Antonio Pozzi (1582), founder of the Puteano college, and author of works on canon and on civil law: Giulio de' Medici (1620), served on missions for the duke, founded the seminary, introduced wise reforms, and evinced great charity during the pest of 1629; Cardinal Scipione Pannocchieschi (1636); Cardinal Cosimo Corsi (1853-70). Important councils have been in 1135, against Anacletus II and the heretic Enrico, leader of the Petrobrusiani in 1409, which increased the schism by the deposition of Gregory XII and of Benedict XIII, and by the election of Alexander V; in 1511, brought about by a few schismatic cardinals and French bishops at the instigation of Louis XII against Julius II. Leghorn, Pescia, Pontremoli, and Volterra are the suffragans of Pisa; the archdiocese has 136 parishes; 190,000 inhabitants; 10 religious houses of men, and 29 of women; 6 educational establishments for boys, and 13 for girls; 1 Catholic daily paper. CAPPELLETTI, Le Chiese d'Italia, XVI; TRONCI, Annuali Pisani (Pisa, 1868-71); DAL BORGO, Dissertazioni sulla storia pisana (Pisa, 1761-68); CHIRONE EPIDAURICO, Navigazione e commercio pisano (Pisa, 1797); FEDELI, I documenti pontificii riguardanti l'Università di Pisa (Pisa, 1908); SUPINO, Pisa in Italia Artistica, XVI (Bergamo, 1905). U. BENIGNI University of Pisa University of Pisa In the eleventh century there were many jurisconsults at Pisa who lectured on law; prominent among them were Opitone and Sigerdo. There also was preserved a codex of the Pandects, dated, it was said, from Justinian. Four professors of the Law School of Bologna, Bulgarus, Burgundius, Uguccione, and Bandino, successors of Irnerius, were trained here; Burgundius acquired renown by his translation of the Pandects and of Greek works on medicine. Gerardo de Fasiano, Lambertuccio Arminzochi, Zacchia da Volterra, Giovanni Fagioli, Ugo Benci, Baldo da Forli, and Giovanni d'Andrea taught at Pisa in the thirteenth century. In the same century medicine also was taught; the most famous professor was Guido of Pisa, who afterwards went to Bologna (1278). In 1338, as Benedict XII had placed Bologna under interdict, Ranieri da Forli and Bartolo removed to Pisa with a large following. The Studium of Pisa is mentioned in the communal documents of 1340. In 1343 Clement VI erected a studium generale, with all the faculties, including theology; and Charles IV confirmed it in 1355. The university, however, did not flourish. From 1359 to 1364 it was closed, and was only reopened by Urban VI. Meantime, however, the teaching of law was not discontinued. In 1406 Pisa fell into the power of the Florentines who suppressed the university. In 1473 Lorenzo de' Medici with Sixtus IV's approval closed the University of Florence and reopened Pisa. For its endowment the goods of the Church and clergy were put under contribution to such an extent that Paul III in 1534 recalled the concessions of his predecessors. The most celebrated teachers of this first epoch were the jurisconsults Francesco Tigrini, Baldo degli Ubaldi, Lancellotto Decio, Francesco Alcolti, Baldo Bartolini, Giasone del Maino, Bartolommeo and Mariano Socini; the physicians, Guido da Prato, Ammanati, Ugolino da Montecatini, Alessandro Sermoneta, Albertino da Cremona, Pietro Leoni, and Cristoforo Prati; the Humanists, Bartolommeo da Pratorecchi, Lorenzo Lippi, Andrea Dati, Mariano Tucci; the theologians, Bernardino Cherichini (1478) and Giorgio Benigni Salviati. In 1543 Cosimo de' Medici undertook to restore the university, and to this end Paul III made large concessions out of the revenues of the Church and monasteries. Several colleges were founded, such as the Ducal College, the Ferdinando, and the Puteano (Pozzi for the Piedmontese). The university at this time became famous especially by its cultivation of the natural sciences. Among its noted scientists were: Cesalpino (botany, medicine, philosophy); Galileo Galilei (mathematics and astronomy); Borelli (mechanics and medicine); Luca Ghini, first director of the botanical gardens (1544); Andrea Vesalio, Realdo Colombo, Gabriele Falloppo; Giovanni Risischi, and Lambeccari in anatomy; Baccio Baldini, Vidio Vidi, Girolamo Mercuriale, Rodrigo Fonseca (seventeenth century), Fil. Cavriami, Marcello Malpighi in medicine. In view of its progressive spirit, Pisa may be called the cradle of modern science. The professors of jurisprudence were rather conservative, but there were not wanting able thinkers, such as the two Torellis, Francesco Vegio, Asinio, Giacomo Mandelli, the two Facchinis, and the Scotsman Dempster; Nicola Bonaparte, who introduced into Pisa the critical-historical study of Roman Law inaugurated by Cujas, Giuseppe Averani, Stefano Fabrucci, historian of the university, Bernardo Tanucci, afterwards minister of Charles III of Naples. At the beginning of the eighteenth century the university was again in a precarious condition; but the new Lorenzian dynasty sought to strengthen it by increasing the scientific institutes, and revising the statutes; thus after 1744 the rector was no longer elected by the scholars or from their ranks, but had to be one of the professors. In the eighteenth century Valsecchi and Berti won distinction in theology; Andrea Guadegni, Bart. Franc. Pellegrini, Migliorotto Maccioni, Flaminio Dal Borgo, Gian Maria Lampredi, Sandonnini (canonist), the criminalists della Pura and Ranuccia in jurisprudence; Politi, Corsini, Antonioli, Sarti in letters; Guido Grandi, Claudio Fromond, Anton Nicola Branchi, Lorenzo Pignotti, Lorenzo Tilli, and Giorgio Santi in natural science; Angelo Gatti, Antonio Matani, Franc. Torrigiani in medicine; Brogiani and Berlinghieri in anatomy. In 1808 the regulations of the French universities were introduced, but were superseded by others in 1814. The professors were then divided into the faculties of theology, law (comprising philosophy and literature), and medicine. But the number of the chairs increased; in 1840 there were six faculties. In 1847 the "Annali delle Università toscane" were published. In 1851, for political reasons, the Universities of Pisa and Siena were united, the faculties of jurisprudence and theology located at Siena, and those of philosophy and medicine at Pisa. The former regime was re-established in 1859 with such modifications as the Law of Casati required. In 1873 all chairs of theology were suppressed throughout Italy. Noted professors in law were Lorenzo Quartieri, Federico del Rosso, Valeri, Poggi, Salvagnoli, Franc. Ferrara, P. Emilio Imbriani, and Franc. Carrara (criminalist). Science and letters were represented by the physicist Gerbi; the chemist Piria; the mathematician Betti; the physicians Puccinotti, Pacini, Marcacci, Ranzi (pathology); the criminalist Rosellini, the Latinist Ferrucci; and Francesco de Sanctis, literary critic. Besides the usual faculties, Pisa has schools of engineering, agriculture, veterinary medicine and pharmacy, and a normal high school. In 1910-11 there were 159 instructors and 1160 students. FABRONI, Historia Acad. Pisanæ (Pisa, 1791); DAL BORGO, Dissertazione epistolare sull' origine dell' univ. di Pisa (Pisa, 1765); CALISSE, Cenni storici sull' Università di Pisa in Annuario della Università di Pisa (1899-1900); BUONAMICI, Della scuola Pisana del diritto romano ecc. (Pisa, 1874); IDEM, I giureconsulti di Pisa al tempo della scuola Bolognese (Rome, 1888); FEDELI, I documenti pontificii riguardanti l'Università di Pisa (Pisa, 1908). U. BENIGNI Council of Pisa Council of Pisa Preliminaries. The great Schism of the West had lasted thirty years (since 1378), and none of the means employed to bring it to an end had been successful. Compromise or arbitral agreement between the two parties had never been seriously attempted; surrender had failed lamentably owing to the obstinacy of the rival popes, all equally convinced of their rights; action, that is the interference of princes and armies, had been without result. During these deplorable divisions Boniface IX, Innocent VII, and Gregory XII had in turn replaced Urban VI (Bartholomew Prignano) in the See of Rome, while Benedict XIII had succeeded Clement VII (Robert of Geneva) in that of Avignon. The cardinals of the reigning pontiffs being greatly dissatisfied, both with the pusillanimity and nepotism of Gregory XII and the obstinacy and bad will of Benedict XIII, resolved to make use of a more efficacious means, namely a general council. The French king, Charles V, had recommended this, at the beginning of the schism, to the cardinals assembled at Anagni and Fondi in revolt against Urban VI, and on his deathbed he had expressed the same wish (1380). It had been upheld by several councils, by the cities of Ghent and Florence, by the Universities of Oxford and Paris, and by the most renowned doctors of the time, for example: Henry of Langenstein ("Epistola pacis", 1379, "Epistola concilii pacis", 1381); Conrad of Gelnhausen ("Epistola Concordiæ", 1380); Gerson (Sermo coram Anglicis); and especially the latter's master, Pierre d'Ailly, the eminent Bishop of Cambrai, who wrote of himself: "A principio schismatis materiam concilii generalis primus ... instanter prosequi non timui" (Apologia Concilii Pisani, apud Tschackert). Encouraged by such men, by the known dispositions of King Charles VI and of the University of Paris, four members of the Sacred College of Avignon went to Leghorn where they arranged an interview with those of Rome, and where they were soon joined by others. The two bodies thus united were resolved to seek the union of the Church in spite of everything, and thenceforth to adhere to neither of the competitors. On 2 and 5 July, 1408, they addressed to the princes and prelates an encyclical letter summoning them to a general council at Pisa on 25 March, 1409. To oppose this project Benedict convoked a council at Perpignan while Gregory assembled another at Aquilea, but those assemblies met with little success, hence to the Council of Pisa were directed all the attention, unrest, and hopes of the Catholic world. The Universities of Paris, Oxford, and Cologne, many prelates, and the most distinguished doctors, like d'Ailly and Gerson, openly approved the action of the revolted cardinals. The princes on the other hand were divided, but most of them no longer relied on the good will of the rival popes and were determined to act without them, despite them, and, if needs were, against them. Meeting of the Council On the feast of the Annunciation, 4 patriarchs, 22 cardinals, and 80 bishops asembled in the cathedral of Pisa under the presidency of Cardinal de Malesset, Bishop of Palestrina. Among the clergy were the representatives of 100 absent bishops, 87 abbots with the proxies of those who could not