Charles-Thomas Maillard De Tournon

Papal legate to India and China, cardinal, born of a noble Savoyard family at Turin, 21 December, 1668; died in confinement at Macao, 8 June, 1710. After graduating in canon and civil law he went to Rome where he gained the esteem of Clement XI, who on 5 December, 1701, appointed him legate a latere to India and China. The purpose of this legation was: to establish harmony among the missionaries there; to provide for the needs of these extensive missions; to report to the Holy See on the general state of the missions, and the labours of the missionaries; and, finally, to enforce the decision of the Holy Office against the further toleration of the so-called Chinese rites among the native Christians. These rites consisted chiefly in offering sacrifices to Confucius and the ancestors, and in using the Chinese names tien (heaven) and xang ti (supreme emperor) for the God of the Christians. On 27 December, 1701, the pope consecrated Tournon bishop in the Vatican Basilica, with the title of Patriarch of Antioch.

The legate left Europe on the royal French vessel Murepas, 9 February, 1703, arriving at Pondicherry in India on 6 November, 1703. It was with greater zeal than prudence that he issued a decree at this place, dated 23 June, 1704, summarily forbidding the missionaries under severe censures to permit the further practice of the Malabar rites. On 11 July, 1704, he set sail for China by way of the Philippine Islands, arriving at Macao in China, 2 April, and at Peking on 4 December, 1705. Emperor Kang hi received him kindly at first, but upon hearing that he came to abolish the Chinese rites among the native Christians, he demanded from all missionaries on pain of immediate expulsion a promise to retain these rites. At Rome the Holy Office had meanwhile decided against the rites on 20 November, 1704, and, being acquainted with this decision, the legate issued a decree at Nanking on 25 January, 1707, obliging the missionaries under pain of excommunication latae sententiae to abolish these rites. Hereupon, the emperor ordered Tournon to be imprisoned at Macao and sent some Jesuit missionaries to Rome to protest against the decree. Tournon died in his prison, shortly after being informed that he had been created cardinal on 1 August, 1707. Upon the announcement of his death at Rome, Clement XI highly praised him for his courage and loyalty to the Holy See and ordered the Holy Office to issue a Decree (25 September, 1710) approving the acts of the legate. Tournon's remains were brought to Rome by his successor, Mezzabarba, and buried in the church of the Propaganda, 27 September, 1723.

Memorie stor. dell' Em. Mgr. card. di Tournon esposte con monumenti rari ed autentici non piu dati alla luce (8 vols., Venice 1761-2), anti-jesuitical; (VILLERMAULES), Anec. sur l'etat de la religion dans la Chine (7 vols., Paris, 1733-42), Jansenistic and extremely biased against the Jesuits; PRAY, Hist. controvers. de ritibus sinicis (Pest, 1789), German tr. with numerous additions (Augsburg, 1791). Concerning his alleged murder by the Jesuits see DUHR. Jesuiten-Fabeln (4 ed. Freiburg, 1904), 776, 786.

MICHAEL OTT

Antoine Touron

Dominican biographer and historian, born at Graulhet, Tarn, France, on 5 September, 1686; died at Paris, 2 September, 1775. Of this author but little has been written, though the number and merit of his works have caused his name to become illustrious, particularly in his order. He was the son of a merchant, and seems to have joined the Dominicans at an early age. After the completion of his studies he taught philosophy and theology to the students of his province (Toulouse); but the later years of his life were devoted to biography, history, and apologetics. From his pen we have twenty-nine volumes, dealing largely with the history of the Dominican order and the biographical sketches of its notable men. His writings are valuable contributions to Dominican literature, and essential to students of Dominican history. Père Mortier, in his "Histoire des maîtres généraux de l'ordre des frères prêcheurs", now in course of publication, has made generous use of his "Histoire des hommes illustres...". Touron's writings include his "Vie de saint Thomas d'Aquin" (considered his best work); "Vie de saint Dominique avec une hist. abrégée des ses premiers disciples"; "Hist. des hommes illustres de l'ordre de saint Dominique"; "De la providence, traité hist., dogmat. et mor."; "La main de Dieu sur les incrédules, ou hist. abrégée des Israélites", a work in which he shows that as often as the Chosen People proved false to their Divine vocation, they were punished by God; "Parallèle de l'incrédule et du vrai fidèle"; "La vie et l'esprit de saint Charles Borromée"; "La verité vengée en faveur de saint Thomas"; and "Hist. génerale de l'Amérique depuis sa découverte", which is really an ecclesiastical history of the New World.

Mortier, Hist. des maîtres gén. de l'ordre des frères prêcheurs (5 vols., Paris, 1903-11), passim; Hurter, Nomenclator literarius, III (Innsbruck, 1895),164-5.

VICTOR F. O'DANIEL

Archdiocese of Tours

(TURONENSIS.)

Comprises the Department of Indre-et-Loire, and was re-established by the Concordat of 1801 with the Dioceses of Angers, Nantes, Le Mans, Rennes, Vannes, St-Brieue, and Quimper as suffragans. The elevation to metropolitan rank of the Diocese of Rennes in 1859, with the last three dioceses as suffragans, dismembered the Province of Tours. The Diocese of Laval, created in 1855, is a suffragan of Tours. For the early ecclesiastical history of Tours we have an excellent document, the concluding chapter "De episcopis Turonicis" in Gregory of Tours's "History of the Franks", though Mgr Duchesne has shown that it requires some chronological corrections. The founder of the see was St. Gatianus; according to Gregory of Tours he was one of the seven apostles sent from Rome to Gaul in the middle of tile third century. Two grottos cut in the hill above the Loire, opposite Tours, are held to have been the first sanctuaries where St. Gatianus celebrated the Liturgy. According to Mgr Duchesne the tradition of Tours furnished Gregory with only the name of Gatianus, accompanied perhaps by the length, fifty years, of his episcopate; it was by comparison with the "Passio S. Saturnini" of Toulouse that Gregory arrived at the date 250. Mgr Duchesne considers this date rather doubtful, but admits that the Church of Tours was founded in the time of Constantine.

After St. Gatianus, according to Mgr Duchesne's chronology, came: St. Litorius, or Lidoire (337-71); the illustrious St. Martin (4 July, 372-8 Nov., 397); St. Brice (397-444), who was accused to Celestine I of immorality and absolved by the pope, but who remained absent seventeen years from the episcopal city, which was governed by the intruded Bishop Armentius; St. Eustochius (444-61); St. Perpetuus (461-91); St. Volusianus (491-98), deprived of his see by the Visigoths, exiled to Toulouse, and perhaps martyred; Verus (498-509), also deprived of his see at the command of Alaric; St. Baud (546-52), chancellor of Clotaire I; St. Euphronius (55-73), who made at Poitiers the solemn transfer of the relic of the True Cross to the monastery founded by St. Radegunde; the historian Gregory (573-94). After St. Gregory the history of the diocese for two centuries and a half is obscure and confused, but the study of various episcopal catalogues has made it possible for Mgr Duchesne to some-what clear up this period. Landramnus, bishop under Louis the Pious, was by this prince appointed missus dominicus, or royal commissary, in 825.

Among subsequent bishops were: Raoul II (1086-1117), who despite the prohibition of Hugues, legate of the Holy See, had dealings with the excommunicated Philip I, and under whose episcopate Paschal II came to Tours (1107); Hildebert de Lavardin (1125-34); Etienne de Bourgueil (1323-35), who founded the College of Tours at Paris; the jurisconsult Pierre Frétaud (1335-57); Jacques Gélu (1415-27), later Bishop of Embrun (see DIOCESE OF GAP); Philippe de Coetquis (1427-41), who, commissioned by Charles VII in 1429 to interrogate Joan of Arc, recognized her perfect sincerity, and who was made a cardinal by antipope Felix V. Hélie de Bourdeilles (1468-84), cardinal in 1483; Robert de Lenoncourt (1484-1501), afterwards Archbishop of Reims; Dominic Carette, Cardinal de Final (1509-14); Alessandro Farnese (1553-54), cardinal in 1534; De Maillé de Brézé (1554-97), who assisted the Cardinal de Lorraine at the Council of Trent and translated the homilies of St. Basil; Victor le Bouthiller (1641-70), who played an important part in the religious renaissance of the seventeenth century; Boisgelin de Cicé (1802-4), who under the old regime had been Archbishop of Aix and in 1802 was created cardinal; De Barral (1804-15); Francois Morlot (1843-57), cardinal in 1853, Archbishop of Paris at the time of his death; Joseph-Hippolyte Guibert (1857-71), cardinal in 1873, later be came Archbishop of Paris; Guillaume-René Meignan (1884-96), cardinal in 1893, known by his exegetical works.

Tours was the capital of the Third Lionize province. The ecclesiastical province of Tours must have been established under the episcopate of St. Martin. Fifty years later it was in regular operation, as is proved by, among other documents, the synodal epistles of the Councils of Angers and Vannes in 453 and 461. (Concerning the prolonged efforts of the Breton Churches to emancipate themselves from the metropolis of Tours and the assistance given to this metropolis by royalty see ARCHDIOCESE OF RENNES.) About 480 the Visigoths were masters of Tours and it was in the Island of Amboise in 504 that the interview took place as a result of which the Frank Clovis and the Visigoth Alaric shared Gaul between them. But the Arising of the Visigoths eventually roused the Catholics of Tours and when in 507 Clovis and his army entered the Visigothic kingdom Tours opened its gate to him, and he received in that city the consular insignia sent by Emperor Anastasius. The Saracens threatened Tours when Charles Martel defeated them in 732. From 853 to 903 the Northmen made frequent inroads, terminated by the victory of St. Martin le Beau. Henry II of England became Count of Touraine in the middle of the twelfth century and the English dominion was maintained at Tours until John Lackland renounced it in 1214.

In the Middle Ages Tours was composed of two cities, the Roman Caesarodunum and the Merovingian Martinopolis. The name of Tours was strictly reserved to the ancient Caesarodunum, and the territory of Tours depended on the archbishops. Martinopolis, which rose around the monastery of St-Martin, took, in the tenth century, the name of Chateauneuf and for five centuries was an independent community. Under Louis XI the two agglomerations were united in one which retained the name of Tours. The cathedral of Tours, dedicated to St. Gatianus, dates from the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries. The windows, which belong to the thirteenth, are among the most beautiful in France. The towers belong to the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The chapter of Tours is the oldest in France. It is said that it was established by St. Baud, who gave the canons property quite distinct from that of the arch-diocese. Simon de Brion, pope from 1281 to 1285 under the name of Martin IV, was canon and treasurer of the church of St. Martin of Tours.

The prestige of the Church of Tours was very great during the Middle Ages. In a letter to Charles the Bald Adrian II designates it as the second in France. Philip Augustus in a letter to Lucius III says that he considers it one of the most beautiful jewels of his crown and that whosoever attacks this church attacks his own person. Kings John II, Charles VII, Charles VIII, and Henry III would never consent when they gave Touraine in fief that this church should be separated from the crown. It owed this prestige chiefly to the Basilica of St. Martin. This was first built by St. Perpetuus and dedicated in 472. It was there that Clovis was clothed with the purple robe and the chlamys sent him with the title of consul by the Emperor Anastasius. As early as the sixth century St. Martin's was a real religious centre. Queen Clotilde died in 545 in the vicinity of the basilica, and in the same neighbourhood St. Radegunde founded a small monastery, near which St. Gregory of Tours built the Church of the Holy Cross. Ingeltrude, daughter of Clotaire I, founded the monastery of Notre-Dame-de-l'Ecrignole, St. Monegunde that of St-Pierre-le-Puellier. When Charlemagne, before setting out to receive the imperial crown at Rome, assembled at Tours (800) the lords of his empire and divided his estates among his sons, his wife Luitgarde died there, and was buried at St-Martin. He gave the Church vast possessions in France and Normandy. Abbot Ithier, his chancellor, founded with some monks from St-Martin the monastery of Cormery. Alcuin, who succeeded Ithier in 796 and was buried in the basilica in 804, founded there a school of calligraphy to which is due the preservation of many ancient works. At this school, directed after Alcuin by Fredegisus (804-34), Adelard (834-45), and Count Vivian (845-54), were copied and illustrated the celebrated Bible of Charles the Bald and the Gospels of Lothaire preserved at the Bibliothèque Nationale of Paris, the Virgil in the library of Berne, the Arithmetic of Boetius in the library of Bamberg, and the superb Gospels preserved in the library of Tours, written throughout in gold letters on white vellum, and on which the kings of France took the oath as abbots of St-Martin. The beautiful artistic labours of the canons were disturbed by the Norman invasions.

The body of St. Martin was transported by the canons to Auxerre in 853 to safeguard it against the invasions of the Northmen. Count Ingelger had to march with 6000 men against Auxerre in 884, before the body was restored. From 845 the abbots of St-Martin were laymen, namely the dukes of France, ancestors of Hugh Capet. When, in 987, Hugh Capet became King of France he joined the dignity of Abbot of St-Martin with the Crown of France in perpetuity. The Abbey of St-Martin had as honorary canons the Dukes of Burgundy, Anjou, Brittany, Vendôme, and Nevers, the Counts of Flanders, Dunois, the Earl of Douglas in Scotland, the Lords of Preuilly and Parthenay. From Clovis, doubtless until Philip Augustus, it enjoyed the right of coinage. Blessed Hervé, treasurer of the basilica, caused it to be rebuilt about 1000. It was in the abbey rebuilt by Hervé that Philip I, King of France, in 1092 arranged to meet Bertrade de Montfort, wife of Foulques le Réchin, and carried her off to the great scandal of the kingdom. Urban II, who came to Tours in 1096, refused to remove the excommunication inflicted on Philip and Bertrade. Paschal II in 1107, Callistus 11 in 1119, Innocent II in 1130, and Alexander III in 1163 came thither to venerate the tomb of St. Martin. Richard Coeur de Lion in 1190 and John of Brienne in 1223 took there the pilgrim's staff prior to setting out on the crusade. Louis XI had great devotion to St. Martin. The day on which he learned in the basilica itself of the death of Charles the Bold he vowed to surround the tomb of the saint with a silver grating, the cost of which would today equal 2,148,000 francs. In 1522 Francis I seized this grating, despite the chapter and the people of Tours. The devastations of the Reformation and the Revolution destroyed the Basilica of St. Martin. There now remain only two large towers, but at the end of the nineteenth century Cardinal Meignan caused a new basilica to be erected on the site of the old one.

According to the legend, the Abbey of St. Julian arose around a church the building of which was ordered by Clovis after his victory of Vouille over the Visigoths. It is historically certain that there were monks from Auvergne there in the sixth century, on whom Gregory of Tours imposed the Rule of St. Benedict and to whom he gave the relics of St. Julian of Brioude. The Northmen destroyed this first monastery; it was rebuilt about 937 by St. Odo, Abbot of Cluny, and Archbishop Theotolon. The present Church of St. Julian is a beautiful monument of the thirteenth century.

The monastery of Marmoutier dates from St. Martin. Near the grottos where St. Gatianus celebrated Mass he established some cells. The cell of St. Brice is still to be seen. Another grotto, known as the grotto of the Seven Sleepers, was inhabited by seven brothers, cousins of St. Martin, who all died on the same day after a lethargy. In the ninth century the Abbey of Marmoutier was ravaged by the Northmen, and out of 140 religious only 20 escaped massacre and were sheltered by the canons of St-Martin. Marmoutier was subsequently inhabited by a small colony of canons, and in 982 the abbey, which had fallen into some disorders, was restored by St. Mayeul, Abbot of Cluny, at the instance of Eudes I, Count of Blois and of Tours, who died a monk at Marmoutier. Urban II came to Marmoutier in 1096 and dedicated the newly-built basilica. Hubaud, canon of St-Martin and brother of the heresiarch Berenger, gave to Marmoutier superb pieces of religious gold work in order to secure prayers for Berenger, who died at the priory of St-Côme, which was dependent on Marmoutier. The fortune of the abbey was considerable, a popular saying runs:

"De quelque cote que le vent vente,
Marmoutier a cens et rente."

In the eleventh century 101 priories were founded dependent on Marmoutier, ten of them in England. Hugh I, Abbot of Marmoutier from 1210 to 1226, organized the estates of Meslay and Louroux, which were models of agricultural exploitation, and began the reconstruction of the basilica. The latter undertaking was hindered by the violent attacks made by the counts of Blois on the monks of Marmoutier. In 1253 St. Louis took the abbey under his protection. In 1562 it was pillaged by the Protestants and the Revolution destroyed it almost entirely. The crosier gateway (Portail de la Crosse) which remains standing dates from the thirteenth century. The origin of the town of Loches was the monastery founded by St. Ours about the beginning of the sixth century. He installed in the bed of the Indre a hand-mill which became a place of pilgrimage. Geoffroy Grisegonelle, Count of Anjou, founded at Loches a Byzantine collegiate church to which he gave a girdle of the Blessed Virgin. Repaired in the twelfth century by the prior, Thomas Pactius, this church still exists. In the dungeon of Loches, founded about 1000 by Foulques Nerra, were imprisoned Cardinal la Balue and the historian Comines. The monastery founded by St. Mexme, disciple of St. Martin (d. shortly after 463), was the origin of a gathering of people which formed the town of Chinon.

Cardinal de Richelieu was born in 1585 at the castle of Richelieu in the diocese. He transformed it into an imposing château, built around it an entire city, which took the name of Richelieu, and joined to his ducal peerage the town of Champigny. The Sainte Chapelle of Champigny was built in 1508 by the princely house of Bourbon-Montpensier to receive a thorn of the crown of Christ and one of the thirty pieces of silver paid to Judas. Urban VIII, who prior to his pontificate had said Mass there, later prevented its demolition; hence the preservation of this fine monument of the Renaissance is due to him. The church of Cande, built between 1175 and 1215 on the site where St. Martin died, is remarkable as a monument not only of religious but also of military architecture. At Tours in 1163 Alexander III excommunicated the antipope Victor and Frederick Barbarossa. It was at the Château of Chinon in 1429 that Joan of Arc first saw Charles VII and gave him confidence in her mission, and in the same year she sent to St-Catherine-de-Fierbois in the diocese to seek in the tomb of an ancient knight the sword of Charles Martel. In the fifteenth century Tours had a brilliant school of painting; unfortunately nothing remains of the paintings executed at Notre-Dame-la-Riche by Jehan Fouquet. The studio of the sculptor Michel Colomb was at Tours; his master production was the tomb of Francis II of Brittany in the cathedral of Nantes. The tomb of the children of Charles VIII in the cathedral of Tours was the collective work of Colomb and his pupils and of some Italian decorators.

There are in Touraine a great many châteaux rich in historic memories, such as Plessis-les-Tours, the residence of Louis XI, Amboise, where was hatched the plot against the Guises under King Francis II; Chenonceaux, built by Francis I, the residence of Diana of Poitiers and later of Catherine de' Medici; Langeais, where Charles VIII wedded Anne of Brittany. Of the château of Chanteloup near Amboise, where the Duc de Choiseul went into exile, there remains only the pagoda. A number of saints are honoured in a special manner or are connected with the religious history of the diocese: Sts. Maura and Brigitta, virgins (end of fourth century); St. Flodovaeus (Flovier), martyr (fifth century); St. Ursus (Ours), founder of the Abbey of Sennevieres, patron of the town of Loches, d. about 508; St. Leubatius (Leubais), Abbot of Sennevières (sixth century); St. Senoch, solitary and abbot, d. in 579; St. Leobardus (Libert), hermit of the grottos of Marmoutier, d. in 593; St. Odo, first Abbot of Cluny, d. at Tours in 942; St. Avertinus, deacon, companion in exile of St. Thomas Becket, d. in Touraine about 1189; Bl. Jeanne-Marie de Maillé, d. in 1414 after having spent her widowhood in the practice of a rigorously ascetic life near the Basilica of St. Martin. Among the natives of the diocese were: the great prose writer Rabelais (1495-1553), b. at Chinon; the philosopher Descartes (l596-1650), b. at La Haye-Descartes; the Abbé de Marolles (1600-81), b. at Genillé, celebrated for his translations, and whose collection of prints formed the basis of that of the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris; Saint-Martin, called the unknown philosopher (1743-1803), b. at Amboise; the poet Alfred de Vigny (1797-1863), b. at Loches; Balzac (1790-1850), b. at Tours.

The chief places of pilgrimage in the diocese besides the grottos of Marmoutier, are: Notre-Dame-la-Riche, a sanctuary erected on the site of a church dating from the third century, and where the founder St. Gatianus is venerated; Notre-Dame-de-Loches; St. Christopher and St. Giles at St-Christophe, a pilgrimage dating from the ninth century; the pilgrimage to the Holy Face, established by M. Dupont, "the Holy Man of Tours", who founded the Priests of the Holy Face canonically erected on 8 December, 1876, to administer the chapel. Before the application of the law of 1901 there were in the diocese Jesuits, Lazarists, and various orders of teaching brothers. Several orders of women had their origin in the diocese the chief being: The Sisters of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin, teaching and nursing, founded in 1684 at Sainville, in the Diocese of Chartres by Mother Marie Poussepin, and in 1813 transported to La Breteche near Tours; the Sisters of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary, teaching, founded in 1805 by the Abbe Guepin, rector of Notre-Dame-la-Riche, with mother-house at Tours; the Sisters of the Third Order of Carmel, since 1824 called the Sisters of St-Martin, teaching, with its mother-house at Bourgeuil. The religious congregations were directing in the diocese at the end of the nineteenth century 5 foundling asylums, 36 infant schools, 3 special houses for sick children, 5 orphanages for boys, 7 for girls, 1 house of retreat, 1 house of refuge, 18 hospitals or hospices, 2 dispensaries, 3 houses of religious for the care of the sick in their homes, 1 home for convalescents, 5 private hospitals and retreats. In the year 1911 the Archdiocese of Tours numbered 337,916 inhabitants, 23 deaneries, 37 first class parishes, and 254 succursal parishes.

Gallia christiaina, nova, XIV (1856), 1-151, instr. 1-98; DUCHESNE, Les listes episcopales de la province de Tours (Paris, 1890); CHEVALIER, Les origines de l'eglise de Tours d'apres l'histoire (Tours, 1871); PITROU, L'episcopat tourangeau, notes biographiques (Tours, 1882) LAMBRON DE LIGNIN, Armorial des archeveques de Tours (Tours, 1858) DE LASTEYRIE, L'eglise S. Martin de Tours, etude critique sur l'histoire et Ia forme de ce monument du Ve au XIe siecle (Paris 1891) DELISLE, Memoirs sur l'ecole calligraphique de Tours au IX siecle (Paris, 1885); MARTENE, Histoire de l'abbaye de Marmoutver, ed. CHEVALIER (2 vols., Tours, 1874-75); CHANTELOU, Marmoutier cartulaire tourangeau et sceaux des abbes, ed. NOBILLAEU (Tours, 1879); CHEVALIER, Promenades pittoresques en Touraine (Tours, 1869); VITRY, Tours St less châteaux de Touraine (Paris 1905) VAUCELLES, Catalogus de lettres de Nicotas V, conc. la prov. eccl. de Tours (Paris, 1908).

GEORGES GOYAU

Charles-François Toustain

French Benedictine, and member of the Congregation of St-Maur, born at Repas in the Diocese of Séez, France, 13 October 1700, died at St-Denis, 1 July, 1754. He belonged to a family of note. On 20 July, 1718, he made the vows of the order at Jumièges. After finishing the philosophical and theological course at the Abbey of Fécamp he was sent to the monastery of Bonne-Nouvelle at Rouen to learn Hebrew and Greek. At the same time he studied Italian, English, German, and Dutch, in order to be able to understand the writers in these languages. He was not ordained priest until 1729 and then only at the express command of his superior. He always said Mass with much trepidation and only after long preparation. In 1730 he entered the Abbey of St-Ouen at Rouen, went later to St-Germain-des-Pres and Blancs-Manteaux, and died while taking his milk-cure at St-Denis. He had worn out his body by fasts and ascetic practices. His theological opinions were not entirely correct, as he inclined to Jansenism. As a scholar he made himself an honoured name. He worked for twenty years with a fellow-member of the order, Tassin, on an edition of the works of St. Theodore of Studium which was never printed, for a publisher could not be found. Another common undertaking of the two is the "Nouveau traité de diplomatique" (6 vols., 1750-65) in which they treated more fully and thouroughly the subjects taken up in Mabillon's great work "De re diplomatica". The publication of Toustain and Tassin is of permanent value. The last four volumes were edited by Tassin alone after Toustain's death. Of general interest among Toustain's personal writings are: "La vérité persecutée par l'erreur" (2 vols., 1733), a collection of the writings of the Fathers on the persecutions of the first eight centuries; and "L'authorité de miracles dans l'église" (no date), in which he expounds the opinion of St. Augustine. Tassin testifies that he was zealous in his duties, modest, and sincerely religious.

TASSIN, Eloge de Toustain in Nouveau traité de diplomatique, II, IDEM, Hist. littéraire de la congrégation de St-Maur, II (Brussels, 1770); DE LAMA, Bibliothèque des écrivains de la congrégation de St-Maur (2nd ed., Munich-Paris, 1882), 174 sq.

KLEMENS LÖFFLER

Antoine-Augustin Touttée

A French Benedictine of the Maurist Congregation, b. at Riom, Department of Puy-de-Dôme, 13 Dec., 1677; d. at the Abbey of St. Germain-des-Prés, 25 Dec., 1718. He studied the humanities with the Oratorians at Riom, made vows at the Abbey of Vendôme, 29 Oct., 1698, and was ordained priest in December, 1702. He taught philosophy at Vendôme from 1702 to 1704 and theology at St-Benoît-sur-Loire from 1704-1708 and at St-Denis from 1708 to 1712. He then withdrew to St-Germain-des-Prés to prepare a new Greek edition and Latin translation of the works of St. Cyril of Jerusalem. This was issued after his death by Prudent Maran under the title: "S. Cyrilli Hiersolymit. opera quae extant omnia et ejus nomine circumferunter; ad mss. codd. castigata" (Paris, 1720; also in P.G., XXXIII). It is preceded by three learned dissertations on the life, writings, and doctrine of St. Cyril, and was at the time the standard edition.

TASSIN, Hist. litteraire de la congreg. de Saint-Maur (Brussels and Paris, 1770); German tr. (Frankfort, 1773-4), s.v.; LE CERF, Bibliotheque historique et critique des auteurs de la congreg. de Saint-Maur (The Hague, 1720), s.v.

MICHAEL OTT

Tower of Babel

The "Tower of Babel" is the name of the building mentioned in Genesis 11:1-9.

History of the Tower

The descendants of Noe had migrated from the "east" (Armenia) first southward, along the course of the Tigris, then westward across the Tigris into "a plain in the land of Sennar". As their growing number forced them to live in localities more and more distant from their patriarchal homes, "they said: Come, let us make a city and a tower, the top whereof may reach to heaven; and let us make our name famous before we be scattered abroad into all lands." The work was soon fairly under way; "and they had brick instead of stones, and slime (asphalt) instead of mortar." But God confounded their tongue, so that they did not understand one another's speech, and thus scattered them from that place into all lands, and they ceased to build the city.

This is the Biblical account of the Tower of Babel. Thus far no Babylonian document has been discovered which refers clearly to the subject. Authorities like George Smith, Chad Boscawen, and Sayce believed they had discovered a reference to the Tower of Babel; but Frd. Delitzch pointed out that the translation of the precise words which determine the meaning of the text is most uncertain (Smith-Delitzsch. "Chaldaische Genesis", 1876, 120-124; Anmerk., p. 310).

Oppert finds an allusion to the Tower of Babel in a text of Nabuchodonosor; but this opinion is hardly more than a theory (cf. "The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia", I, pl. 38, col. 2, line 62; pl. 41, col. 1, I. 27, col. 2, 1. 15; Nikel, "Genesis und Keilschriftforschung", 188 sqq.; Bezold, "Ninive und Babylon", 128; Jeremias, "Das alte Testament im Lichte des alten Orients", 2nd ed., Leipzig, 1906, 286; Kaulen, "Assyrien und Babylonien", 89).

A more probable reference to the Tower of Babel we find in the "History" of Berosus as it is handed down to us in two variations by Abydenus and Alexander Polyhistor respectively ("Histor. Graec. Fragm.", ed. Didot, II, 512; IV, 282; Euseb., "Chron.", I, 18, in P.G., XIX, 123; "Praep. Evang.", IX, 14, in P.G., XXI, 705). Special interest attaches to this reference, since Berosus is now supposed to have drawn his material from Babylonian sources.

Site of the Tower of Babel

Both the inspired writer of Genesis and Berosus place the Tower of Babel somewhere in Babylon. But there are three principal opinions as to its precise position in the city.

(1) Pietro della Valle ("Viaggi descritti", Rome, 1650) located the tower in the north of the city, on the left bank of the Euphrates, where now lie the ruins called Babil. Schrader inclines to the same opinion in Riehm's "Handworterbuch des biblischen Altertums" (I, 138), while in "The Cuneiform Inscriptions" (I, 108) he leaves to his reader the choice between Babil and the temple of Borsippa. The position of Babil within the limits of the ancient Babylon agrees with the Biblical location of the tower; the name Babil itself may be regarded as a traditional relic of the name Babel interpreted by the inspired writer as referring to the confusion of tongues.

(2) Rawlinson (Smith-Sayce, "Chaldean account of the Genesis", 1880, pp. 74, 171) places the tower on the ruins of Tell-Amram, regarded by Oppert as the remnants of the hanging gardens. These ruins are situated on the same side of the Euphrates as those of the Babil, and also within the ancient city limits. The excavations of the German Orientgesellschaft have laid bare on this spot the ancient national sanctuary Esagila, sacred to Marduk-Bel, with the documentary testimony that the top of the building had been made to reach Heaven. This agrees with the description of the Tower of Babel as found in Genesis 11:4: "The top whereof may reach to heaven". To this locality belongs also the tower Etemenanki, or house of the foundation of Heaven and earth, which is composed of six gigantic steps.

(3) Sayce (Lectures on the Religion of the Ancient Babylonians, p. 112-3, 405-7), Oppert ("Expédition en Mésopotamie", I, 200-16; "Études assyriennes", pp. 91-132), and others follow the more common opinion which identifies the tower of Babel with the ruins of the Birs-Nimrud, in Borsippa, situated on the right side of the Euphrates, some seven or eight miles from the ruins of the city proper. They are the ruins of the temple Ezida, sacred to Nebo, which according to the above-cited inscription of Nabuchodonosor, was repaired and completed by that king; for it had been left incomplete by a former ruler in far distant days. These data are too vague to form the basis of an apodictic argument. The Babylonian Talmud (Buxtorf, "Lexicon talmudicum", col. 313) connects Borsippa with the confusion of tongues; but a long period elapsed from the time of the composition of Genesis 11 to the time of the Babylonian Talmud. Besides, the Biblical account seems to imply that the tower was within the city limits, while it is hardly probably that the city limits extended to Borsippa in very ancient times. The historical character of the tower is not impaired by our inability to point out its location with certainty.

Form of the Tower of Babel

The form of the tower must have resembled the constructions which today exist only in a ruined condition in Babylonia; the most ancient pyramids of Egypt present a vestige of the same form. Cubic blocks of masonry, decreasing in size, are piled one on top of the other, thus forming separate stories; an inclined plane or stairway leads from one story to the other. The towers of Ur and Arach contained only two or three stories, but that of Birs-Nimrud numbered seven, not counting the high platform on which the building was erected. Each story was painted in its own peculiar colour according to the planet to which it was dedicated. Generally the corners of these towers faced the four points of the compass, while in Egypt this position was held by the sides of the pyramids. On top of these constructions there was a sanctuary, so that they served both as temples and observatories. Their interior consisted of sun-dried clay, but the outer walls were coated with fire-baker brick. The asphalt peculiar to the Babylonian neighbourhood served as mortar; all these details are in keeping with the report of Genesis. Though some writers maintain that every Babylonian city possessed such a tower, or zikkurat (meaning "pointed" according to Schrader, "raised on high" according to Haupt, "memorial" according to Vigouroux), no complete specimen has been preserved to us. The Tower of Khorsabad is perhaps the best preserved, but Assyrian sculpture supplements our knowledge of even this construction. The only indication of the time at which the Tower of Babel was erected, we find in the name of Phaleg (Genesis 11:10-17), the grandnephew of Heber; this places the date somewhere between 101 and 870 years after the Flood. The limits are so unsatisfactory, because the Greek Version differs in its numbers from the Massoretic text.

Besides the works indicted in the course of the articles, see RAWLINSON, The Five Great Monarchies, II (London, 1862-7, 1878), 534-5; SCHRADER-WHITEHOUSE, The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the Old Testament, I (London, 1885-8), 106-14; HOBERG, Genesis, 2nd ed. (Freiburg, 1899), 129. For critical view, see SKINNER, Genesis (New York, 1910, 228 sqq.

A.J. MAAS

Alexandre De Prouville, Marquis de Tracy

Viceroy of New France, born in France, 1603, of noble parents; died there in 1670. A soldier from his youth, he had proved his valour in many battles and won the rank of lieutenant-general of the king's armies. He was no less prudent and wise as a negotiator and organizer. Entrusted by Louis XIV with a most extensive mission and jurisdiction over all the French possessions in the New World, he first redeemed Cayenne from the Dutch, restored order to the Antilles, and reached Quebec in 1665. He had been preceded by the Carignan regiment which had distinguished itself against the Turks in Hungary (1664) and was entitled to bear the royal colours. With the concurrence of Courcelles, the newly-appointed governor, and Talon, the famous intendant, he inaugurated a glorious period in the history of New France. To secure peace for the colony war was decided against the Agniers, and in spite of his advanced age, Tracy commanded the invading army. The year previous he had ordered the construction of three forts on the Richelieu River, including those of Sorel and Chambly. The enemies had fled from their villages, which were destroyed, and Tracy returned with nearly all his men. The humiliated Agniers sued for peace and asked for missionaries to instruct them in the Faith. Tracy with his two associates then devoted himself to the organization of the courts of justice and to the promotion of agriculture and industry. During his administration were imported the first horses seen in Canada. Tracy's noble and conciliatory conduct endeared him to the colonists and won the respect both of the aborigines and of the authorities of New York. His administration was marked by two chief events full of promise for the prosperity of the colony: the abolition of the monopoly of the West India company, which had replaced that of New France, and the conclusion of a peace with the Iroquois which lasted eighteen years and facilitated several brilliant discoveries in the interior of the continent.

LIONEL LINDSAY

Tradition and Living Magisterium

The word tradition (Greek paradosis in the ecclesiastical sense; which is the only one in which it is used here; refers sometimes to the thing (doctrine, account, or custom) transmitted from one generation to another sometimes to the organ or mode of the transmission (kerigma ekklisiastikon, predicatio ecclesiastica). In the first sense it is an old tradition that Jesus Christ was born on 25 December, in the second sense tradition relates that on the road to Calvary a pious woman wiped the face of Jesus. In theological language, which in many circumstances has become current, there is still greater precision and this in countless directions. At first there was question only of traditions claiming a Divine origin, but subsequently there arose questions of oral as distinct from written tradition, in the sense that a given doctrine or institution is not directly dependent on Holy Scripture as its source but only on the oral teaching of Christ or the Apostles. Finally with regard to the organ of tradition it must be an official organ, a magisterium, or teaching authority.

Now in this respect there are several points of controversy between Catholics and every body of Protestants. Is all revealed truth consigned to Holy Scripture? or can it, must it, be admitted that Christ gave to His Apostles to be transmitted to His Church, that the Apostles received either from the very lips of Jesus or from inspiration or Revelation, Divine instructions which they transmitted to the Church and which were not committed to the inspired writings? Must it be admitted that Christ instituted His Church as the official and authentic organ to transmit and explain in virtue of Divine authority the Revelation made to men? The Protestant principle is: The Bible and nothing but the Bible; the Bible, according to them, is the sole theological source; there are no revealed truths save the truths contained in the Bible; according to them the Bible is the sole rule of faith: by it and by it alone should all dogmatic questions be solved; it is the only binding authority. Catholics, on the other hand, hold that there may be, that there is in fact, and that there must of necessity be certain revealed truths apart from those contained in the Bible; they hold furthermore that Jesus Christ has established in fact, and that to adapt the means to the end He should have established, a living organ as much to transmit Scripture and written Revelation as to place revealed truth within reach of everyone always and everywhere. Such are in this respect the two main points of controversy between Catholics and so-called orthodox Protestants (as distinguished from liberal Protestants, who admit neither supernatural Revelation nor the authority of the Bible). The other differences are connected with these or follow from them, as also the differences between different Protestant sects--according as they are more or less faithful to the Protestant principle, they recede from or approach the Catholic position.

Between Catholics and the Christian sects of the East there are not the same fundamental differences, since both sides admit the Divine institution and Divine authority of the Church with the more or less living and explicit sense of its infallibility and indefectibility and its other teaching prerogatives, but there are contentions concerning the bearers of the authority, the organic unity of the teaching body, the infallibility of the pope, and the existence and nature of dogmatic development in the transmission of revealed truth. Nevertheless the theology of tradition does not consist altogether in controversy and discussions with adversaries. Many questions arise in this respect for every Catholic who wishes to give an exact account of his belief and the principles he professes: What is the precise relation between oral tradition and the revealed truths in the Bible and that between the living magisterium and the inspired Scriptures? May new truths enter the current of tradition, and what is the part of the magisterium with regard to revelations which God may yet make? How is this official magisterium organized, and how is it to recognize a Divine tradition or revealed truth? What is its proper rôle with regard to tradition? Where and how are revealed truths preserved and transmitted? What befalls the deposit of tradition in its transmission through the ages? These and similar questions are treated elsewhere in the CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA, but here we must separate and group all that has reference to tradition and to the living magisterium inasmuch as it is the organ of preservation and transmission of traditional and revealed truth.

The following are the points to be treated:

A full treatment of these questions would require a lengthy development; here only a brief outline can be given, the reader being referred to special works for a fuller explanation.

I. Divine Traditions not contained in Holy Scripture; institution of the living magisterium; its prerogatives.

Luther's attacks on the Church were at first directed only against doctrinal details, but the very authority of the Church was involved in the dispute, and this soon became evident to both sides. However the controversy continued for many years to turn on particular points of traditional teaching rather than on the teaching authority and the chief weapons were Biblical texts. The Council of Trent, even while implying in its decisions and anathemas the authority of the living magisterium (which the Protestants themselves dared not explicitly deny), while appealing to ecclesiastical tradition and the sense of the Church either for the determination of the canon or for the interpretation of some passages of Holy Scripture, even while making a rule of interpretation in Biblical matters, did not pronounce explicitly concerning the teaching authority, contenting itself with saying that revealed truth is found in the sacred books and in the unwritten traditions coming from God through the Apostles; these were the sources from which it would draw. The Council, as is evident, held that there are Divine traditions not contained in Holy Scripture, revelations made to the Apostles either orally by Jesus Christ or by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost and transmitted by the Apostles to the Church.

Holy Scripture is therefore not the only theological source of the Revelation made by God to His Church. Side by side with Scripture there is tradition, side by side with the written revelation there is the oral revelation. This granted, it is impossible to be satisfied with the Bible alone for the solution of all dogmatic questions. Such was the first field of controversy between Catholic theologians and the Reformers. The designation of unwritten Divine traditions was not always given all the clearness desirable especially in early times; however Catholic controversialists soon proved to the Protestants that to be logical and consistent they must admit unwritten traditions as revealed. Otherwise by what right did they rest on Sunday and not on Saturday? How could they regard infant baptism as valid, or baptism by infusion? How could they permit the taking of an oath, since Christ had commanded that we swear not at all? The Quakers were more logical in refusing all oaths, the Anabaptists in re-baptizing adults, the Sabbatarians in resting on Saturday. But none were so consistent as not to be open to criticism on some point. Where is it indicated in the Bible that the Bible is the sole source of faith? Going further, the Catholic controversialists showed their opponents that of this very Bible, to which alone they wished to refer, they could not have the authentic canon nor even a sufficient guarantee without an authority other than that of the Bible. Calvin parried the blow by having recourse to a certain taste to which the Divine word would manifest itself as such in the same way that honey is recognized by the palate. And this in fact was the only loophole, for Calvin recognized that no human authority was acceptable in this matter. But this was a very subjective criterion and one calling for caution. The Protestants dared not adhere to it. They came eventually, after rejecting the Divine tradition received from the Apostles by the infallible Church, to rest their faith in the Bible only as a human authority, which moreover was especially insufficient under the circumstances, since it opened up all manner of doubts and prepared the way for Biblical rationalism. There is not, in fact, any sufficient guarantee for the canon of the Scriptures, for the total inspiration or inerrancy of the Bible, save in a Divine testimony which, not being contained in the Holy Books with sufficient clearness and amplitude, nor being sufficiently recognizable to the scrutiny of a scholar who is only a scholar, does not reach us with the necessary warrant it would bear if brought by a Divinely assisted authority, as is, according to Catholics, the authority of the living magisterium of the Church. Such is the way in which Catholics demonstrate to Protestants that there should be and that there are in fact Divine traditions not contained in Holy Writ.

In a similar way they show that they cannot dispense with a teaching authority, a Divinely authorized living magistracy for the solution of controversies arising among themselves and of which the Bible itself was often the occasion. Indeed experience proved that each man found in the Bible his own ideas, as was said by one of the earliest reforming sectarians: "Hic liber est in quo quaerit sua dogmata quisque, invenit et pariter dogmata quisque sua." One man found the Real Presence, another a purely symbolic presence, another some sort of efficacious presence. The exercise of free inquiry with regard to Biblical texts led to endless disputes, to doctrinal anarchy, and eventually to the denial of all dogma. These disputes, anarchy, and denial could not be according to the Divine intention. Hence the necessity of a competent authority to solve controversies and interpret the Bible. To say that the Bible was perfectly clear and sufficient to all was obviously a retort born of desperation, a defiance of experience and common sense. Catholics refuted it without difficulty, and their position was amply justified when the Protestants began compromising themselves with the civil power, rejecting the doctrinal authority of the ecclesiastical magisterium only to fall under that of princes.

Moreover it was enough to look at the Bible, to read it without prejudice to see that the economy of the Christian preaching was above all one of oral teaching. Christ preached, He did not write. In His preaching He appealed to the Bible, but He was not satisfied with the mere reading of it, He explained and interpreted it, He made use of it in His teaching, but He did not substitute it for His teaching. There is the example of the mysterious traveller who explained to the disciples of Emmaus what had reference to Him in the Scriptures to convince them that Christ had to suffer and thus enter into His glory. And as He preached Himself so He sent His Apostles to preach; He did not commission them to write but to teach, and it was by oral teaching and preaching that they instructed the nations and brought them to the Faith. If some of them wrote and did so under Divine inspiration it is manifest that this was as it were incidentally. They did not write for the sake of writing, but to supplement their oral teaching when they could not go themselves to recall or explain it, to solve practical questions, etc. St. Paul, who of all the Apostles wrote the most, did not dream of writing everything nor of replacing his oral teaching by his writings. Finally, the same texts which show us Christ instituting His Church and the Apostles founding Churches and spreading Christ's doctrine throughout the world show us at the same time the Church instituted as a teaching authority; the Apostles claimed for themselves this authority, sending others as they had been sent by Christ and as Christ had been sent by God, always with power to teach and to impose doctrine as well as to govern the Church and to baptize. Whoever believed them would be saved; whoever refused to believe them would be condemned. It is the living Church and not Scripture that St. Paul indicates as the pillar and the unshakable ground of truth. And the inference of texts and facts is only what is exacted by the nature of things. A book although Divine and inspired is not intended to support itself. If it is obscure (and what unprejudiced person will deny that there are obscurities in the Bible?) it must be interpreted. And even if it is clear it does not carry with it the guarantee of its Divinity, its authenticity, or its value. Someone must bring it within reach and no matter what be done the believer cannot believe in the Bible nor find in it the object of his faith until he has previously made an act of faith in the intermediary authorities between the word of God and his reading. Now, authority for authority, is it not better to have recourse to that of the Church than to that of the first comer? Liberal Protestants, such as M. Auguste Sabatier, have been the first to recognize that, if there must be a religion of authority, the Catholic system with the splendid organization of its living magisterium is far superior to the Protestant system, which rests everything on the authority of a book.

The prerogatives of this teaching authority are made sufficiently clear by the texts and they are to a certain extent implied in the very institution. The Church, according to St. Paul's Epistle to Timothy, is the pillar and ground of truth; the Apostles and consequently their successors have the right to impose their doctrine; whosoever refuses to believe them shall be condemned, whosoever rejects anything is shipwrecked in the Faith. This authority is therefore infallible. And this infallibility is guaranteed implicitly but directly by the promise of the Saviour: "Behold I am with you all days even to the consummation of the world." Briefly the Church continues Christ in its mission to teach as in its mission to sanctify; its power is the same as that which He received from His Father and, as He came full of truth no less than of grace, the Church is likewise an institution of truth as it is an institution of grace. This doctrine was intended to be spread throughout the world despite so many obstacles of every kind, and the accomplishment of the task required miracles. So did Christ give to his Apostles the miraculous power which guaranteed their teaching. As He Himself confirmed His words by His works He wished that they also should present with their doctrine unexceptionable motives for credibility. Their miracles were the Divine seals of their mission and their Apostolate. The Divine seal has always been stamped on the teaching authority. It is not necessary that every missionary should work miracles, the Church herself is an ever-living miracle, bearing always on her brow the unexceptionable witness that God is with her.

II. The relation of Scripture to the living magisterium, and of the living magisterium to Scripture.

This relation is the same as that between the Gospel and the Apostolic preaching. Christ made use of the Bible, He appealed to it as to an irrefragable authority, He explained and interpreted it and furnished the key to it, with it he shed light on His own doctrine and mission. The Apostles did in like manner when they spoke to the Jews. Both sides had access to the Scriptures in a text admitted by all, both recognized in them a Divine authority, as in the very word of God. This was also the way of the faithful in their studies and discussions; but with pagans and unbelievers it was necessary to begin with presenting the Bible and guaranteeing its authority -- the Christian doctrine concerning the Bible had to be explained to the faithful themselves, and the guarantee of this doctrine demonstrated. The Bible had been committed to the care of the living magisterium. It was the Church's part to guard the Bible, to present it to the faithful in authorized editions or accurate translations, it was for her to make known the nature and value of the Divine Book by declaring what she knew regarding its inspiration and inerrancy, it was for her to supply the key by explaining why and how it had been inspired, how it contained Revelation, how the proper object of that Revelation was not purely human instruction but a religious and moral doctrine with a view to our supernatural destiny and the means to attain it, how, the Old Testament being a preparation and annunciation of the Messias and the new dispensation, there might be found beneath the husk of the letter typical meanings, figures, and prophecies. It was for the Church in consequence to determine the authentic canon, to specify the special rules and conditions for interpretation, to pronounce in case of doubt as to the exact sense of a given book or text, and even when necessary to safeguard the historical, prophetical, or apologetic value of a given text or passage, to pronounce in certain questions of authenticity, chronology, exegesis, or translation, either to reject an opinion compromising the authority of the book or the veracity of its doctrine or to maintain a given body of revealed truth contained in a given text. It was above all for the Church to circulate the Divine Book by minting its doctrine, adapting and explaining it, by offering it and drawing from it nourishment wherewith to nourish souls, briefly by supplementing the book, making use of it, and assisting others to make use of it. This is the debt of Scripture to the living magisterium.

On the other hand the living magisterium owes much to Scripture. There it finds the word of God, new-blown so to speak, as it was expressed under Divine agency by the inspired author; while oral tradition, although faithfully transmitting revealed truth with the Divine assistance, nevertheless transmits it only in human formulas. Scripture gives us beyond doubt to a certain extent a human expression of the truth which it presents, since this truth is developed in and by a human brain acting in a human manner, but also to a certain extent Divine, since this human development takes place wholly under the action of God. So also with due proportion it may be said of the inspired word what Christ said of His: It is spirit and life. In a sense differing from the Protestant sense which sometimes goes so far as to deify the Bible, but, in a true sense, we admit that God speaks to us in the Bible more directly than in oral teaching. The latter, moreover, ever faithful to the recommendations which St. Paul made to his disciple Timothy, does not fail to have recourse to Biblical sources for its instruction and to draw thence the heavenly doctrine, to take thence with the doctrine a sure, ever-young, and ever-living expression of this doctrine, one more adequate than any other despite the inevitable inadaptability of human formulas to divine realities In the hands of masters Scripture may become a sharp defensive and offensive weapon against error and heresy. When a controversy arises recourse is had first to the Bible. Frequently when decisive texts are found masters wield them skilfully and in such a way as to demonstrate their irresistible force. If none are found of the necessary clearness the assistance of Scripture is not thereby abandoned. Guided by the clear sense of the living and luminous truth, which it bears within itself, by its likeness to faith defended at need against error by the Divine assistance, the living magisterium strives, explains, argues, and occasionally subtilizes in order to bring forward texts which, if they lack an independent and absolute value, have an ad hominem force, or value, through the authority of the authentic interpreter, whose very thought, if it is not, or is not clearly, in Scripture, nevertheless stands forth with a distinctness or new clearness in this manipulation of Scripture, by this contact with it.

Manifestly there is no question here of a meaning which is not in Scripture and which the magisterium reads into it by imposing it as the Biblical meaning. This individual writers may do and have sometimes done, for they are not infallible as individuals, but not the authentic magisterium. There is question only of the advantage which the living magisterium draws from Scripture whether to attain a clearer consciousness of its own thought, to formulate it in hieratic terms, or to triumphantly reject an opinion favourable to error or heresy. As regards Biblical interpretation properly so called the Church is infallible in the sense that, whether by authentic decision of pope or council, or by its current teaching that a given passage of Scripture has a certain meaning, this meaning must be regarded as the true sense of the passage in question. It claims this power of infallible interpretation only in matters of faith and morals, that is where religious or moral truth is in danger, directly, if the text or passage belongs to the moral and religious order; indirectly, if in assigning a meaning to a text or book the veracity of the Bible, its moral value, or the dogma of its inspiration or inerrancy is imperilled. Without going further into the manifold services which the Bible renders to the living magisterium mention must nevertheless be made as particularly important of its services in the apologetic order. In fact Scripture by its historic value, which is indisputable and undisputed on many points, furnishes the apologist with irrefragable arguments in support of supernatural religion. It contains for example miracles whose reality is impressed on the historian with the same certainty as the most acknowledged facts. This is true and perhaps more strikingly so of the argument from the prophecies, for the Scriptures, the Old as well as the New Testament, contain manifest prophecies, the fulfilment of which we behold either in Christ and His Apostles or in the later development of the Christian religion.

In view of all this it will be readily understood that since the time of St. Paul the Church has urgently recommended to her ministers the study of Holy Scripture, that she has watched with a jealous authority over its integral transmission, its exact translation, and its faithful interpretation If occasionally she has seemed to restrict its use or its diffusion this too was through an easily comprehensible love and a particular esteem for the Bible, that the sacred Book might not like a profane book be made a ground for curiosity, endless discussions, and abuses of every kind. In short, since the Church at last proves to be the best safeguard for human reason against the excesses of an unbridled reason, so by the very avowal of sincere Protestants does she show herself at the present day the best defender of the Bible against an unrestrained Biblicism or an unchecked criticism.

III. The proper mode of existence of revealed truth in the mind of the Church and the way to recognize this truth.

There is a formula current in Christian teaching (and the formula is borrowed from St. Paul himself) that traditional truth was confided to the Church as a deposit which it would guard and faithfully transmit as it had received it without adding to it or taking anything away. This formula expresses very well one of the aspects of tradition and one of the principal rôles of the living magisterium. But this idea of a deposit should not make us lose sight of the true manner in which traditional truth lives and is transmitted in the Church. This deposit in fact is not an inanimate thing passed from hand to hand; it is not, properly speaking, an assemblage of doctrines and institutions consigned to books or other monuments. Books and monuments of every kind are a means, an organ of transmission, they are not, properly speaking, the tradition itself. To better understand the latter it must be represented as a current of life and truth coming from God through Christ and through the Apostles to the last of the faithful who repeats his creed and learns his catechism. This conception of tradition is not always clear to all at the first glance. It must be reached, however, if we wish to form a clear and exact idea. We can endeavour to explain it to ourselves in the following manner: We are all conscious of an assemblage of ideas or opinions living in our mind and forming part of the very life of our mind, sometimes they find their clear expression, again we find ourselves without the exact formula wherewith to express them to ourselves or to others an idea is in search as it were of its expression, sometimes it even acts in us and leads us to actions without our having as yet the reflective consciousness of it. Something similar may be said of the ideas or opinions which live, as it were, and stir the social sentiment of a people, a family, or any other well-characterized group to form what is called the spirit of the day, the spirit of a family, or the spirit of a people.

This common sentiment is in a sense nothing else than the sum of individual sentiments, and yet we feel clearly that it is quite another thing than the individual taken individually. It is a fact of experience that there is a common sentiment, as if there were such a thing as a common spirit, and as if this common spirit were the abode of certain ideas and opinions which are doubtless the ideas and opinions of each man, but which take on a peculiar aspect in each man inasmuch as they are the ideas and opinions of all. The existence of tradition in the Church must be regarded as living in the spirit and the heart, thence translating itself into acts, and expressing itself in words or writings; but here we must not have in mind individual sentiment, but the common sentiment of the Church, the sense or sentiment of the faithful, that is, of all who live by its life and are in communion of thought among themselves and with her. The living idea is the idea of all, it is the idea of individuals, not merely inasmuch as they are individuals, but inasmuch as they form part of the same social body. This sentiment of the Church is peculiar in this, that it is itself under the influence of grace. Hence it follows that it is not subject, like that of other human groups to error and thoughtless or culpable tendencies. The Spirit of God always living in His Church upholds the sense of revealed truth ever living therein.

Documents of all kinds (writings, monuments, etc.) are in the hands of masters, as of the faithful, a means of finding or recognizing the revealed truth confided to the Church under the direction of her pastors. There is between written documents and the living magisterium of the Church a relation similar, proportionately speaking, to that already outlined between Scripture and the living magisterium. In them is found the traditional thought expressed according to varieties of environments and circumstances, no longer in an inspired language, as is the case with Scripture, but in a purely human language, consequently subject to the imperfections and shortcomings of human thought. Nevertheless the more the documents are the exact expression of the living thought of the Church the more they thereby possess the value and authority which belong to that thought because they are so much the better expression of tradition. Often formulas of the past have themselves entered the traditional current and become the official formulas of the Church. Hence it will be understood that the living magisterium searches in the past, now for authorities in favour of its present thought in order to defend it against attacks or dangers of mutilation, now for light to walk the right road without straying. The thought of the Church is essentially a traditional thought and the living magisterium by taking cognizance of ancient formulas of this thought thereby recruits its strength and prepares to give to immutable truth a new expression which shall be in harmony with the circumstances of the day and within reach of contemporary minds. Revealed truth has sometimes found definitive formulas from the earliest times; then the living magisterium has only had to preserve and explain them and put them in circulation. Sometimes attempts have been made to express this truth, without success. It even happens that, in attempting to express revealed truth in the terms of some philosophy or to fuse it with some current of human thought, it has been distorted so as to be scarcely recognizable, so closely mingled with error that it becomes difficult to separate them. When the Church studies the ancient monuments of her faith she casts over the past the reflection of her living and present thought and by some sympathy of the truth of to-day with that of yesterday she succeeds in recognizing through the obscurities and inaccuracies of ancient formulas the portions of traditional truth, even when they are mixed with error. The Church is also (as regards religious and moral doctrines) the best interpreter of truly traditional documents; she recognizes as by instinct what belongs to the current of her living thought and distinguishes it from the foreign elements which may have become mixed with it in the course of centuries.

The living magisterium, therefore, makes extensive use of documents of the past, but it does so while judging and interpreting, gladly finding in them its present thought, but likewise, when needful, distinguishing its present thought from what is traditional only in appearance. It is revealed truth always living in the mind of the Church, or, if it is preferred, the present thought of the Church in continuity with her traditional thought, which is for it the final criterion, according to which the living magisterium adopts as true or rejects as false the often obscure and confused formulas which occur in the monuments of the past. Thus are explained both her respect for the writings of the Fathers of the Church and her supreme independence towards those writings--she judges them more than she is judged by them. Harnack has said that the Church is accustomed to conceal her evolution and to efface as well as she can the differences between her present and her former thought by condemning as heretical the most faithful witnesses of what was formerly orthodoxy. Not understanding what tradition is, the ever-living thought of the Church, he believes that she abjured her past when she merely distinguished between what was traditional truth in the past and what was only human alloy mixed with that truth, the personal opinion of an author substituting itself for the general thought of the Christian community. With regard to official documents, the expression of the infallible magisterium of the Church embodied in the decision of councils, or the solemn judgments of the popes, the Church never gainsays what she has once decided. She is then linked with her past because in this past her entire self is concerned and not any fallible organ of her thought. Hence she still finds her doctrine and rule of faith in these venerable monuments; the formulas may have grown old, but the truth which they express is always her present thought.

IV. The organization and exercise of the living magisterium; its precise rôle in the defence and transmission of revealed truth--its limits and modes of action.

Closer study of the living magisterium will enable us to better understand the splendid organism created by God and gradually developed that it might preserve, transmit, and bring within the reach of all revealed truth, ever the same, but adapted to every variety of time, circumstances, and environment. Properly speaking, this magisterium is a teaching authority; it not only presents the truth, but it has the right to impose it, since its power is the very power given by God to Christ and by Christ to His Church. This authority is called the teaching Church. The teaching Church is essentially composed of the episcopal body, which continues here below the work and mission of the Apostolic College. It was indeed in the form of a college or social body that Christ grouped His Apostles and it is likewise as a social body that the episcopate exercises its mission to teach. Doctrinal infallibility has been guaranteed to the episcopal body and to the head of that body as it was guaranteed to the Apostles, with this difference, however, between the Apostles and the bishops that each Apostle was personally infallible (in virtue of his extraordinary mission as founder and the plenitude of the Holy Ghost received on Pentecost by the Twelve and later communicated to St. Paul as to the Twelve), whereas only the body of bishops is infallible and each bishop is not so, save in proportion as he teaches in communion and concert with the entire episcopal body.

At the head of this episcopal body is the supreme authority of the Roman pontiff, the successor of St. Peter in his primacy as he is his successor in his see. As supreme authority in the teaching body, which is infallible, he himself is infallible. The episcopal body is infallible also, but only in union with its head, from whom moreover it may not separate, since to do so would be to separate from the foundation on which the Church is built. The authority of the pope may be exercised without the co-operation of the bishops, and this even in infallible decisions which both bishops and faithful are bound to receive with the same submission. The authority of the bishops may be exercised in two ways; now each bishop teaches the flock confided to him, again the bishops assemble in council to draw up together and pass doctrinal or disciplinary decrees. When all the bishops of the Catholic world (this totality is to be understood as morally speaking; it suffices for the whole Church to be represented) are thus assembled in council the council is called oecumenical. The doctrinal decrees of an oecumenical council, once they are approved by the pope, are infallible as are the ex cathedra definitions of the sovereign pontiff. Although the bishops, taken individually, are not infallible their teaching participates in the infallibility of the Church according as they teach in concert and in union with the episcopal body, that is according as they express not their personal ideas, but the very thought of the Church.

Beside the sovereign pontiff are the Roman Congregations, many of which are especially concerned with doctrinal questions. Some of them, such as the Congregation of the Index, are not so concerned save from a disciplinary standpoint, by prohibiting the reading of certain books, regarded as dangerous to faith or morals, if not by the very doctrine which they contain, at least by their way of expressing it or by their unseasonableness. Other congregations, that of the Inquisition, for example, have a more directly doctrinal authority. This authority is never infallible; it is nevertheless binding and exacts a religious submission, interior as well as exterior. Nevertheless this interior submission does not necessarily bear on the absolute truth or falsity of the doctrine concerned in the decree, it may only bear on the safety or danger of a certain teaching or opinion, the decree itself usually having in view only the moral qualification of the doctrine. To assist them in their doctrinal task the bishops have all those who teach by their authority or under their surveillance; pastors and curates, professors in ecclesiastical establishments, in a word, all who teach or explain Christian doctrine.

Theological teaching in all its forms (in seminaries, universities, etc.) gives valuable assistance as a whole to the teaching authority and to all who teach under that authority. In the study of theology the masters themselves have acquired the knowledge which usually assists them to discern truth or falsehood in doctrinal matters, they have drawn thence what they themselves are to provide. Theologians as such do not form a part of the teaching Church, but as professional expounders of revealed truth they study it scientifically, they collect and systematize it, they illumine it with all the lights of philosophy, history, etc. They are, as it were, the natural consultors of the teaching authority, to furnish it with the necessary information and data; they thereby prepare and sometimes in an even more direct manner by their reports, their written consultations, their projects or schemata, and their preparatory redactions the official documents which the teaching authority completely develops and publishes authoritatively. On the other hand, their scientific works are useful for the instruction of those who should spread and popularize the doctrine, put it in circulation, and adapt it to all by speech or writings of every kind. It is evident what marvellous unity is attained on this point alone in ecclesiastical teaching and how the same truth, descended from above, distributed through a thousand different channels, finally comes pure and undefiled to the most lowly and the most ignorant.

This multifarious work, of scientific exposition as well as of popularization and propaganda, is likewise assisted by the countless written forms of religious teaching, among which catechisms have a special character of doctrinal security, approved as they are by the teaching authority and claiming only to set forth with clearness and precision the teaching common in the Church. Thus the child who learns his catechism may, provided he is informed of it, take cognizance that the doctrine presented to him is not the personal opinion of the volunteer catechist or of the priest who communicates it to him. The catechism is the same in all the parishes of a diocese, apart from a few differences of detail which have no bearing on doctrine all the catechisms of a country are alike; the differences between those of one country and another are scarcely perceptible. It is truly the mind of the Church received from God or Christ and transmitted by the Apostles to the Christian society which thus reaches even little children by the voice of the catechist, or the savage by that of the missionary. This diffusion of the same truth throughout the world and this unity of the same faith among the most diverse peoples is a marvel which by itself forces the recognition that God is with His Church. St. Irenaeus in his time was in admiration of it and he expressed his admiration in language of such brilliancy and poetry as is seldom to be met with in the venerable Bishop of Lyons. The outer and visible cause of its diffusion and unity is the splendid organization of the living magisterium. This magisterium was not instituted to receive new truths, but to guard, transmit, propagate, and preserve revealed truth from every admixture of error, and to cause it to prevail. Moreover the magisterium should not be considered as external to the community of the faithful. Those who teach cannot and should not teach save what they have learned themselves, those who have the office of teachers have been chosen from among the faithful and they first of all are obliged to believe what they propose to the faith of others. Moreover they usually propose to the belief of the faithful only the truths of which the latter have already made more or less explicit profession. Sometimes it is even by sounding as it were the common sentiment of the Church, still more by scrutinizing the monuments of the past, that masters and theologians discover that such and such a doctrine, perhaps in dispute, belongs nevertheless to the traditional deposit. More than one among the faithful may be unconscious of personal belief in it, but if he is in union of thought with the Church he believes implicitly that which perhaps he declines to recognize explicitly as an object of his faith. It was thus with regard to the dogma of the Immaculate Conception before it was inserted in the explicit faith of the Church.

Hence there is between the teaching Church and the faithful an intimate union of thought and heart. The teaching authority loses nothing of its rights; these are limited only from above by the very conditions of the command which they have received. But the exercise of this authority is by so much more certain and easy as the faithful, generally, so to speak, confirm by their adhesion the decisions of this authority: a dogmatic definition scarcely does more than sanction the faith already existing in the Christian community. The better to understand, adapt, and preserve revealed truth against attacks or errors the masters in the Church and the professors of theology naturally appeal to all the resources offered by human science. Among these sciences philosophy, history, languages, philology in all its forms necessarily have an important place in the arsenal of the teaching magisterium. With regard to theological systematization in particular, philosophy necessarily intervenes to assist theology better to comprehend revealed truth, the better to synthesize traditional data, and the better to explain the dogmatic idea. In the Middle Ages a fruitful alliance was formed between Scholastic philosophy and theology. It may happen that philosophy and the other human sciences are at variance with theology, the science of revealed truth. The conflict is never insoluble, for the true can never be opposed to the true, nor the human truth of philosophy and human knowledge to the supernatural truth of theology. But the fact remains that scientific hypothesis, science which seeks itself, and philosophy which develops itself sometimes seem in opposition to revealed truth. In this case the teaching Church has the right, in order to preserve traditional truth, to condemn the assertions, opinions, and hypotheses which, although not direct denials, nevertheless endanger it or rather expose some souls to the loss of it. Authority has need to be prudent in these condemnations and it is well known that the cases are very rare when it may be asserted with any appearance of justification that it has not been sufficiently so, but its right to interfere is indisputable for anyone who admits the Divine institution of the magisterium.

There are then between purely profane facts and opinions and revealed truths mixed facts and opinions which by their nature belong to the human order, but which are in intimate contact and close connexion with supernatural truth. These facts are called dogmatic facts and these opinions theological opinions. In very virtue of its mission the teaching authority has jurisdiction over these facts and opinions; it is even a positive truth, if not a revealed truth, that dogmatic facts and theological opinions may also like dogmatic truths themselves be the object of an infallible decision. The Church is no less infallible in maintaining that the five famous propositions are in Jansenism than in condemning these propositions as heretical. A distinction must be made between dogmatic traditions or revealed truths, pious traditions, liturgical customs, and the accounts of supernatural manifestations or revelations which circulate in the world of Christian piety. When the Church intervenes in order to pronounce in these matters it is never to canonize them, if we may so speak, nor to give them an authority of faith; in such cases it claims only to preserve them against temerarious attacks, to pronounce that they contain nothing contrary to faith or morals, and to recognize in them a human value sufficient for piety to nourish itself therewith freely and without danger.

V. The identity of revealed truth in the varieties of formulas, systematization, and dogmatic development, the identity of faith in the Church and through the variations of theology.