come to Pisa, 41 priors and generals of religious orders, 300 doctors of theology or canon law. The ambassadors of all the Christian kingdoms completed this august assembly. Judicial procedure began at once. Two cardinal deacons, two bishops, and two notaries gravely approached the church doors, opened them, and in a loud voice, in the Latin tongue, called upon the rival pontiffs to appear. No one replied. "Has anyone been appointed to represent them?" they added. Again there was silence. The delegates returned to their places and requested that Gregory and Benedict be declared guilty of contumacy. On three consecutive days this ceremony was repeated without success, and throughout the month of May testimonies were heard against the claimants, but the formal declaration of contumacy did not take place until the fourth session. In defence of Gregory, a German embassy unfavourable to the project of the assembled cardinals went to Pisa (15 April) at the instance of Robert of Bavaria, King of the Romans. John, Archbishop of Riga, brought before the council several excellent objections, but in general the German delegates spoke so blunderingly that they aroused hostile manifestations and were compelled to leave the city as fugitives. The line of conduct adopted by Carlo Malatesta, Prince of Rimini, was more clever. Robert by his awkward friendliness injured Gregory's otherwise most defendable cause; but Malatesta defended it as a man of letters, an orator, a politician, and a knight, though he did not attain the desired success. Benedict refused to attend the council in person, but his delegates arrived very late (14 June), and their claims aroused the protests and laughter of the assembly. The people of Pisa overwhelmed them with threats and insults. The Chancellor of Aragon was listened to with little favour, while the Archbishop of Tarragona made a declaration of war more daring than wise. Intimidated by rough demonstrations, the ambassadors, among them Boniface Ferrer, Prior of the Grande Chartreuse, secretly left the city and returned to their master. The pretended preponderance of the French delegates has been often attacked, but the French element did not prevail either in numbers, influence, or boldness of ideas. The most remarkable characteristic of the assembly was the unanimity which reigned among the 500 members during the month of June, especially noticeable at the fifteenth general session (5 June, 1409). When the usual formality was completed with the request for a definite condemnation of Peter de Luna and Angelo Corrario, the Fathers of Pisa returned a sentence until then unexampled in the history of the Church. All were stirred when the Patriarch of Alexandria, Simon de Cramaud, addressed the august meeting: "Benedict XIII and Gregory XII", said he, "are recognised as schismatics, the approvers and makers of schism, notorious heretics, guilty of perjury and violation of solemn promises, and openly scandalising the universal Church. In consequence, they are declared unworthy of the Sovereign Pontificate, and are ipso facto deposed from their functions and dignities, and even driven out of the Church. It is forbidded to them henceforward to consider themselves to be Sovereign Pontiffs, and all proceedings and promotions made by them are annulled. The Holy See is declared vacant and the faithful are set free from their promise of obedience." This grave sentence was greeted with joyful applause, the Te Deum was sung, and a solemn procession was ordered next day, the feast of Corpus Christi. All the members appended their signatures to the decree of the council, and every one thought that the schism was ended forever. On 15 June the cardinals met in the archiepiscopal palace of Pisa to proceed with the election of a new pope. The conclave lasted eleven days. Few obstacles intervened from outside to cause delay. Within the council, it is said, there were intrigues for the election of a French pope, but, through the influence of the energetic and ingenious Cardinal Cossa, on 26 June, 1409, the votes were unanimously cast in the favour of Cardinal Peter Philarghi, who took the name of Alexander V. His election was expected and desired, as testified by universal joy. The new pope announced his election to all the sovereigns of Christendom, from whom he received expressions of lively sympathy for himself and for the position of the Church. He presided over the last four sessions of the council, confirmed all the ordinances made by the cardinals after their refusal of obedience to the antipopes, united the two sacred colleges, and subsequently declared that he would work energetically for reform. Judgment of the Council of Pisa The right of the cardinals to convene a general council to put an end to the schism seemed to themselves indisputable. This was a consequence of the natural principle of discovering within itself a means of safety: Salus populi suprema lex esto, i.e., the chief interest is the safety of the Church and the preservation of her indispensable unity. The tergiversations and perjuries of the two pretenders seemed to justify the united sacred colleges. "Never", said they, "shall we succeed in ending the schism while these two obstinate persons are at the head of the opposing parties. There is no undisputed pope who can summon a general council. As the pope is doubtful, the Holy See must be considered vacant. We have therefore a lawful mandate to elect a pope who will be undisputed, and to convoke the universal Church that her adhesion may strengthen our decision". Famous universities urged and upheld the cardinals in this conclusion. And yet, from the theological and judicial point of view, their reasoning might seem false, dangerous, and revolutionary. For if Gregory and Benedict were doubtful, so were the cardinals whom they had created. If the fountain of their authority was uncertain, so was their competence to convoke the universal Church and to elect a pope. Plainly, this is arguing in a circle. How then could Alexander V, elected by them, have indisputable rights to the recognition of the whole of Christendom? Further, it was to be feared that certain spirits would make use of this temporary expedient to transform it into a general rule, to proclaim the superiority of the sacred college and of the council to the pope, and to legalize henceforth the appeals to a future council, which had already commenced under King Philip the Fair. The means used by the cardinals could not succeed even temporarily. The position of the Church became still more precarious; instead of two heads there were three wandering popes, persecuted and exiled from their capitals. Yet, inasmuch as Alexander was not elected in opposition to a generally recognized pontiff, nor by schismatic methods, his position was better than that of Clement VII and Benedict XIII, the popes of Avignon. An almost general opinion asserts that both he and his successor, John XXIII, were true popes. If the pontiffs of Avignon had a colourable title in their own obedience, such a title can be made out still more clearly for Alexander V in the eyes of the universal Church. In fact the Pisan pope was acknowledged by the majority of the Church, i.e. by France, England, Portugal, Bohemia, Prussia, a few countries of Germany, Italy, and the County Venaissin, while Naples, Poland, Bavaria, and part of Germany continued to obey Gregory, and Spain and Scotland remained subject to Benedict. Theologians and canonists are severe on the Council of Pisa. On the one hand, a violent partisan of Benedict's, Boniface Ferrer, calls it "a conventicle of demons". Theodore Urie, a supporter of Gregory, seems to doubt whether they gathered at Pisa with the sentiments of Dathan and Abiron or those of Moses. St. Antoninus, Cajetan, Turrecremata, and Raynald openly call it a conventicle, or at any rate cast doubt on its authority. On the other hand, the Gallican school either approves of it or pleads extenuating circumstances. Noël Alexander asserts that the council destroyed the schism as far as it could. Bossuet says in his turn: "If the schism that devastated the Church of God was not exterminated at Pisa, at any rate it received there a mortal blow and the Council of Constance consummated it." Protestants, faithful to the consequences of their principles, applaud this council unreservedly, for they see in it "the first step to the deliverance of the world", and greet it as the dawn of the Reformation (Gregorovius). Perhaps it is wise to say with Bellarmine that this assembly is a general council which is neither approved nor disapproved. On account of its illegalities and inconsistencies it cannot be quoted as an ecumenical council. And yet it would be unfair to brand it as a conventicle, to compare it with the "robber council" of Ephesus, the pseudo-council of Basle, or the Jansenist council of Pistoia. This synod is not a pretentious, rebellious, and sacrilegious coterie. The number of the fathers, their quality, authority, intelligence and their zealous and generous intentions, the almost unanimous accord with which they came to their decisions, the royal support they met with, remove every suspicion of intrigue or cabal. It resembles no other council, and has a place by itself in the history of the Church, as unlawful in the manner in which it was convoked, unpractical in its choice of means, not indisputable in its results, and having no claim to represent the Universal Church. It is the original source of all the ecclesiastico-historical events that took place from 1409 to 1414, and opens the way for the Council of Constance. D'Achery, Spicilegium, I (Paris, 1723), 853, see names of the members of the Council, I, 844; D'Ailly in Operibus Gersonii, ed. Ellies Dupin (1706); St. Antoninus, Summa Historialis, III, xxii, c. v. ?2; Bellarmine, De concil., I (Paris, 1608), vii, 13; Bess, Johannes Gerson und die kirchenpolitischen Parteien Frankenreichs vor dem Konzil zu Pisa (Marburg, 1890); Bleimetzrieder, Das general Konzil im grossen abendländischen Schisma (Paderborn, 1904); Bouix, De Papa, I, 497; Chronicon S. Dionysii, IV, 32, 216-38; Gerson, Opera Omnia, ed Ellies Dupin, II (1706), 123 sqq.,Hardouin, Concilia, VIII, 85; Hefele, Histoire des Conciles, Leclercq, X, 255; Mansi, Collectio Conciliarum, XXVI, 1090-1240, XXVII, 114-308; MartÈne and Durand, Amplissima Collectio, VII;, 894; Idem, Thesaurus, II, 1374-1476; Muzzarelli, De auctor. Rom. pontifis, II, 414; Niem, De Schismate, ed. Erler, III (Leipzig, 1890), 26-40, 262 sqq.; Pastor, Histoire des Papes, I, 200-3; Salembier, Le grand schisme d'Occident (Paris, 1900), 251-74, tr. Mitchell (London, 1907); Idem, Petrus ab Alliaco (Lille, 1886), 76 sqq.; Tiraboschi, Storia litt. ital., II, 370; Tschackert, Peter von Ailii (Gotha, 1877), see especially Appendix, p. 29; Valois, La France et le grand Schisme d'Occident, IV, 75 sqq.; WeizsÄcker, Deutsche Reichstagsakten, VI, 496 sqq.; Bleimetzrieder, Literarische Polemik zu Beginn des grossen abendlandischen Schismas; Ungedruckte texte und Untersuchungen (Vienna and Leipzig, 1909); Die kirchenrechtlichen Schriften Peters von Luna, tr. Erhle in Archiv für Literatur und Kirchengeschichte, VII (1900), 387, 514; Schmitz, Zur Geschichte des Conzils von Pisa in Röm.Quartalschr. (1895). L. SALEMBIER Piscataway Indians Piscataway Indians A tribe of Algonquian linguistic stock formerly occupying the peninsula of lower Maryland between the Potomac River and Chesapeake Bay and northward to the Patapsco, including the present District of Columbia, and notable as being the first tribe whose Christianization was attempted under English auspices. The name by which they were commonly known to the Maryland colonists == Pascatæ in the Latin form == was properly that of their principal village, on Piscataway Creek near its mouth, within the present Prince Georges county. After their removal to the north they were known as Conoy, a corruption of their Iriquois name. There seems to be no good ground for the assertion of Smith (1608) that they were subject to the Powhatan tribes of Virginia. Besides Piscataway, which was a palisaded village or "fort", they had about thirty other settlements, among which may be named Yaocomoco, Potopaco (Port Tobacco), Patuxent, Mattapanient (Mattapony), Mattawoman, and Nacochtank (Lat. Anacostan, now Anacostia, D.C.). The original relation of these towns to one another is not very clear, but under the Maryland Government their chiefs or "kings" all recognized the chief of Piscataway as their "emperor", and held the succession subject to the ratification of the colonial "assembly". Their original population was probably nearly 2500. The recorded history of the Piscataway begins in 1608, when Captain John Smith of Virginia sailed up the Potomac and touched at several of their villages, including Nacochtank, where "the people did their best to content us". In 1622 the same town was destroyed by a band of plunderers from Virginia, but afterward rebuilt. On 25 March, 1634, the Catholic English colony of Lord Baltimore, including the Jesuit fathers Andrew White and John Altham, and two lay brothers, landed on St. Clement's (Blackstone"s) Island and established friendly relations with the people of Yaocomoco, as well as with the great chief of Piscataway, as also the chief of Potomac town on the Virginia side. The first altar was set up in an Indian wigwam. Owing to the attacks of the powerful Susquehanna at the head of the bay the people of Yaocomoco were about to remove, apparently to combine with those of Piscataway, and the English settlers bargained with them for the abandoned site. The Jesuits at once set to work to study the language and customs of the Indians in order to reach them with Christianity. Father White, superior of the mission, whose valuable "Relatio" is almost our only monument to the Maryland tribes, composed a grammar, dictionary, and catechism in the Piscataway dialect, of which the last, if not the others, was still in existence in Rome in 1832. Another catechism was compiled later by Father Roger Rigbie at Patuxent. The Indians generally were well-disposed to the new teaching, and, other Jesuits having arrived, missions were established at St. Mary's (Yaocomoco), Mattapony, Kent Island, and, in 1639, by Father White, at the tribal capital Piscataway, which, from the name of the tapac or great chief, Kittamaquund, "Big Beaver", was sometimes known as Kittamaquindi. Here on 5 July, 1640, in presence of the governor and several of the colonial officers who attended for the purpose, Father White, with public ceremony, baptized and gave Christian names to the great chief, his wife, and daughter, and to the chief councillor and his son, afterward uniting the chief and his wife in Christian marriage. A year later the missionaries were invited to Nacochtank, and in 1642 Father White baptized the chief and several others of the Potomac tribe. About this time the renewed inroads of the Susquehanna compelled the removal of the mission from Piscataway to Potopaco, where the woman chief and over 130 others were Christians. The work prospered until 1644, when Claiborne with the help of the Puritan refugees who had been accorded a safe shelter in the Catholic colony, seized the government, deposed the governor, and sent the missionaries as prisoners to England. They returned in 1648 and again took up the work, which was again interrupted by the confusion of the civil war in England until the establishment of the Cromwellian government in 1652 outlawed Catholicism in its own colony and brought the Piscataway mission to an end. Under the new Government the Piscataway rapidly declined. Driven from their best lands by legal and illegal means, demoralized by liquor dealers, hunted by slave-catchers, wasted by smallpox, constantly raided by the powerful Susquehanna while forbidded the possession of guns for their own defence, their plantations destroyed by the cattle and hogs of the settlers and their pride broken by oppressive restrictions, they sank to the condition of helpless dependents whose numbers constantly diminished. In 1666 they addressed a pathetic petition to the assembly: "We can flee no further. Let us know where to live, and how to be secured for the future from the hogs and cattle". As a result reservations were soon afterward established for each of twelve villages then occupied by them. Encroachments still continued, however, and the conquest of the Susquehanna by the Iroquois in 1675 only brought down upon the Piscataway a more cruel and persistent enemy. In 1680 nearly all the people of one town were massacred by the Iroquois, who sent word to the assembly that they intended to exterminate the whole tribe. Peace was finally arranged in 1685. In 1692 each principal town was put under a nominal yearly tribute of a bow and two arrows, their chiefs to be chosen and to hold at the pleasure of the assembly. At last, in 1697, the "emperor" and principal chiefs, with nearly the entire tribe excepting apparently those on the Chaptico river reservation, abandoned their homes and fled into the backwoods of Virginia. At this time they seemed to have numbered under four hundred and this small remnant was in 1704 still further reduced by a wasting epidemic. Refusing all offers to return, they opened negotiations with the Iroquois for a settlement under their protection, and, permission being given, they began a slow migration northward, stopping for long periods at various points along the Susquehanna until in 1765 we find them living with other remnant tribes at or near Chenango (now Binghamton, New York) and numbering only about 120 souls. Thence they drifted west with the Delawares and made their last appearance in history at a council at Detroit in 1793. Those who remained in Maryland are represented to-day by a few negro mongrels who claim the name. In habit and ceremony the Piscataway probably closely resembled the kindred Powhatan Indians of Virginia as described by Smith and Strachey, but except for Father White's valuable, though brief, "Relatio" we have almost no record on the subject. Their houses, probably communal, were oval wigwams of poles covered with mats or bark, and with the fire-hole in the centre and the smoke-hole in the roof above. The principal men had bed platforms, but the common people slept upon skins upon the ground. Their women made pottery and baskets, while the men made dug-out canoes and carried the bows and arrows. They cultivated corn, pumpkins, and a species of tobacco. The ordinary dress consisted simply of a breech-cloth for the men and a short deerskin apron for the women, while children went entirely naked. They painted their faces with bright colours in various patterns. They had descent in the female line, believed in good and bad spirits, and paid special reverence to corn and fire. Father White gives a meagre account of a ceremony which he witnessed at Patuxent. They seem to have been of kindly and rather unwarlike disposition, and physically were dark, very tall, muscular, and well proportioned. Archives of Maryland (29 vols., Baltimore, 1883-1900); Bozman, History of Maryland (2 vols., Baltimore, 1837); Brinton, The Lenape and their Legends (Walam Olum) (Philadelphia, 1884); Hughes History of the Society of Jesus in North America I, 1580-1615 (Cleveland, 1907); Mooney and Others, Aborigines of the District of Columbia and the Lower Potomac in American Anthropologist, II (Washington, 1889); New York Colonial Documents (15 vols., Albany, 1843-87), s. v. Conoy; Piscataway, etc.; Shea, Catholic Indian Missions (New York, 1854); Smith, General History of Virginia (London, 1629; Richmond, 1819), ed. Arber (Birmingham, 1884); White, Relatio Itineris in Marylandiam, Maryland Historical Society Fund pub. no 7 (Baltimore, 1874). JAMES MOONEY Piscina Piscina (Lat. from piscis, a fish, fish-pond, pool or basin, called also sacrarium, thalassicon, or fenestella) The name was used to denote a baptismal font or the cistern into which the water flowed from the head of the person baptized; or an excavation, some two or three feet deep and about one foot wide, covered with a stone slab, to receive the water from the washing of the priest's hands, the water used for washing the palls, purifiers, and corporals, the bread crumbs, cotton, etc. used after sacred unctions, and for the ashes of sacred things no longer fit for use. It was constructed near the altar, at the south wall of the sanctuary, in the sacristy, or some other suitable place. It is found also in the form of a small column or niche of stone or metal. ROCK, Church of Our Fathers, IV (London, 1904), 194; BINTERIM, Denkwürdigkeiten, IV, 1, 112: Theol. prakt. Quartalschrift (1876), 33. FRANCIS MERSHMAN. Charles Constantine Pise Charles Constantine Pise Priest, poet, and prose writer, b. at Annapolis, Maryland, 22 Nov., 1801; d. at Brooklyn, New York, 26 May, 1866. He was educated at Georgetown College, and was for some time a member of the Society of Jesus. He taught rhetoric at Mount St. Mary's College, Emmitsburg, Md., where John Hughes, afterwards Archbishop of New York, was among his pupils. In 1825 he was ordained to the priesthood and officiated for some time at the cathedral in Baltimore. He afterwards served at St. Patrick's Church, Washington, as assistant pastor, and while there was elected (11 Dec., 1832) chaplain to the United States Senate -- the