The saying of Sully Prud'homme is well known, "How is it that this which is so complicated (the 'Summa' of St. Thomas) has proceeded from what was so simple (the Gospel)?" In fact when we read a theological treatise or the profession of faith and anti-Modernist oath imposed by Pius X they seem at first glance very different from the Holy Scripture or the Apostles' Creed. On closer study we become aware that the differences are not irreconcilable; despite appearances the "Summa" and the anti-Modernist oath are naturally linked with the Scripture and the faith of the first Christians. To grasp thoroughly the identity of revealed truth such as was believed in the early centuries with the dogmas which we now profess, it is necessary to study thoroughly the process of dogmatic expression in the complete history of dogma and theology. It is sufficient here to indicate its general outlines and characteristics. That which was shown in Scripture or the Evangelic Revelation as a living reality (the Divine Person of Jesus Christ) has been formulated in abstract terms (one person, two natures) or in concrete formulas (my Father and I are one); men passed constantly from the implicit seen or received to the explicit reasoned and reflected upon; they analyzed the complex data, compared the separate elements, built up a system of the scattered truths; they cleared up by analogies of faith and the light of reason points which were still obscure and fused them into a whole, in whose parts the data of Divine Revelation and those of human knowledge were sometimes difficult to distinguish. Briefly all this led to a work of transposition, analysis, and synthesis, of deduction and induction, of the elaboration of the revealed matter by theology. In the course of this work the formulas have changed, the Divine realities have become tinged with the colours of human thought, revealed truths have been mingled with those of science and philosophy, but the heavenly doctrine has remained the same throughout the varieties of formulas, systematization, and dogmatic expression. It is seen at different angles and to a certain extent with other eyes, but it is the same truth which was presented to the first Christians and which is presented to us to-day.

To this identity of revealed truth corresponds the identity of faith. What the first Christians believed we still believe; what we believe to-day they believed more or less explicitly, in a more or less conscious way. Since the deposit of Revelation has remained the same, the same also, in substance, has remained the taking possession of the deposit by the living faith. Each of the faithful has not at all times nor has he always explicit consciousness of all that he believes, but his implicit belief always contains what he one day makes explicit in the profession of faith. Certain truths, which may be called fundamental, have always been explicitly professed in the Church either by word or action; others which may be called secondary may have long remained implicit, enveloped, as regards their precise detail, in a more general truth where faith did not discern them at the first glance. In the first case at a given time uncertainties may have existed, controversies have arisen, heresies cropped up. But the mind of the Church, the Catholic sense, has not hesitated as to what was essential, there has never been in the Christian world that darkening of the truth with which heretics have reproached it; these might have seen and they who had eyes to see did see. On these points disputes have never arisen among the faithful; there have sometimes been very sharp disputes, but they had to do with misunderstandings or bore only on details of expression.

As regards truths such as the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, there have been uncertainties and controversies over the very substance of the subjects involved. The revealed truth was indeed in the deposit of truth in the Church, but it was not formulated in explicit terms nor even in clearly equivalent terms; it was enveloped in a more general truth (that e. g. of the all-holiness of Mary), the formula of which might be understood in a more or less absolute sense (exemption from all actual sin, exemption even from original sin). On the other hand, this truth (the exemption of Mary from original sin) may seem in at least apparent conflict with other certain truths (universality of original sin, redemption of all by Christ). It will be readily understood that in some circumstances, when the question is put explicitly for the first time, the faithful have hesitated. It is even natural that the theologians should show more hesitation than the other faithful. More aware of the apparent opposition between the new opinion and the ancient truth, they may legitimately resist, while awaiting fuller light, what may seem to them unreflecting haste or unenlightened piety. Thus did St. Anselm, St. Thomas, and St. Bonaventure in the case of the Immaculate Conception. But the living idea of Mary in the mind of the Church implied absolute exemption from all sin without exception, even from original sin; the faithful whom theological preoccupations did not prevent from beholding this idea in its purity, with that intuition of the heart often more prompt and more enlightened than reasoning and reflected thought, shrank from all restriction and could not suffer, according to the expression of St. Augustine, that there should be question of any sin whatsoever in connexion with Mary. Little by little the feeling of the faithful won the day. Not, as has been said, because the theologians, powerless to struggle against a blind sentiment, had themselves to follow the movement, but because their perceptions, quickened by the faithful and by their own instinct of faith, grew more considerate of the sentiment of the faithful and eventually examined the new opinion more closely in order to make sure that, far from contradicting any dogma, it harmonized wonderfully with other revealed truths and corresponded as a whole to the analogy of faith and rational fitness. Finally scrutinizing with fresh care the deposit of revelation, they there discovered the pious opinion, hitherto concealed, as far as they were concerned in the more general formula, and, not satisfied to hold it as true, they declared it revealed. Thus to implicit faith in a revealed truth succeeded, after long discussions, explicit faith in the same truth thenceforth shining in the sight of all. There have been no new data, but there has been under the impulse of grace and sentiment and the effort of theology a more distinct and clear insight into what the ancient data contained. When the Church defined the Immaculate Conception it defined what was actually in the explicit faith of the faithful what had always been implicitly in that faith. The same is true of all similar cases, save for accidental differences of circumstances. In recognizing a new truth the Church thereby recognizes that it already possessed that truth.

There is, therefore in the Church progress of dogma, progress of theology, progress to a certain extent of faith itself, but this progress does not consist in the addition of fresh information nor the change of ideas. What is believed has always been believed, but in time it is more commonly and thoroughly understood and explicitly expressed. Thus, thanks to the living magisterium and ecclesiastical preaching, thanks to the living sense of truth in the Church, to the action of the Holy Ghost simultaneously directing master and faithful, traditional truth lives and develops in the Church, always the same, at once ancient and new--ancient, for the first Christians already beheld it to a certain extent, new, because we see it with our own eyes and in harmony with our present ideas. Such is the notion of tradition in the double meaning of the word; it is Divine truth coming down to us in the mind of the Church and it is the guardianship and transmission of this Divine truth by the organ of the living magisterium, by ecclesiastical preaching, by the profession of it made by all in the Christian life.

JEAN BAINVEL

Traditionalism

A philosophical system which makes tradition the supreme criterion and rule of certitude.

Exposition

According to traditionalism, human reason is of itself radically unable to know with certainty any truth or, at least, the fundamental truths of the metaphysical, moral, and religious order. Hence our first act of knowledge must be an act of faith, based on the authority of revelation. This revelation is transmitted to us through society, and its truth is guaranteed by tradition or the general consent of mankind. Such is the philosophical system maintained chiefly, in its absolute form, by the Vicomte de Bonald and F. de Lamennais in their respective works and, with some mitigation, by Bautain, Bonetty, Ventura, Ubaghs, and the school of Louvain.

According to de Bonald, man is essentially a social being. His development comes through society; and the continuity and progress of society have their principle in tradition. Now language is the instrument of sociability, and speech is as natural to man as is his social nature itself. Language could not have been discovered by man, for "man needs signs or words in order to think as well as in order to speak"; that is "man thinks his verbal expression before he verbally expresses his thought"; but originally language, in its fundamental elements together with the thoughts which it expresses, was given him by God His Creator (cf. Législation primitive, I, ii). These fundamental truths, absolutely necessary to the intellectual, moral, and religious life of man, must be first accepted by faith. They are communicated through society and education, and warranted by tradition or universal reason of mankind. There is no other basis for certitude and there remains nothing, besides tradition, but human opinions, contradiction, and uncertainty (cf. Recherches philosophiques, i, ix).

The system presented by Lamennais is almost identical with that of de Bonald. Our instruments of knowledge, namely sense, feeling, and reason, he says, are fallible. The rule of certitude therefore can only be external to man and it can consist only in the control of the individual senses, feelings, and reasoning by the testimony of the senses, feelings, and reason of all other men; their universal agreement is the rule of certitude. Hence, to avoid scepticism, we must begin with an act of faith preceding all reflection, since reflection pre-supposes the knowledge of some truth. This act of faith must have its criterion and rule in the common consent or agreement of all, in the general reason (la raison générale). "Such is", Lamennais concludes, "the law of human nature", outside of which "there is no certitude, no language no society, no life" (cf. Défense de l'Essai sur l'Indifférence, xi).

The Mitigated Traditionalists make a distinction between the order of acquisition (ordo acquisitionis) and the order of demonstration (ordo demonstrationis). The knowledge of metaphysical truths, they say, is absolutely necessary to man in order to act reasonably. It must then be acquired by the child through teaching or tradition before he can use his reason. And this tradition can have its source only in a primitive revelation. Hence, in the order of acquisition, faith precedes science. With these truths, however, received by faith, human reason is able, through reflection, to demonstrate the reasonableness of this act of faith, and thus, in the order of demonstration, science precedes faith. When replaced in its historical surroundings, Traditionalism clearly appears as a reaction and a protest against the rationalism of the philosophers of the eighteenth century and the anarchic individualism of the French Revolution. Against these errors it pointed out and emphasized the weakness and insufficiency of human reason, the influence of society, education, and tradition on the development of human life and institutions. The reaction was extreme, and landed in the opposite error.

Criticism

Since Traditionalism, in its fundamental principles, is a kind of Fideism, it falls under the condemnation pronounced by the Church and under the refutation furnished by reason and philosophy against Fideism. We may, however, advance certain criticisms touching the characteristic elements of Traditionalism. It is evident, first of all, that authority, whatever be the way or agency in which it is presented to us, cannot of itself be the supreme criterion or rule of certitude. For, in order to be a rule of certitude, it must first be known as valid, competent, and legitimate, and reason must have ascertained this before it is entitled to our assent (cf. St. Thomas, I-II:2:1). Without entering upon the psychological problem of the relations between thought and expression, and even admitting with de Bonald that the primitive elements of thought and language were originally given directly by God to man, we are not forced to conclude logically with him that our first act is an act of faith. Our first act should rather be an act of reason, acknowledging, by natural reflection, the credibility of the truths revealed by God. Lamennais's criterion of universal reason or consent is open to the same objections. First, how could universal consent or general reason, which is nothing more than the collection of individual judgments or of individual reasons, give certitude, when each of these individual judgments is only matter of opinion or each of these individual reasons is declared to be fallible? Again, how could we in practice apply such a criterion, that is, how could we ascertain the universality of such a judgment in the whole human race, even if only moral universality were required? Moreover, what would be, in this system, the criterion of truth, concerning matters in which the human mind is not generally interested, or in the scientific problems of which it is generally incompetent? But above all, in order to give a firm and unhesitating assent to the teaching of universal consent, we must first have ascertained the reasonableness and legitimacy of its claims to our assent; that is, reason must ultimately precede faith, otherwise our assent would not be reasonable.

Mitigated or Semi-Traditionalism, in spite of its apparent differences, is substantially identical with pure Traditionalism, and falls under the same criticism, since religious and moral truths are declared to be given to man directly by Revelation and accepted by him antecedently to any act of his reason. Moreover, there is no real foundation for the essential distinction between the orders of invention and demonstration, which is supposed to distinguish Semi-Traditionalism from pure Traditionalism. The difference between these two orders is only accidental. It consists in the fact that it is easier to demonstrate a truth already known than to discover it for the first time; but the faculties and process used in both operations are essentially the same, since to demonstrate a truth already known is simply to reproduce, under the guidance of this knowledge, the operation performed and to take again the path followed in its first discovery (cf. St. Thomas, "De Veritate", Q. xi, a. 1). Semi-Traditionalism and absolute Traditionalism, then, rest upon the same fundamental error, namely, that ultimately faith precedes reason. Let us point out, however, the partial truth contained in Traditionalism. Against Individualism and Rationalism, it rightly insisted upon the social character of man, and rightly maintained that authority and education play a large part in the intellectual, moral, and religious development of man. Rightly also it recalled to the human mind the necessity of respect for tradition, for the experience and teaching it contains, to secure a true and solid progress Universal consent may indeed be, in certain conditions; a criterion of truth. In many circumstances, it may furnish suggestion for the discovery of truth or afford confirmation of the truth already discovered, but it can never be the supreme criterion and rule of truth. Unless we admit that our reason is of itself capable of knowing with certainty some fundamental truths, we logically end in scepticism-the ruin of both human knowledge and faith. The true doctrine, as taught by the Catholic Church and confirmed by psychology and history, is that man is physically and practically able to know with certainty some fundamental truths of the natural, moral, and religious order, but that, although he has the physical power, he remains in the conditions of the present life, morally and practically incapable of knowing sufficiently all the truths of the moral and religious order, without the help of Divine Revelation (cf. Vatican Council, Sess. III, cap. ii).

GEORGE M. SAUVAGE

Traducianism

Traducianism (tradux, a shoot or sprout, and more specifically a vine branch made to take root so as to propagate the vine), in general the doctrine that, in the process of generation, the human spiritual soul is transmitted to the offspring by the parents. When a distinction is made between the terms Traducianism and Generationism, the former denotes the materialistic doctrine of the transmission of the soul by the organic process of generation, while the latter applies to the doctrine according to which the soul of the offspring originates from the parental soul in some mysterious way analogous to that in which the organism originates from the parent's organism. Traducianism is opposed to Creationism or the doctrine that every soul is created by God. Both, however, against Emanationism and Evolutionism (q.v.) admit that the first human soul originated by creation. They differ only as to the mode of origin of subsequent souls.

In the early centuries of the Christian Church, the Fathers who touch upon this question defend the immediate creation of the soul. Tertullian, Apollinaris, and a few other heretics advocate Traducianism, but the testimony of Saint Jerome (Epist. cxxvi, 1) that "the majority of Oriental writers think that, as the body is born of the body, so the soul is born of the soul" seems exaggerated, as no other writer of prominence is found to advocate Generationism as certain. Saint Gregory of Nyssa, Macarius, Rufinus, Nemesius, although their views on this point are not always clear, seem to prefer Generationism. After the rise of Pelagianism, some Fathers hesitate between Generationism and Creationism, thinking that the former offers a better, if not the only, explanation of the transmission of original sin. Among them Saint Augustine is the most important. Creationism is held as certain by the Scholastics, with the exception of Hugh of Saint Victor and Alexander of Hales, who propose it merely as more probable. In recent times Generationism has been rejected by all Catholic theologians. Exceptions are Froschammer who defends Generationism and gives to the generation of the soul from the parents the name of secondary creation; Klee and Ubaghs who leave the question undecided; Hermes who favours Generationism; Gravina who advocates it- and Rosmini who asserts that the sensitive soul is generated by the parents, and becomes spiritual when God illuminates it and manifests to it the idea of being which is the foundation of the whole intellectual life.

From the philosophical point of view, the reasons alleged in favour of Generationism have little or no value. The parents are really generators of their offspring even if the soul comes from God, for the generative process is the condition of the union of body and soul which constitutes the human being. A murderer really kills a man, although he does not destroy his soul. Nor is man inferior to animals because they generate complete living organisms, since the difference between man and animals comes from the superiority of the human soul and from its spiritual nature which requires that it should be created by God. On the other hand the reasons against Generationism are cogent. The organic process of generation cannot give rise to a spiritual substance, and to. say that the soul is transmitted in the corporeal semen is to make it intrinsically dependent on matter. The process of spiritual generation is impossible. since the soul is immaterial and indivisible, no spiritual germ can be detached from the Parental soul (cf. St. Thomas, "Contra gent." II, c 86; "Sum. theol." I:90:2, I:98:2, etc.). As to the power of creation, it is the prerogative of God alone (see CREATION, VI).

Theologically, corporeal Traducianism is heretical because it goes directly against the spirituality of the soul. As to Generationism, it is certainly opposed to the general attitude of the Church. Froschammer's book, "Ueber den Ursprung der menschlichen Seelen", was condemned in 1857, and Ubaghs's opinion expressed in his "Anthropologiae philosophicae elementa" was reproved in a letter of Cardinal Patrizi written by authority of Pius IX to the Archbishop of Mechlin (2 March, 1866). Moreover, Anastasius II in a letter to the bishops of Gaul (498) condemns Generationism (Thiel, "Epistolae Romanorum Pontificum", 634 sqq.). In the Symbol to be subscribed to by Bishop Peter of Antioch (1053), Leo IX declares the soul to be "not a part of God, but created from nothing" (Denzinger, 348). Among the errors which the Armenians must reject, Benedict XII mentions the doctrine that the soul originates from the soul of the father (Denzinger, 533). Hence, although there are no strict definitions condemning Generationism as heretical, it is certainly opposed to the doctrine of the Church, and could not be held without temerity.

C. A. DUBRAY

Trajan

Emperor of Rome (A.D. 98-117), b. at Italica Spain, 18 September, 53; d. 7 August, 117.

He was descended from an old Roman family, and was adopted in 97 by the Emperor Nerva. Trajan was one of the ablest of the Roman emperors; he was stately and majestic in appearance, had a powerful will, and showed admirable consideration and a chivalrous kindliness. He gained a large amount of territory for the empire and laid the foundations of civilization all over the provinces by the founding of municipal communities. He established order on the borders of the Rhine, built the larger part of the boundary wall (limes) between Roman and Germanic territory from the Danube to the Rhine, and with great determination led two campaigns (101-2 and 105-7) against the Dacian king, Decebalus, whose country he converted into a new province of the empire. Two other provinces were conquered, although neither proved of importance subsequently. The Governor of Syria conquered Arabia Petraea and Trajan himself entered Armenia during the Parthian War (114-7).

In his internal administration Trajan was incessantly occupied in encouraging commerce and industries. The harbour of Ancona was enlarged and new harbours and roads were constructed. Numerous stately ruins in and around Rome give proof of this emperor's zeal in erecting buildings for public purposes. The chief of these is the immense Forum Trajanum, which in size and splendour casts the forums of the other emperors into the shade. In the middle of the great open space was the colossal equestrian statute of Trajan; the free area itself was surrounded by rows of columns and niches surmounted by high arches. At the end of the structure was the Bibliotheca Ulpia, in the court of which stood the celebrated Trajan's Column with its reliefs representing scenes in the Dacian wars. Later Hadrian built a temple to the deified Trajan at the end of the Forum towards the Campus Martius.

Art and learning flourished during Trajan's reign. Among his literary contemporaries were Tacitus, Juvenal, and the younger Pliny with whom the emperor carried on an animated correspondence. This correspondence belonging to the years 111-3 throws light on the persecution of Christians during this reign. Pliny was legate of the double Province of Bithynia and Pontus. In this territory he found many Christians and requested instructions from Trajan (Ep. 96). In his reply (Ep. 97) Trajan considers the confession of Christianity as a crime worthy of death, but forbades a search for Christians and the acceptance of anonymous denunciations. Whoever shows by sacrificing to the gods that he is not a Christian is to be released. Where the adherence to Christianity is proved the punishment of death is to follow. The action he prescribed rests on the coercive power of the police, the right of repression of the magistracy, which required no settled form of procedure. In pursuance of these orders measures were taken against Christians in other places also. The most distinguished martyrs under Trajan were Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, and Simeon, Bishop of Jerusalem. Legend names many others, but there was no actual persecution on a large scale and the position of the Christians was in general satisfactory.

MERIVALE, Hist. of the Romans under the Empire (London, 1850-62), lxiii, lxiv; SCHILLER, Gesch. der romischen Kaiserzeit, I (Gotha, 1883), 543-94; DOMASZEWSKI, Gesch. der romischen Kaiser, II (Leipzig, 1909), 171-86; LA BERGE, Essai sur le regne de Trajan (Paris, 1877); RAMSAY, The Church in the Roman Empire (London, 1893); ARNOLD, Studien zur Gesch. de plinianischen Christenverfolgung (Konigsberg, 1887).

KLEMENS LOFFLER

Trajanopolis

Titular metropolitan see of Rhodope. The city owes its foundation or restoration to Trajan. Le Quien (Oriens Christ., I, 1193-96) mentions a great many of its bishops: Theodulus, persecuted by the Arians in the fourth century; Syncletius, the friend of St. John Chrysostom; Peter, present at the Council of Ephesus in 431; Basilius at that of Chalcedon in 451; Abundantius in 521; Eleusius in 553; Cudumenes about 1270; Germanus in 1352. In 1564 Gabriel is called Metropolitan of Trajanopolis, that is of Maronia, which proves that Trajanopolis was then destroyed and that the title of metropolitan had passed to the neighbouring city of Maronia. About 640 Trajanopolis had two suffragan sees (Gelzer, "Ungedruckte. . .Texte der Notitiae episcopatuum", 542); at the beginning of the tenth century, seven (Gelzer, op. cit., 558). St. Glyceria, a martyr of the second century, venerated on 13 May, was born there. The town is mentioned by Villchardouin (ed. Wailly, 382, 568); it was captured and pillaged in 1206 by Joannitza, King of the Bulgarians (George Acropolita, "Hist.", XIII). It is still mentioned in Nicephoras (Ancedota of Boissonade, V, 279), in John Cantacuzenus (Hist., I, 38; II, 13; III, 67), in George Pachymeres (ad ann. 1276, V, 6), etc. The site of Trajanopolis was discovered by Viquesnel and Dumont on the right bank near the mouth of the Maritza, not far from Ouroundjik.

VIQUESNEL, Voyage dans le Turquie d'Europe: description phys. et geolog. de la Thrace, II, 297; DUMONT, Arch. des missions scientif., III (Paris, 1876), 174; MULLER, Ptolemaei geographia, I, 487; SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geog., s.v.

S. VAILHÉ

Trajanopolis

A titular see of Phrygia Pacatiana, suffragan of Laodicea. The only geographer who speaks of Trajanopolis is Ptolemy (v, 2, 14, 15), who wrongly places this city in Greater Mysia. It was founded about 109 by the Grimenothyritae, who obtained permission from Hadrian to give the place the name of his predecessor. It had its own coins. Hierocles (Synecedemus, 668, 150) calls it Tranopolis, and this abridged form is found, with one exception, in the "Notitae episcopatuum", which speak of the see up to the thirteenth century among the suffragans of Laodicea. Le Quien (Oriens Christianus, I, 803) names seven bishops of Trajanopolis: John, present at the Council of Constantinople under the Patriarch Gennadius, 459; John, at the Council of Constantinople under Menas, 536; Asignius, at the Council of Constantinople, 553; Tiberius, at the Council in Trullo, 692; Philip, at Nice, 787; Eustathius, at Constantinople, 879. Another, doubtless more ancient than the preceding, Demetrius, is known from one inscription (C. I. G., 9265). Trajanopolis has been variously identified; the latest identification is Radet ("En Phrygie", Paris, 1895), who locates it at Tcharik Keui, about three miles from Ghiaour Euren towards the south-east, on the road from Oushak to Sousouz Keui, vilayet of Brusa, a village abounding in sculptures, marbles, and fountains, and where the name of the city may be read on the inscriptions. However, Ramsay (Asia Minor, 149; Cities and Bishopries of Phrygia, 595) continues to identify Trajanopolis with Ghiasour Euren.

S. PÉTRIDÈS

Tralles

A titular see, suffragan of Ephesus in Asia Minor. It was founded, it is said, by the Argians and Thracians, and is situated on one of the slopes of Mount Messogis in the valley of the Meander; it was one of the most populous and richest cities of Lydia. King Attalus had a splendid palace there. The local god was Zeus Larasios, but Apollo Pythius and other divinities were also worshipped.

Tralles was destroyed by an earthquake but was rebuilt by Augustus and took the name of Caesarea. Christianity was introduced at a very early date. In his famous letter to the Church at Tralles, St. Ignatius of Antioch says that their bishop, Polybius, visited him at Smyrna, and he puts them on their guard against Docetism (q. v.). We see by this letter that the Church there was already well organized. Among its bishops were: Heracleon, in 431; Maximus, in 451; Uranius, in 553; Myron, in 692; Theophylactus, in 787; Theophanes and Theopistus, in the ninth century; John, in 1230 (Revue des etudes grecques, VII, 80). In 640 ("Ecthesis Pseudo-Epiphanii"; Gelzer, "Ungedruckte. . . .Texte der notitiae episcopatuum", 537). Tralles appears as suffragan of Sardes in Lydia, and we know, despite Le Quien (Oriens christ., I, 697), that it was such in 553. Towards 1270 Andronicus, son of Michael VIII Palaeologus, rebuilt and repeopled the city; it then numbered 36,000 inhabitants, but it was not long before it was retaken and demolished by the Turks (Pachymeres, "De Michaele Palaeologo", VI, 20 and 21, in P.G., CXLIII, 929-34). The emir Aïdin then gave it the name which it still bears, Aïdin Guzel-Hissar; it is a sanjak of the vilayet of Symrna, numbering 40,000 inhabitants, of whom 28,000 are Mussulmans, 10,000 Greek Schismatics, and the remainder Jews or Armenians. There are 120 Catholics. The Mechitarists of Vienna and the Sisters of St. Vincent de Paul have two schools there. Tralles was the birthplace of Anthemius, the architect of St. Sophia of Constantinople.

LE QUIEN, Oriens christianus, I (1740), 695-8; TEXIER, Asie Mineure (Paris, 1862), 279-81; RAYET, Milet et le golfe latimique (Paris, 1877), 33-116; LEBAS-WADDINGTON, Asie Mineure, 597-616, 1651; CHAPOT, La province romaine proconsulaire d'Asie (Paris, 1904), passim; CUINET, La Turquie d' Asie, III (Paris, 1892), 591-9; PAPPACONSTANTINOU, Tralles (Athens, 1895), in Greek.

S. VAILHÉ

Trani and Barletta

(Tranen, et Barolen.)

Diocese in Italy. The city of Trani is situated on the Adriatic in a fertile plain, producing cereals, wine, and oil, which are exported in great quantities. For a long time, however, the port has lost the importance it had in the time of the Norman and Angevins who fortified it. The fishing industry is extensive. The cathedral, in Byzantine style, was built by Canon Nicola di Trani in 1143; its bronze gates by Barisano date from that period. Outside the city, on a peninsula, stand the old Benedictine Abbey of S. Maria de Colonna, containing a mineral spring, the ‘acqua di Cristo". Trani is built on the site of the ancient Turenum. It grew in importance under the Byzantines and was taken several times by the dukes of Benevento. In 840 and 1009 it fell into the hands of the Saracens. In the tenth and eleventh centuries it was a republic recognizing the nominal sovereignty of Byzantium. The ‘Ordinamenta et consuetudo maris", published in 1063 by the consuls of Trani is, after the "Tavole di Amalfi", the oldest maritime commercial code of the Middle Ages. Trani resisted the Norman invaders energetically, but in 1073 it had to open its gates to Pierre d'Hauteville, who assumed the title of Count of Trani. In the twelfth century, in league with Bari, Troia, and Melfi, it attempted to regain its ancient freedom; and in the battle of Bigano (1137) defeated Roger of Sicily, but two years later it had to capitulate. Frederick II constructed a fortress there and made it one of the royal residences. In the Neapolitan wars Trani became a place of the greatest importance, especially during the struggle between the Aragonese and the Angevins. From 1497 to 1509 it was held by Venice. Charles V established a school of jurisprudence there. In 1647 the populace rebelled against the nobles; in 1799 the people opposed the republic, and the city in consequence was sacked by the revolutionaries and the French. The legend of St. Magnus relates that there was at Trani about the middle of the third century a bishop, Redemptus, who was succeeded by St. Magnus. The first bishop whose date is known with certainty is Eusebius who was present at the dedication of the Basilica of Monte Gargano in 493. A few other names have been preserved like Suthinius (761) and Rodostanus (983). Till then Trani had certainly followed the Latin Rite and Bishop Bernardo opposed the decree of the Partiarch Polyeuctus (968) introducing the Greeek Rite; it is uncertain whether Joannes, who embraced the schism of Michael Caerularius and in consequence was deposed by Nicholas II (1059), belonged to the Greek Rite. His sxuccessor was Delius, and thenceforward Trani continued in the Latin Rite. In 1098 St. Nicholas Pellegrino, a Byzantine bishop, died there; under another Byzantine the new cathedral was dedicated to that saint. Grammaro was imprisoned in Germany by Henary VI for supporting King William; Bartolommeo Brancacci (1328) distinguished himself on several embassies and was chancellor of the Kingdom of Naples. Mention may be made likewise of Cardinal Latino Orsini (1438), Cosimo Migliorati (1479), Giovanni Castelar (1493), Giambernardo Scotti, a Theatine (1555), who introduced the Tridentine reform, Cesare Lambertini, the canonist (1503); Diego Alvarez, O. P. (1607), the famous adversary of Molina; Tommaso de Sarria, O. P. (1656), who enlarged the seminary; Giuseppe Antonio Davanzati (1717), who abolished many abuses. With the See of Trani is united the ancient Diocese of Salpe (Salapia of the Greeks), its known bishops comprising Palladius (465) and 23 successors before the definitive union in 1547. Anoather united see is that of Carnia, which had bishops before the time of St. Gregory, who entrusted it to the care of the Bishop of Reggio; in 649 it had a new ordinary, but later the city fell into decay. The Archbishop of Trani has also the title of Bishop of Nazareth, because when Palestine was lost in 1190 the title of that see was transferred to Barletta (the ancient Barduli), a seaport on the Adriatic, a little south of Trani, to which diociese it then belonged. At Nazareth between 1100 and 1190 there were eight Latin bishops; the names of the bishops resident at Barletta before 1265 are unknown. We may mention the following Bishops: Blessed Agostino Favorini (1431), General of the Augustinians, a learned writer, and Maffeo Barberini (1604), later Urban VIII. In 1455 the Diocese of Cannae, a city celebrated as the scene of Hannibal's victory (216 B.C.), was united with that of Nazareth. It was destroyed in 1083 by Robert Guiscard, with the exception of the cathedral and the episcopal residence. At Cannae St. Liberalis suffered martydom. It had bishops in ths sixth century, for St. Gregory entrusted the see to the care of the bishop of Siponto; its bishops are again mentioned after the tenth century. In 1534 Cannae was separated from Nazareth and united to Monteverde, but in 1552 the united dioceses were incorporated with Nazareth. In 1860 the See of Nazareth (Barletta) was united withTrani, the archbishop of which had been appointed in 1818 perpetual administrator of the ancient See of Bisceglie, the scene of the glorious martydom of Saints Pantelemon and Sergius, whose bodies repose in the cathedral. Tha names of fifty bishops of Bisceglie are known. Trani has been an archdiocese since the twelfth century. The united dioceses contain 19 parishes; 98,000 inhabitants; 110 priests; 1 house of religious (men); 15 convents of nuns; 2 schools for girls.

CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, XXI, 47; VANIA, Cenno storico della citta di Trani (Barletta, 1870).

U. BENIGNI

Transcendentalism

The terms transcendent and transcendental are used in various senses, all of which, as a rule, have antithetical reference in some way to experience or the empirical order.

(1) For the Scholastics, the categories are the highest classes of "things that are and are spoken of". The transcendentals are notions, such as unity, truth, goodness, being, which are wider than the categories, and, going beyond them, are said to transcend them. In a metaphysical sense transcendent is opposed by the Scholastics and others to immanent; thus, the doctrine of Divine Transcendence is opposed to the doctrine of Divine Immanence in the Pantheistic sense., Here, however, there is no reference to experience. (See IMMANENCE.)

(2) In the loosest sense of the word any philosophy or theology which lays stress on the intuitive, the mystical, the ultra-empirical, is aid to be transcendentalism. Thus, it is common to refer to the New England School of Transcendentalism, of which mention is made further on.

(3) In a stricter sense transcendentalism refers to a celebrated distinction made by Kant. Though he is not consistent in the use of the terms transcendent and transcendental, Kant understands by transcendent what lies beyond the limits of experience, and by transcendental he understands the non-empirical or a priori elements in our knowledge, which do not come from experience but are nevertheless, legitimately applied to the data or contents of knowledge furnished by experience. The distinction is somewhat subtle, Yet, it may be made clear by an example. Within the limits of experience we learn the uniform sequence of acorn and oak, heat and expansion, cold and contraction, etc., and we give the antecedent as the cause of the consequent. If, now, we go beyond the total of our experience and give God as the cause of all things, we are using the category "cause in a transcendent sense, and that use is not legitimate. If, however, to the data of sequence furnished by experience we apply the a priori form causation, we are introducing a transcendental element which elevates our knowledge to the rank of universal and necessary truth: "Every effect has its cause." Kant, as has been said, does not always adhere to this distinction. We may, then, understand transcendent and transcendental to refer to those elements or factors in our knowledge which do not come from experience, but are known a priori. Empirical philosophy is, therefore, a philosophy based on experience alone and adhering to the realm of experience in obedience to Hume's maxim, " 'Tis impossible to go beyond experience." Transcendental philosophy, on the contrary, goes beyond experience, and considers that philosophical speculation is concerned chiefly, if not solely, with those things which lie beyond experience.

(4) Kant himself was convinced that, for the theoretical reason, the transcendental reality, the thing-in-itself, is unknown and unknowable. Therefore, he defined the task of philosophy to consist in the examination of knowledge for the purpose of determining the a priori elements, in the systematic enumeration of those elements, for forms, and the determination of the rules for their legitimate application to the data of experience. Ultra-empirical reality, he taught, is to be known only by the practical reason. Thus, his philosophy is critical transcendentalism. Thus, too he left to his successors the task of bridging over the chasm between the theoretical and the practical reason. This task they accomplished in various ways, eliminating, transforming, or adapting the transcendent reality outside us. the thing-in-itself, and establishing in this way different transcendentalisms in place of the critical transcendentalism of Kant.