only Catholic priest hitherto appointed to that office. He was a personal friend of President Tyler. In 1848 he became a pastor of St. Peter's church, New York; he had previously been assistant pastor in the same church under the vicar-general, Dr. Powers. In 1849 he was appointed pastor of St. Charles Borromeo's, Brooklyn where he officiated until his death. Dr. Pise wrote several works in prose and verse, among them being: "A History of the Catholic Church (5 vols., 1829); "Father Rowland" (1829); "Alethia, or Letters on the Truth of Catholic Doctrines" (1845); "St. Ignatius and His First Companions" (1845); "Christianity and the Church" (1850). His "Clara", a poem of the fifteenth century, and "Montezuma", a drama, were never published. He contributed to the magazine literature of the day, was a distinguished lecturer and preacher, and a writer of Latin verse. SHEA, History of the Catholic Church in the United States, IV (New York, 1892). HENRY A. BRANN Pisidia Pisidia A country in the southwestern part of Asia Minor, between the high Phrygian tableland and the maritime plain of Pamphilia. This district, formed by the lofty ridges of the western Taurus range, was in pre-Christian times the abode of stalwart, half-civilized, and unruly tribes, never entirely subdued. Ancient writers describe them as a restless, plunder-loving population. St. Paul, no doubt, had in mind Pisidia, which he had traversed twice (Acts, xiii, 13-14: note here that, according to the more probable text, in the latter verse we should read "Pisidian Antioch"; xiv, 20-23), perhaps three times (Acts, xvi, 6), when in II Cor., xi, 26, he mentions the "perils of waters" and "perils of robbers" he had confronted. Independent until 36 b.c., the Pisidians were then conquered by the Galatian king, Amyntas, and soon after, together with their conquerors, forced to acknowledge Roman suzerainty. Joined first to one province, then to another, it received a governor of its own in 297 a.d. The principal cities were Cremna, Adada (the modern name of which, Kara Bavlo, preserves the memory of St. Paul), Serge, Termessos, Pednalissos, Sagalassos. Heaps of imposing ruins are all that is now left. CONYBEARE AND HOWSON, The Life and Epistles of St. Paul (London, 1875); FOUARD, Saint Paul and His Missions, tr. GRIFFITH (New York, 1894); RAMSAY, Historical Geography of Asia Minor (London, 1890); IDEM, The Church in the Roman Empire (London, 1894); IDEM, Inscriptions en langue Pisidienne in Revue des Universités du Midi (1895), 353-60; KIEPERT, Manuel de géographic ancienne (French tr., Paris, 1887); LANCKORONSKI, Städte Pamphyliens und Pisidiens (Vienna, 1892). CHARLES L. SOUVAY. Synod of Pistoia Synod of Pistoia Held 18 to 28 September, 1786, by Scipio de' Ricci, Bishop of Pistoia and Prato. It marks the most daring effort ever made to secure for Jansenism and allied errors a foothold in Italy. Peter Leopold, created Grand Duke of Tuscany in 1763, emulated the example of his brother, Emperor Joseph II, in assuming to control religious affairs in the domain. Imbued with Regalism and Jansenism he extended a misguided zeal for reform to minutest details of discipline and worship. In two instructions of 2 August, 1785, and 26 January, 1786, he sent to each of the bishops of Tuscany a series of fifty-seven "points of view of His Royal Highness" on doctrinal, disciplinary, and liturgical matters, directing that diocesan synods be held every two years to enforce reform in the Church and "to restore to the bishops their native rights abusively usurped by the Roman Court". Of the eighteen Tuscan bishops but three convoked the synod; and of these his only partisan was Scipio de' Ricci in whom he found a kindred spirit. Born in 1714 of an eminent family, de' Ricci gave early promise of worth and eminence. Made Bishop of Pistoia and Prato, the most populous of the Tuscan dioceses, 19 June, 1780, he planned and energetically pursued, with the encouragement of Pius VI, the work of much-needed reform, but influenced by the times, his zeal came to be marked by reckless audacity. He condemned devotion to the Sacred Heart, discouraged the use of relics and images, undervalued indulgences, improvised liturgy, and founded a press for Jansenistic propaganda. On 31 July, 1786, de' Ricci, in convoking the synod, invoked the authority of Pius VI who had previously recommended a synod as the normal means of diocesan reform. With characteristic energy and prevision he prepared for the council by inviting from without his diocese, theologians and canonists notorious for Gallican and Jansenistic tendencies, and issued to his clergy pronouncements which reflected the dominant errors of the times. On 18 September, 1786, the synod was opened in the church of St. Leopold in Pistoia and continued through seven sessions until 28 September. De' Ricci presided, and at his right sat the royal commissioner, Guiseppe Paribeni, professor at the University of Pisa, and a regalist. The promoter was Pietro Tamburini, professor at the University of Pavia, conspicuous for his learning and for Jansenistic sympathies. At the opening session 234 members were present; but at the fifth session 246 attended, of whom 180 were pastors, 13 canons, 12 chaplains, 28 simple priests of the secular clergy, and 13 regulars. Of these many, including even the promoter, were extra-diocesans irregularly intruded by de' Ricci because of their sympathy with his designs. Several Pistorian priests were not invited while the clergy of Prato, where feeling against the bishop was particularly strong, was all but ignored. The points proposed by the grand duke and the innovations of the bishop were discussed with warmth and no little acerbity. The Regalists pressed their audacity to heretical extremes, and evoked protests from the papal adherents. Though these objections led to some modifications, the propositions of Leopold were substantially accepted, the four Gallican Articles of the Assembly of the French Clergy of 1682 were adopted, and the reform programme of de' Ricci carried out virtually in its entirety. The theological opinions were strongly Jansenistic. Among the vagaries proposed were: the right of civil authority to create matrimonial impediments; the reduction of all religious ourders to one body with a common habit and no perpetual vows; a vernacular liturgy with but one altar in a church etc. Two hundred and thirty-three members signed the acts in the final session of 28 September, when the synod adjourned intending to reconvene in the following April and September. In February, 1787, the first edition (thirty-five hundred copies) of the Acts and Decrees appeared, bearing the royal imprimatur. De' Ricci, wishing the Holy See to believe that the work was approved by his clergy, summoned his priests to pastoral retreat in April with a view to obtaining their signatures to an acceptance of the synod. Only twenty- seven attended, and of these twenty refused to sign. Leopold meantime summoned all the Tuscan bishops to meet at Florence, 22 April, 1787, to pave the way for acceptance of the Pistorian decrees at a provincial council; but the assembled bishops vigorously opposed his project and after nineteen stormy sessions he dismissed the assembly and abandoned hope of the council. De' Ricci became discredited, and, after Leopold's accession to the imperial throne in 1790, was compelled to resign his see. Pius VI commissioned four bishops, assisted by theologians of the secular clergy, to examine the Pistorian enactments, and deputed a congregation of cardinals and bishops to pass judgment on them. They condemned the synod and stigmatized eighty-five of its propositions as erroneous and dangerous. Pius VI on 28 August, 1794, dealt the death-blow to the influence of the synod and of Jansenism in Italy in his Bull "Auctorem Fidei". Atti e Decreti del Concilio Diocesano di Pistoja (2nd ed., Florence, 1788); tr. Schwarzel, Acta Congregationis Archiepiscoporum et Episcoporum Etruriae, Florentiae anno 1l787 celebratus (7 vols., Bamberg, 1790-94); Denzinger-Bannwart, Enchiridion (Freiburg, 1908), 397-422; Ballerini, Opus Morale, I (Prato, 1898), li-lxxxii; Gerodulo, Lettera critologica sopra il sinodo di Pistoia (Barletta, 1789); La voce della greggia di Pistoja e Prato al suo pastore Mgr Vescovo Scipione de' Ricci (Sondrio, 1789); Lettera ad un Prelato Romano dove con gran vivezza e con profunda dottrina vengono confutati gli errori de' quali abbonda il Sinodo di Mgr de' Ricci, Vescovo di Pistoja (Halle, 1789); Seconda lettera ad un Prelato Romano sull' idea falsa, scismatica, erronea, contradittoria, ridicola della chiesa formata del Sinado di Pistoja (Halle, 1790); Considerazioni sul nuovo Sinodo di Pistoja e Prato fatte da un paroco della stessa diocesi (Pistoia, 1790); Picot, Mémoires pour servir à l'histoire du 18 ^e siecle (Paris, 1855), V, 251 sq.; VI, 407 sq.; Gendry, Pie VI, sa vie-son pontificat, II (Paris, 1907), 451-83, documented from Vatican archives; Scaduto, Stato e Chiesa sotto Leopold I (Florence, 1885); de Potter, Vie et Mémoires de Scipion de' Ricci (Paris, 1827), 1 sq.; Parsons, Studies in Church History, IV (New York, 1897), 592-600; Scipio de' Ricci in Dublin Review (March, 1852), XXXII, 48- 69. JOHN B. PETERSON Pistoia and Prato Diocese of Pistoia and Prato (PISTORIENSIS ET PRATENSIS) Located in the Province of Florence. The city of Pistoia is situated at the foot of the Apennines in the valley of the Ombrone. The chief industries of the town are the manufacture of paper and objects in straw. The cathedral dates from the fifth century, but was damaged by fire several times prior to the thirteenth century, when Nicolò Pisano designed its present form; the outer walls are inlaid with bands of black and white marble; the tribune was painted by Passignano and by Sorri; the paintings by Alessio d'Andrea and by Buonaccorso di Cino (1347), which were in the centre aisle, have disappeared. Other things to be admired, are the ancient pulpit, the cenotaphs of Cino da Pistoia and Cardinal Forteguerri, by Verrocchio, the altar of S. Atto, with its silver work, the baptismal font by Ferrucci, and the equipments of the sacristy. Opposite the cathedral is S. Giovanni Rotondo, the former baptistery; it is an octagonal structure, the work of Andrea Pisano (1333-59), with decorations by Cellino di Nese; the font itself is a square base with four wells, surmounted by a statue of St. John the Baptist by Andrea Vaccà. The church of S. Giovanni Fuoricivitas is surrounded, on the upper part, by two rows of arches; it is a work of the twelfth century; within, there is the pulpit, with its sculptures by Fra Gulielmo d'Agnello, and the holy-water font, representing the theological