(5) Fiche introduced Egoistic Transcendentalism. The subject, he taught, or the Ego, has a practical as well as a theoretical side. to develop its practical side along the line of duty, obligation, and right, it is obliged to posit the non-Ego. In this way, the thing-in-itself as opposed to the subject, is eliminated, because it is a creation of the Ego, and, therefore all transcendental reality is contained in self. I am I, the original identity of self with itself, is the expression of the highest metaphysical truth.

(6) Schelling, addressing himself to the same task, developed Transcendental Absolutism. He brought to the problems of philosophy a highly spiritual imaginativeness and a scientific insight into nature which were lacking in Kant, the critic of knowledge, and Fiche, the exponent of romantic personalize. He taught that the transcendental reality is neither subject or object, but an Absolute which is so indeterminate that it may be said to be neither nature nor spirit. Yet the Absolute is, in a sense, potentially both the one and the other. For, from it, by gravity, light and organization, is derived spirit, which slumbers in nature, but reaches consciousness of self in the highest natural organization, man. There is here a hint of development which was brought out explicitly by Hegel.

(7) Hegel introduced Idealistic Transcendentalism. He taught that reality is not an unknowable thing in itself, nor the subject merely, nor an absolute of indifference, but an absolute Idea, Spirit, or Concept (Begriff), whose essence is development (das Werden), and which becomes in succession object and subject, nature and spirit, being and essence, the soul, law, the state, art, science, religion, and philosophy.

In all these various meanings there is preserved a generic resemblance to the original signification of the term transcendentalism. The transcendentalists one and all, dwell in the regions beyond experience, and, if they do not condemn experience as untrustworthy, at least they value experience only in so far as it is elevated, sublimated, and transformed by the application to it of transcendental principles. The fundamental epistemological error of Kant, that whatever is universal and necessary cannot come from experience, runs all through the transcendentalist philosophy, and it is on epistemological grounds that the transcendentalists are to be met. This was the stand taken in Catholic circles, and there, with few exceptions, the doctrines of the transcendentalists met with a hostile reception. The exceptions were Franz Baader (1765-1841), Johann Frohschammer (1821-1893), and Anton Günther (1785-1863), who in their attempt to "reconcile" Catholic dogma with modern philosophical opinion, were influenced by the transcendentalists and overstepped the boundaries of orthodoxy. It may without unfairness be laid to the charge of the German transcendentalists that their disregard for experience and common sense is largely accountable for the discredit into which metaphysics has fallen in recent years.

New England transcendentalism, sometimes called the Concord School of Philosophy, looks to William Ellery Channing (1780-1842) as its founder. Its principal representatives are Amos Bronson Alcott (1799-1888), Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882), Theodore Parker (1810-1860), Frederick Henry Hedge (1805-890), George Ripley (1802-1880), and Margaret Fuller (1810-1850). It had its inception in the foundation of the Transcendental Club in 1836. The chief influences discernible in its literary output are German philosophy, French sociology, and the reaction against the formalism of Its sociological and economic theories were tested in the famous Brook Farm (1841), with which the names just mentioned and those of several other distinguished Americans were associated.

For the history of German transcendentalism see Ueberweg, Hist. of Philosophy, tr. Morris (New York, 1892); Falckenberg, Hist. of Modern Philosophy, tr. Armstrong (New York, 1893); Turner, Hist. of Philosophy (Boston, 1903); St=F6ckl, Gesch. der Phil. (Mainz, 1888). For New England transcendentalism see Frothingham, Transcendentalism in New England (New York, 1876); Codman, Brook Farm (Boston, 1894).

WILLIAM TURNER

Transept

A rectangular space inserted between the apse and nave in the early Christian basilica. It sprang from the need of procuring sufficient space for the increased number of clergy and for the proper celebration of the service. The length of the rectangle either equals the entire breadth of the nave, as in Santa Maria Maggiore and Santa Croce at Rome, or it exceeds this breadth more or less, so that the transept extends beyond the walls of the nave. The transept, though, is not peculiar to the Roman basilica, as was for a long time believed; it is also to be found in the churches of Asia Minor, as at Sagalassos. Beside this first form, in which the apse was directly united with the transept, there were to be found in Asia Minor and Sicily, even in the early era, a number of churches of a second form. These were formerly considered to belong to the medieval period, because they were not fully developed until the Middle Ages. This is the cross-shaped or cruciform church, over the origin of which a violent literary controversy raged for a long time. In the cruciform design the transept is organically developed from the structure. It contains three squares which in height and breadth correspond to that of the main nave. Beyond the central square, called the bay, and connected with it is a fourth square, the choir, and beyond, and connected with the choir, is the apse; in this way the cruciform shape of the church is produced. The transept generally terminates towards the north and south in a straight line. Still there are a number of churches, especially in Germany, that end in a semicircular or triple conch shape. Strzygowski thinks he has found the model of this style of structure in the Roman imperial palace; this form of transept is found in as early a church as that of the Virgin at Bethlehem erected by Constantine. A favourite method in the Romanesque style was to construct small apses opening into the transept to the right and left of the choir. In the churches of the Cistercians and of the mendicant orders these small apses were transformed at a later date into numerous chapels, as at Santa Croce at Florence. the prototype of this design can also be proved to have existed in the East and the districts under its influence. The doubling of the transept, however, seems to have been peculiar to Western architecture; this type of transept appeared both in the Romanesque and in the Gothic periods, although the manner of producing it varied greatly. Many Romanesque churches are constructed at the west end the same as at the east, that is, the west end also contains a transept and choir. The earliest known church with this double transept is the eighth-century church of St-Riquier at Centula in France. The style was also adopted in the church of St. Pantaleon at Cologne (981), and almost at the same time by Mittelzell on the island of Reichenau in Lake Constance, and in many other churches. The west transept disappeared in Gothic architecture, excepting that in England some of the great cathedrals have a second, short transept added to the east choir, as at Salisbury. Gothic architecture also emphasized the choir by giving it in the large cathedrals three aisles; in this way very beautiful vistas are produced. In the effort to gain large, well-lighted spaces the architecture of the Renaissance and the Baroque periods enlarged the transept and covered the bay with a cupola which caused the transept to dominate the entire structure.

BEDA KLEINSCHMIDT

Transfiguration

The Transfiguration of Christ is the culminating point of His public life, as His Baptism is its starting point, and His Ascension its end. Moreover, this glorious event has been related in detail by St. Matthew (17:1-6), St. Mark (9:1-8), and St. Luke (9:28-36), while St. Peter (II Peter 1:16-18) and St. John (1:14), two of the privileged witnesses, make allusion to it.

About a week after His sojourn in Cæsarea Philippi, Jesus took with him Peter and James and John and led them to a high mountain apart, where He was transfigured before their ravished eyes. St. Matthew and St. Mark express this phenomenon by the word metemorphothe, which the Vulgate renders transfiguratus est. The Synoptics explain the true meaning of the word by adding "his face did shine as the sun: and his garments became white as snow," according to the Vulgate, or "as light," according to the Greek text.

This dazzling brightness which emanated from His whole Body was produced by an interior shining of His Divinity. False Judaism had rejected the Messias, and now true Judaism, represented by Moses and Elias, the Law and the Prophets, recognized and adored Him, while for the second time God the Father proclaimed Him His only-begotten and well-loved Son. By this glorious manifestation the Divine Master, who had just foretold His Passion to the Apostles (Matthew 16:21), and who spoke with Moses and Elias of the trials which awaited Him at Jerusalem, strengthened the faith of his three friends and prepared them for the terrible struggle of which they were to be witnesses in Gethsemani, by giving them a foretaste of the glory and heavenly delights to which we attain by suffering.

LOCATION OF THE TRANSFIGURATION

Already in Apostolic times the mount of the Transfiguration had become the "holy mount" (II Peter 1:18). It seems to have been known by the faithful of the country, and tradition identified it with Mount Thabor. Origen said (A.D. 231-54) "Thabor is the mountain of Galilee on which Christ was transfigured" (Comm. in Ps. lxxxviii, 13). In the next century St. Cyril of Jerusalem (Catech., II, 16) and St. Jerome (Ep. xlvi, ad Marcel.; Ep. viii, ad Paulin.; Ep. cviii, ad Eust.) likewise declare it categorically. Later St. Proculus, Patriarch of Constantinople (d. 447; Orat. viii, in Transfig.), Agathangelus (Hist. of Armenia, II, xvii), and Arnobius the Younger (d. 460; Comm. in Ps. lxxxviii, 13) say the same thing. The testimonies increase from century to century without a single dissentient note, and in 553 the Fifth Council of Constantinople erected a see at Mount Thabor (Notitif. Antioch. . . . patriarch.).

Some modern writers claim that the Transfiguration could not have taken place on Mount Thabor, which, according to Josephus, was then surmounted by a city. This is incorrect; the Jewish historian speaks neither of a city nor a village; he simply fortified, as he repeats three times, "the mount called Itabyrion" ("Bell. Jud.", II, xx, 6; IV, i, 8; Vita, 37). The town of Atabyrion of Polybius, the Thabor or Celeseth Thabor, the "flank of Thabor" of the Bible, is situated at the foot of Mount Thabor. In any case the presence of houses on a wooded height would not have made it impossible to find a place apart.

It is again objected that Our Lord was transfigured on Mount Hermon, since He was at that time in its vicinity. But the Synoptics are all explicit concerning the lapse of time, six days, or about eight days including those of departure and arrival, between the discourse in Cæsarea and the Transfiguration, which would infer a somewhat lengthy journey. Moreover the summits of Hermon are covered with snow as late as June, and even the lesser peaks of 4000 or 5000 feet are likewise snow-covered in February and March, the period of the Transfiguration. Finally, the ancients judged of the height of mountains by their appearance, and Thabor especially was considered a "high mountain", if not by David and Jeremias, at least by Origen and St. Jerome and the pilgrims who made the ascent.

BARNABAS MEISTERMANN

Feast of the Transfiguration of Christ

Observed on August 6 to commemorate the manifestation of the Divine glory recorded by St. Matthew (Chapter 17).

Origin. The Armenian bishop Gregory Arsharuni (about 690) ascribes the origin of this feast to St. Gregory the Illuminator (d. 337?), who, he says, substituted it for a pagan feast of Aphrodite called Vartavarh (roseflame), retaining the old appellation of the feast, because Christ opened His glory like a rose on Mount Thabor. It is not found however in the two ancient Armenian calendars printed by Conybeare (Armenian Ritual, 527 sq.). It probably originated, in the fourth or fifth century, in place of some pagan nature-feast, somewhere in the highlands of Asia.

Propagation. The Armenians at present keep it for three days as one of the five great feasts of the year (seventh Sunday after Pentecost); it is preceded by a fast of six days. Also in the Syriac Church it is a feast of the first class. In the Greek Church it has a vigil and an octave. The Latin Church was slow in adopting this feast; it is not mentioned before 850 (Martyrology of Wandelbert, Gavanti, "Thesaurus Liturg.", II, August); it was adopted in the liturgy about the tenth century in many dioceses, and was celebrated mostly on 6 August; in Gaul and England, 27 July; at Meissen, 17 March; at Halberstadt, 3 September, etc. In 1456 Callixtus III extended the feast to the Universal Church in memory of the victory gained by Hunyady at Belgrade over the Turks, 6 August, 1456. Callixtus himself composed the Office. It is the titular feast of the Lateran Basilica at Rome; as such it was raised to a double second class for the Universal Church, 1 Nov., 1911.

Customs. On this day the pope at Mass uses new wine or presses a bunch of ripe grapes into the chalice; raisins are also blessed at Rome. The Greeks and Russians bless grapes and other fruit.

F.G. HOLWECK

Transvaal

Vicariate apostolic; lies between 23° 3' and 27° 30' S. lat., and 25° and 32° E. long. The total population is approximately estimated at 960,000, consisting of about 320,000 whites and 640,000 natives. The agricultural and pastoral resources of this portion of south Africa are great, the vast rolling plains being capable of raising almost unlimited quantities of cereals. Stock-raising can also be pursued to great advantage. The discovery of gold in the Transvaal has brought about a large influx of British immigrants, who have developed the mineral resources of the country. Since the time of the "Great Trek" (1835-38) of the emigrant Dutch farmers from Cape Colony, several wars have been waged between the Boers, natives, and British. But streams of Boer immigrants succeeded in repelling the natives, and in gradually securing their own independence. In 1850 the British were engaged in a lengthy and costly war with the Kafirs, during which the Boers took advantage of the situation to demand the recognition of their independence; this was granted to them by the Sand River Convention, 17 Jan., 1852, and Great Britain gave up the Orange River Sovereignty in 1834, which they had proclaimed in 1848 after the battle of Boomplaats. In 1876 the Boers were defeated by the Kafirs, and Great Britain, afraid of a general rising of the natives throughout south Africa, deemed it expedient to annex the country, which was done, 12 April, 1877. A new war, however, broke out between British and Boers, in which the former were defeated, 27 Feb., 1881, and the Boers recovered their independence, which they enjoyed until the outbreak of the war in Oct., 1899, which resulted in their defeat and the final annexation of the country to the British Empire.

The Transvaal formed a portion of the Vicariate of Natal until 1886. From time to time the few Catholics residing in this part of South Africa were visited by a priest from Natal, till 1877, when the first mission was founded in Pretoria by the Right Rev., Dr. Jolivet, O. Mi. I. The first church in the Transvaal was not, however, completed until the first Sunday of October, 1887, when it was dedicated by Bishop Jolivet. At that time the number of Catholics at Pretoria was about 100. In the other localities of the Transvaal the Catholic population was insignificant. Johannesburg, which has at the present day a population of about 130,000, including about 80,000 Europeans and 50,000 natives and Asiatics, was then hardly in existence. The Catholic population is about 9500, Europeans, natives, and Syrians included.

The Transvaal was detached from Natal in 1886 by Leo XIII. It remained an independent prefecture Apostolic till 29 Jan., 1902. The first prefect Apostolic was the Very Rev. Father Moniginoux, O. M. I., who was succeeded by Very Rev. Father Schock, O. M. I., who died on his way to the chapter of his order held in Paris in 1898. Until Jan., 1902, father Jean de Laey, O. M. I., acted as prefect Apostolic. Then the Right Rev. Dr. Matthew Gaughran, O. M. I., was elected Vicar Apostolic of Kimberley, and administrator of the Transvaal prefecture. On 20 Nov., 1904, the prefecture Apostolic of the Transvaal became a vicariate, and the Right Rev. Dr. William Miller, O. M. I., was consecrated Bishop of Eumenia, and Vicar Apostolic of the Transvaal. He resides at Johannesburg. (See KAFIRS.)

On 13 Jan., 1911, the northern portion of the Vicariate of the Transvaal, including the two districts of Zoutpansberg and Waterberg, lying between 24° and 23° S. lat., and between 28° and 32° E. long. was erected into a prefecture Apostolic, under the title of Prefecture Apostolic of the Northern Transvaal, and entrusted to the care of the Benedictines, with the Very Rev. Father Lanslots, O. S. B., as prefect Apostolic. The missionaries number at the present 6 fathers and 3 lay brothers, all of whom are natives of Belgium. Through the erection of the new prefecture Apostolic, the boundaries of the Vicariate of the Transvaal have been altered. They are at present delimited by 25° and 32° E. long., and 27° S. lat. (north of the Orange River Colony) and 28° S. lat. (west of the same Colony).

There are at present (1911) in the Vicariate of the Transvaal: 27 priests (13 of whom are Oblates, 12 secular, 2 military chaplains); and 1 Oblate lay brother and 20 Marist Brothers, who conduct a very prosperous school at Johannesburg; also other schools, a sanatorium, a refuge, a hospital, and a home for children and aged, are under the management of various religious congregations, viz., the Sisters of the Holy Family; Sisters of Nazareth House; Dominican Sisters; Sisters of the Good Shepherd; Sisters of Mercy; Ursuline Sisters; and Sisters of Loreto; making a total number of 147 Sisters for the whole vicariate.

Missiones catholicae (Rome, 1907), 444-45; The Catholic directory of British South Africa (Cape Town, 1910).

A. LANGOUET

Transylvania

(Also TRANSYLVANIENSIS or ERDELY).

Diocese in Hungary, suffragan of Kalocsa Bács. The foundation of the see is attributed to King St. Stephen, but it was probably established by King St. Ladislaus, patron of Transylvania; Simon (1103-13) was the first bishop. The episcopal residence is at Gyula-Fehérvar (Alba Julia) in Alsó-Fehér.

The original limits of the diocese varied somehat from the present boundaries, as they included the County of Mármaros, while the provostship of Szeben was exempt and some parts of the Szekler country were subject to the Bishop of Milkovia in Rumania. The bishops received rich donations from King Béla IV, Charles Robert, Louis I, and Sigismund. The diocese suffered greatly during the reign of Béla IV from the Tatar invasion, and during the civil disturbances under his successors, but recovered very quickly in the fourteenth century. The see was again imperilled by the advance of the Turks, but its decay did not set in until the sixteenth centruy, and was caused by the progress of Lutheranism, in consequence of which the exempt provostship of Szeben ceased to exist, and by internal disturbancea in Transylvania. It flourished again under Cardinal Martinuzzi, but after his assassination in 1551 it decayed rapidly. The advance of Protestantism led, in 1556, to the secularization of the see, which was, however, re-established by Prince Stephen Báthory. After the coming of the Jesuits the Catholic Faith flourished again, but only while the house of Báthory continued to rule. Bishop Demetrius Náprágyi was forced to leave the see, and in 1601 the cathedral of Gyula-Fehérvár, which had been founded in the thirteenth century, was taken and held by the Protestants until the eighteenth century, the Catholics not regaining possession of it until the reign of Charles III.

When the Principality of Transylvania lost its independence, the decrees against the Catholic Church were withdrawn, but the bishopric and chapter were not re-established until 1713. The succession to the see had been kept up regularly till 1713, but the bishops resided abroad. The exempt provostship of Szeben was incorporated in the bishopric, which was completely restored under Maria Theresa in 1771. Of the bishops, who filled the see after 1713, the following may be mentioned: Ignatius Count Batthyany (1780-98), who founded the library at Gyula-Fehérvár, whic is named after him; Alexander Rudnay (1816-19), later Archbishop of Gran; Louis Haynald (1852-64), afterwards Archbishop of Kalocsa. Count Gustavus Majláth has occupied the episcopal see since 1897. The diocese contains: 16 archdeaconries; 10 titular abbeys; 2 titular provostships; 229 parishes; 398 secular priests; 226 regular clergy; 30 monasteries of men and 17 convents of nuns; the Catholics number 354,145. There are 103 patrons. The chapter consista of 10 active members and of 6 titular canons. Catholics are to a certain extent autonomous, i.e., certain church and school matters are managed by mixed boards, parly clerical, partly lay. This autonomy dates back to the time of the Reformation; it ceased in 1767 with the establishment of the Commissio catholica by Maria Theresa, and was re-established as late as 1873. The control is exercised by the general assembly of the Catholic estates and a managing committee.

PRAY, Specimen hierarchiae Hungariae, II (POZSONY, 1776-9), 202-8: SZEREDAL, Series antiq. et recent. episcop. Transylvaniae (Gyula-Fehervar, 1790); Schematismus diacesis Tr. pro 1909; A katolikus Magyarorszag (i.e. Catholic Hungary) (Budapest, 1902).

A. ALDASY

Trapani

(TREPANENSIS).

Diocese in Sicily, suffragan of Palermo. The city is the capital of a Sicilian province situated on a tongue of land at the most western part of the island, shaped like a reaping-hook, hence the ancient name Drepanon (reaping-hook). It has a good harbour with exports of wine, acid fruits, fish (especially tunny-fish), salt, and ornaments of coral, alabaster, and mother-of-pearl, which are extensively manufactured. The cathedral, exteriorly resembling a fortress, contains paintings by Careca and Vandyke (Crucifixion), and statue of the Dead Christ in alabaster by Tartaglia. Other churches are: San Michele, with wooden statuary, and the sanctuary of the Annunziata outside the city, with a colossal statue of the Madonna, attributed to Nicolò Pisano. In the Jesuit church, called "Nazionale", are precious pictures by Morrealese, Spagnoletto, and Marabiti. The ancient college, now a lyceum, contains the Fardelliona Gallery, with valuable paintings by Reni, Luca Giordano, Caravaggio, Salvator Rosa, Guercino, etc. Trapani is the birthplace of Carrera and Errante the painters, Ximenes the mathematician, Scarlatti the musician, and the Carmelite St. Alberto degli Abbati. Excavations have proved that the shore about Trapani was inhabited during the Stone Age. Drepanon must have been founded by the Greeks, but fell under the sway of the Carthaginians. Hamilcar fortified the port against the Romans, who in 250 suffered a severe defeat near by, at the hands of Adherbal. In the vicinity is Mons Eryx (now San Giuliano), with a magnificent temple of Venus and many votive offerings. Under the Romans the temple fell into decay, but was restored by Tiberius. Trapani was sacked by the Moors in 1077. In 1282 Pedro III of Aragon landed there to begin the capture of the island. In 1314 it was besieged by Robert, King of Naples. Charles V fortified it. The city boasts of having received the Gospel from St. Paul; it is not known to have had any bishop before the Arab conquest of Sicily; certainly it was subject to the See of Mazzara from the Norman Conquest till 1844. Its first bishop was the Redemptorist Vincenzo M. Marolda.

CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, XXI, 556.

U. BENIGNI

Trapezopolis

A titular see in Phrygia Pacatiana, suffragan to Laodicea. Trapezopolis was a town of Caria acording to Ptolemy (V, 2, 18) and Pliny (V, 109); according to Socrates (Hist. eccl., VII, xxxvi), Hierocles (Synecdeus, 665, 5), and the "Notitiae episcopatuum" it was a town of Phrygia Pacatiana and among the suffragans of Laodicea until the thirteenth century. Nothing is known of its history. Its coins testify to close intercourse with Attouda, now Assar, and its site must be sought near this town, most probably at Kadi Keui, capital of a nahie in the sandjak of Denizli and the vilayet of Smyrna. Le Quien (Oriens christ., I, 809) names six bishops of Trapezopolis: Hierophilius, prior to 400; Asclepiades, present at the Council of Ephesus (431); John, at Chalcedon (451); Eugenius, at Constantinople (692); Zacharias, at Nicaea (787); Leo, at Constantinople (879).

SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Rom. Geogr., s.v.; RAMSAY, Cities and Bishopries of Phrygia, 171 and passim; MULLER, notes on Ptolemy, ed. DIDOT, I, 822.

S. PÉTRIDÈS

Trappists

The common name by which the Cistercians who follow the reform inaugurated by the Abbot de Rancé (b. 1626; d. 1700) in the Abbey of La Trappe, were known; and often now applied to the entire Order of Reformed Cistercians. Thus it cannot be said that there is an Order of Trappists; though if one were to speak of Trappist monks, he would be understood to refer to monks of the Order of Reformed Cistercians, as distinguished from the Order of Cistercians of the common Observance (see Cistercians and La Trappe). The primitive austerities of the cistercians had fallen into desuetude in practically the entire order principally through the introduction of commendatory abbots, political disturbances, and human inconstancy; and though many and very praiseworthy attempts at their restoration had been made in France, Spain, Germany, Italy, Portugal, etc., yet these were but local or at most national in extent. That of de Rancé, however, was destined by Divine Providence to be more enduring and of wider scope than any other. Although the Abbey of La Trappe flourished exceedingly, even after the death of its venerated reformer, as evidenced by more than 300 professions between the years 1714 and 1790, yet the spirit of materialism and sensualism rampant in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, did not permit the rapid extension of the reform outside its walls; it did not even allow the entire severity of ancient Cîteaux to be introduced at La Trappe, though this reform was the most thorough and perfect of the many attempts that had then been made. Consequently it founded but a small number of monasteries; these were: Buon-Solazzo, hear Florence (1705), and St. Vito at Rome (1709); Casamari, in the Papal States, was obliged to adopt the Constitutions of de Rancé (1717), but for nearly a century there was no further expansion. It was from the time of these earliest foundations that they who embraced de Rancés reform were called Trappists. Too much credit cannot be given to these noble bands of monks, who by their lives demonstrated to a corrupt world that man could have a higher ambition than the gratification of the mere natural instincts of this ephemeral life.

At the time of the Revolution, when the monastery of La Trappe, in common with all others, was ordered to be confiscated by the Government, the people of the neighbourhood petitioned that an exception be made in their favour, and the Trappists themselves, encouraged by this, addressed a memorial to the National Assembly and the king considered the matter for nearly a year, but finally decided that they should be despoiled like the others. com augustine de Lestrange (b. 1754; d. 1827, see Lestrange), vicar-general of the Archdiocese of Vienna, had entered La Trappe (1780) in order to escape the burden of the episcopate. He it was whom God had raised up to preserve the Trappists when so direly threatened with extinction; he resolved, therefore, to expatriate himself for the welfare of his order. Having been elected superior of those who were of the same mind, and with the permission of his higher superiors, he left La Trappe 26 april, 1791, with twenty-four religious, and established a monastery at Val-Sainte, Canton of Fribourg, Switzerland. Here they had much to suffer besides the rigour of their rule, for their monastery (which had formerly belonged to the Carthusians) was an unroofed ruin; they were in want of the very necessities of life, not even having the meagre requirements they were accustomed to.

In France the Revolution was taking its course. On 3 June, 1792, the commissioners of the Government arrived at La Trappe, took the sacred vessels and vestments, as well as everything moveable, and obliged the eighty-nine religious yet remaining to abandon their abbey and find a home as best they could; some in other monasteries, and others in charitable families of the neighbourhood. At Val-Sainte, whilst celebrating the feast of St. Stephen, the religious resolved to put into practice the exact and literal observance of the Rule of St. Benedict, and three days afterwards, 19 July, they began the new reform; establishing the order of exercises prescribed by the holy patriarch, as well as all the primitive fasts, together with the first usages of Cîteaux; even making their rule still more severe in many points. They entered upon their new mode of life with a fervour that exceeded discretion and had soon to be moderated. Even in their exile many subjects were attracted to them, so that they were enabled to send religious to found several new monasteries: one in Spain (1793), a second in England at Lulworth the same year, a third at Westmalle, Belgium (1794), and a fourth at Mont-Brac, in Piedmont (1794). On 31 July, 1794, Pius VI encouraged these religious by a special Brief, and authorized the erection of Val-Sainte into an abbey and mother-house of the congregation of Trappists. Dom Augustine was elected abbot, 27 Nov. of this year, and given supreme authority over the abbey and congregation. This state of quiet and prosperity lasted but six years. When the French invaded Switzerland (1798) they compelled the Trappists to find a refuge elsewhere; thus they were obliged to roam from country to country, even Russia and America being visited by the indomitable abbot and some of his companions, with the hope of finding a permanent home, until after almost incredible sufferings the fall of Napoleon permitted them to return to France. The monasteries of La Trappe and Aiguebelle came into the possess ion of Dom Augustine, who divided the community of Val-Sainte between them. Other monasteries were re-established from time to time, as the number of religious increased and as they were able to purchase the buildings.

From 1813 N.-D. de l'Eternite, near Darfeld, Westphalia (founded 16 Oct., 1795, from the Abbey of Val-Sainte), which had been exempted some years previous from the authority of Dom Augustine, followed the Regulations of de Rancé, which differed from those of Dom Augustine principally in the hour for dinner, and the length of time devoted to manual labour; their order of exercises was naturally followed by the houses founded by them, thus instituting a new observance and the nucleus of a congregation. In 1834 the Holy See erected all the monasteries of France into the "Congregation of the Cistercian Monks of Notre-Dame de la Trappe". The Abbot of La Trappe was by right the vicar-general of the congregation as soon as his election was confirmed by the president-general of the Order of Cîteaux. They were to hold a general chapter each year; were to follow the Rule of St. Benedict and the Constitutions of de Rancé, except for a few points, and retain the liturgical books of the Cistercian Order. Divergences of opinion on several matters concerning regular observance induced the abbots of the various monasteries to believe that this union could not be productive of that peace so much desired, and so at their solicitation the Holy See issued a new Decree, deciding that "All the monasteries of Trappists in France shall form two congregations, of which the former will be termed 'the Ancient Reform of Our Lady of La Trappe', and the second the 'New Reform of Our Lady of La Trappe'. Each shall be a congregation of the Cistercian Monks. The Ancient Reform is to follow the Constitutions of de Rancé, whilst the New Reform is not to follow the Constitutions of the Abbot de Lestrange, which it abandoned in 1834, but the Rule of St. Benedict, with the ancient Constitution of Cîteaux, as approved by the Holy See excepting the prescriptions contained in this Decree. The Moderator General of the Cistercian Order shall be at the head of both congregations and will confirm the election of all abbots. In France each congregation shall have its vicar-general with full authority for its administration" (Apostolic Decree, 25 Feb., 1847).

After this the congregations began to flourish. The Ancient Reform made fourteen foundations, some of them in China and Natal; the New Reform was even more fruitful, establishing twenty monasteries as far as the United States, Canada, Syria, etc. The Belgian congregation of Westmalle also prospered, forming five new filiations. As the combined strength of the three congregations thus became greater than the Old Cistercian Order, the earnest desire soon developed amongst all to establish a permanent bond of union between them, with one head and a uniform observance; this was effected in 1892. Dom Sebastian Wyart (b. 1839; d. 1904), Abbot of Sept-Fons and Vicar-General of the Ancient Reform, was elected first abbot-general. After twelve years of zealous labour, the most worthy monument of which was the purchase of the cradle of the Order, Cîteaux, and making it again the mother-house, he passed to his reward, and was succeeded as abbot-general by Mgr Augustin Marre, then Abbot of Igny (a monastery which he had governed since 1881), titular Bishop of Constance and auxiliary to Cardinal Langénieux of Reims; he is still ruling the order (1911), with the greatest zeal and prudence.

The name under which the order was reorganized is "Order of Reformed Cistercians" and while its members no longer bear the name of "Trappists", yet they are heirs to the old traditions, and even the name will continue to be connected with them in the popular mind. The present Constitutions (approved 13 Aug. 1894) under which the order is governed and upon which all the usages and regulations are based, is derived from the Rule of St. Benedict, the "Charta Charitatis" and ancient usages and definitions of the general chapters of Cîteaux, and the Apostolic Letters and Constitutions. It is divided into three parts. The first part regards the government of the order; the supreme power residing in the general chapter, which is composed of all the abbots (actually in office), titular priors and superiors of houses, and meets each year under the presidency of the abbot-general, who is elected by themselves for life. During the time the general chapter is not in session the order is directed, in urgent cases, by the abbot-general with the assistance of a council composed of five definitors, also elected by the general chapter, but for a term of five years. The abbot-general is titular Abbot of Cîteaux, and must reside at Rome. The order is not divided into provinces, nor is there an officer similar to a provincial. Each monastery is autonomous and maintains its own novitiate; its abbot or titular prior appointing all local subordinate superiors, and having full administration in both spiritual and temporal affairs. Nevertheless each monastery has the duty of visiting all the houses it has founded, either once each year, or once every two years, according to distance, and then rendering a report of its material and spiritual well-being to the next subsequent general-chapter. The abbot of such a monastery is called the father-immediate, and the houses thus subject are termed "daughter-houses" or filiations. It is especially prescribed that all houses be dedicated to the Blessed Virgin.

The second part is concerned with monastic observances; which must be uniform in all the monasteries of the order. The Divine Office must be sung or recited in choir according to the directions of the Breviary, Missal, Ritual and Martyrology, no matter how few may be the number of religious in a particular house; the canonical Office is always preceded (except at Compline, when it is followed) by the Office of the Blessed Virgin; and on all ferial days throughout the year Vespers and Lauds are followed by the Office of the Dead. Mass and the day Offices are always sung with the Gregorian Chant; Matins and Lauds also are sung on Sundays and the more solemn feasts. Mental prayer, one half-hour in the morning, and fifteen minutes in the evening, is of obligation, but of counsel much more frequently. Confession must be made once each week, and daily Holy Communion is strongly commended. Out of the time of Divine Office, before which nothing is to be preferred, and when not engaged in manual labour, the monks devote themselves to prayer, study, or pious reading, for there is never any time granted for recreation; these exercises always take place in common, never in private rooms. The hour for rising is at 2 a.m. on weekdays, 1:30 on Sundays, and 1 on the more solemn feasts; whilst the hour for retiring is at 7 p.m. in winter, and 8 in summer; in this latter season there is a siesta given after dinner, so that the religious have seven hours' sleeping the course of the day; about seven hours also are devoted to the Divine Office and Mass, one hour to meals, four hours to study and private prayers and five hours to manual labour; in winter there are only about four hours devoted to manual labour, the extra hour thus deducted being given to study.

The monks are obliged to live by the labour of their hands, so the task appointed for manual labour is seriously undertaken, and is of such a nature as to render them self-supporting; such as cultivation of the land, cattle-raising, etc. Dinner is partaken of at 11 a.m. in summer, at 11:30 in winter, and at 12 on fast days, with supper or collation in the evening. Food consists of bread, vegetables, and fruits; milk and cheese may also be given except in Advent, Lent, and all Fridays out of Paschal time. flesh-meat, fish, and eggs are forbidden at all times, except to the sick. All sleep in a common dormitory, the beds being divided from each other only by a partition and curtain, the bed to consist of mattress and pillow stuffed with straw, and sufficient covering. The monks are obliged to sleep in their regular clothing; which consists of ordinary underwear, a habit of white, and a scapular of black wool, with a leathern cincture; the cowl, of the same material as the habit, is worn over all. Enclosure, according to canon law, is perpetual in all houses. It is never allowed for the religious to speak amongst themselves, though the one in charge of a work or employment may give necessary directions; and all have the right of conversing with the superiors at any time except during the night hours, called the "great silence".

Studies

Before ordination to the priesthood (and all choir religious are destined for that) the monk must pass a satisfactory examination before the abbot, in the curriculum prescribed by the order and the Decrees of the Holy See; and afterwards all are obliged to participate in conferences on theology and Sacred Scriptures at least once each month. Students preparing for ordination are granted extra time, during the hours of work, for the prosecution of their studies.

The third part deals with the reception of subjects. The greatest care is insisted on to see that the postulants are of good character, honest birth, and without encumbrances of any kind; also that they have pursued the course of studies prescribed by the Holy See; they must have attained at least their fifteenth year. The novitiate is of two years' duration, during which time the novice is formed to the religious life, but he can leave, or the superior may send him away, if he is unable or unwilling to conform to the spirit of his vocation. The time of probation completed, the subject is voted for, and if accepted, makes simple, but perpetual vows; these are followed by solemn vows at the end of three, or in special cases, five years. Besides choir religious there are lay brothers. These must be at least seventeen years of age when received; they are then postulants for two years, novices for two more, after which they may be admitted to simple, though perpetual vows, then after six years more they may make solemn vows. They do not recite the Divine Office, but have special prayers appointed to be said at the same hours throughout the day. They are not obliged to follow special studies, but are engaged in manual labour for a somewhat longer time than the choir religious; their habit is nearly the same as that of those in the choir, but brown in colour. They are religious in the full sense of the word, and participate in all the graces and privileges of the order, except that they have neither active nor passive voice in the management of the affairs of the order.

It may be well to deny a few customs that have been attributed, by ignorance, to the order. The monks do not salute one another by the "memento mori", nor do they dig a part of their grave each day; in meeting each other they salute by an inclination of the head, and graves are dug only after a brother is ready to be placed in it. (For statistics see Cistercians.)

Gaillardin, Les trappistes ou l'order de Cîteaux au XIXe. (siecle Paris, 1844); Hist. populaire de N.-D. de la Grande Trappe (Paris, 1895); La Trappe, by a Trappist of Sept-Fons (Paris, 1870); VErite, Cîteaux, La Trappe et Bellefontaine (Paris, 1883); The Cistercian Order, its Object; its Rule (Cambridge, 1895); La Trappe, congregation de moines de l'ordre benedictino-cistercien (Rome 1864); M.P.P., La Trappe mieux connue (Paris, 1834); Reglements de la Maison Dieu de No.-D. de la Trappe mis en nouvel order et augmentes des usages particuliers de la Val-Sainte (2 vols., Fribourg, 1794); Hist. abregee de l'order de Cîteaux by a monk of Thymadeuse (St-Brieue, 1897); Us des cisterciens reformes de la congregation de la Grande Trappe, with the Charta Charitatis and Decretum Apostolicum quo institutae sunt dua congregationes B.M. de Trappa in Gallia, 1847 (Toulouse, 1876); Us de l'ordre des cisterciens reformes precedes de la regle de S. Benoit et des constitutions, published by the general chapter of 1894 (Westmalle, 1895); Reglement de la Trappe du Rev. Pere Dom Armand-Jean le Bouthillier de Rancé, revu par le chapitre general de la congregation (Paris, 1878).

EDMOND M. OBRECHT

Sts. Trasilla and Emiliana

Aunts of St. Gregory the Great, virgins in the sixth century, given in the Roman Martyrology, the former on 24 December, the latter on 5 January. St. Gregory (Hom. XXXVIII, 15, on the Gospel of St. Matthew, and Lib. Dial., IV, 16) relates that his father, the Senator Gordian, had three sisters who vowed themselves to God and led a life of virginity, fasting, and prayer in their own home on the Clivus Scauri in Rome. They were Trasilla (Tarsilla, Tharsilla, Thrasilla), Emiliana, and Gordiana. Gordiana, led on at first by the words and example of her sisters, did not persevere but returned to the vanities of the world. After many years in the service of God, St. Felix III, an ancestor, appeared to Trasilla and bade her enter her abode of glory. On the eve of Christmas she died, seeing Jesus beckoning. A few days later she appeared to Emiliana, who had followed well in her footsteps, and invited her to the celebration of Epiphany in heaven. Tradition says that their relics and those of their mother, St. Silvia, are in the Oratory of St. Andrew on the Celian Hill.

FRANCES MERSHMAN

Accusations of Treason

A common misrepresentation concerning the Elizabethan persecution of English and Irish Catholics from 1570 onwards is the statement that the victims devoted to imprisonment, torture, and death suffered not for their religious belief but for treason against the queen and her government. This view, officially promulgated by Elizabeth's lord high treasurer, William Cecil, Lord Burghley, in 1583, was constantly reiterated by the judges in the courts, by Protestant writers in their controversial works, and has thence made its way into popular manuals of history. At the present day it frequently reappears as one of the stock accusations brought against the Church by Anglican controversialists of various types.

The simple fact that in very many instances those condemned to death ostensibly for treason were offered their lives and liberty if they would attend Anglican worship, shows conclusively that the martyrs did in fact suffer for religion; but at this epoch religion and politics were so inextricably confused that this explanation, though valid in the case of individual martyrs, does not suffice to meet the general accusation. As a recent Anglican historian writes: "The vexed question whether the Romanists died for treason or for their faith implies an antithesis which had little meaning in that age of mingled politics and religion" (A.F. Pollard, "Political History of England", VI, 377). Everything centres round the excommunication of Elizabeth by St. Pius V, 25 February, 1570. This act created a situation full of perplexity for English Catholics. It even underlies the history of the rising of the northern earls in 1569, for when they rose they had reason to believe that the excommunication had already taken place. Harassed as they were, the Catholics would take no steps in defence of their rights till the pope declared that Elizabeth's misgovernment had so infringed the spiritual liberty of her subjects as to absolve them from their allegiance. Once this declaration was made a number of Catholics acted on it, and there was a certain section who under the influence of Mendoza and others were implicated in plots against Elizabeth which were undoubtedly treasonable from the Government's point of view. But they might well have urged that in so assailing the royal power they were doing no more against Elizabeth than Bolingbroke had done against Richard II, or Richmond against Richard III. Yet neither Henry IV nor Henry VII are usually branded as "traitors".

The subsequent cases of Pym and Hampden, not to mention the successful revolutionaries of 1688, show that success or failure is often made the real test between treason and rebellion. That a certain party of English Catholics was in rebellion against Elizabeth is not disputed, but justified rebellion ceases to be treason and may be the noblest patriotism. Thus Allen with many of the exiles of Douai and Louvain, and Persons with many of the Jesuits, saw in the rule of Elizabeth a greater danger to the highest interests of England than had previously been threatened in cases where history had justified the deposition of kings. And the supreme authority had sanctioned this view. Moreover, such exercise of papal prerogative was one of the recognized principles of the Middle Ages throughout which it had served to protect the rights of the people. This became evident later, when, after the decline of papal power, the autocratic power of the European sovereigns was greatly increased and always at the expense of the people. Nevertheless, it remains true that in the eyes of Elizabeth and her ministers such opposition was nothing less than high treason. But a large number of English Catholics refused to go so far as rebellion. The historian already quoted admits that the opposition which relied on avowedly treasonable methods was "limited to extremists" (ibid., 297). Elsewhere he says of the rank and file of English Catholics: "They tried to ignore their painful dilemma between two forms of allegiance, for both of which they had deep respect" (p. 370). As Lingard writes: "among the English Catholics (the bull) served only to breed doubts, dissensions, and dismay. Many contended that it had been issued by an incompetent authority; others that it could not bind the natives till it should be carried into actual execution by some foreign power; all agreed that it was in their regard an imprudent and cruel expedient, which rendered them liable to the suspicion of disloyalty, and afforded their enemies a presence to brand them with the name of traitors" (ibid., 225).

The terrible strain of this dilemma was relieved by the next pope, Gregory XIII, who on 14 April 1580, issued a declaration that though Elizabeth and her abettors remained subject to the excommunication, it was not to bind Catholics to their detriment. The large majority of English Catholics were relieved in conscience by this dispensation, and never gave the Government the least ground for suspecting their loyalty, but they persisted in the practice of their religion, which was made possible only by the coming of the seminary priests. With regard to these priests, who entered England at the risk of their lives to preserve the Catholic religion and to give facilities for Mass and the sacraments there could be no presumption of treason by the ancient laws of England. But in the panic which followed the Northern Rising, Parliament had passed a statute (13 Eliz. c. 2) declaring it to be high treason to put into effcet any papal Bull of absolution to absolve or reconcile any person to the Catholic Church, to be absolved or reconciled, or to procure or publish any papal Bull or writing whatsoever. Thus for the first time purely religious acts were declared by Parliament to be treasonable, a position which no Catholic could admit. It is clear that persons suffering under such a law as this suffered for religion and not for treason. Elizabeth's Government, however, for its own purposes refused to make any distinction between Catholics who had been engaged in open opposition to the queen and those who were forced by conscience to ignore the provisions of this statute of 1571. These two classes, really distinct, were purposely identified by the Government and treated as one for controversial purposes. For when the reports of so many bloody executions for religion began to horrify Europe, the queen's ministers adopted the defence that their severity was not exercised against Catholics as such, but as traitors guilty of treason against their sovereign.

This view was put forward officially in a pamphlet by Lord Burghley, which was not only published in English but translated into Latin and other languages for foreign circulation. The very title of this work indicates its scope: "The Execution of Justice in England for maintenance of public and Christian peace, against certain stirrers of sedition and adherents to the traitors and enemies of the realm without any persecution of them for questions of religion, as is falsely reported, and published by the fautors and fosterers of their treasons." This pamphlet, which was issued on 17 December, 1583, may briefly be summarized. Attention is first drawn to late rebellions in England and Ireland which had been suppressed by the queen's power. Whereupon some of the defeated rebels had fled into foreign countries and there alleged that they were suffering for religion. Great stress is laid upon the Bull of excommunication; and all Catholics living abroad are represented as engaged in seditious practices with a view to carrying the Bull into effect. The seminaries are exhibited merely as foundations established to assist in this disloyal object. They have been "erected to nurse seditious fugitives". The priests who came forth at the risk of their lives are not given credit for any religious purpose, but "the seminary fugitives come secretly into the realm to induce the people to obey the Pope's bull". This view is important as it shows the pretext put forth by the Government to defend the Act of 1585 by which it became high treason for any seminary priest simply to come to England. The pamphlet proceeds to decIare that some of these "sowers of sedition" have been taken, convicted, and executed "not being ddealt withal upon questions of religion, but justly condemned as traitors". They were so condemned "by the ancient realm made 200 years past". Moreover, if they retracted their treasonable opinions their lives were spared. As "the foreign traitors continue sending of persons to move sedition in the realm" who cloak their real object of enforcing the Bulls under the pretext of religion and who "labour to bring the realm into a war external and domestical", it becomes the duty of the queen and her ministers to repel such rebellious practices. Burghley insists that before the excommunication no one had been charged with capital crimes on the ground of religion, and brings everything back to the question of the Bull. "And if then it be inquired for what cause these others have of late suffered death it is truely to be answered as afore is often remembered that none at all are impeached for treason to the danger of their life but such as do obstinately maintain the contents of the Pope's Bull aforementioned, which do import that her Majesty is not the lawful Queen of England, the first and highest point of treason, and that all her subjects are discharged of their oaths and obedience, another high point of treason. and all warranted to disobey her and her laws, a third and very large point of treason."

A fourth point is taken from the refusal of the Catholics to disavow the pope's proceedings in Ireland. After many other points some of an historical nature addressed to foreign princes the writer anticipates the objection that many sufferers had been simple priests and unarmed scholars. He says "Many are traitors though they have no armour nor weapon." Such people are like spies, "necessary accessaries and adherents proper to further and continue all rebellions and wars. . . . The very causes final of these rebellions and wars have been to depose her Majesty from her crown: the causes instrumental are these kind of seminaries and seedmen of sedition. The pamphlet ends by proposing six questions or tests by which traitors might be distinguished from simple scholars. These interrogatories, known later as "the bloody questions", were ingeniously framed to entangle the victim into admissions with regard to the pope's action in excommunicating Elizabeth, which might be construed as treason. This is the government case and it was promptly answered by Allen in his "Answer to the Libel of English Justice", published in 1584, in which he joins issue on all points, showing "that many priests and other Catholics in England have been persecuted, condemned and executed for mere matter of religion and for transgression only of new statutes which make cases of conscience to be treason without all pretence or surmise of any old treasons or statutes for the same". He defends Campion and the other martyrs from the imputation of treason, points to the oppression of the Government and the prudent attitude of the Catholics with regard to the Bull; he explains the doctrine of the excommunication and deprivation of princes, the advantages of having a supreme authority to decide between princes and people in causes involving questions of deprivation; defends the pope's action in Ireland and concIudes by showing "that the separation of the prince and realm from the unity of the Church and See Apostolic and fall from Catholic religion is the only cause of all the present fears and dangers that the State seemeth to stand in. And that they unjustly attribute the same to the Pope's Holiness or Catholics and untruly call them the enemies of the Realm".

In the following year, 1585, the Government took another step forward in their policy of drawing religious and indifferent acts into the political net. This was the statute 27 Eliz. c. 2, by which it was made high treason for any Jesuit or any seminary priest even to be in England, and felony for anyone to harbour or relieve them. Even so biased an historian as David Hume realized the injustice of this measure of which he says: "In the subsequent part of the queen's reign the law was sometimes executed by the capital punishment of priests; and though the partisans of that princess asserted that they were punished for their treason, not their religion, the apology must only be understood in this sense, that the law was enacted on account of the treasonable views and attempts of the sect, not that every individual who suffered the penalty of the law was convicted of treason" (Hist. of Eng., sub an 1584). The martyrs themselves constantly protested against this accusation of treason, and prayed for the queen on the scaffold. In very many instances they were offered a free pardon if they would attend the Protestant church, and some priests unfortunately yielded to the temptation. But the fact of the offer being made sufficiently shows that religion, not treason, was the ground of their offence. This is notably the ease with regard to Blessed Thomas Percy who had himself been the leader of the Northern Rising and who yet was offered his liberty at the price of conformity. There are three beatified martyrs directly connected with the excommunication, Felton, Storey, and Woodhouse, who for that reason stand in a class apart from the other martyrs; their cases have received special treatment by Father Pollen, S.J. (Camm's "Lives of the English Martyrs", II, xvii-xxii). It may not be amiss to state that so careful is the Holy See in such questions that the cause of beatification of James Laborne has been postponed for more careful consideration simply because of certain words he uttered about the queen. With regard to all the other martyrs there is no difficulty in showing that they died for their religion, and that the accusation of treason in their regard is false and unfounded.

EDWIN BURTON

Trebizond

(TRAPEZUNTINA).

An Armenian Catholic diocese. The city owes its ancient name to the fact that it was built on the shores of the Black Sea in the form of a trapeze. It was a Greek colony from Sinopus, established in the eighth century, B.C., and not a colony from Trapezus, in Arcadia, as Xenophon relates, who was received here with enthusiasm during the retreat of the Ten Thousand. After having formed a part of the Kingdom of Armenia, and then of that of Pontus, it fell into the hands of the Romans, and was declared a free city by Pompey. The Emperor Hadrian adorned it and endowed it with great commercial importance by creating its artificial harbor. Under Valerian the Goths took and pillaged it; its inhabitants were slain or sent as slaves to the Cimmerian Bosphorus. Justinian raised it from its ruins and thenceforth it became rich in monuments, especially churches and monasteries. In 1204 when Constantinople fell into the power of the Latins, a prince of the family of the Comneni, who in 1185 sought safety in Iberia, proclaimed himself Emperor of Trebizond under the name of Alexis, and founded a Greek empire, the rival of that of Nicaea. The new state comprised nearly all of the ancient Pontus Polemoniacus and stretched eastward as far as the River Phasis. It was in perpetual conflict with the Seljuk Turks and later with the Osmanli Turks, as well as with the Greeks of Nicaea and Constantinople, the Italian republics, and especially the Genoese. During the two centuries and a half in which it succeeded in subsisting the Empire of Trebizond contributed greatly to the development of Christian civilization and Greek literature in those distant parts, until then somewhat backward. In 1462 Trebizond was taken by assault by the troops of Mohammed II, and its last emperor, David, was exiled to the vicinity of Serrae in Macedonia. He was soon obliged to choose between embracing Islam or forfeiting his life; he kept the faith and was executed together with six of his children. The seventh fled to the Peloponnesus where he founded the Comneni of Morea. From 1204 to 1462 Trebizond had, in all, twenty emperors.

At present Trebizond is the capital of the vilayet of the same name, bounded by those of Sivas and Erzeroum, the Black Sea, and Asiatic Russia, which after the war of 1877 absorbed a part of its territory. The vilayet measures about 270 miles from west to east by 65 miles at its extreme length; its area is 11,275 sq. miles. Its total population may be estimated at 900,000. The city itself has 50,000 inhabitants, among whom are 12,000 Greeks, 10,000 Armenians, some Jews, and a few hundred Catholics The remainder are Turkish Mussulmans, Lazis, Circassians, and Afghazis. Trebizond has a citadel, at least 40 mosques, 10 Greek churches, some of which have preserved ancient paintings, several Armenian churches, etc.; it carries on an active trade with Persia, Russia, and European countries by way of the black Sea. Close to the city are several Greek monasteries still inhabited, and which played a certain part in Byzantine history.

The first traces of Christianity at Trebizond are found under Diocletian when St. Eugenius, still the patron of the city, St. Canoeists, and their companions were martyred. Among the saints of whom mention is still made were the Bishop St. Basil, tenth century (feast, 20 October), and St. Theodore Gabras, martyred about 1098 (feast, 2 October). At first merely a suffragan of Neocaesarea in Pontus Polemoniacus Trebizond became the metropolitan see of Lazica when the ancient metropolis, Phasis, was lost by the Byzantine Empire. At the end of the ninth century it had seven suffragans, which number continued to increase. The emperors of Trebizond profited by their political situation to secure privileges for the bishop of their capital. By an official act of 1 January, 1260, the Greek Patriarch of Nicaea, at the request of Michael VIII Paleologus, recognized a semi-independence of the Metropolitan of Trebizond. Thenceforth the titulars of this city went neither to Nicaea nor Constantinople to receive episcopal consecration from the patriarch; it was given them in their own church in the presence of a delegate from the patriarch who assisted at, or, if he were a bishop, presided at the ceremony. But the patriarch reserved to himself as formerly the ordinations of the other metropolitans or the autocephalous archbishops of the empire. Of course after the suppression of the Empire of Trebizond in 1462 the metropolitans of this city lost these privileges and were made like all the other metropolitans, in which condition they are at present. Le Quien (Oriens christ., I, 509-14) gives a list of eighteen Greek bishops of Trebizond, to which other names might be added. Among them Domnus, the oldest known, who assisted at the Council of Nicaea in 325; Atarbius, at Chalcedon in 451; Anthimus, the future Monophysite Patriarch of Constantinople, who deposed Pope St. Agapitus in 536; Dorotheus, who assisted at the Council of Florence (1439), and signed its decree of union; Cyril, who in 1653 was in Paris with the Dominican Pere Goar, and made a profession of Catholic faith at Rome. To these may be added the Bishop Ouranios who, according to an inscription (C.I.G., 8636), restored buildings in the year 542. In the Middle Ages, because of the Venetian and Genoese merchants and also because of the missionaries who went to evangelize the Khazars, Comans, and Tatars, a Latin see was established at Trebizond. The oldest-known titular was a Franciscan, Andronicus Comnenus, mentioned in 1289. In Le Quien (op. cit.. III, 1097-1100) and in Eubel (Hierarchia catholica medii aevi, I, 520) will be found the names of several other bishops from 1344 to 1437. The Latin diocese must have lasted until the capture of the city by Mohammed II.

The Armenian Catholic diocese erected in 1850 by Pius IX, is of vast extent; it has 4300 faithful, 4 churches, 7 stations, 4 primary schools, 9 secular priests, and 4 Mechitarists. There are also Jesuits at Marsivan and Amasia, engaged exclusively with the Armenians; the Oblates of the Assumption are at Amasia for the same object. The Capuchins are established for the Latins at Trebizond, Samsun, and Ineboli, and are dependent on the delegate Apostolic at Constantinople; the Sisters of St. Joseph of the Apparition have a boarding-school at Trebizond.

GAINSFORD, The Historic of Trebizonde (London, 1616); FALLMERAYER Gesch. des Kaisertums Trapezunt (Munich, 1827); FISCHER, Trapezunt u. seine Bedeutung in der Gesch. in Zeitschrift fur allgemeine Gesch., III (Stuttgart, 1886), 13-39: IDEM Trapezuns im 11 u. 1 Jahrhundert in Mitteilungen des Instituts fur ost. Geschichtsforsch. X, 77-127; KRUMBACHER Gesch. der byzantinischen Literatur (Munich, 1897), 1049-1051; MILLET, Les monasteres et les eglises de Trebizonde in Bulletin de correspondance hellenique XIX, 419-459; IDEM, Inscriptions byzantines de Trebizonde, op cit. XX, 498-501; STRZYGOWSKI Les chapiteaux de Sainte-Sophie d Trebizonde, op. cit., XIX, 517-522; PETIT, Acte synodal du patriarche Nicephore II sur les privileges du metropolitain de Trebizonde in Bulletin de l'institut arch. russe de Constantinople VIII, 163-171; Missiones catholica (Rome, 1897), 759.

S. VAILHÉ

Trebnitz

A former abbey of Cistercian nuns, situated north of Breslau in Silesia. It was founded in 1203 by Duke Henry the Bearded of Silesia and his wife St. Hedwig. The story of its foundation relates that one Duke Henry when out hunting fell into a swamp from which he could not extricate himself. In return for the rescue from this perilous position he vowed to build the abbey. With St. Hedwig's consent, Bishop Ekbert of Bamberg, her brother, chose the first nuns that occupied the convent. The first abbess was Petrussa; she was followed by Gertrude, the daughter of St. Hedwig. Up to 1515 the abbesses were first princesses of the Piast House and afterwards members of the nobility. The abbey was richly endowed with lands by Duke Henry. When Hedwig became a widow she went to live at Trebnitz and was buried there. It is said that towards the end of the thirteenth century the nuns numbered 120. In 1672 there were 32 nuns and 6 lay sisters, in 1805 there were 23 nuns and 6 lay sisters. The abbey suffered from all kinds of misfortunes both in the Middle Ages and in modern times: from famine in 1315, 1338, 1434, and 1617, from disastrous fires in 1413, 1432, 1464, 1486, 1505, 1595, and 1782. At the Reformation most of the nuns were Poles, as were the majority until during the eighteenth century. The Abbey of Trebnitz suffered so greatly during the Thirty Years War that the nuns fled to Poland, as they did again in 1663 when the Turks threatened Silesia. The last abbess, Dominica von Giller, died on 17 August, 1810, and on 11 November, 1810, the abbey was suppressed and secularized. The building, which was very extensive, was sold later and turned into a cloth factory. It is now used as the mother-house of the Trebnitz Sisters of St. Charles Borromeo and as a hospital conducted by the sisters. The church, a basilica with pillars in the late Romanesque style, to which Baroque additions were made, is now the parish church. The grave of St. Hedwig is in the chapel of St. Hedwig to the right of the high altar. The grave of Duke Henry I, her husband, is in front of the altar.

SCHMIDT, Gesch. des Klosterstiftes Trebnitz (Oppein, 1853); Bach., Gesch. und Beschreibung des Klosterstiftes in Trebnitz (Neisse, 1859); JUNGNITZ, Wahrfahrtsbuchlein fur Verehrer der hl. Hedwig (3d ed., Breslau, 1902).

KLEMENS LÖFFLER

Lettice Mary Tredway

(Called "Lady" Tredway)

Born 1595; died Oct., 1677; daughter of Sir Walter Tredway, of Buckley Park, Northamptonshire; her mother was Elizabeth Weyman. In July, 1616, Lady Tredway entered the novitiate of the Canonesses Regular of the Lateran of Notre-Dame-de-Beaulieu at Sin, near Douai (where she was probably educated), and in Oct., 1617, made her solemn profession. In 1631 she and Miles Pinkney, better known as Father Carre, a priest of the English College at Douai, conceived the project of opening a house for canonesses for English subjects only at Douai. The idea was approved by the authorities at home and abroad, and in 1634 it was decided to open this English convent at Paris. Dr. Smith, Bishop of Chalcedon, then in exile in Paris, helped them so generously that he may be counted a co-founder. He blessed Lady Tredway as abbess, and the Convent of Notre-Dame-de-Sion was permanently established in the Rue des Fosses in 1639. Father Carre and Lady Tredway were also practically the founders of the Seminary of St. Gregory for training priests for the English Mission. A pension for English ladies and a school were attached to the new convent, of which Lady Tredway held the office of abbess till 1675, when her infirmities compelled her to resign. Since her death the superiors have held the title of prioress. For forty-one years this noble woman laboured bravely for her convent. The community has been obliged to leave France, and is established in England at Ealing (1912).

CEDOZ, Un couvent de religieuses anglaises (1891); ALMOND, Les dames anglaises (Paris, 1911).

FRANCESCA M. STEELE

Francis Tregian

Confessor, b. in Cornwall, 1548; d. at Lisbon, 25 Sept., 1608. He was son of Thomas Tregian of Wolveden, Cornwall, and Catherine Arundell; and inherited property worth three thousand pounds a year, the whole of which was confiscated by Elizabeth becaused he had harboured Blessed Cuthbert Mayne (q.v.). Previously he had resided at Court in order to help the persecuted Catholics, and he is said by his biographer to have incurred the queen's displeasure by refusing her improper advances. After suffering imprisonment at Windsor and in various London prisons for twenty-eight years, he was liberated by James I, who banished him. Having visited Douai he retired to Madrid, where the King of Spain assigned him a pension. Seventeen years after death his body was found incorrupt, and miracles are stated to have been wrought by his intercession. He married Mary, daughter of Charles, seventh Lord Stourton, by whom he had eighteen children.

PLUNKETT, Heroum speculum de vita D.D. Francisci Tregeon (Lisbon, 1655); ANONYMOUS, Great and Long Sufferings for the Catholic Faith of Mr. Francis Tregian, contemporary MS. printed by MORRIS in Troubles of Our Catholic Forefathers, I (London, 1872); CHALLONER, Memoirs of Missionary Priests, I (London, 1741); CAMM, Lives of the English Martyrs, II (London, 1905); Third Douay Diary in Catholic Record Society Publications, X (London, 1911); GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., s.v.; COOPER in Dict. Nat. Biog., s.v.

EDWIN BURTON

Tremithus

Titular see, suffragan of Salamis in Cyprus. The city is mentioned by Ptolemy (Geog., V, xiii, 6), Hierocles (ed. Buckhardt, 708, 7), George of Cyprus (ed. Gelzer, 1109), and other geographers. Among its bishops were: St. Spyridon, a shepherd and married, present at the council of Nicaea in 325, and whose cult is popular in the East (Anal. bolland., XXVI, 239); St. Arcadius and St. Nestor, venerated 14 Feb. or 7 March; Theopompus, at the Second Ecumenical Council in in 381; Theodore, at the Sixth Ecumenical Council in 681, and who wrote a biography of St. John Chrysostom (P.G., XLVII; 51-88); George, at the Second Council of Nicaea in 787; Spyridon in 1081, when the see was temporarily restored. The usurper Isaac Comnenus was defeated here in 1191 by Richard Coeur de Lion who afterwards took possession of Cyprus. The city was then destroyed and survives only in the Greek village of Trimethusia in the district of Chrysocho.

LE QUIEN, Oriens christ., II, 1069-72; GELZER, Georgii Cyprii Descriptio orbis romani (Leipzig, 1890), 213; HACKETT, A History of the orthodox Church of Cyprus (London, 1901), 322 sqq.

S. VAILHÉ

Council of Trent

The nineteenth ecumenical council opened at Trent on 13 December, 1545, and closed there on 4 December, 1563. Its main object was the definitive determination of the doctrines of the Church in answer to the heresies of the Protestants; a further object was the execution of a thorough reform of the inner life of the Church by removing the numerous abuses that had developed in it.

I. CONVOCATION AND OPENING

On 28 November, 1518, Luther had appealed from the pope to a general council because he was convinced that he would be condemned at Rome for his heretical doctrines. The Diet held at Nuremberg in 1523 demanded a "free Christian council" on German soil, and at the Diet held in the same city in 1524 a demand was made for a German national council to regulate temporarily the questions in dispute, and for a general council to settle definitely the accusations against Rome, and the religious disputes. Owing to the feeling prevalent in Germany the demand was very dangerous. Rome positively rejected the German national council, but did not absolutely object to holding a general council. Emperor Charles V forbade the national council, but notified Clement VII through his ambassadors that he considered the calling of a general council expedient and proposed the city of Trent as the place of assembly. In the years directly succeeding this, the unfortunate dispute between emperor and pope prevented any further negotiations concerning a council. Nothing was done until 1529 when the papal ambassador, Pico della Mirandola, declared at the Diet of Speyer that the pope was ready to aid the Germans in the struggle against the Turks, to urge the restoration of peace among Christian rulers, and to convoke a general council to meet the following summer. Charles and Clement VII met at Bologna in 1530, and the pope agreed to call a council, if necessary. The cardinal legate, Lorenzo Campeggio, opposed a council, convinced that the Protestants were not honest in demanding it. Still the Catholic princes of Germany, especially the dukes of Bavaria, favoured a council as the best means of overcoming the evils from which the Church was suffering; Charles never wavered in his determination to have the council held as soon as there was a period of general peace in Christendom.

The matter was also discussed at the Diet of Augsburg in 1530, when Campegio again opposed a council, while the emperor declared himself in favour of one provided the Protestants were willing to restore earlier conditions until the decision of the council. Charles's proposition met the approval of the Catholic princes, who, however, wished the assembly to meet in Germany. The emperor's letters to his ambassadors at Rome on the subject led to the discussion of the matter twice in the congregation of cardinals appointed especially for German affairs. Although opinions differed, the pope wrote to the emperor that Charles could promise the convoking of a council with his consent, provided the Protestants returned to the obedience of the Church. He proposed an Italian city, preferably Rome, as the place of assembly. The emperor, however, distrusted the pope, believing that Clement did not really desire a council. Meantime, the Protestant princes did not agree to abandon their doctrines. Clement constantly raised difficulties in regard to a council, although Charles, in accord with most of the cardinals, especially Farnese, del Monte, and Canisio, repeatedly urged upon him the calling of one as the sole means of composing the religious disputes. Meanwhile the Protestant princes refused to withdraw from the position they had taken up. Francis I, of France, sought to frustrate the convoking of the council by making impossible conditions. It was mainly his fault that the council was not held during the reign of Clement VII, for on 28 Nov., 1531, it had been unanimously agreed in a consistory that a council should be called. At Bologna in 1532, the emperor and the pope discussed the question of a council again and decided that it should meet as soon as the approval of all Christian princes had been obtained for the plan. Suitable Briefs addressed to the rulers were drawn up and legates were commissioned to go to Germany, France, and England. The answer of the French king was unsatisfactory. Both he and Henry VIII of England avoided a definitive reply, and the German Protestants rejected the conditions proposed by the pope.

The next pope, Paul III (1534-49), as Cardinal Alessandro Farnese, had always strongly favoured the convening of a council, and had, during the conclave, urged the calling of one. When, after his election, he first met the Cardinals, 17 October, 1534, he spoke of the necessity of a general council, and repeated this opinion at the first consistory (13 November). He summoned distinguished prelates to Rome to discuss the matter with them. Representatives of Charles V and Ferdinand I also laboured to hasten the council. The majority of the cardinals, however, opposed the immediate calling of a council, and it was resolved to notify the princes of the papal decision to hold a church assembly. Nuncios were sent for this purpose to France, Spain, and the German king, Ferdinand. Vergerio, nuncio to Ferdinand, was also to apprise the German electors and the most distinguished of the remaining ruling princes personally of the impending proclamation of the council. He executed his commission with zeal, although he frequently met with reserve and distrust. The selection of the place of meeting was a source of much difficulty, as Rome insisted that the council should meet in an Italian city. The Protestant rulers, meeting at Smalkald in December, 1535, rejected the proposed council. In this they were supported by Kings Henry VIII and Francis I. At the same time the latter sent assurances to Rome that he considered the council as very serviceable for the extermination of heresy, carrying on, as regards the holding of a council, the double intrigue he always pursued in reference to German Protestantism. The visit of Charles V to Rome in 1536 led to a complete agreement between him and the pope concerning the council. On 2 June, Paul III published the Bull calling all patriarchs, archbishops, bishops, and abbots to assemble at Mantua on 23 May, 1537, for a general council. Cardinal legates were sent with an invitation to the council to the emperor, the King of the Romans, the King of France, while a number of other nuncios carried the invitation to the other Christian countries. The Netherlander Peter van der Vorst was sent to Germany to persuade the German ruling princes to take part. The Protestant rulers received the ambassador most ungraciously; at Smalkald they refused the invitation curtly, although in 1530 they had demanded a council. Francis I took advantage of the war that had broken out between himself and Charles in 1536 to declare the journey of the French bishops to the council impossible.