virtues, by Giovanni Pisano. The name of Pistoia appears for the first time in history in connexion with the conspiracy of Catiline (62 b.c.), but it was only after the sixth century that it became important; it was governed, first, by its bishops, later by stewards of the Marquis of Tuscany. It was the first to establish its independence, after the death of Countess Matilda, and its municipal statutes are the most ancient of their kind in Italy. It was a Ghibelline town, and had subjugated several cities and castles; but, after the death of Frederick II, the Florentines compelled it to become Guelph. About 1300, the Houses of the Cancellieri (Guelphs), and Panciatichi (Ghibellines), struggled with each other for supremacy. The former having triumphed it soon divided into Bianchi and Neri, which made it easy for Castruccio Castracane to subject the town to his domination, in 1328. Florence assisted the Pistoians to drive Castruccio from their town, but that aid soon weighed upon them, and they revolted (1343), taking part with Pisa. In 1351 Pistoia became definitively subject to Florence. Clement IX was a Pistoian. PRATO is also a city in the Province of Florence, situated in the fertile valley of the Bisenzio, which supports many industries, among them flour mills, woolen and silk manufactories, quarries, iron, and copper works. The Cicognani college of Prato is famous. The cathedral, which was erected before the tenth century, was restored in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, according to plans of Giovanni Pisano; it contains paintings by Fra Filippo Lippi and by Gaddi, a pulpit that is a masterpiece of Donatello, and the mausoleums of Carlo de'Medici and of Vincenzo Danti. In the chapel of la Cintola there is preserved a girdle that, according to the legend, was given by Our Lady to St. Thomas. Pinto is first mentioned in history, in 1007, as being in rebellion against Florence; after that it had several wars with Florence and Pistoia. In 1350, it was bought by the Florentines, to prevent it from falling into the hands of the Visconti. In 1512, it was sacked by the Spaniards. Fra Arlotto, author of the first Biblical concordance, was a native of Prato, as were also Fra Bartolommeo della Porta and several personages of the Inghirami family. Pistoin claims to have received the Gospel from St. Romulus, the first Bishop of Fiesole. The first mention of a Bishop of Pistoia is in 492, though the name of this prelate, like that of another Bishop of Pistoia, referred to in 516, is unknown. The first historically known bishop is Joannes (700); Leo (1067), important in the schism of Henry IV; Jacobus (1118-41); the Blessed Atto (1135-53); Bonus (1189), author of "De cohabitatione clericorum et mulierum"; the Ven. Giovanni Vivenzi (1370); Matteo Diamanti (1400); Donato de'Medici (1436) Nicolò Pandolfini (1475), who later became a cardinal; three Pucci, Cardinal Lorenzo (1516), Cardinal Antonio (1519) and Roberto (1541); Alessandro de'Medici (1573) became Leo XI. In 1653, Prato was made a diocese, and united, oeque principaliter, with Pistoia; as early as 1409, Florence asked for the creation of a diocese at Pinto, on account of the dissensions of the collegiate church of Pinto with the Bishops of Pistoia; and in 1460, it had been made a prelatura nullius, and given, as a rule, to some cardinal, in commendam. Other bishops of these sees were the Ven. Gerardo Gerardi (1679-90), under whom Prato founded its seminary; Leone Strozza (1690), Abbot of Vallombrosa, founded the seminary of Pistoia, enlarged by Michele C. Visdomini (1702); Scipione Ricci (1780), famous on account of the Synod of Pistoia which he convened in 1786, and which Pius VI afterwards condemned. The diocese is a suffragan of Florence; has 194 parishes, with 200,100 inhabitants, 5 religious houses of men, and 19 of women, and 7 educational establishments for girls. CAPPELLETTI, Le Chiesa d'Italia, XVII; ROSATI, Memorie per servire alla storia des vescovi di Pistoia. U. BENIGNI. Johann Pistorius Johann Pistorius A controversialist and historian, born at Nidda in Hesse, 14 February, 1546; died at Freiburg, 18 July, 1608. He is sometimes called Niddanus from the name of his birthplace. His father was a well-known Protestant minister, Johann Pistorius the Elder (died 1583 at Nidda), who from 1541 was superintendent or chief minister of Nidda, and took part in several religious disputations between Catholics and Protestants. Pistorius the Younger studied theology, law, and medicine at Marburg and Wittenberg 1559-67. He received the degree of Doctor of Medicine, and in 1575 was appointed court physician to the Margrave Karl II of Baden-Durlach, who frequently sought his advice in political and theological matters. In search of more consistent beliefs, Pistorius turned from Lutheranism to Calvinism; through his influence the Margrave Ernst Friedrich of Baden-Durlach made the same change. As time went on, however, Pistorius became dissatisfied with Calvinism also. In 1584 he became a privy councillor of Margrave James III of Baden-Hochberg at Emmendingen; after further investigation he entered the Catholic Church in 1588. At his request the Margrave James brought about the religious disputations of Baden, 1589, and Emmendingen, 1590. After the second disputation the court preacher Zehender and the margrave himself became Catholics. James III, however, died on 17 August, 1590, and being succeeded by his Protestant brother Ernst Friedrich, Pistorius was obliged to leave. He went to Freiburg, became a priest in 1591, then vicar-general of Constance until 1594; after this he was an imperial councillor, cathedral provost of Breslau, Apostolic prothonotary, and in 1601 confessor to the Emperor Rudolph II. After his death his library came into the possession of the Jesuits of Molsheim and later was transferred to the theological seminary at Strasburg. Pistorius published a detailed account of the conversion of Margrave James III: "Jakobs Marggrafen zu Baden . . . christliche, erhebliche und wolfundirte Motifen" (Cologne, 1591). His numerous writings against Protestantism, while evincing clearness, skill, and thorough knowledge of his opponents, especially of Luther, are marked by controversial sharpness and coarseness. The most important are: "Anatomia Lutheri" (Cologne, 1595-8);"Hochwichtige Merkzeichen des alten und neuen Glaubens" (Münster, 1599); "Wegweiser vor alle verführte Christen" (Münster, 1599). Pistorius was attacked violently by the Protestants; e. g., by Huber, Spangenbert, Mentzer, Horstius, and Christoph Agricola. Replies to the "Anatomia Lutheri" were written by the Protestant theologians of Wittenberg and Hesse. Pistorius also busied himself with cabalistic studies, and published "Artis cabbalisticæ, h. e. reconditæ theologiæ et philosophiæ scriptorum tomus unus" (Basle, 1587). As court historiographer to the Margrave of Baden, he investigated the genealogy of the princely house of Zahringen; he also issued two works on historical sources: "Polonicæ historiæ corpus, i. e. Polonicarum rerum latini veteres et recentiores scriptores quotquot exstant" (Basle, 1582), and "Rerum Germanicarum veteres jam primum publicati scriptores aliquot insignes medii ævi ad Carolum V" (Frankfort, 1583-1607). RÄSS, Die Convertiten seit der Reformation (Freiburg, 1866), II, 488-507; III, 91 sqq.; GASS in Allgem. deut. Biog., XXVI, 199-201; HURTER, Nomenclator, III (Innsbruck, 1907); JANSSEN, Hist. of the German People at the close of the Middle Ages, X (tr. CHRISTIE, London, 1906), 116-48; SCHMIDLIN, Johann Pistorius als Propst im Elsass in Hist. Jahrbuch, XXIX (1908), 790-804; [ZELL], Markgraf Jakob III. von Baden in Hist-pol. Blätter, XXXVIII (1856); VON WEECH, Zur Gesch. des Markgrafen Jacob III. von Baden und Hachberg in Zeitsch. für Gesch. des Oberrheins, new series, VII (1892), 656-700; VIII (1893), 710; XII (1897), 266-72. FRIEDRICH LAUCHERT. Pithou, Pierre Pierre Pithou A writer, born at Troyes, 1 Nov. 1539; died at Nogent-sur-Seine, 1 Nov., 1596. His father, a distinguished lawyer, had secretly embraced Calvinism. Pierre studied the classics in Paris under Turnèbe, and afterwards with his brother, François Pithou, attended lectures in law at Bourges and Valence under Cujas, who often said: Pithoei fratres, clarissima lumina. In 1560 he was admitted to practise at the Paris bar; but on the outbreak of the second war of religion, he withdrew to Troyes. Not being admitted to the bar at Troyes on account of his Calvinist belief, he withdrew to Sedan which was a Protestant district, and, at the request of the Duc de Bouillon, he codified the legal customs into the form of laws. He then proceeded to Basle, where he published Otto de Freisingen's "Vie de Frédéric Barberousse" and Warnfrid's" Historia Miscellanea". After the Edict of Pacification of 1570 he returned to France, escaped during the Massacre of St. Bartholomew, and, in 1573, joined the Catholic Church. In the struggles between the future Henry IV and the League. he was an ardent adherent of Henry; he collaborated in the production of the "Satire Ménippée", and being skilled in canon law, made a study, in an anonymous letter published in 1593, of the right of the French bishops to absolve Henry IV without consulting the pope. In 1594 he published an epoch-making work "Les libertés de l'église gallicane". For the first time the maxims of Gallicanism were really codified, in eighty-three articles, The first edition was dedicated to Henry IV. The permission to publish the edition of 1651 under Louis XIV contains these words: "We wish to show our favour to a work of so great importance for the rights of our crown". Pithou's book was the basis of the Four Articles of 1682. D'Aguesseau declared that the book was "the palladium of France", President Hénault, that "the maxims of Pithou have in a sense the force of laws". An edict of 1719, and a decree of the Parliament of Dauphiné on 21 April, 1768, ordered the enforcement of certain articles in Pithou's book, as if these eighty-three articles were legal enactments. They were reprinted by Dupin in 1824. Henry IV appointed Pithou procurator general of the Parliament of Paris; but he soon resigned the post, preferring to return to his juristic and literary studies. He edited Salvian, Quintilian, Petronius, Phædrus, the Capitularies of Charlemagne, and the "Corpus juris canonici". His brother François (1541-1621), who became a Catholic in 1578, wrote in 1587 a treatise on "The greatness of the rights, and of the preeminence of the kings and the kingdom of France", and was distinguished for his fanatical hostility to the Jesuits. Pierre Pithou, more equitable, saved the Jesuits from some of the