Meanwhile preparations were carried on with zeal at Rome. The commission of reform, appointed in July, 1536, drew up a report as the basis for the correction of the abuses in ecclesiastical life; the pope began preparations for the journey to Mantua. The Duke of Mantua now raised objections against the holding of the assembly in his city and made conditions which it was not possible to accept at Rome. The opening of the council, therefore, was put off to 1 November; later it was decided to open it at Vicenza on 1 May, 1538. The course of affairs, however, was continually obstructed by Francis I. Nevertheless the legates who were to preside at the council went to Vicenza. Only six bishops were present. The French king and the pope met at Nice, and it was decided to prorogue until Easter, 1539. Soon after this the emperor also desired to postpone the council, as he hoped to restore religious unity in Germany by conferences with the Protestants. After further unsuccessful negotiations both with Charles V and Francis I the council was indefinitely prorogued at the consistory of 21 May, 1539, to reassemble at the pope's discretion. When Paul III and Charles V met at Lucca in September, 1541, the former again raised the question of the council. The emperor now consented that it should meet at Vicenza, but Venice would not agree, whereupon the emperor proposed Trent, and later Cardinal Contarini suggested Mantua, but nothing was decided. The emperor and Francis I were invited later to send the cardinals of their countries to Rome, so that the question of the council could be discussed by the college of cardinals. Morone worked in Germany as legate for the council, and the pope agreed to hold it at Trent. After further consultations at Rome, Paul III convoked on 22 May, 1542, an ecumenical council to meet at Trent on 1 Nov. of the same year. The Protestants made violent attacks on the council, and Francis I opposed it energetically, not even permitting the Bull of convocation to be published in his kingdom.

The German Catholic princes and King Sigismund of Poland consented to the convocation. Charles V, enraged at the neutral position of the pope in the war that was threatening between himself and Francis I, as well as with the wording of the Bull, wrote a reproachful letter to Paul III. Nevertheless, preparations were made for the council at Trent, by special papal commissioners, and three cardinals were appointed later as conciliary legates. The conduct, however, of Francis I and of the emperor again prevented the opening of the council. A few Italian and German bishops appeared at Trent. The pope went to Bologna in March 1543, and to a conference with Charles V at Busseto in June, yet matters were not advanced. The strained relations which appeared anew between pope and emperor, and the war between Charles V and Francis I, led to another prorogation (6 July, 1543). After the Peace of Crespy (17 Sept., 1544) a reconciliation was effected between Paul III and Charles V. Francis I had abandoned his opposition and declared himself in favour of Trent as the place of meeting, as did the emperor. On 19 Nov., 1544, the Bull "Laetare Hierusalem" was issued, by which the council was again convoked to meet at Trent on 15 March, 1545. Cardinals Giovanni del Monte, Marcello Cervini, and Reginald Pole were appointed in February, 1545, as the papal legates to preside at the council. As in March only a few bishops had come to Trent, the date of opening had to be deferred again. The emperor, however, desired a speedy opening, consequently 13 December, 1545, was appointed as the date of the first formal session. This was held in the choir of the cathedral of Trent after the first president of the council, Cardinal del Monte, had celebrated the Mass of the Holy Ghost. When the Bull of convocation and the Bull appointing the conciliary legates were read, Cardinal del Monte declared the ecumenical council opened, and appointed 7 January as the date of the second session. Besides the three presiding legates there were present: Cardinal Madruzza, Bishop of Trent, four archbishops, twenty-one bishops, five generals of orders. The council was attended, in addition, by the legates of the King of Germany, Ferdinand, and by forty-two theologians, and nine canonists, who had been summoned as consultors.

II. ORDER OF BUSINESS

In the work of accomplishing its great task the council had to contend with many difficulties. The first weeks were occupied mainly with settling the order of business of the assembly. After long discussion it was agreed that the matters to be taken into consideration by the members of the council were to be proposed by the cardinal legates; after they had been drawn up by a commission of consultors (congregatio theologorum minorum) they were to be discussed thoroughly in preparatory sessions of special congregations of prelates for dogmatic questions, and similar congregations for legal questions (congregatio proelatorum theologorum and congregatio proelatorum canonistarum). Originally the fathers of the council were divided into three congregations for discussion of subjects, but this was soon done away with as too cumbersome. After all the preliminary discussions the matter thus made ready was debated in detail in the general congregation (congregatio generalis) and the final form of the decrees was settled on. These general congregations were composed of all bishops, generals of orders, and abbots who were entitled to a vote, the proxies of absent members entitled to a vote, and the representatives (oratores) of the secular rulers. The decrees resulting from such exhaustive debates were then brought forward in the formal sessions and votes were taken upon them. On 18 December the legates laid seventeen articles before the general congregations as regards the order of procedure in the subjects to be discussed. This led to a number of difficulties. The main one was whether dogmatic questions or the reform of church life should be discussed first. It was finally decided that both subjects should be debated simultaneously. Thus after the promulgation in the sessions of the decrees concerning the dogmas of the Church followed a similar promulgation of those on discipline and Church reform. The question was also raised whether the generals of orders and abbots were members of the council entitled to a vote. Opinions varied greatly on this point. Still, after long discussion the decision was reached that one vote for the entire order belonged to each general of an order, and that the three Benedictine abbots sent by the pope to represent the entire order were entitled to only one vote.

Violent differences of opinion appeared during the preparatory discussion of the decree to be laid before the second session determining the title to be given the council; the question was whether there should be added to the title "Holy Council of Trent" (Sacrosancta tridentina synodus) the words "representing the Church universal" (universalem ecclesiam reproesentans). According to the Bishop of Fiesole, Braccio Martello, a number of the members of the council desired the latter form. However, such a title, although justified in itself, appeared dangerous to the legates and other members of the council on account of its bearing on the Councils of Constance and Basle, as it might be taken to express the superiority of the ecumenical council over the pope. Therefore instead of this formula the additional phrase " oecumenica et generalis" was proposed and accepted by nearly all the bishops. Only three bishops who raised the question unsuccessfully several times later persisted in wanting the formula "universalem ecclesiam reproesentans". A further point was in reference to the proxies of absent bishops, namely, whether these were entitled to a vote or not. Originally the proxies were not allowed a vote; Paul III granted to those German bishops who could not leave their dioceses on account of religious troubles, and to them alone, representation by proxies. In 1562, when the council met again, Pius IV withdrew this permission. Other regulations were also passed, in regard to the right of the members to draw the revenues of their dioceses during the session of the council, and concerning the mode of life of the members. At a later date, during the third period of the council, various modifications were made in these decisions. Thus the theologians of the council, who had grown in the meantime into a large body, were divided into six classes, each of which received a number of drafts of decrees for discussion. Special deputations also were often appointed for special questions. The entire regulation of the debates was a very prudent one, and offered every guarantee for an absolutely objective and exhaustive discussion in all their bearings of the questions brought up for debate. A regular courier service was maintained between Rome and Trent, so that the pope was kept fully informed in regard to the debates of the council.

III. THE WORK AND SESSIONS

A. First Period at Trent

Among the fathers of the council and the theologians who had been summoned to Trent were a number of important men. The legates who presided at the council were equal to their difficult task; Paceco of Jaen, Campeggio of Feltre, and the Bishop of Fiesole already mentioned were especially conspicuous among the bishops who were present at the early sessions. Girolamo Seripando, General of the Augustinian Hermits, was the most prominent of the heads of the orders; of the theologians, the two learned Dominicans, Ambrogio Catarino and Domenico Soto, should be mentioned. After the formal opening session (13 December, 1545), the various questions pertaining to the order of business were debated; neither in the second session (7 January, 1546) nor in the third (4 February, 1546) were any matters touching faith or discipline brought forward. It was only after the third session, when the preliminary questions and the order of business had been essentially settled, that the real work of the council began. The emperor's representative, Francisco de Toledo, did not reach Trent until 15 March, and a further personal representative, Mendoza, arrived on 25 May. The first subject of discussion which was laid before the general congregation by the legates on 8 February was the Scriptures as the source of Divine revelation. After exhaustive preliminary discussions in the various congregations, two decrees were ready for debate at the fourth session (8 April, 1546), and were adopted by the fathers. In treating the canon of Scripture they declare at the same time that in matters of faith and morals the tradition of the Church is, together with the Bible, the standard of supernatural revelation; then taking up the text and the use of the sacred Books they declare the Vulgate to be the authentic text for sermons and disputations, although this did not exclude textual emendations. It was also determined that the Bible should be interpreted according to the unanimous testimony of the Fathers and never misused for superstitious purposes. Nothing was decided in regard to the translation of the Bible in the vernaculars.

In the meantime earnest discussions concerning the question of church reform had been carried on between the pope and the legates, and a number of items had been suggested by the latter. These had special reference to the Roman Curia and its administration, to the bishops, the ecclesiastical benefices and tithes, the orders, and the training of the clergy. Charles V wished the discussion of the dogmatic questions to be postponed, but the council and the pope could not agree to that, and the council debated dogmas simultaneously with decrees concerning discipline. On 24 May the general congregation took up the discussion of original sin, its nature, consequences, and cancellation by baptism. At the same time the question of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin was brought forward, but the majority of the members finally decided not to give any definite dogmatic decision on this point. The reforms debated concerned the establishment of theological professorships, preaching, and episcopal obligation of residence. In reference to the latter the Spanish bishop, Paceco, raised the point whether this obligation was of Divine origin, or whether it was merely an ecclesiastical ordinance of human origin, a question which led later to long and violent discussions. In the fifth session (17 June, 1546) the decree on the dogma of original sin was promulgated with five canons (anathemas) against the corresponding erroneous doctrines; and the first decree on reform (de reformatione) was also promulgated. This treats (in two chapters) of professorships of the Scriptures, and of secular learning (artes liberales), of those who preach the Divine word, and of the collectors of alms.

For the following session, which was originally set for 29 July, the matters proposed for general debate were the dogma of justification as the dogmatic question and the obligation of residence as regards bishops as the disciplinary decree; the treatment of these questions was proposed to the general congregation by the legates on 21 June. The dogma of justification brought up for debate one of the fundamental questions which had to be discussed with reference to the heretics of the sixteenth century, and which in itself presented great difficulties. The imperial party sought to block the discussion of the entire matter, some of the fathers were anxious on account of the approaching war of Charles V against the Protestant princes, and there was fresh dissension between the emperor and the pope. However, the debates on the question were prosecuted with the greatest zeal; animated, at times even stormy, discussions took place; the debate of the next general session had to be postponed. No less than sixty-one general congregations and forty-four other congregations were held for the debate of the important subjects of justification and the obligation of residence, before the matters were ready for the final decision. At the sixth regular session on 13 January, 1547, was promulgated the masterly decree on justification (de justificatione), which consisted of a prooemium or preface and sixteen chapters with thirty-three canons in condemnation of the opposing heresies. The decree on reform of this session was one in five chapters respecting the obligation of residence of bishops and of the occupants of ecclesiastical benefices or offices. These decrees make the sixth session one of the most important and decisive of the entire council.

The legates proposed to the general congregation as the subject-matter for the following session, the doctrine of the Church as to the sacraments, and for the disciplinary question a series of ordinances respecting both the appointment and official activities of bishops, and on ecclesiastical benefices. When the questions had been debated, in the seventh session (3 March, 1547), a dogmatic decree with suitable canons was promulgated on the sacraments in general (thirteen canons), on baptism (fourteen canons), and on confirmation (three canons); a decree on reform (in fifteen chapters) was also enacted in regard to bishops and ecclesiastical benefices, in particular as to pluralities, visitations, and exemptions, concerning the founding of infirmaries, and as to the legal affairs of the clergy. Before this session was held the question of the prorogation of the council or its transfer to another city had been discussed. The relations between pope and emperor had grown even more strained; the Smalkaldic War had begun in Germany; and now an infectious disease broke out in Trent, carrying off the general of the Franciscans and others. The cardinal legates, therefore, in the eighth session (11 March, 1547) proposed the transfer of the council to another city, supporting themselves in this action by a Brief which had been given them by the pope some time before. The majority of the fathers voted to transfer the council to Bologna, and on the following day (12 March) the legates went there. By the ninth session the number of participants had risen to four cardinals, nine archbishops, forty-nine bishops, two proxies, two abbots, three generals of orders, and fifty theologians.

B. Period at Bologna

The majority of the fathers of the council went with the cardinal legates from Trent to Bologna; but fourteen bishops who belonged to the party of Charles V remained at Trent and would not recognize the transfer. The sudden change of place without any special consultation beforehand with the pope did not please Paul III, who probably foresaw that this would lead to further severe difficulties between himself and the emperor. As a matter of fact Charles V was very indignant at the change, and through his ambassador Vaga protested against it, vigorously urging a return to Trent. The emperor's defeat of the Smalkaldic League increased his power. Influential cardinals sought to mediate between the emperor and the pope, but the negotiations failed. The emperor protested formally against the transfer to Bologna, and, refusing to permit the Spanish bishops who had remained at Trent to leave that city, began negotiations again with the German Protestants on his own responsibility. Consequently at the ninth session of the council held at Bologna on 21 April, 1547, the only decree issued was one proroguing the session. The same action was all that was taken in the tenth session on 2 June, 1547, although there had been exhaustive debates on various subjects in congregations. The tension between the emperor and the pope had increased despite the efforts of Cardinals Sfondrato and Madruzzo. All negotiations were fruitless. The bishops who had remained at Trent had held no sessions, but when the pope called to Rome four of the bishops at Bologna and four of those at Trent, the latter said in excuse that they could not obey the call. Paul III had now to expect extreme opposition from the emperor. Therefore, on 13 September, he proclaimed the suspension of the council and commanded the cardinal legate del Monte to dismiss the members of the council assembled at Bologna; this was done on 17 September. The bishops were called to Rome, where they were to prepare decrees for disciplinary reforms. This closed the first period of the council. On 10 Nov., 1549, the pope died.

C. Second Period at Trent

The successor of Paul III was Julius III (1550-55), Giovanni del Monte, first cardinal legate of the council. He at once began negotiations with the emperor to reopen the council. On 14 Nov., 1550, he issued the Bull "Quum ad tollenda," in which the reassembling at Trent was arranged. As presidents he appointed Cardinal Marcellus Crescentius, Archbishop Sebastian Pighinus of Siponto, and Bishop Aloysius Lipomanni of Verona. The cardinal legate reached Trent on 29 April, 1551, where, besides the bishop of the city, fourteen bishops from the countries ruled by the emperor were in attendance; several bishops came from Rome, where they had been staying, and on 1 May, 1551, the eleventh session was held. In this the resumption of the council was decreed, and 1 September was appointed as the date of the next session. The Sacrament of the Eucharist and drafts of further disciplinary decrees were discussed in the congregations of the theologians and also in several general congregations. Among the theologians were Lainez and Salmeron, who had been sent by the pope, and Johannes Arza, who represented the emperor. Ambassadors of the emperor, King Ferdinand, and Henry II of France were present. The King of France, however, was unwilling to allow any French bishop to go to the council. In the twelfth session (1 Sept., 1551) the only decision was the prorogation until 11 October. This was due to the expectation of the arrival of other German bishops, besides the Archbishops of Mainz and Trier who were already in attendance. The thirteenth session was held on 11 Oct., 1551; it promulgated a comprehensive decree on the Sacrament of the Eucharist (in eight chapters and eleven canons) and also a decree on reform (in eight chapters) in regard to the supervision to be exercised by bishops, and on episcopal jurisdiction. Another decree deferred until the next session the discussion of four articles concerning the Eucharist, namely, Communion under the two species of bread and wine and the Communion of children; a safe-conduct was also issued for Protestants who desired to come to the council. An ambassador of Joachim II of Brandenburg had already reached Trent.

The presidents laid before the general congregation of 15 October drafts of definitions of the Sacraments of Penance and Extreme Unction for discussion. These subjects occupied the congregations of theologians, among whom Gropper, Nausea, Tapper, and Hessels were especially prominent, and also the general congregations during the months of October and November. At the fourteenth session, held on 25 November, the dogmatic decree promulgated contained nine chapters on the dogma of the Church respecting the Sacrament of Penance and three chapters on extreme unction. To the chapters on penance were added fifteen canons condemning heretical teachings on this point, and four canons condemning heresies to the chapters on unction. The decree on reform treated the discipline of the clergy and various matters respecting ecclesiastical benefices. In the meantime, ambassadors from several Protestant princes and cities reached Trent. They made various demands, as: that the earlier decisions which were contrary to the Augsburg Confession should be recalled; that debates on questions in dispute between Catholics and Protestants should be deferred; that the subordination of the pope to an ecumenical council should be defined; and other propositions which the council could not accept. Since the close of the last session both the theologians and the general congregations had been occupied in numerous assemblies with the dogma of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and of the ordination of priests, as well as with plans for new reformatory decrees. At the fifteenth session (25 January, 1552), in order to make some advances to the ambassadors of the Protestants, the decisions in regard to the subjects under consideration were postponed and a new safe-conduct, such as they had desired, was drawn up for them. Besides the three papal legates and Cardinal Madruzzo, there were present at Trent ten archbishops and fifty-four bishops, most of them from the countries ruled by the emperor. On account of the treacherous attack made by Maurice of Saxony on Charles V, the city of Trent and the members of the council were placed in danger; consequently, at the sixteenth session (23 April, 1552) a decree suspending the council for two years was promulgated. However, a considerably longer period of time elapsed before it could resume its sessions.

D. Third Period at Trent

Julius III did not live to call the council together again. He was followed by Marcellus II (1555), a former cardinal legate at Trent, Marcello Cervino; Marcellus died twenty-two days after his election. His successor, the austere Paul IV (1555-9), energetically carried out internal reforms both in Rome and in the other parts of the Church; but he did not seriously consider reconvening the council. Pius IV (1559-65) announced to the cardinals shortly after his election his intention of reopening the council. Indeed, he had found the right man, his nephew, the Cardinal Archbishop of Milan, Charles Borromeo, to complete the important work and to bring its decisions into customary usage in the Church. Great difficulties were raised once more on various sides. The Emperor Ferdinand desired the council, but wished it to be held in some German city, and not at Trent; moreover he desired it to meet not as a continuation of the earlier assembly but as a new council. The King of France also desired the assembling of a new council, but he did not wish it at Trent. The Protestants of Germany worked in every way against the assembling of the Council. After long negotiations Ferdinand, the Kings of Spain and Portugal, Catholic Switzerland, and Venice left the matter to the pope. On 29 Nov., 1560, the Bull "Ad ecclesiae regimen," by which the council was ordered to meet again at Trent at Easter, 1561, was published. Notwithstanding all the efforts of the papal nuncios, Delfino and Commendone, the German Protestants persisted in their opposition. Cardinal Ercole Gonzaga was appointed president of the council; he was to be assisted by the cardinal legates Stanislaus Hosius, Jacobus Puteus (du Puy), Hieronymus Seripando, Luigi Simonetta, and Marcus Siticus of Altemps. As the bishops made their appearance very slowly, the opening of the council was delayed. Finally on 18 Jan., 1562, the seventeenth session was held; it proclaimed the revocation of the suspension of the council and appointed the date for the next session. There were present, besides the four cardinal legates, one cardinal, three patriarchs, eleven archbishops, forty bishops, four abbots, and four generals of orders; in addition thirty-four theologians were in attendance. The ambassadors of the princes were a source of much trouble to the presidents of the council and made demands which were in part impossible. The Protestants continued to calumniate the assembly. Emperor Ferdinand wished to have the discussion of dogmatic questions deferred.

At the eighteenth session (25 Feb., 1562) the only matters decided were the publication of a decree concerning the drawing up of a list of forbidden books and an agreement as to a safe-conduct for Protestants. At the next two sessions, the nineteenth on 14 May, and the twentieth on 4 June, 1562, only decrees proroguing the council were issued. The number of members had, it is true, increased, and various ambassadors of Catholic rulers had arrived at Trent, but some princes continued to raise obstacles both as to the character of the council and the place of meeting. Emperor Ferdinand sent an exhaustive plan of church reform which contained many articles impossible to accept. The legates, however, continued the work of the assembly, and presented the draft of the decree on Holy Communion, which treated especially the question of Communion under both species, as well as drafts of several disciplinary decrees. These questions were subjected to the usual discussions. At the twenty-first session (16 July, 1562) the decree on Communion under both species and on the Communion of children was promulgated in four chapters and four canons. A decree upon reformation in nine chapters was also promulgated; it treated ordination to the priesthood, the revenues of canons, the founding of new parishes, and the collectors of alms. Articles on the Sacrifice of the Mass were now laid before the congregations for discussion; in the following months there were long and animated debates over the dogma. At the twenty-second session, which was not held until 17 Sept., 1562, four decrees were promulgated: the first contained the dogma of the Church on the Sacrifice of the Mass (in nine chapters and nine canons); the second directed the suppression of abuses in the offering of the Holy Sacrifice; a third (in eleven chapters) treated reform, especially in regard to the morals of the clergy, the requirements necessary before ecclesiastical offices could be assumed, wills, the administration of religious foundations; the fourth treated the granting of the cup to the laity at Communion, which was left to the discretion of the pope.

The council had hardly ever been in as difficult a position as that in which it now found itself. The secular rulers made contradictory and, in part, impossible demands. At the same time warm debates were held by the fathers on the questions of the duty of residence and the relations of the bishops to the pope. The French bishops who arrived on 13 November made several dubious propositions. Cardinals Gonzaga and Seripando, who were of the number of cardinal legates, died. The two new legates and presidents, Morone and Navagero, gradually mastered the difficulties. The various points of the dogma concerning the ordination of priests were discussed both in the congregations of the eighty-four theologians, among whom Salmeron, Soto, and Lainez were the most prominent, and in the general congregations. Finally, on 15 July, 1563, the twenty-third session was held. It promulgated the decree on the Sacrament of Orders and on the ecclesiastical hierarchy (in four chapters and eight canons), and a decree on reform (in eighteen chapters). This disciplinary decree treated the obligation of residence, the conferring of the different grades of ordination, and the education of young clerics (seminarists). The decrees which were proclaimed to the Church at this session were the result of long and arduous debates, in which 235 members entitled to a vote took part. Disputes now arose once more as to whether the council should be speedily terminated or should be carried on longer. In the meantime the congregations debated the draft of the decree on the Sacrament of Matrimony, and at the twenty-fourth session (11 Nov., 1563) there were promulgated a dogmatic decree (with twelve canons) on marriage as a sacrament and a reformatory decree (in ten chapters), which treated the various conditions requisite for contracting of a valid marriage. A general decree on reform (in twenty-one chapters) was also published which treated the various questions connected with the administration of ecclesiastical offices.

The desire for the closing of the council grew stronger among all connected with it, and it was decided to close it as speedily as possible. A number of questions had been discussed preliminarily and were now ready for final definition. Consequently in the twenty-fifth and final session, which occupied two days (3-4 December, 1563), the following decrees were approved and promulgated: on 3 December a dogmatic decree on the veneration and invocation of the saints, and on the relics and images of the same; a decree on reform (in twenty-two chapters) concerning monks and nuns; a decree on reform, treating of the mode of life of cardinals and bishops, certificates of fitness for ecclesiastics, legacies for Masses, the administration of ecclesiastical benefices, the suppression of concubinage among the clergy, and the life of the clergy in general. On 4 December the following were promulgated: a dogmatic decree on indulgences; a decree on fasts and feast days; a further decree on the preparation by the pope of editions of the Missal, the Breviary, and a catechism, and of a list of forbidden books. It was also declared that no secular power had been placed at a disadvantage by the rank accorded to its ambassadors, and the secular rulers were called upon to accept the decisions of the council and to execute them. Finally, the decrees passed by the council during the pontificates of Paul III and Julius III were read and proclaimed to be binding. After the fathers had agreed to lay the decisions before the pope for confirmation, the president, Cardinal Morone, declared the council to be closed. The decrees were subscribed by two hundred and fifteen fathers of the council, consisting of four cardinal legates, two cardinals, three patriarchs, twenty-five archbishops, one hundred and sixty-seven bishops, seven abbots, seven generals of orders, and also by nineteen proxies for thirty-three absent prelates. The decrees were confirmed on 26 Jan., 1564, by Pius IV in the Bull "Benedictus Deus," and were accepted by Catholic countries, by some with reservations.

The Ecumenical Council of Trent has proved to be of the greatest importance for the development of the inner life of the Church. No council has ever had to accomplish its task under more serious difficulties, none has had so many questions of the greatest importance to decide. The assembly proved to the world that notwithstanding repeated apostasy in church life there still existed in it an abundance of religious force and of loyal championship of the unchanging principles of Christianity. Although unfortunately the council, through no fault of the fathers assembled, was not able to heal the religious differences of western Europe, yet the infallible Divine truth was clearly proclaimed in opposition to the false doctrines of the day, and in this way a firm foundation was laid for the overthrow of heresy and the carrying out of genuine internal reform in the Church.

J.P. KIRSCH

Trent

(TRIDENTUM; TRIDENTINA).

Diocese; suffragan of Salzburg. Trent became universally known through the famous general council held there from 1545 to 1563. At an earlier date, however, it had a certain historical importance. In 15 B.C. its territory became subject to the Romans. As early as 381 there appeared at the Council of Aquileia Abundantius, Bishop of Trent. While Arianism and the barbarian invasions elsewhere smothered the seed of the gospel, it grew in Trent under the care and protection of St. Vigilius. Bishop Valerian of Aquileia had consecrated the youthful Vigilius, while the great Ambrose of Milan had instructed him as to his duties in lengthy, fatherly, epistles. Vigilius came to his end prematurely; he was stoned to death when barely forty years of age.

In the sixth century during the Three Chapters controversy, the Provinces of Milan and Aquileia continued in schism even after Popes Vigilius and Pelagius I had recognized the decrees of the Council of Constantinople; through the Patriarch of Aquileia the bishops of Trent also persisted in the schism. Placed between Germany and Italy, Trent was exposed to the influences of both. Ecclesiastically it remained subject to Aquileia until 1751, but in political affairs it could not withstand the power of the Salic and Saxon kings and emperors. Under the first Franconian king, Bishop Ulrich II became an independent prince of the empire, with the powers and privileges of a duke. In consideration of imperial favour the bishops of Trent sided with Henry IV and Frederick I during the great struggle between the Church and the Empire, but in such a skilful manner so as to avoid a rupture with the pope. Bishop Adelbert is even revered as a saint, although he sided with the antipope Victor IV, who had been chosen by the emperor; in those times of confusion it was often difficult to find the right path. He died a martyr in defence of the rights of his see (1177). Under Innocent III, Friedrich von Wanga raised Trent to the height of its power and influence. He was a great temporal and ecclesiastical ruler. He used every means to kindle and strengthen the religious spirit, and began the building of the splendid Romanesque cathedral. He died at Acre in 1218 during the Fourth Crusade.

The untimely death of Meinhard III, son of Margaret of Tyrol, brought Trent under the rule of Austria in 1363. In 1369 Rudolph IV concluded a treaty with Bishop Albrecht II of Ortenburg, by virtue of which Rudolph became the real sovereign of the diocese. The bishop promised in his own name and in that of his successors to acknowledge the duke and his heirs as lords, and to render assistance to them against their enemies. Thereafter Trent ceased to be an independent principality, and became a part of the Tyrol. Ortenburg's successor was George I of Liechtenstein, who endeavoured to regain its independence for the see. His efforts involved him in several wars, terminated only by his death in 1419. More than once during these wars he was taken prisoner, while the duke was excommunicated and the see interdicted.

The much discussed story of the death of St. Simon of Trent belongs to the reign of Prince-Bishop Johannes IV Hinderbach. On Holy Thursday of the year 1475, the little child, then about 20 months old, son of a gardener, was missed by its parents. On the evening of Easter Sunday the body was found in a ditch. Several Jews, who were accused of the murder, were cruelly tortured.

The sixteenth century was a time of trouble and worry for the Church in the Tyrol. In the towns the Lutherans, in the villages and among the peasants the Anabaptists, multiplied. After many ineffectual efforts, the sovereign, bishops and several monastic orders combined their authority, and a new order set in, which reached its climax in the Council of Trent. At the time of the council Cardinal Christoph von Madrutz was prince-bishop. He was succeeded by three members of his house, with the last of whom the house of Madrutz died out. The decrees of the council were executed but slowly. In 1593 Cardinal Ludwig von Madrutz founded the seminary, which later was conducted by the Somaschi. The Jesuits came to Trent in 1622.

Peter Vigil, Count of Thun, governed the see during the Josephite reforms, with which he was in sympathy. He abolished some of the monasteries in his territory, interfered with the constitutions of the various orders, and closed some churches. When the patriarchate of Aquileia ceased to exist in 1751, Trent became exempt. During the administration of his successor, Emmanuel Maria Count of Thun, it ceased to be an independent ecclesiastical principality (1803). The Bavarian Government insisted on the following: (1) priests were to be ordained only after an examination at the university; (2) the bishops were to order their clergy to obey all orders of the Government in connection with the ecclesiastical police; (3) when filling benefices a list of three names was to be presented by the bishop to the Government or by the Government to the bishop; (4) recourse to Rome or combination with other bishops was forbidden. Bishop Emmanuel replied that he would remain true to his oath to support and defend the privileges of the Church, and that he would rather suffer all the consequences which might arise from his refusal rather than act against his conscience. He was expelled in 1807 and crossed the frontier into Salzburg at Reichenhall. He could only return after the Tyrolese had freed themselves of the Bavarian yoke. After the Peace of Viena negotiation were begun relative to the circumscription of the dioceses of the Tyrol, and were concluded in 1825. Trent was made a suffragan of Salzburg, and the bishops, instead of being chosen by the chapter, were appointed by the emperor. The 115th Bishop of Trent was Johann Nepomuk Tschiderer. He died on 12 March, 1860, and his canonization is already under way. The diocese numbers 602,000 Catholics, 1072 priests, 817 male religious, and 1527 nuns.

Acta Tirolensia, urkundliche Quellen zur Geschichte Tirols (2 vols., 1886, 1899); KINK, Urkundenbuch des Hochstiftes Trient in Fontes rerum Austriacarum, II (5 vols., Vienna, 1812); ATZ, Der deutsche Anteil des Bistums Trient (Bozen, 1879); Austria sancta: Die Heiligen und Seligen Tirols. (Vienna, 1910); RONELLI, Notizie istorice-critiche delle Chiese di Trento (3 vols., Trent, 1761); PINCIUS, De vitis Pontificum Tridentinorum, lib. XII (Mantua, 1546); Kurze Geschichte des Bistums und der Bischofe von Trient (Bozen, 1852).

C. WOLFSGRUBER

Trenton

(Trentonensis).

Diocese created 15 July, 1881, suffragan of New York, comprises Atlantic, Burlington, Camden, Cape May, Cumberland, Gloucester, Hunterdon, Mercer, Middlesex, Monmouth, Ocean, Salem, Somerset, and Warren counties in the State of New Jersey, U.S.A., an area of about 5,756 square miles. From 1808 to 1853 the territory now occupied by the Diocese of Trenton covered the lower sections of what was then known as East and West Jersey, the former belonging to the jurisdiction of New York and the latter to Philadelphia. In 1853 the Diocese of Newark was formed, and the entire State of New Jersey was placed under Bishop James Roosevelt Bayley, afterwards Archbishop of Baltimore. The Diocese of Trenton lies between New York and Philadelphia and has within its confines all the sea coast from Sandy Hook to Cape May Point, whereon thirty churches have been built to accommodate the summer visitors to the Jersey coast. The first Mass said within its territory was celebrated at Woodbridge, about 1672, and the city of Trenton, in 1814, witnessed the formation of the first congregation and the erection of the first church.

The first bishop was the Right Rev. Michael Joseph O'Farrell (b. at Limerick, Ireland, 2 December, 1832; d. 2 April, 1894). Bishop O'Farrell completed his classics and philosophy at All Hallows College, Dublin, and went to St-Sulpice, Paris, where he made his theology course. He became a Sulpician and was ordained in his native city by the Most Rev. Dr. Ryan, 18 Aug., 1855. His superiors sent him to Montreal, Canada, where he taught dogmatic theology at the Grand Seminary. He left the Congregation of St-Sulpice and was made rector of St. Peter's Church, New York City. He took up the work of organizing the new diocese of Trenton with fifty-one priests, sixty-nine churches, and a Catholic population of about forty thousand. Soon new parishes and missions were formed, an orphan asylum was opened at New Brunswick, and a home for the aged at Beverly. At the Third Council of Baltimore Bishop O'Farrell was considered one of the most eloquentr speakers in the American hierarchy. He wrote pastoral letters on Christian marriage and Christian education. His remains were at first interred in the cathedral cemetery, Trenton, but in 1905 were transferred to a vault in the chapel of St. Michael's Orphan Asylum, Hopewell, New Jersey.