dangers that threatened them for a short time after the attempted assassination of Henry IV by Châtel. GROSLEY, Vie de Pierre Pithou (Paris, 1756); DUPIN, Libertés de l'Eglise gallicane (Paris, 1824), preface. GEORGES GOYAU. Joseph Pitoni Joseph Pitoni A musician, born at Rieti, Perugia, Italy, 18 March, 1657; died at Rome, 1 Feb., 1743, and buried in the church of San Marco, where he had been choirmaster, in the Pitoni family vault. His biography, by his pupil Girolamo Chiti, is in the library of the Corsini palace. At five years he began to study music at Rome. Not yet sixteen, he composed pieces which were sung in the church of the Holy Apostles. At that age he was in charge of the choir at Monte Rotondo; at seventeen at the Cathedral of Assisi. At twenty (1677) he returned to Rome, and was maestro di cappella in many churches; in 1708 he was appointed director of St. John Lateran. In 1719 he became choirmaster of St. Peter's, and remained in that office for twenty-four years. In the Accademia di S. Cecilia he was one of the four esaminatori dei maestri. Pitoni acquired such a marvellous facility, that for his compositions, which were of great musical value, he could write every part separately, without making a score. The number of his compositions, says Chiti, is infinite. Many of them are written for three and four choirs. He also began a Mass for twelve choirs; but his advanced age did not allow him to finish it. He left a work "Notizie dei maestri di Cappella si di Roma che oltramontani". Dictionary of Music from 1450-1880 (London, 1880); EITNER, Quellenlexicon, VII (1902), 462-64; BAINI, Memorie . . . di G. P. da Palestrina, II (Rome, 1828), 55, nota 502, Ger. tr. KANDLER (Vienna, 1834). A. WALTER. Jean-Baptiste-Francois Pitra Jean-Baptiste-François Pitra Cardinal, famous archæologist and theologian, b. 1 August, 1812, at Champforgeuil in the Department of Saône-et-Loire, France; d. 9 Feb., 1889, in Rome. He was educated at Autun, ordained priest on 13 December, 1836, and occupied the chair of rhetoric at the petit séminaire of Autun from 1836 to 1841. >From his early youth he manifested indefatigable diligence which, combined with brilliant talents and a remarkable memory, made him one of the most learned men of his time. The first fruit of his scholarship was his decipherment, in 1839, of the fragments of a sepulchral monument, discovered in the cemetery of Saint-Pierre at Autun and known as the "Inscription of Autun". It probably dates back to the third century, was composed by a certain Pectorius and placed over the grave of his parents. The initials of the first five verses of the eleven-line inscription form the symbolical word ichthús (fish), and the whole inscription is a splendid testimony of the early belief in baptism, the Holy Eucharist, prayer for the dead, communion of saints, and life everlasting. He published the inscription in "Spicilegium Solesmense" (III, 554-64). In 1840 Pitra applied to Abbot Guéranger of Solesmes for admission into the Benedictine order but, to accommodate the Bishop of Autun, he remained another year as professor at the petit séminaire of Autun. He finally began his novitiate at Solesmes on 15 January, 1842, and made his profession on 10 February, 1843. A month later, he was appointed prior of St-Germain in Paris. During his sojourn there he was one of the chief collaborators of Abbé Migne in the latter's colossal "Cursus patrologiæ". Pitra drew up the list of the authors whose writings were to find a place in the work, and collaborated in the edition of the Greek writers up to Photius, and of the Latin up to Innocent III. At the same time he contributed extensively to the newly founded periodical "Auxiliare catholique". In 1845 he had to break his connexion with the great work of Migne, owing to the financial difficulties of the priory of St-Germain, which finally had to be sold to satisfy the creditors. Pitra undertook a journey through Champagne, Burgundy, Lorraine, Alsace, Switzerland, Belgium, Holland, and England in the interests of his priory. At the same time he visited numerous libraries in these countries in search of unpublished manuscripts bearing on the history of the early Christian Church. The fruits of his researches he gave to the world in his famous "Spicilegium Solesmense" (see below). His many great archæological discoveries and his unusual acquaintances with whatever bore any relation to the Byzantine Church, induced Pius IX to send him on a scientific mission to the libraries of Russia in 1858. Before setting out on his journey he studied the manuscripts relative to Greek canon law, in the libraries of Rome and other Italian cities. In Russia, where he spent over seven months (July, 1859- March, 1860), he had free access to all the libraries of St. Petersburg and Moscow. On his return he made an official visit of the twenty Basilian monasteries of Galicia at the instance of the papal nuncio at Vienna. After arranging his writings at the monasteries of Solesmes and Ligugé, he was called to Rome in August, 1861, to consult with the pope on the advisability of erecting at the Propaganda a special department for Oriental affairs and to make a personal report on his findings in the libraries of Russia. Pitra was also chosen to supervise the new edition of the liturgical books of the Greek Rite, which was being prepared by the Propaganda. He was created cardinal on 16 March, 1863, with the titular church of St. Thomas in Parione. As his residence he chose the palace of San Callisto where he continued to live the simple life of a monk as far as his new duties permitted. On 23 Jan., 1869, he was appointed librarian of the Vatican. He drew up new and more liberal regulations for the use of the library and facilitated in every way access of scholars to the Vatican manuscripts. Above all, however, he himself made diligent researches among the manuscripts and published many rare and valuable specimens in his "Analecta" (see below). At the Vatican Council in 1870, he ably maintained against the inopportunists that the Catholics of the Greek and Oriental Churches upheld the papal infallibility. After the accession of Leo XIII (20 Feb., 1878) he supervised the edition of a catalogue of the Vatican manuscripts, of which the first volume, "Codices Palatini Græci", appeared in 1885 and was prefaced by Cardinal Pitra with a laudatory epistle addressed to Leo XIII. On 21 May, 1879, he was appointed Cardinal-Bishop of Frascati and for five years laboured incessantly for the welfare of his diocese, which had been greatly neglected. On 24 Merch, 1884, he was transferred to the episcopal See of Porto and Santa Rufina to which was annexed the dignity of subdean of the Sacred College. On 19 May, 1885, Abbé Brouwers published in the "Amstelbode", a Catholic journal of Belgium, a letter of Pitra, which the hostile press construed into an attack upon the policy of Leo XIII; but Pitra soon satisfied the Holy See of his filial devotion. Cardinal Pitra was one of the most learned and pious members of the Sacred College. Besides being Librarian of the Holy Roman Church and member of various Roman congregations and cardinalitial commissions, he was cardinal protector of the Cistercians, the Benedictine congregation of France, the Benedictine nuns of St. Cecilia at Solesmes and of Stanbrook in England, the Eudists, the Brothers of Christian Schools, the Sisters of Mercy of St. Charles in Nancy, and the Sisters of the Atonement in Paris. The following are his literary productions:-(1) "Histoire de Saint Léger, évêque d'Autun et martyr, et de l'église des Francs au VII ^e siècle" (Paris, 1846), one of the most complete monographs on the Church of the Franks during the seventh century; (2) "La Hollande catholique" (Paris, 1850), consisting mostly of letters concerning Holland and its people, which he wrote while travelling in that country in 1849; (3) "Etudes sur la collection des Actes des Saints par les RR. PP. Jésuites Bollandistes" (Paris, 1850), a complete history of the "Acta Sanctorum" of the Bollandists, preceded by a treatise on the hagiological collections up to the time of Rosweyde (d. 1629); (4) "Spicilegium Solesmense" (4 vols., Paris, 1852-1858), a collection of hitherto unpublished works of Greek and Latin Fathers of Church and other early ecclesiastical writers; (5) "Vie du P. Libermann" (Paris, 1855; 2nd ed., 1872; 3rd ed., 1882), a very reliable life of the Venerable Paul Libermann, founder of the Congregation of the Sacred Heart of Mary. Libermann had been a personal acquaintance of Pitra; (6) "Juris ecclesiastici Græcorum historia et monumenta" (2 vols., Rome, 1864-8), containing the canonical writings of the Greeks from the so-called "Apostolic Constitutions" to the "Nomocanon", generally ascribed to Photius. With its learned introduction and its many notes and comments, the work forms a complete history of Byzantine law; (7) "Hymnographie de l'église grecque" (Rome, 1867), a dissertation on Greek hymnography, accompanied by numerous Greek hymns in honour of Sts. Peter and Paul; (8) "Analecta sacra Spicilegio Solesmense". The first volume (Paris, 1876) contains Greek hymns; the second (Frascati, 1883), the third (Venice, 1883), and the fourth (Paris, 1883) contain writings of ante-Nicene Fathers; the fifth (Paris, 1888) is composed of writings of the Fathers and of a few pagan philosophers; the seventh (Paris, 1891) contains writings bearing on the canon law of the Greeks and was published posthumously by Battandier, who had been Pitra's secretary; the eighth (Monte Cassino, 1881) contains the writings of St. Hildegard; the sixth, which was to contain Greek melodies, has not been published; (9) "Analecta novissima" (2 vols., Frascati, 1885-8), a second supplement to "Spicilegium Solesmense". The first volume contains a French treatise on papal letters, bullaria, catalogues of popes etc., and a hitherto unpublished treatise on Pope Vigilius by Dom Constant. The second volume is devoted to writings of Odon d'Ourscamp, Odon de Châteauroux, Jacques de Vitry, and Bertrand de la Tour, four medieval French bishops of Frascati; (10) "Sancti Romani cantica sacra" (Rome, 1888), a collection of hymns written by Romanos, the greatest Byzantine hymnodist. Pitra presented this work to Leo XIII on the occasion of his sacerdotal jubilee. In addition to these works Pitra contributed numerous archælogical, theological, historical, and other articles to various scientific periodicals of France. Cabrol, Histoire du Cardinal Pitra, bénédictin de la Congrégation de France (Paris, 1893), tr. into German by BÜhler in Studien und Mitteilungen aus dem Benediktiner- und Cistercienser-Orden, XXVII-XXX (Brünn, 1907-9); Battandier, Le