Bishop O'Farrell was succeeded by his chancellor and vicar-general, the Right Rev. James Augustine McFaul (b. near Larne, Co. Antrim, Ireland, 6 June, 1850), the second and present Bishop of Trenton. The latter went with his parents to America when a few months old. The family dwelt for several years in New York City and then moved to Bound Brook, New Jersey. Bishop McFaul made his collegiate course at St. Vincent's, Beatty, Pennsylvania, and at St. Francis Xavier's, New York City, his theological studies being made at Seton Hall, South Orange, New Jersey. He was ordained on 26 May, 1877, and, when the See of Trenton was erected, was appointed an assistant priest at St. Mary's church, Trenton, which Bishop O'Farrell selected as his cathedral. Hence he early became a friend of his predecessor, by whom he was held in great confidence and by whom he was appointed pastor of the Church of St. Mary, Star of the Sea, Long Branch. In October, 1890, he returned to the cathedral to be its rector and to assist the bishop. He was made secretary and chancellor, and on 1 November, 1892, was appointed vicar-general. On the death of Bishop O'Farrell he acted as administrator of the diocese and on 20 July, of the same year, was raised to the episcopate, being consecrated in St. Mary's Cathedral (18 Oct., 1894) by Archbishop Corrigan, from whom, when Bishop of Newark, he received all his other orders. Being familiar with the diocese he soon placed it on a splendid financial basis, and erected many churches, schools, and institutions, among which are: the orphan asylum, at Hopewell; the home for the aged, at Lawrenceville; and Mount St. Mary's College for young ladies, at Plainfield. Bishop McFaul is organizer of the American Federation of Catholic Societies, which has a membership of about two million.

Among the most widely known of Bishop McFaul's works are his pastoral letters, "The Christian Home", "The Christian School", and "Some Modern Problems", as well as a timely and valuable brochure on tuberculosis. His address on "The American Universities", delivered in New York City, June, 1909, revealed to the American people the fact that the professors of several of these institutions were advancing ideas in conflict with morality and the established standards of right and wrong. In May, 1911, he delivered an address on the Press before several thousand newspaper men, in St. Patrick's Cathedral, New York City.

In the Diocese of Trenton there are many nationalities, and the Gospel is preached in the following languages: English, German, Italian, Polish, Hungarian, Slovak, Lithuanian, and Rumanian.

The religious communities in the diocese are: men — Franciscans (Minor Conventuals), Augustinians, Fathers of the Pious Society of Missions, Dominicans, Brothers of the Sacred Hearrt, and Brothers of the Christian Schools (summer only); women — Sisters of Mercy, Sisters of Charity, Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis, Sisters of St. Francis, Mission Helpers of trhe Sacred Heart, Dominican Sisters of the Perpetual Rosary, Sisters of St. Dominic, Gray Nuns, Poor Clares, Felician Sisters, School Sisters of Notre-Dame, Franciscan Sisters of Christian Charity, Pious Teachers (Pii Filippini), Sisters of the Precious Blood.

General statistics (1911): bishop, 1; secular priests, 167; regular, 23; churches with resident priests, 124; missions with churches, 30; stations, 84; chapels, 13; religious women (including novices and postulants), 372; college (Franciscan) 1, students, 90; academies for young ladies, 5, pupils, 350; college for young ladies, 1, students, 87; parishes with parochial schools, 44, pupils, 12,263; Sunday-schools, 153; teachers, 900, pupils, 20,364; orphan asylums, 2, orphans, 313; total number of young people under Catholic care, 13,103: hospitals, 3, patients treated during 1910, about 7,000; day-nurseries 2, children, 125; homes for aged, 2, inmates, 100; Catholic population, about 130,000.

FLYNN, The Catholic Church in New Jersey MORRISTOWN, 1904); LEAHY, The Diocese of Trenton (Princeton, 1907); MCFAUL, Memorial of the Rt. Rev. Michael J. O'Farrell; FOX, A Century of Catholicity in Trenton, N. J.; The Catholic Directory (1852, 1882, 1911).

JAMES J. POWERS

Sir Thomas Tresham

Knight Bachelor (in or before 1524), Grand Prior of England in the Order of Knights Hospitallers of St. John of Jerusalem (1557); date of birth unknown; d. 8 March, 1558-9. The eldest son of John Tresham of Rushton, Northamptonshire, and Elizabeth, daughter of Sir James Harrington, of Hornby, Lancashire, he married (1) Anne, daughter of William, Lord Parr, of Horton, by whom he had two sons, and (2) Lettice, relict of Sir Robert Lee, who predeceased him without issue. He was chosen sheriff of Northamtonshire in 1524, 1539, 1545, and 1555, and returned as member for the county in 1541 and twice in 1554. He constantly served on commissions of the peace, of gaol delivery, of oyer and terminer, of sewers, and the like, and was appointed special commissioner in 1527 to search for grain, in 1530 to inquire into Wolsey's possessions, and in 1537 to inquire into the Lincolnshire rebellion. In 1539 he was one of the knights appointed to receive Anne of Cleves at Calais. In 1540 he had licence to impark the Lyveden estate in Aldwinkle St. Peter's parish, where the "New Bield" erected by his grandson still stands. In this year, though his main estates were in Northamptonshire, he had a house with twenty-nine household servants in Wolfeton, Dorsetshire. In 1544 he supplied men for the king's army in France, and a little later was one of the commissioners to collect the "benevolence" for the defence of the realm. In 1546 he was appointed assessor to the "Contribution Commission" and was summoned to Court to meet the French ambassador. In 1549 he assisted in suppressing the Norfolk rising and received £272, 19.6 for his services. He proclaimed Queen Mary at Northampton on 18 July, 1553, and accompanied her on her entry into London. He was one of those appointed on 3 August, 1553, "to staye the assemblies in Royston and other places of Cambridgeshire". In April, 1554, he conveyed a prisoner from Peterborough to be examined by the Privy Council in London. In May, 1554, he was one of the custodians of the Earl of Devonshire.

Although by Royal Charter dated 2 April, 1557, he was named grand prior, it was not till 30 November that the order was re-established in England with four knights under him, and he was solemnly invested. In the meantime Sir Richard Shelley had been made turcopolier at Malta. The order was endowed by the queen with lands to the yearly value of £1436. He sat in the House of Lords in January, 1557-8, and sent his proxy to the first parliament of Queen Elizabeth. He was buried at Rushton with great pomp on 16 March, 1558-9.

JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT

Treviso

(TARVISINA).

Diocese in Venetia (Northern Italy). The capital is surrounded by the River Sile; its environs are the favourite summer resort of the Venetian nobility.

The cathedral, erected in 1141, was transformed in 1485 by Tullio and Pietro Lombardo, and modernized in 1758 with five cupolas; the entrance portal dates from 1835. It contains sculptures by the brothers Bregno and by Antonio Lombardo; paintings by Paris Bourdone, Titian, and Francesco di Dominicis; frescoes by Seitz, Pordenone, etc.; and the tombs of Canon Malchiostro and the Bishop Zanetti. The Church of S. Nicolò, designed in Gothic style by Fra Nicolo da Smola, was erected by Benedict XI, who presented it to the Dominicans. It now belongs to the seminary which occupies the ancient convent of Santa Maria Maddalena; it has paintings by Paolo Veronese.

Among the civil buildings is the Palazzo dei Trecento (1184) containing the Galleria Comunale with pictures by Lotto, Tintoretto, Bordone, Bellini. Natives of Treviso were: the painters Paris Bordone, Pier Maria and Girolamo Pennacchi; the historian Odorigo Rinaldi (Raynaldus), continuator of Baronius; the jurist Bartolommeo Zuccati; the Carmelite Francesco Turchi, mathematician and architect; and the poet Venantius Fortunatus.

Tarvisium was an ancient city of the Veneti, which became Roman in 183 B.C. and was a stronghold of the Goths in the Gothic war. Through the intercession of Bishop Felix the city was spared during the Lombard invasion (569) and became the seat of a duchy. Charlemagne made it a marquisate, extending from Belluno to Ceneda, and from the Adige to the Tagliamento. In 922 Treviso, which was under episcopal jurisdiction, was sacked by the Hungarians. In 1014 it was organized as a commune ruled by consuls, with a council of three hundred citizens. A member of the Lombard league, it later made peace with Barbarossa, who respected its constitution, but appointed as podesta (1173) Ezzellino il Monaco. He was expelled, and thereafter the Ezzelini and Da Canino took turns in the office. Notwithstanding a war with Padua, Belluno, and Feltre, the city flourished through its riches, commerce, and the spirit of its inhabitants. Released from the tyranny of Ezzelino IV (1231-50), Treviso was an independent commune until Emperor Henry VII in 1309 made Riccardo da Canino imperial vicar. He was treacherously slain and succeeded by his son Guecello, against whom a conspiracy was formed. In 1314-18 Can Grande della Scala of Verona annexed Treviso to his state, but the inhabitants revolted to Frederick the Fair of Austria, and afterwards to Louis the Bavarian. Meanwhile, Guecello Tempesta was proclaimed ruler and liberator of the city (1328), but after four years he induced the citizens to recognize the supremacy of Can Grande. Becoming involved in war with Venice, Treviso was ceded to that city (1338), captured by Leopold of Austria (1383), sold to the Carrar, lords of Padua, taken by Gian Galezzo Visconti, Duke of Milan (1404), and finally returned to Venice. In 1848 the papal troops at Treviso, commanded by Ferrari, sustained a siege by the Austrians. The university, established at Treviso in 1317 by Frederick the Fair, did not flourish. The republic of Venice maintained the school until the conquest of Padua (1405), with its great university, resulted in closing the one at Treviso.

Treviso probably received the Gospel from Aquileia. The first bishop of certain date was Jucundus, who in 421 took part in the consecration of the church of the Rialto in Venice. The bishops of Treviso who participated in the schism of the Three Chapters were: Felix (see above); Rusticus, present at the Council of Murano (588); and Felix II, who signed the petition to the Emperor Maurice. In 905 Bishop Adelbert received from King Berengar the temporal jurisdiction of the city, which extended to Rozo (969- 1001) and Rolando who adhered to the schism of Clement III. Bishop Tiso (1212-45) suffered from the tyranny of Ezzelino, and Alberto Ricco, O. M. (1255), was imprisoned for preaching against him. Successive bishops were: Loto Gambacurta (1394), exiled by the Florentines from his archbishopric of Pisa; Giovanni Benedetti, O. P. (1418), who reformed many convents of his order and concubinary priests; Ludovico Barbo (1437), Abbot of S. Giustina of Padua, and reformer of the Benedictine order; Ermolao Barbaro (1443), a learned and zealous prelate; Cardinal Pietro Riario, O. M. (1471); Fra Giovanni Dacri (1478), formerly general of the Franciscans, who restored the cathedral and reorganized the revenues of the bishopric, leaving many pious foundations; Nicolò Franco (1486), papal nuncio in various countries; Francesco Cornaro (1577), who founded a seminary, introduced the reforms of the Council of Trent, resigned his see, and was created cardinal; Gian Antonio Lupo (1646), who conflicted with his canons; Giambattista Saniedo (1684), zealous and beneficent pastor; Fortunato Morosini (1710), who enlarged the Seminary; Bernardino Marini (1788-1817), a canon of the Lateran, present at the Council of Paris, 1811, who united the abbey nullius of Novisa with the See of Treviso; and Giuseppe Giapelli, appointed by the Austrian Government, but not recognized by the Holy See, so that the diocese remained in turmoil until the death of the candidate.

In 1818 Treviso passed from the metropolitan jurisdiction of Aquileia (Udine) to that of Venice. Bishop Giuseppe Grasser (1822) healed the evils caused by the interregnum, Bishop Antonio Farina (1890) conferred sacred orders on Giuseppe Sarto, now Pius X. United with Treviso is the ancient Diocese of Asolo, the bishops of which are unknown from 587 (Agnellus) until 1049 (Ugo), and that of Heraclea (Città Nova), a city founded in the times of the Byzantine emperor Heraclius, as a refuge for the inhabitants of Opitergium (Oderzo), who with their bishop (Magnus) had been exiled by the Lombards. Twenty-six bishops are known, from 814 until the union of the see with Treviso, 1440. The Diocese of Treviso has 215 parishes with 386 secular and 30 regular clergy, 5 monasteries, 27 convents, 2 educational institutions for boys, five for girls, and 414,330 souls.

CAPPELLETTI, Le Chiese d'Italia, X; Collectio Historicorum de Marchia Trevisana (Venice, 1636); VERCI, Storia della Marchia Trivigiana (Venice, 1789); RIGAMONTI, Descrizione delle pitture piu celebri nelle chiese di Treviso (Treviso, 1744); RICCATI, Stato antico e moderno della citta di Asolo (Pesaro, 1763); SEMENZI, Treviso e la sua prorincia (Treviso, 1862); PICCOTTI, I Caminesi e la loro signoria in Treviso dal 1283 al 1312 (Leghorn, 1904).

U. BENIGNI

Jewish Tribe

(Phyle, tribus.)

The earlier Hebrew term rendered in our English versions by the word "tribe" is shebet, while the term matteh, prevails in the post-exilic writings. The two terms are nearly synonymous, signifying "branch", "rod", "staff", "sceptre", and in the sense of "tribe" are used figuratively with probable reference to the derivation of the tribe as a branch of the family of Jacob (stirps), or perhaps signifying originally a company led by a chief with a staff or sceptre.

Arrangement by clans represents a form of social and political organization natural to Semitic nomads, as may be observed among the Bedouins of today, and the division of the Jewish people into twelve tribes is a prominent feature of the Old Testament records, while frequent allusion to the same is found in the New Testament writings. There is a difference of opinion among scholars as to the origin and nature of this most famous of all known tribal organizations. If the Biblical account of the patriarchs be accepted as personal (not tribal) history, each of the twelve tribes owed its origin to direct lineal descent from one of the sons or grandsons of Jacob. The sons of Jacob by Lia were Ruben, Simeon, Levi, Juda, Issachar, and Zabulon; and by Lia's handmaid Zelpha, Gad and Aser, who were legally reputed according to the custom of the time as children of Lia. Jacob's sons by Rachel were Joseph and Benjamin, and by Rachel's handmaid Bala, Dan and Nephtali. The names of all of these, with the exception of Joseph, were given to their respective groups of descendants in the tribal organization, but instead of the tribe of Joseph we find in most of the lists and in the final traditional classification two tribes named after his two sons, Ephraim and Manasses.

Thus, in reality, there were thirteen tribes in all but they are habitually referred to as twelve, doubtless because in the distribution of the land after the conquest of Palestine only twelve tribal territories were assigned, the tribe of Levi being distributed among the others because of its priestly functions and Divine inheritance. To this may be added the fact that the sons of Jacob or Israel were twelve, to say nothing of the probable artificial influence of this mystic number. According to this traditional view the origin of the tribes was due to the fact that the descendants of each of these thirteen fathers or eponyms kept together, forming as many social groups which were to some extent augmented by the inclusion of foreign slaves and wives. Another theory, which has prevailed to a considerable extent among modern scholars, interprets as tribal history and tradition much of what is told of the patriarchal eponyms in personal form. The tribes, according to this view, were not constituted by a subdivision of Israel, but rather the nation was formed originally by the aggregation of some of the earlier tribes which had themselves grown out of the union of pre-existing groups of families and clans. Little is historically known of the tribal system during the nomadic period, but it is assumed on general grounds that the organization was much similar to that of the nomadic Arabs among whom the unifying forces are chiefly the blood bond and the tribal or family cult. At the time of the invasion of Palestine the nation was still in the stage of loose tribal confederation and the war was waged by tribes and subdivisions of tribes, sometimes acting separately, sometimes in combination with others (Judges, i, 3, iv, v). The process of consolidation went on after the conquest; the kindred families and clans naturally settled in the same neighbourhood, and finally the complete tribal organization was evolved with territorial boundaries and independent historical traditions.

It would seem that prior to the monarchy the tribal districts varied in number and extent, as may be gathered from the discrepancies that occur in the Biblical descriptions of their respective boundaries, nor do they appear to have had any fixed or continuous political organization. Aggression by a foreign enemy would unite the clans of a tribe or even several distinct tribes under a common leader as in the case of Gideon and others of the judges; but there is no intimation that in times of peace the tribe was governed by any single chief, though mention is occasionally made of "ancients" and "princes" (Judges, x, 18; xi, 5; 1 Kings, iv, 3; xi, 3; 11 Kings, xix, 11; etc.). These were probably the heads of the clans and families of which the tribes were composed. After the establishment of the monarchy the autonomy and importance of the tribe as a political unit gradually waned, and at length the tribal names came to be little more than geographical expressions. On the other hand, veneration for the ancient tribes as social organizations with their religious and family traditions seems to have increased as time went on, and not only after the exile but also in the New Testament times we find much care displayed in recording the particular tribe or even family to which various persons are said to belong. The descendants of kings and other noted Old-Testament personages could, of course, name their tribe, but in the case of more obscure individuals it is likely that the tribal indication is inferred from the fact of family residence in a particular district of Palestine.

JAMES F. DRISCOLL

Diocese of Tricarico

(TRICARICENSIS.)

Located in the Province of Potenza in the Basilicata (Southern Italy), near the River Perrola. In 1694 it was almost destroyed by earthquake. The cathedral was erected in 968 by Polyeuctos, Patriarch of Constantinople. The names of the bishops, then of the Greek Rite, are not known. Of the Latin bishops after the Norman conquest the first was Arnoldo (1068); others were: the theologians Palmerio di Gallusio (1253) and Fra Nicolo; Cardinal Pier Luigi Caraffa (1624), who restored the cathedral and founded the seminary. From 1805 to 1819 the see remained vacant. The diocese is suffragan of the metropolitan See of Acerenza and Matera; it has 25 parishes, 80,540 souls, 180 secular and regular clergy, one educational institution for boys and one for girls.

Cappelletti, Le Chiese d'Italia, XX, 481.

U. BENIGNI

Charles Joseph Tricassin

One of the greatest theologians of the Capuchin Order, b. at Troyes; d. in 1681. There is but little positive information about his life. By continued study he acquired a profound knowledge of the writings of Augustine, and explained and defended with success his doctrine of grace against the Jansenists. Tricassin's writings were violently attacked; they treat exhaustively both the Augustinian doctrine of grace and that of St. Bonaventure. They comprise in the main: "De praedestinatione hominum ad gloriam" (Paris, 1669 and 1673), to which was added "Supplementum Augustinianum" (1673), the work being intended to prove predestination for foreknown merits; "De indifferenti lapsi hominis arbitrio sub gratia et concupiscentia" (Paris, 1673), a thorough explanation of many Augustinian tenets; "De necessaria ad salutem gratia omnibus et singulis data" (Paris, 1673), proof of the sufficient grace for every individual, with special emphasis upon difficult passages in Augustine's writings on which a full understanding of his doctrine depends; "De natura peccati originalis" (Paris, 1677); "De causa bonorum operum" (Paris, 1679), a proof of the virtue of the hope of eternal life and of the fear of hell; a "Supplementum" (Paris, 1679) shows that attrition in connection with the Sacrament of Penance is sufficient according to Augustine and the Council of Trent. Tricassin also published a commentary to several of Augustine's works to prove that Augustine calls the Pelagians heretical teachers, because they do not concede any necessity of grace for the will. Tricassin published at Paris in 1678 a French translation with explanations and applications of Augustine's books, "De gratia et libero arbitrio", "De correptione et gratia" and also a treatise to prove that the Cartesian philosophy was contrary to faith. The importance of the author and his writings is best shown by the fact that the Jansenists bought up his books and burned them because they could not answer them.

FATHER ODORICK

Tricca

Titular see, suffragan of Larissa in Thessaly. It was an ancient city of Thessaly, near the River Peneius and on the River Lethaeus which devastated it in 1907. It is mentioned in Homer (Iliad, II, 729; IV, 202) as the Kingdom of Machaon and Podaleirius, sons of AEsculapius and physicians of the Greek army. It possessed the oldest known temple of AEsculapius, which was discovered in 1902, with a hospital for pilgrims. Tricca is mentioned by other writers, but not in connection with important events. It was a suffragan of Larissa at an early date and remained so until 1882 when this portion of Thessaly was annexed to the Kingdom of Greece, Since then the see, which bears the names of Triccala and Stagoi, is dependent on the Holy Synod of Athena. Socrates (V 22), Sozomenes (V 12), and Nicephorus Callistus (XII, 34) say that Heliodorus, probably the same as the author of the romance of the Ethiopian women or of Theagenes and Charicles (third century), became Bishop of Tricca. Another bishop, to whom have been wrongly attributed commentaries on the Acts of the Apostles, the Epistle of St. Paul and the Catholic Epistles (for the works published in his name are not his), lived at the end of the sixth century. He was an Origenist and Monophysite who wrote a commentary on the Apocalypse (Petrides "OEcumenius de Tricca, ses oeuvres et son culte" in "Echos d'Orient", VI, 307-10; Le Quien, "Oriens christ.", I, 117-20). Some Latin titular bishops in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries are also known (Eubel, "Hierarchia catholica medii aevi," II, 280; III, 338). Tricca, now Triccala, is the capital of the nome of the same name and has 28,000 inhabitants: Greeks, Turks, and Jews.

S. VAILHÉ

Diocese of Trichinopoly

(TRICHINOPOLITAN.)

Located in India, suffragan of Bombay, comprises the south east portion of the peninsula as far as the Western Ghauts by which it is separated from the dioceses of Verapoly and Quilon; bounded on the north by the Dioceses of Kumbakonam and Coimbatore, on the north-east by a portion of the Diocese of Saint Thomas of Mylapur on the east and south by the sea. In order to facilitate administration the diocese is divided into three districts, northern, central, and southern, each under a superior having his residence at Trichinopoly, Madura, and Palamcottah respectively; and these districts are again subdivided into pangus or sections, of which there are in all fifty-two. The Catholic population, according to the census of 1907, is 245,255, who are served by 60 priests of the Toulouse province of the Society of Jesus (41 European and 19 native) and 19 native secular priests, helped by 156 catechists. Besides these, 53 other priests, European and native, are engaged chiefly in educational work at Trichinopoly, Shembaganur, Palamcottah, etc. A novitiate, juniorate, and scholasticate of the Society is established at Shembaganur. There is a congregation of Brothers of the Sacred Heart (native lay brothers) engaged in catechetical work and teaching at Palamcottah, Madura, Panchampetti, and Trichinopoly, and also the following orders of nuns: Daughters of the Cross of Annecy at Trichinopoly and Tuticorin; Sisters of St. Joseph of Lyons at Madura; native nuns of Our Lady of Seven Dolours and native nuns of St. Anna, both with their novitiate at Trichinopoly; finally the Oblates -- native women devoted to the baptism of pagan children and the instruction of village girls. The places of worship in the diocese amount to 282 churches and 811 chapels. There are also fifteen churches and some chapels scattered over the diocese which (by exemption) belong to the padroado jurisdiction of the Diocese of Saint Thomas of Mylapur.

HISTORY

The present diocese comprises a large portion of the ancient Madura mission, so that down to the year 1836 its history will be found under MANDURA MISSION. In that year the district was once entrusted to the Society of Jesus, and its first vicar Apostolic was appointed in 1845. In 1886, on the establishment of the hierarchy, the vicariate became a diocese suffragan of Pondicherry; but in 1893 it was made suffragan of Bombay, as it still remains. Succession of prelates: Alexis Canoz, S.J., vicar Apostolic 1847, became first bishop in 1887, in 1888; John Mary Barthe, S.J., in 1890, resigned on account of failing sight in 1909; A. Faisandier, S.J., coadjutor bishop from 1909. Educational institutions for boys: St. Joseph's College, Trichinopoly, first opened at Negapatam in 1846, transferred to Trichinopoly in 1883, with about 1800 pupils, prepares students for the degree of M. A. in Madras University; boarding-house for native Catholic boys; ecclesiastical seminary to prepare boys for one at Kandy; lower secondary school for Europeans and Eurasians and seven primary schools for natives, with total of 600 pupils, all at Trichinopoly; St. Xavier's High School, Palamcottah, with boarding-house and St. Anthony's primary school; St. Xavier's High School, Tuticorin; St. Mary's High School, Madura; lower secondary schools at Palamcottah, Dindigul, Uttamplayama; industrial schools at Trichonopoly, Irudaiyakulam, and Adaikalaburam; training schools for teachers at the same places; primary schools in the diocese number 260, with 11,027 pupils. For girls: St. Joseph's High School and lower secondary school, Trichinopoly, for European and Eurasian girls, both under Daughters of the Cross; three secondary schools for native girls (Trichonopoly) under Sisters of Our Lady of Seven Dolours, also training schools for mistresses; lower secondary schools at Palamcottah, Madura, Tuticorin, Vadakangulam, Manapad, Satankulam primary schools at Dindigul, Sarakanai and several other villages; industrial school (Tuticorin) under Daughters of the Cross. Various institutions: orphanages for children born of pagan parents at Trichinopoly, Madura, and Adaikalaburam, and one for girls at Pallamcottah; dispensaries in five places; asylums for native widows at Trichinopoly, Sarakanai, Adaikalaburam, and for Brahmin widows at Trichinopoly; St. Mary's Tope, a settlement in Trichinopoly for Brahmin converts, opened in 1893, has (1912) 45 residents; catechumenates for men and women in three places, besides associations of voluntary catechists who give their leisure time to teaching on Sundays and feasts; St. Joseph's College Press, which publishes the "Tamil Messenger of the S. Heart", the "Morning Star", devotional books, etc. There are over 100 sodalities in the diocese.

ERNEST R. HULL

Trichur

(TRICHURENSIS.)

Vicariate Apostolic in India, one of the three vicariates of the Syro-Malabar Rite, bounded on the north by the diocese of Mangalore, east by the diocese of Coimbature, south by the Vicariate of Ernaculam, and on the west by the Indian Ocean. According to the census of 1900 the Catholics of the, Syrian Rite in the vicariate numbered 91,998, having 63 churches and 23 chapels served by 66 native secular priests. There are also three monasteries of Tertiary Carmelite monks at Elthuruth, Ampalacad, and Paratti, containing about 20 professed and 11 lay brothers, besides a number of novices; also four convents for Carmelite nuns with 31 professed besides novices, postulants and lay sisters. There are in the vicariate 2 high schools, 2 lower secondary schools, and 184 elementary schools, the number of children under training being 19,093. A seminary at Trichur prepares candidates for Puthenpally or Kandy. The vicar Apostolic (John Menacherry, appointed 1896) resides at Trichur. For the ancient history of the Christians of the Syro-Malabar Rite see THOMAS CHRISTIANS. They remained under the jurisdiction partly of Cranganore, till 1887, when on the establishment of the hierarchy, the churches of the Syrian Rite were separated from those of the Latin Rite and placed under two vicars Apostolic with their centres at Trichur and Kottayam respectively. Later on, in 1896, a new division was made and three vicariates established, viz. of Trichur, Ernaculam, and Changanacherry. These three vicariates cover the same ground as the Archdiocese of Verapoly, the Archbishop of Verapoly exercising territorial jurisdiction over all Christians of the Latin Rite, while the vicars Apostolic hold personal and quasi-territorial jurisdiction over all of the Syrian Rite. The vicariates are nominally classed as belonging to the province of Verapoly, but without the usual ecclesiastical connection.

(See CHANGANACHERRY, VICARIATE APOSTOLIC OF; VERAPOLY, ARCHDIOCESE OF; DAMAO, DIOCESE OF; EASTERN CHURCHES; THOMAS CHRISTIANS.)

Madras Catholic Directory, 1910.

ERNEST R. HULL

Tricomia

Titular see, suffragan of Caesarea in Palaestina Prima. It is mentioned in George of Cyprus (Descriptio orbis romani, ed. Gelzer, 1024) and, according to the other cities preceding or following its name, would seem to have been situated in southern Palestine. Malalas (Chronographia, V, in P.G., XCVII, 236) relates an ancient legend regarding Tricomia, which he calls Nyssa and confounds with Scythopolis. According to his account it was the site of a famous temple of Artemis. It was never a Greek see, and Le Quien (Oriens Christ., III, 677) is at fault in his complaint of being unable to find any bishops. The Roman Curia, taking the "Descriptio orbis romani" of George of Cyprus, a civil document, for a "Notitia episcopatuum", has made Tricomia a titular see. It is now a Mussulman village called Terkoumieh on a high hill between Hebron and Bet-Djibrin. It must not be confused with another Tricomia in Arabia which was the camping place of the equites promoti Illyriciani.

S. VAILHÉ

Triduum

(Three days).

A time frequently chosen for prayer or for other devout practices, whether by individuals in private, or in public by congregations or special organizations in parishes, in religious communities, seminaries, or schools. The form of prayer or devotion depends upon the occasion or purpose of the triduum. The three days usually precede some feast, and the feast then determines the choice of the pious execises. In liturgical usage there is a triduum of ceremonies and prayers in Holy Week; the Rogation Days (q.v.); the three days of litanies prior to the feast of the Ascension, and the feasts of Easter and Pentecost, with the first two days of their octaves. There is ecclesiastical authorization for a triduum in honour of the Holy Trinity, of the Holy Eucharist, and of St. Joseph. The first of these, instituted Pius IX, 8 August, 1847, may be made at any time of the year in public or private, and partial or plenary indulgences are attached to it on the usual conditions. The second, also indulgenced, was instituted by Pius X, 10 April, 1907, for the purpose of promoting frequent Communion. The time for it is Friday, Saturday, and Sunday after the feast of Corpus Christi, though the bishops may designate any other more convenient time of the year. Each day there should be a sermon on the Holy Eucharist and Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament, and on Sunday, there should be besides a sermon on the Gospel and on the Holy Eucharist, at the parochial Mass. This triduum is specially for cathedral churches, though the bishops may also require other churches to have it. The prayer, "O Most Sweet Jesus" (Dulcissime Jesu), as given in the "Raccolta", is appointed for reading during Benediction. The triduum in honor of St. Joseph, prior to his feast on 19 March, was recommended by Leo XIII in the Encyclical "Quamprimum pluries" (15 August, 1889), with the prayer, "To thee, O blessed Joseph." The most frequent occasions for a triduum are: when children are in preparation for their first Communion; among pupils in school at the beginning of the scholastic year; among seminarians at the same time; and in religious communities for those who are to renew their vows yearly or every six months. The exercises of these triduums are mainly meditations or instructions disposing the hearers to a devout reception of the sacraments of penance and of Holy Communion and to betterment of life.

ST. JOHN, The Raccolta (6th ed., London, 1912); BERINGER, Die Ablasse, ihr Wesen u. Gebrauch (Paderborn, 1900, tr., Fr., Paris, 1905).

JOHN J. WYNNE

Trier

(TREVIRENSIS)

Diocese; suffragan of Cologne; includes in the Prussian province of the Rhine the governmental department of Trier, with the exception of two districts administered by mayors, and the governmental department of Coblenz with the exception of ten such districts that belong to the Archdiocese of Cologne; it also includes the Principality of Birkenfeld belonging to the Grand Duchy of Oldenburg (see map to article GERMANY). The diocese is divided into 46 deaneries, each administered by a dean and a definitor. In 1911 it comprised 750 parishes, 28 parishes administered by vicars, 200 chaplaincies and similar offices, 70 administrative and school offices. In 1912 there were 711 parish priests, 28 parish vicars, 210 chaplains and curates, 122 ecclesiastics in other positions (administration and schools), 65 priests either retired or on leave of absence, 105 clergy belonging to the orders, 1,249,700 Catholics, and 450,000 persons of other faiths. In most of the country districts the population is nearly entirely Catholic; in the mining and manufacturing districts on the Saar, as well as on the Hunsrück and in the valley of the Nahe River, the Catholic faith is not so predominant. The cathedral chapter has the right to elect the bishop; besides the bishop there is also an auxiliary bishop. The chapter consists of a provost, a dean (the auxiliary bishop), 8 cathedral canons, 4 honorary canons; 6 curates are also attached to the cathedral. The educational institutions of the diocese for the clergy are the episcopal seminar for priests at Trier, which has a regent, 7 clerical professors, and 220 students, and the gymnasial seminaries for boys at Trier and Pr m.