cardinal Jean-Baptiste Pitra, évêque de Porto, bibliothécaire de la Sainte Eglise romaine (Paris, 1896); Cabrol, Le Cardinal Pitra. Ses travaux et ses découvertes in Science catholique (1889), tr. in The Lamp (1899); Bibliographie des Bénédictines de la Congrégation de France (Paris, 1906), 120-31. MICHAEL OTT Pitts, John John Pitts Born at Alton, Hampshire, 1560; died at Liverdun, Lorraine, 17 Oct., 1616. He was educated at Winchester and New College, Oxford, where he remained, 20 March, 1578-1580. He was admitted to the English College, Rome, 18 Oct., 1581, ordained priest 2 March, 1588, became professor of rhetoric and Greek at the English College, Reims, proceeded M.A. and B.D. at Pont-à-Musson, Lic.D. at Trèves (1592), and D.D. at Ingolstadt (1595). After holding a canonry at Verdun for two years he was appointed confessor and almoner to the Duchess of Cleves, and held this position for twelve years. After her death his former pupil, the Bishop of Toul, appointed him dean of Liverdun. His chief work is the "Relationum Historicarum de rebus Angliæ", of which only one part, "De Illustribus Angliæ Scriptoribus", was published (Paris, 1619). The other sections, "De Regibus Angliæ", "De Episcopis Angliæ", and "De Viris Apostolicis Angliæ", remained in Manuscript at Liverdun. The "De Scriptoribus" is chiefly valuable for the notices of contemporary writers. On other points it must be used with caution, being largely compiled from the uncritical work of Bale. Pitts also published "Tractatus de legibus" (Trier, 1592); "Tractatus de beatitudine' (Ingolstadt, 1595); and "Libri septem de peregrinatione" (Dusseldorf, 1604). KIRBY, Annals of Winchester College (London, 1892); FOSTER, Alumni Oxonienses (Oxford, 1891); WOOD, Athenoe Oxonienses (London, 1813-20); DODD, Church History, II (Brussels, 1739); KNOX, Douay Diaries (London, 1878); FOLEY, Records Eng. Prov. S. J., III, VI; GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., s. v. EDWIN BURTON. Pittsburgh Pittsburgh DIOCESE OF PITTSBURG/PITTSBURGH (PITTSBURGENSIS). Suffragan of Philadelphia, in the United States of America. It comprises the counties of Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, Fayette, Greene, Indiana, Lawrence, Washington, and Westmoreland in the State of Pennsylvania, an area of 7238 square miles, the total population of which is 1,944,942 (U.S. Census, 1910). About 24.42 per cent of these are Catholics. It is probable that the first religious services held by white men within the limits of what is now the Diocese of Pittsburg were conducted by a Jesuit, Father Bonnecamp, who accompanied Celeron in his exploration along the Allegheny and Ohio Rivers in 1749. The strategic character of the ground where the Monongahela and Allegheny Rivers meet to form the Ohio pointed this place out to George Washington as a spot of future importance. He first saw "the Forks", as the place was called by the Indians, on 24 November, 1753, when engaged in bearing a letter from Robert Dinwiddie, Lieutenant-Governor of Virginia, to the commander of the French forces, asserting the British claims to the territory of Western Pennsylvania. Both England and France regarded the Forks as a valuable military position, opening a way for exploration to the west and south, and each was determined to occupy it. At the time the adjacent country was occupied by various Indian tribes -- the Shawnees, Delawares, Senecas -- dwelling along the Allegheny, Monongahela, and Ohio Rivers. The first place of public worship within this territory was a chapel erected by the French in the stockade of Fort Duquesne, after Captain Contrecoeur and his forces had driven Ensigns Ward and Frazier from the Fort they were constructing at the fork of the Ohio. This chapel was built at some time later than 16 April, 1754, and dedicated under the title of "Assumption of the Blessed Virgin of the Beautiful River". In those days and for long afterwards, the Ohio -- on account of its clear water and rugged scenery -- was known as the "beautiful river". There is preserved in the archives of the city of Montreal a register of baptisms and deaths kept by the army chaplain at Fort Duquesne, from which we learn that the first interment in the cemetery of the fort was that of Toussaint Boyer, who died 20 June, 1754. The first white child born on the site of the city of Pittsburg was John Daniel Norment. His godfather was the chief officer of Fort Duquesne, John Daniel Sieur Dumas. These entries are signed by "Friar Denys Baron, Recollect Priest, Chaplain". If written evidence alone were to be considered, Father Baron, and not Father Bonnecamp (mentioned above), must be regarded as the first priest to offer the Holy Sacrifice, and the first white man to perform any public act of religious worship in the territory of the diocese. The register of baptisms and interments which took place at Fort Duquesne begins 11 July, 1753, and ends 10 October, 1756. The records before June, 1754, are from posts occupied by the French in the north-western part of Pennsylvania, now in the Diocese of Erie, before they took possession of the spot on which Fort Duquesne stood. In the register we find entries made by Friar Gabriel Amheuser and Friar Luke Collet, but they were chaplains from other French forts. Friar Denys Baron alone signs himself "Chaplain" of Fort Duquesne. These records testify to the baptism and burial of a number of Indians, showing that the French chaplains did not neglect their missionary duties. The French evacuated the fort, the British army under General Forbes took possession in 1758, and the place was named Pittsburg, or Fort Pitt, after William Pitt, Prime Minister of England. For thirty or forty years the Catholic religion was almost, if not entirely, without adherents in Western Pennsylvania. Gradually, as the western part of the state was settled, the Catholics gained a foothold, but met with much opposition in this strongly Calvinistic section. In 1784 their number had increased sufficiently about Pittsburg to warrant them in sending Felix Hughes to the Very Rev. John Carroll, at Baltimore, who was then superior of the clergy in the United States, asking that a priest be sent to minister to them at least once or twice a year. By this time there were seventy-five or eighty families along the Chartiers Creek, up the Monongahela Valley, and about Pittsburg. Priests were few in the country then, and the request could not be complied with. Under such conditions some of the Catholics in Western Pennsylvania had become indifferent, abandoned their religion altogether, or neglected their religious duties, even when the priests came. It is probable that the first priest to pass through Western Pennsylvania and minister to the Catholics there was a Carmelite, Father Paul, who came in 1785. Another was the Rev. Charles Whalen, a Capuchin, who remained a short time in 1787. In 1792 the Rev. Benedict Joseph Flaget, afterwards Bishop of Bardstown, remained here for some weeks. In 1793 the Revs. Baden and Barrieres came to Pittsburg and remained from September until November. The Rev. Michael Fournier was here fourteen weeks in the winter of 1796-7. The site on which St. Vincent's Archabbey now stands, in Unity township, Westmoreland county, was the first place where a permanent Catholic settlement was made in Western Pennsylvania. This was about 1787. The Rev. Theodore Bowers purchased the tract of land then known as "Sportsman's Hall" in 1790, and became the first priest of the little colony. When the Rev. Peter Heilbron came to take charge of the parish, in November, 1799, he found seventy-five communicants. In March, 1789, ground was purchased at Greensburg, where the Rev. John B. Causse said Mass for the first time in June, 1789. A log chapel was begun in 1790, but was never completed. The Rev. Patrick Lonergan went with a colony of Catholics from Sportsman's Hall in 1798 and, after a short stay at West Alexander, began a church at Waynesburg, Greene County, in 1799, or 1800, "which", says Archbishop Kenrick of Baltimore, writing in 1862, "was completed by me thirty years later". In the summer of 1799, the Rev. Demetrius A. Gallitzin came to reside with a colony of Catholics at Maguire's Settlement, now known as Loretto, in Cambria County, in the present Diocese of Altoona, and his mission-field included much of what is now the Diocese of Pittsburg. These, with the churches at Sugar Creek, Armstrong County, where the Rev. Lawrence F. Phelan took up his residence in 1805, and at Pittsburg, where the Rev. William F. X. O'Brien settled in 1808, were the first centres of the Faith in Western Pennsylvania. The Franciscans, who had reared the first altar at Fort Duquesne, furnished the first missionaries to attempt permanent centres of Catholic life, and establish places of worship in Western Pennsylvania. The Revs. Theodore Browers, John B. Causse, Patrick Lonergan, Peter Heilbron, Charles B. Maguire, all belonged to one or another branch of the Order of St. Francis. The Rev. William F. X. O'Brien, the first resident pastor of Pittsburg, was ordained at Baltimore 11 June, 1808, came to Pittsburg in November of the same year, and took up the erection of the church which is known in history as "Old St. Patrick's". It stood at the corner of Liberty and Epiphany streets, at the head of Eleventh Street, in front of the present Union Station. The Right Rev. Michael Egan dedicated this church in August, 1811, and its dedication and the administration of the Sacrament of Confirmation mark the first visit of a bishop to this part of the state. After twelve years of labour and exposure on the missions of his extensive territory, in which there were perhaps not more than 1800 souls, Father O'Brien's health declined, and in March, 1820, he retired to Maryland, where he died 1 November, 1832. He was succeeded in May, 1820, by the Rev. Charles B. Maguire, who had been pastor of the church at Sportsman's Hall since 1817. "Priest Maguire", as he was called by the Protestant people of Pittsburg, was a man of great ability and extensive learning, and in his day one of the best known and most respected and influential citizens of the community. He gave to the parish of St. Patrick, and to the Church in Western Pennsylvania something of his own strong personality and splendid qualities of order, progress, industry, love, and fidelity to Jesus Christ -- influences that are still felt. He began in 1827 the erection of St. Paul's church, which, when finished and dedicated 4 May, 1834, was the largest and most imposing church edifice in the United States. The Poor Clare Nuns opened a convent and academy in 1828 on Nunnery Hill in what was then Allegheny (now the North Side of Pittsburg). The community left Nunnery Hill in 1835 and, after remaining in another part of Allegheny until 1837, the sisters either returned to Europe, or entered other religious communities in the United States. Father Maguire died of cholera 17 July, 1833, and was succeeded as pastor by his assistant, the Rev. John O'Reilly, who completed St. Paul's church, introduced the Sisters of Charity from Emmitsburg, Maryland, in 1835, and established in the same year a Catholic school, and in 1838 an orphan asylum which the Sisters of Charity conducted until they were withdrawn from the diocese by their superiors in 1845. In April, 1837, Father O'Reilly was transferred to Philadelphia, and the Rev. Thomas Heyden, of Bedford, took his place. In November of the same year, Father Heyden returned to Bedford, and the Rev. P. R. Kenrick, the late Archbishop of St. Louis, became pastor of St. Paul's, Pittsburg. In the summer of 1838, Father O'Reilly exchanged places with Father Kenrick, and returned to Pittsburg. He remained at St. Paul's until succeeded by the Rev. Michael O'Connor, 17 June, 1841. He then went to Rome, entered the Congregation of the Mission, and died at St. Louis, Missouri, 4 March, 1862. The first religious community of men was established in Pittsburg, 8 April, 1839, which date marks the advent of the Fathers of the Congregation of Our Most Holy Redeemer, in the person of the Rev. Father Prost, who came to take charge of St. Patrick's parish, and established St. Philomena's. Bishop Flaget appears to have been the first to regard Pittsburg as the future see of a bishop, having entertained this idea in 1825. As early as 1835 Bishop Kenrick proposed to the cardinal prefect of Propaganda a division of the Diocese of Philadelphia by the erection at Pittsburg of an episcopal see, and he recommended the appointment of the Rev. John Hughes as Bishop either of Philadelphia or of Pittsburg. The suggestion of Bishop Kenrick was officially approved in Rome, and in January, 1836, the Rev. John Hughes was named Bishop of Philadelphia, and Bishop Kenrick was transferred to Pittsburg. Some obstacle intervened, and the appointments were recalled. The matter was again discussed in the Third Provincial Council of Baltimore, 16 April, 1837, but no definite action was taken. In the Fifth Provincial Council, which assembled at Baltimore, 14 May, 1843, the division of the State of Pennsylvania into two dioceses was recommended to the Holy See, and the Rev. Dr. Michael O'Connor was named as the most suitable person to govern the new see. Both actions of the council were confirmed at Rome. The new Diocese of Pittsburg, according to the Bull of erection, issued 11 August, 1843, was "Western Pennsylvania". This designation being rather vague, Bishop Kenrick, of Philadelphia, and Bishop O'Connor agreed to consider the Diocese of Pittsburg as comprising the Counties of Bedford, Huntingdon, Clearfield, McKean, and Potter, and all west of them in the state of Pennsylvania. This agreement was afterwards confirmed by a rescript of the Holy See. The new diocese contained an area of 21,300 sq. miles, or a little less than one-half of the state, and not more than one-third either of the entire, or of the Catholic population. Dr. Michael O'Connor was in Rome at the time of the division of the Diocese of Philadelphia, and his appointment to the new see was announced to him by Gregory XVI, while the future bishop knelt at his feet to ask permission to enter the Society of Jesus. "You shall be bishop first, and a Jesuit afterwards", said the venerable pontiff. These prophetic words were literally fulfilled. The Bull of his appointment was dated 11 August, 1843, and he was consecrated four days later by Cardinal Franzoni in the church of S. Agata, at Rome, on the feast of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin, the titular feast of the first chapel at Fort Duquesne. Michael O'Connor was born near the city of Cork, Ireland, 27 September, 1810. His early education was received at Queenstown, in his native country. At the age of fourteen he went to France, where he studied for several years. Then he was sent by the Bishop of Cloyne and Ross to the College of the Propaganda, at Rome where he won the title of Doctor of Divinity. Cardinal Wiseman, then Rector of the English College at Rome, in his "Recollections of the Last Four Popes", speaks in terms of high commendation of the ability of the youthful O'Connor, and of the manner in which he won his doctor's cap and ring. On 1 June, 1833, he was ordained, and immediately afterwards was appointed professor of Sacred Scripture at the Propaganda. The post of vice-rector of the Irish College was next assigned to him, and, returning to his native land, he was stationed for a time in the parish of Fermoy. At the invitation of Bishop Kenrick he came to the United States in 1839, and was at once appointed to a professorship in St. Charles Borromeo's Seminary, Philadelphia, afterwards becoming its president. During his connexion with the seminary, he attended the mission at Morristown, and built the church of St. Francis Xavier at Fairmount. In June, 1841, he was appointed vicar-general of the western part of the State of Pennsylvania, and came to Pittsburg to succeed the Rev. John O'Reilly, as pastor of St. Paul's. The event is chronicled in his notebook as follows: "June 17, 1841, arrived at Pittsburg on this day (Thursday); lodging at Mrs. Timmons, at $4.00 per week". One month after his arrival, Father O'Connor undertook the erection of a parochial school, organized a literary society for young men of the city, and opened a reading-room. He was consecrated Bishop of Pittsburg 15 August, 1843, at Rome. Soon after his consecration he left Rome and passed through Ireland on his way to America, with a view of providing priests and religious for his diocese. He called at Maynooth in October, 1843, and made an appeal to the students, asking some of them to volunteer their services for the new Diocese of Pittsburg. Five students whose course of studies was almost completed and three others also far advanced resolved to accompany the bishop. Coming to Dublin, he obtained a colony of seven Sisters of the recently-founded Order of Our Lady of Mercy to take charge of the parochial schools and of the higher education of young ladies. These were the first Sisters of the Order of Mercy, founded by Mother Catherine McCauley, to establish a convent in the United States. He sailed for America 12 November, and arrived at Pittsburg in December, 1843. At that time the bishop had in his vast diocese 33 churches, a few of which were unfinished, 16 priests, and a Catholic population of less than 25,000 souls. The following were the churches and priests of Western Pennsylvania at the time of the erection of the Diocese of Pittsburg. In Allegheny County: Pittsburg, St. Paul's Cathedral, the Very Rev. M. O'Connor and his assistant, the Rev. Joseph F. Deane; St. Patrick's, the Rev. E. F. Garland; St. Philomena's (German), the Revs. John N. Neuman, Julius P. Saenderl, F. X. Tschenheus, Peter Czackert, C.SS.R. The Rev. A. P. Gibbs resided in Pittsburg and attended a number of small congregations and missions in Allegheny and other counties: St. Philip's, Broadhead (now Crafton); St. Mary's, Pine Creek; St. Alphonsus, Wexford; St. Peter's, McKeesport. Westmoreland County: St. Vincent's; Mt. Carmel (near Derry), the Rev. Jas. A. Stillinger. Indiana County: Blairsville, Sts. Simon and Jude, and St. Patrick's, Cameron's Bottom; the Rev. Jas. A. Stillinger, from St. Vincent's. Butler County: Butler, St. Peter's, the Rev. H. P. Gallagher; Donegal, St. Joseph's (now North Oakland); Murrinsville, St. Alphonsus; St. Mary's (now Herman), the Rev. H. P. Gallagher (residing at Butler). Armstrong County: St. Patrick's, Sugar Creek; St. Mary's, Freeport; the Rev. Joseph Cody, residing at Sugar Creek. Washington County: St. James, West Alexander. Fayette County: St. Peter's, Brownsville (in course of erection), the Rev. M. Gallagher. Greene County: Waynesburg, St. Ann's; other stations in Greene County, Washington County, and Fayette County, attended by the Rev. M. Gallagher, from Brownsville. Beaver County: Beaver, Sts. Peter and Paul. Bedford County: Bedford, St. Thomas, the Rev. Thomas Heyden. Somerset County: Harman Bottom, St. John's, the Rev. Thomas Heyden (residing at Bedford). Huntingdon County: Huntingdon, Holy Trinity, attended from Newry by the Rev. James Bradley. Blair County: Newry, St. Patrick's; St. Luke's, Sinking Valley and St. Mary's, Hollidaysburg, attended from Newry by the Rev. James Bradley. Cambria County: Loretto, St. Michael's; Jefferson (now Wilmore), St. Bartholomew's; Johnstown, St. John Gaulbert; Ebensburg, St. Patrick's (now Holy Name of Jesus); Hart's Sleeping Place, St. Joseph's; Summit, St. Aloysius's (these places attended in 1843 by the Rev. Peter H. Lemke, pastor of Loretto, and his assistant, the Rev. Matthew W. Gibson). Mercer County: Mercer, St. Raphael's, attended from Butler by the Rev. H. P. Gallagher. Clearfield County: Clearfield, St. Francis; French Settlement, St. Mary's; Grampian Hills, St. Bonaventure. Crawford County: Cupewago (dedication unknown); French Settlement, St. Hippolyte's; Oil Creek, St. Stephen's. Erie County: Erie, St. Patrick's; Erie, St. Mary's. Elk County: Elk Creek (dedication unknown); Marysville (dedication unknown). Clarion County: Erismans, St. Michael's; Red Bank, St. Nicholas's. The Rev. J. A. Berti seems to have attended the missions of Clearfield, Crawford, Erie, Elk, and Clarion Counties in 1843. As yet there were but two religious communities in the diocese, the Redemptorist Fathers at St. Philomena's church, and the Sisters of Charity, who had charge of St. Paul's Orphan Asylum, and two schools in Pittsburg. The first parochial school building at St. Paul's, which has already been mentioned, was opened 14 April, 1844. On 16 June of the same year the first diocesan synod was held, and statutes were enacted for the government of the Church. On the 30th of the same month a chapel was opened for the use of the coloured Catholics of the city. In the same year the publication of "The Catholic" was begun, and the paper has been regularly issued every week down to the present time. St. Michael's ecclesiastical seminary, for the education of candidates for the priesthood, was established also in 1844. Thus in the brief space of a single year Bishop O'Connor had succeeded in thoroughly organizing all the departments of his vast diocese. The Presentation Brothers came in 1845 to take charge of St. Paul's Boys' School. They withdrew from the diocese, however, in 1848. In 1846 Bishop O'Connor received the Benedictine