Since the close of the Kulturkampf the religious orders have prospered greatly, and in 1911 there were in the diocese: a Benedictine Abbey at Maria-Laach containing 26 fathers, 80 brothers; a Franciscan monastery on the Apollinarisberg at Reimagen, 9 fathers, 8 brothers; 2 houses of the Capuchins, 18 fathers, 12 brothers; 1 house of the Oblates, 5 fathers, 21 brothers; 2 houses of the Pallotines, 9 fathers, 24 brothers; 1 house of the Redemptorists, 9 fathers, 8 brothers; 1 house of the White Fathers, 5 fathers, 5 brothers; 1 house of the Fathers of the Divine Word, 21 fathers, 50 brothers; 126 Brothers of Charity in 4 houses, and 144 Brothers of St. Francis in 7 houses. The female orders and congregations in the diocese in 1911 were: Benedictine Nuns of the Perpetual Adoration, 1 house with 37 sisters; Sisters of St. Charles Borromeo, 71 houses with 500 sisters; Servants of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, 4 houses, 41 sisters; Serving-Maids of Christ, 30 houses, 193 sisters; Dominican Nuns, 2 houses, 69 sisters; Sisters of St. Francis from the mother-houses at Aachen, Heithuizen, Olpe, and Waldbreitbach, 94 houses, 476 sisters; Capuchin Nuns, 1 house, 10 sisters; Sisters of St. Clement, 1 house, 6 sisters; Nuns of the Visitation, 1 house, 50 sisters; Sisters of the Holy Spirit, 47 houses, 300 sisters; Sisters of the Love of the Good Shepherd, 2 houses, 125 sisters; Sisters of the Poor Child Jesus, 1 house, 9 sisters; Sisters of St. Joseph, 1 house, 20 sisters; Ursuline Nuns, 5 houses, 220 Sisters; Sisters of St. Vincent de Paul, 7 houses; 30 sisters. The most important church of the diocese is the cathedral, the oldest church of a Christian bishop on German soil. The oldest section of the building goes back to the Roman era and was a church as early as the fourth century. In the course of time other parts were added which belong to all forms of architecture, although the Romanesque style preponderates. The cathedral contains the remains of twenty-five archbishops and electors as well as those of the last four bishops of Trier. The most precious of its numerous treasures is the Holy Coat of Christ, which, according to legend, was given to the Church of Trier by St. Helena. Two exhibitions of this venerable relic are worthy of special note: that of 1844, connected with the rise of the sect of German Catholics, and the one held in 1891, which attracted over two million pilgrims. Other noted churches in Trier are: the Church of Our Lady, one of the most beautiful ecclesiastical monuments of Gothic architecture, built 1227-43; the Church of St. Paulinus or of the Martyrs, the burial place of Bishop Paulinus, erected in 1734 in Rococo style to replace the old church destroyed by the French in l674; the thirteenth-century Romanesque church of the former Benedictine Abbey of St. Matthias, containing the grave of St. Matthias, the only grave of an Apostle in Germany; it is much visited by pilgrims. Other noted churches of the diocese are: the churches of St. Castor and Our Lady at Coblenz, the abbey church of Maria-Laach, the old monastery churches of Pr m, M nstermaifeld, and Merzig; the Church of St. Maria at Oberwesel, the Gothic churches of Andernach, Boppard, Remagen, Sinzig, and of other places on the Rhine and the Moselle.

HISTORY

The beginnings of the see of Trier are obscure. From the time of Diocletian reorganization of the divisions of the empire, Trier was the capital of Belgica Prima, the chief city of Gaul, and frequently the residence of the emperors. There were Christians among its population as early as the second century, and there was probably as early as the third century a bishop at Trier, which is the oldest episcopal see in Germany. The first clearly authenticated bishop is Agricius who took part in the Council of Arles in 314. His immediate successors were St. Maximinus who sheltered the excommunicated St. Athanasius at Trier, and St. Paulinus, who was exiled to Phrygia on account of his opposition to Arianism. Little is known of the later bishops up to the reign of Charlemagne; during this intervening period the most important ones were St. Nicetius (527-66) and Magnericus (d. 596), the confidant of the Merovingian king, Childebert II. The bishops during the reign of Charlemagne were: Wiomad (757-91), who accompanied the emperor on his campaign against the Avars; Richbod (792-804), one of Alcuin's pupils; and Amalarius Fortunatus (809-14), sent by Charlemagne as ambassador to Constantinople, and the author of liturgical writings. Charlemagne's will proves that Trier at this era was an archdiocese; Metz, Toul, and Verdun are mentioned as its suffragans. In 772 Charlemagne granted Wiomad complete immunity from the jurisdiction of the ruling count for all the churches, monasteries, villages, and castles belonging to the Church of St. Peter at Trier. In 816 Louis the Pious confirmed to Archbishop Hetti (814-47) the privileges of protection and immunity granted by his father. At the partition of the Frankish empire at Verdun in 843, Trier fell to Lothair's empire; at the partition of Lothair's empire at Mersen in 870, it fell to the East-Frankish kingdom which later became the German Empire. However, after the death of Louis the Child, the lords of Lorraine separated from the East-Frankish Kingdom and became vassals of the West-Frankish ruler King Charles the Simple, until Henry I conquered the country for Germany again. Archbishop Ratbod (883-915) received in 898 complete immunity from all state taxes for the entire episcopal territory from the King of Lorraine and Burgundy, Swentibold, son of Emperor Arnulf. He obtained from Louis the Child the district and city of Trier, the right to have a mint and to impose customs-duties; from Charles the Simple he gained the right of a free election of the Bishop of Trier. In this way the secular possessions of the bishops of Trier, which had sprung from the valuable donations of the Merovingian and Carlovingian rulers, were raised to a secular principality. Archbishop Ratbert (931-56), brother-in-law of King Henry I, was confirmed by Otto I in all the temporal rights gained by his predecessors.

Archbishop Poppo (1016-47), son of Margrave Leopold of Austria, did much to enlarge the territory owned by the church of Trier. During the strife over Investiture, Engelbert of Ortenburg (1078-1101) and Bruno of Laufen (1102-24) belonged to the imperial party. Albero of Montreuil (1131-52) had, as Archdeacon of Metz, opposed lay Investiture; during his administration the cathedral school of Trier reached its highest fame. From about 1100 the Archbishop of Trier was the Arch-Chancellor of Gaul, for the German emperor, and thus became the possessor of an imperial office and an Elector of the German king and emperor. As the archbishops of Trier were among the leading spiritual princes of the empire, they became involved in all the struggles between pope and emperor. While Hillin (1152-69) was a partisan of Frederick Barbarossa, Arnold I (1169-83) made successful efforts to bring about a reconciliation between the emperor and pope (1177). John I (1190-1212) was excommunicated by Innocent III on account of his adherence to King Philip of Swabia; Bishop John increased the possessions of the archdiocese by gaining several countships and castles. Theodoric II of Wied (1212-42) belonged to the party of Frederick II, while Arnold II of Isenburg (1242-59) opposed the emperor. Henry II of Vinstingen (1260-86) was the first Archbishop of Trier who took part in the election of a German emperor as one of the seven Electors; the electoral dignity, together with the right to the first vote, was confirmed by the Golden Bull in 1356. As in other German dioceses, so also in Trier, the rising cities, especially Trier and Coblenz, sought to rid themselves of the suzerainty of the bishop. Such attempts were crowned with considerable success during the rule of Archbishop Diether of Nassau (1300-07), brother of King Adolph of Nassau. On the other hand, Baldwin of Luxembourg (1308-54), the most noted of the medieval archbishops of Trier, was able to restore and raise the importance of the See of Trier by his wide-reaching activity both in secular and spiritual affairs. He brought the cities of Coblenz and Trier under his suzerainty again, and was the actual organizer of his possessions as an electoral state. Werner of Falkenstein (1388-1418), one of Baldwin's successors, acquired Limburg on the Lahn; during the great Western Schism he held loyally to Gregory XII. After the death of Otto of Ziegenhain (1418-30), who laboured zealously for the reform of the Church, there was a double election; upon this Pope Martin V appointed a third person archbishop. During the struggle of the candidates to secure the diocese it suffered severely. James of Sierck (1439-56) sought to restore order in the confused finances of the diocese. He was deposed by Eugenius IV as an adherent of the Council of Basle and of the Antipope Felix V, who was elected there. However, the deposition had no effect as the German Electors opposed it. John II, Margrave of Baden (1456-1503), promoted the reform of the Church. He left the diocese heavily in debt, and these debts were increased by his great-nephew and successor, James II of Baden (1503-11).

The Reformation limited the spiritual jurisdiction of the Archdiocese of Trier. Although the energetic Richard von Greiffenklau (1511-31) vigorously opposed the Reformation, still he could not prevent the new doctrine from gaining a foothold in the district of the Hunsr ck, and in that on the right bank of the Rhine. He defeated the attacks of Franz von Sickingen upon the city of Trier, as well as the efforts of that city to become independent of the bishop. In 1512 he exhibited the Holy Coat for the first time and spent the donations of the pilgrims on the cathedral. John II von Metzenhausen (1531-40) attempted reforms which were frustrated by his death. John II von Hagen (1541-47) sent a representative to the Council of Trent and began earnest measures of reform. John V von Isenburg (1547-56) attended the council himself, but was recalled home by the incursion of Margrave Albrecht of Brandenburg-Ansbach into the archdiocese, which the margrave devastated horribly. John VI von der Leyen (1556-67) was able to regain Trier, but could not prevent the French from taking possession of his three suffragan dioceses, Metz, Toul, and Verdun. He checked the further spread of the new doctrines by calling the Jesuits into his diocese (1561). James III von Eltz (1567-81) and John VII von Schönenberg (1581-99) carried out in their possessions the reformatory decrees of the Council of Trent. The former secured the administration of the Abbey of Prüm, whereby the secular possessions of the archdiocese reached their final extent; the latter established two seminaries at Coblenz and Trier. Lothair von Metternich (1599-1623) joined the Catholic League in order to secure the stability of the Catholic Church in Germany. In this way his see became involved in the Thirty Years War. His successor, Philip Christopher von S tern (1623-52), withdrew from the League, formed an alliance with France, and permitted the French to garrison the fortress of Ehrenbreitstein. When he made advances to the Swedes he was captured by the Spanish troops in 1635 under suspicion of heresy, and was kept a prisoner at Vienna until 1645. In the struggle between the imperial troops and the French the archdiocese was often devastated. Charles Caspar von der Leyen (1652-76) had scarcely repaired the damage done by the Thirty Years War by an excellent administration, when the marauding wars of Louis XIV of France brought fresh misery upon the country. John Hugo von Orsbeck (1676-1711) refused to recognize the seizure of some of his territories and their incorporation into France by Louis XIV through what was called the "reunions", neither would take the oath of loyalty to Louis. Consequently, during the years 1684-97 large parts of the see were garrisoned by French troops.

During the long period of peace in the eighteenth century the archdiocese had excellent rulers. Francis Louis von Pfalz-Neuburg (1716-29) gave particular attention to the organization of the administration of justice, and raised the decaying university by establishing new professorships. Francis George von Sch nborn (1729-56) encouraged learned studies and founded a university library and building. The short administration of John Philip von Walderdorf (1756-68) was followed by the reign of the last Elector of Trier, Clement Wenceslaus, Duke of Saxony (1768-1812), who was also Bishop of Augsburg. He gained a reputation by improving the schools and reforming the monasteries, but, on the other hand, influenced by the ideas of the "Enlightenment", he supported Febronianism, shared in the labours of the Congress of Ems (q.v.), and also was involved in the dispute about the nunciatures (see NUNCIO). After the outbreak of the French Revolution the territories of Trier, especially Coblenz, became the gathering place of the French émigrés. In 1794 Trier and Coblenz were besieged by the French. In 1797, by the Peace of Campo-Formio, the part of the archdiocese on the left bank of the Rhine was ceded to France; in 1797 the university was suppressed. In 1801 the Peace of Lunéville gave to France, in addition, the fortress of Ehrenbreitstein. When the German Church was secularized in 1803, the section of the archdiocese on the right bank of the Rhine was also secularized and the greater part of it was incorporated into Nassau. Clemens Wenceslaus renounced his rights in return for an annual pension of 100,000 gulden and withdrew to the Diocese of Augsburg. An ecclesiastical administration, which lasted until 1824, was established in Ehrenbreitstein for the part of the former archdiocese on the right bank of the Rhine. The French Diocese of Trier was established in 1801 for the section of the former archdiocese which had been ceded to France. It embraced hardly a third of the old diocese and was made suffragan to Mechlin. Its first and only bishop was Charles Mannay (1802-16). The Congress of Vienna gave the territory included in this diocese once more to Germany, largely to Prussia and the Grand Duchy of Oldenburg. In 1816 Bishop Charles Mannay resigned his office and retired to France, where he died in 1824 as Bishop of Rennes. For six years the see remained vacant, the administration being conducted in the interim by Hubert Anthony Corden as vicar-general, from 1818 as vicar Apostolic. On the reorganization of the Catholic Church in Prussia in 1821, Trier was revived as a simple diocese by the Bull "De salute animarum", made suffragan to Cologne, and received about its present territory. In 1824 it contained 531 parishes with 580,000 Catholics.

The first bishop of the new diocese was Joseph von Hommer (1824-36). The election of his successor, William Arnoldi (1842-64) which took place in 1839 and was renewed in 1842, was not recognized by the Government until Frederick William IV ascended the throne. Arnoldi did a great deal for the reawakening of Catholic consciousness in Germany. The exhibition of the Holy Coat, which he brought about in 1844, led to the forming of the sect called German Catholics. He was succeeded by Leopold Pelldram (1865-67), formerly chaplain general of the Prussian army, who was followed by Matthias Eberhard (1867-76), who enjoys the honours of a Confessor of the Faith. Eberhard was one of the first to suffer by the Kulturkampf which broke out in Prussia. After being repeatedly condemned to pay heavy fines he was sentenced on 6 March, 1876, to ten months imprisonment. Trier was one of the dioceses that suffered the most during the Kulturkampf. The number of its parishes robbed of their parish priests amount to 197, while nearly 294,000 Catholics lacked regular spiritual care. After the death of the bishop on 30 May, 1876, the see was vacant for five years and had to be secretly administered by an Apostolic Delegate. Finally in 1881, through the personal efforts of Leo XIII, an agreement was made with the Prussian Government, and Mich l Felix Korum (cathedral canon and parish priest of the minster at Strasburg) was appointed Bishop of Trier by the pope, consecrated at Rome on 19 August, and enthroned on 25 September. Up to the present day the bishop has sought to repair the damage inflicted upon his diocese by the Kulturkampf, through the confessional, the pulpit, and religious associational life. He has founded religious institutions for education, and promoted the establishment of numerous houses of the orders. The exhibition of the Holy Coat in 1891 which he carried out was the occasion for impressive demonstrations of Catholic faith and life in Germany (cf. Korum, "Wunder und Gnadenerweise, die sich bei der Austellung 1891 zugetragen haben", Trier, 1894).

A complete bibliography is to be found in MARX, Trevirensia. Literaturkunde zur Gesch. der Trierer Lande (Trier, 1909). Most important works are: BROUWER AND MASENIUS, Antiquitatum et annalium Trevirensium libri XXV (Li ge, 1670-71); HONTHEIM, Hist. Trevirensis diplomatica et pragmatica (Augsburg and W rzburg, 1750); IDEM, Prodromus Hist. Trevirensis (1757); Gesta Trevirorum, ed. WYTTENBACH AND M LLER (Trier,1836-39); MARX, Gesch. des Erzstifts Trier (5 vols., Trier, 1858-1864); G RZ, Regesten der Erzbisch fe zu Trier von Hetti bis Johann II, 814-1503 (Trier, 1859-61); IDEM Mittelrheinische Regesten (Coblenz, 1876-86); Codex diplomaticus Rheno-Mosellanus, ed. G NTHER (5 vols. Coblenz, 1822-26); Urkundenbuch zur Gesch. der mittelrheinischen Territorien, ed. ZEYER, ELTESTER, AND G RZ (Coblenz, 1860-74); DE LORENZI, Beitr ge zur Gesch. s mtlicher Pfarreien der Di zese Trier (Trier, 1887); SAUERLAND, Trier Geschichtsquellen (Trier, 1889); IDEM, Urkunden u. Regesten zur Gesch. der Rheinlande aus dem vatikansichen Archiv (4 vols., Bonn, 1902-07); SCHORN, Eiflia illustrata (Bonn, 1888-1892); NEY, Die Reformation in Trier 1559 ihre Entstehung (Leipzig and Halle, 1906-07); VON SCHR TTER, Die M nzen von Trier, II (Bonn, 1908); BASTGEN, Die Gesch. des Trierer Domkapitels im Mittelalter (Paderborn, 1910); EWALD, Die Siegel der Erzbisch fe von Trier (Bonn, 1910). On art and architecture: VON WILMOWSKY, Der Dom zu Trier (Trier, 1874); IDEM, Die Grabst tten der Erzbisch fe von Trier (Trier, 1876); BEISSEL, Gesch. der Trierer Kirchen (1888-89); KR GER AND KENTENICH, Trier zur R merzeit u. im Mittelalter (Leipzig, 1911); VON SCHLEINITZ, Trier (Leipzig, 1909). One of the series, Ber hmte Kunst tten; CRAMER, Das r mische Trier (G tersloh, 1911). Most important periodicals: Trierisches Archiv (Trier, 1898----), and its supplementary numbers (Trier, 1901----); Westdeutsche Zeitschrift f r Gesch. u. Kunst (Trier, 1882----), with supplementary numbers.

JOSEPH LINS

Francis a Paula Triesnecker

Astronomer, b. at Kirchberg on the Wagram, in Lower Austria, 2 April, 1745; d. at Vienna 29 January, 1817. At the age of sixteen he entered the Society of Jesus, and, after several years' study of philosophy (Vienna) and mathematics (Tyrnau), he taught at various Jesuit colleges. After the suppression of the Society he went to Gras, where he completed his theological studies and was ordained shortly afterwards. He soon attained a reputation as a mathematician and astronomer and was appointed assistant to the director of the Vienna Observatory, Father Max Hell, whom he succeeded in 1792. He occupied this post during the remainder of his life. Triesnecker was thoroughly grounded in the science of mathematics and its applications to astronomy; and the accuracy of his observations, which in spite of ill-health he pursued till an advanced age, was universally recognized. His numerous treatises mainly deal with geography and astronomy. A considerable portion of his time was taken up by the "Ephemerides" of Vienna, the editorship of which, after Father Hell's death, he shared with the ingenious computer Burg. In this periodical he published, between the years 1787-1806, his "Tabulae Mercurii, Martis, Veneris, Solares", and the greater part of his micrometrical observations of the sun, moon, planets, and positions of stars. His "Novae motuum lunarium tabulae" were published separately in 1802. Other astronomical investigations may be found in "Zach's monatliche Correspondenz", in the "Commentarii soc. leg. Götting.", and in Bode's "Astron. Jahrbuch". In geography he determined or corrected the longitude and latitude of various places from the best available data. The results of this labour are embodied in the periodicals referred to above, the "Transactions of the Royal Soc. of Bohemia", and Zach's "Allgemeine geographische Ephemeriden". He completed Father Metzburg's triangulation of lower Austria, using it as a basis for the production of a new map of that country, and assisted him with the triangulation of Galicia. The erection of the "New Observatory" of Vienna (which afterwards gave place to the new structure on the "Turkenschanze") was Triesnecker's work. He was a member of the scientific associations of Breslau, Göttingen, Munich, St. Petersburg, and Prague.

J. STEIN

Triest-Capo d'Istria

(TERGESTINA ET JUSTINOPOLITANA.)

Suffragan diocese of Görz-Gradiska; exists as a triple see since 1821, when Cittanova (Æmonia) and Capodistria (Ægida, Capris, Justinopolis) were united to Triest, and its present name was assigned to the see.

St. Frugifer, consecrated in 524, was the first Bishop of Triest; since then it exhibits a long line of eighty-seven bishops. Despite their high character and great abilities, however, these bishops only in rare instances attained to eminence, owing to the small size of their diocese, which was subject to Aquileia, and to the rivalry between Aquileia and Venice. Foremost among the bishops is Enea Silvio de' Piccolomini, later Pope Pius II. Petrus Bonomo, a secretary of Frederick IV and Maximilian I, became Bishop of Triest in 1502, and was known as pater concilii in the fifth Lateran Council (1512). Giovanni Bogarino, teacher of Archduke Charles of Styria, was bishop from 1591. Joseph II abolished the Diocese of 'Triest in 1788, transferring the see to Gradiska. His brother, Leopold II, divided Gradiska into the Dioceses of Gorz and Triest, re-establishing Triest in 1791 and appointing as its bishop, Sigismund Anton, Count of Hohenwart and tutor of his children. Other attempts were made to suppress the see, but the emperor decreed its preservation, and von Buset was appointed bishop. After his death (1803) the see remained vacant eighteen years, owing to the disorders caused by Napoleon. Emperor Franz finally appointed Leonardi as Bishop of Triest. At the Synod of Vienna in 1849, Bartholomew Legat was present; he defended, with considerable fervour, the views of the minority in the Vatican Council. In 1909 Bishop Franz X. Nagi was appointed coadjutor cum jure successionis to the ninety-year-old Cardinal Prince-Archbishop Anton Gruscha of Vienna. The see numbers 409,800 Catholics with 291 priests, 81 male religious and 174 nuns.

CÖLESTIN WOLFSGRUBER

Trincomalee

(TRINCOMALIENSIS.)

Located in Ceylon, suffragan of Colombo, was created in 1893 by a division of the diocese of Jaffna. The diocese comprises the whole of the eastern province as well as the district of Tamankuduwa. Out of a total population of 186,251 the Catholics number 8773, with 28 churches and chapels served by 13 fathers and two lay brothers of the Belgian province of the Society of Jesus, with two missionaries Apostolic. Candidates for the priesthood are sent to Kandy seminary. There are fifty-five schools with 2523 pupils, and one convent of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Cluny with five inmates who conduct an orphanage attached to the convent. The bishop is Charles Lavigne, S.J. (consecrated 1887), who resides at Trincomalee.

Madras Catholic Directory, 1910.

ERNEST R. HULL

Abbey of Trinità di Cava dei Tirreni

Located in the Province of Salerno. It stands in a gorge of the Finestre Hills near Cava dei Tirreni, and was founded in 980 by Alferio Pappacarbona, a noble of Salerno who became a Cluniac monk. Urban II endowed this monastery with many privileges, making it immediately subject to the Holy See, with jurisdiction over the surrounding territory. In 1394 Boniface IX made it a diocese, but in 1513 Leo X erected the Diocese of Cava, detaching that city from the abbot's jurisdiction. About the same time the Cluniacs were replaced by Cassinese monks. This monastery, an abbey nullius, possesses a very rich store of public and private documents, which date back to the eighth century, and is now the seat of a national educational establishment, under the care of the Benedictines. The church is famous for its organ. In 1893 the cultus of the first four abbots (Alferius, Leo, Petrus, and Constabilis) was sanctioned. There are 18 parishes with 68 priests, regular and secular, and 28,000 faithful, subject to the abbacy.

U. BENIGNI

Order of Trinitarians

The redemption of captives has always been regarded in the Church as a work of mercy, as is abundantly testified by many lives of saints who devoted themselves to this task. The period of the Crusades, when so many Christians were in danger of falling into the hands of infidels, witnessed the rise of religious orders vowed exclusively to this pious work. In the thirteenth century there is mention of an order of Montjoie, founded for this purpose in Spain, but its existence was brief, as it was established in 1180 and united in 1221 with the Order of Calatrava. Another Spanish order prospered better; this was founded in the thirteenth century by St Peter Nolasco under the title of Our Lady of Mercy (de la Merced), whence the name Mercedarians. It soon spread widely from Aragon, and has still several houses at Rome, in Italy, Spain, and the old Spanish colonies. Finally, the Order of Trinitarians, which exists to the present day, had at first no other object, as is recalled by the primitive title: "Ordo S. Trinitatis et de redemptione captivorum". its founder, St. John of Math, a native of Provence and a doctor of the University of Paris, conceived the project under the pious inspiration of a pious solitary, St Felix of Valois, in a hermitage called Cerfroid, which subsequently became the chief house of the order. Innocent III, though little in favor of new orders, granted his approbation to this enterprise in a Bull of 17 December, 1198.

The primitive rule, which has been in turns mitigated or restored, enacted that each house should comprise seven brothers, one of whom should be superior; the revenues of the house should be divided into three parts, one for the monks, one for the support of the poor, and one for the ransom of captives; finally it forbade the monks when journeying to use a horse, either through humility, or because horses were forbidden to Christians in the Mussulman countries, whither the friars had to go; hence their popular name of "Friars of the Ass".

In France the Trinitarians were as much favoured by the kings as by the popes. St. Louis installed a house of their order in his château of Fontainebleu. He chose Trinitarians as his chaplains, and was accompanied by them on his crusades. Their convent in Paris is dedicated to St. Mathurin; hence they are also known in France as Mathurins. Founded in 1228, the Paris house soon eclipsed Cerfroid, the cradle of the Trinitarians, and eventually became the residence of the general, also called grand minister, of the order. Towards the end of the twelfth century the order had 250 houses throughout Christendom, where its benevolent work was manifested by the return of liberated captives. This won for it many alms in lands and revenues, a third of which was used for ransoms. But the chief source was collections; and to make these fruitful it was not considered enough to attach indulgences to the almsdeed, recourse was had to theatrical demonstrations to touch hearts and open purses. The misfortunes of the unhappy captives in the Mussulman countries were the readiest subjects for descriptions, sermons, and even tableaux. In Spain these alms-quests were made solemnly: the religious on their mules were preceded by trumpeters and cymbal-players, and a herald proclaimed the redemption by inviting families to make known their kinsfolk in captivity and the alms destined for their ransom.

From the fourteenth century the Trinitarians had lay assistants, i.e., charitable collectors, authorised by letters patent to solicit alms for the order in their respective towns; these were called marguilliers. There were also confraternities of the Holy Trinity, chiefly in the towns where the order had no convent; these consisted of lay tertiaries who wore the scapular of the order, were associated with its spiritual favours, and devoted a portion of their income to its work. In fact the Trinitarians had considerable resources to meet the needs of their work. The funds being collected, the ransomers to the number of three or four set sail from Provence or Spain with objects to alleviate the lot of the captives or coax their jailers. Their destination was usually the Barbary States, especially in the sixteenth century when the corsairs of Tunis, Algiers, and Morocco infested the Mediterranean and made plunder their chief means of existence. The Mercedarians went chiefly to Morocco, while the Trinitarians went preferably to Tunis or Algiers. There began their trials. They had to confront the dangers of the journey, the endemic diseases of the African coast, exposed to the outrages of the natives, sometimes to burst of Mussulman fanaticism, which cost several lives. The most delicate part of the task lay in the choice of captives amid the solicitations with which the monks were besieged and the negotiations for settling the ransom-price between the corsairs and the Trinitarians, between the exactions of the former and the limited resources of the latter. When the sum was not sufficient, the Trinitarians were held as hostages in the place of the captives until the arrival of fresh funds. The choice of captives was made according to the funds; ransom was first paid for the natives of the regions which had contributed to the redemption. Sometimes certain captives were previously indicated by their family who paid the ransom. When the captives returned to Europe, the Trinitarians had them go in procession from town to town amid scenery intended to impress the imagination in justification of the use of the alms and to inspire fresh almsdeeds. The number of those ransomed during the three centuries is estimated at 90,000. The most famous of these was Cervantes (ransomed in 1580), who at his death was buried among the trinitarians at Madrid in a habit of a Trinitarian tertiary.

Despite the large sums of money which passed through their hands, the Trinitarians had to struggle constantly with poverty. They had to defray the expenses of numerous hospitals, as well as to administer parochial charges. They suffered greatly in France during the English invasion of the fifteenth century and the wars of religion of the sixteenth. Moreover, there were conflicts between the Mercedarians, who had spread from Spain to France, and the Trinitarians, who had spread from France to Spain. They contested each other's right to collect and receive legacies: attempts at fusion failed, and their rivalry gave rise to numerous suits in both countries and to a whole controversial literature. Their poverty resulted in a relaxation of the rules which had often to be revised, and in divisions in the order. While one party followed the mitigated rule, there was a reform party which aimed at a return to the primitive observance. Thus arose the first schism in 1578 at Pontoise, which in 1633 succeeded in entering the mother-house at Cerfroid.

About the same time the Trinitarians of Spain formed a schism by separating from the Trinitarians of France under Father Juan Bautista of the Immaculate Conception; the latter added fresh austerity to their rule by founding the Congregation of "Discalced Trinitarians of Spain". This rule spread to Italy and Austria (1690), where the ransom of captives was much esteemed during the constant wars with the Turks. Hence the three congregations, which gave rise to regrettable dissensions. The Discalced also went to France, where they were suppressed by a Papal Bull in 1771. The division between those observing the mitigated and the reformed rule was terminated by uniting without fusing them under a common general. At this time also they began to lay claim in France to the title by which they have since been known: Canons Regular of the Holy Trinity. The Revolution of 1789 suppressed them in all the territories to which they had spread. Joseph II had already suppressed them in 1784 in Austria and the Low Countries. They have retained a few houses in Italy, Spain, and the Spanish colonies. At Rome, where the convent of St. Thomas was united with the chapter of St. Peter in 1387, the Trinitarians protested many times unsuccessfully against this spoliation, when on the occasion of the seventh centenary of the foundation of the order in 1898, the chapter of St. Peter's voluntarily restored it. But their chief house is the Basilica of St. John Chrysogonus which was given to them by Pius IX in 1856.

There have always been nuns attached to the hospitals of the order, but they do not seem to have formed an integral part of it. The true Trinitarian Sisters were founded in Spain by Maria de Romero in 1612 and they still have convents at Madrid and in other cities. They form part of the discalced congregation.

The Trinitarians wear a white habit, with a cross of which the upright is red and the cross bar blue.

CH. MOELLER

The Blessed Trinity

This article is divided as follows:

I. Dogma of the Trinity;
II. Proof of the Doctrine from Scripture;
III. Proof of the Doctrine from Tradition;
IV. The Trinity as a Mystery;
V. The Doctrine as Interpreted in Greek Theology;
VI. The Doctrine as Interpreted in Latin Theology.

I. THE DOGMA OF THE TRINITY

The Trinity is the term employed to signify the central doctrine of the Christian religion -- the truth that in the unity of the Godhead there are Three Persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, these Three Persons being truly distinct one from another. Thus, in the words of the Athanasian Creed: "the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and yet there are not three Gods but one God." In this Trinity of Persons the Son is begotten of the Father by an eternal generation, and the Holy Spirit proceeds by an eternal procession from the Father and the Son. Yet, notwithstanding this difference as to origin, the Persons are co-eternal and co-equal: all alike are uncreated and omnipotent. This, the Church teaches, is the revelation regarding God's nature which Jesus Christ, the Son of God, came upon earth to deliver to the world: and which she proposes to man as the foundation of her whole dogmatic system.

In Scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together. The word trias (of which the Latin trinitas is a translation) is first found in Theophilus of Antioch about A.D. 180. He speaks of "the Trinity of God [the Father], His Word and His Wisdom ("Ad. Autol.", II, 15). The term may, of course, have been in use before his time. Afterwards it appears in its Latin form of trinitas in Tertullian ("De pud." c. xxi). In the next century the word is in general use. It is found in many passages of Origen ("In Ps. xvii", 15). The first creed in which it appears is that of Origen's pupil, Gregory Thaumaturgus. In his Ekthesis tes pisteos composed between 260 and 270, he writes:

There is therefore nothing created, nothing subject to another in the Trinity: nor is there anything that has been added as though it once had not existed, but had entered afterwards: therefore the Father has never been without the Son, nor the Son without the Spirit: and this same Trinity is immutable and unalterable forever (P. G., X, 986).

It is manifest that a dogma so mysterious presupposes a Divine revelation. When the fact of revelation, understood in its full sense as the speech of God to man, is no longer admitted, the rejection of the doctrine follows as a necessary consequence. For this reason it has no place in the Liberal Protestantism of today. The writers of this school contend that the doctrine of the Trinity, as professed by the Church, is not contained in the New Testament, but that it was first formulated in the second century and received final approbation in the fourth, as the result of the Arian and Macedonian controversies. In view of this assertion it is necessary to consider in some detail the evidence afforded by Holy Scripture. Attempts have been made recently to apply the more extreme theories of comparative religion to the doctrine ot the Trinity, and to account for it by an imaginary law of nature compelling men to group the objects of their worship in threes. It seems needless to give more than a reference to these extravagant views, which serious thinkers of every school reject as destitute of foundation.

II. PROOF OF DOCTRINE FROM SCRIPTURE

A. New Testament

The evidence from the Gospels culminates in the baptismal commission of Matthew 28:20. It is manifest from the narratives of the Evangelists that Christ only made the great truth known to the Twelve step by step. First He taught them to recognize in Himself the Eternal Son of God. When His ministry was drawing to a close, He promised that the Father would send another Divine Person, the Holy Spirit, in His place. Finally after His resurrection, He revealed the doctrine in explicit terms, bidding them "go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" (Matthew 28:18). The force of this passage is decisive. That "the Father" and "the Son" are distinct Persons follows from the terms themselves, which are mutually exclusive. The mention of the Holy Spirit in the same series, the names being connected one with the other by the conjunctions "and . . . and" is evidence that we have here a Third Person co-ordinate with the Father and the Son, and excludes altogether the supposition that the Apostles understood the Holy Spirit not as a distinct Person, but as God viewed in His action on creatures.

The phrase "in the name" (eis to onoma) affirms alike the Godhead of the Persons and their unity of nature. Among the Jews and in the Apostolic Church the Divine name was representative of God. He who had a right to use it was invested with vast authority: for he wielded the supernatural powers of Him whose name he employed. It is incredible that the phrase "in the name" should be here employed, were not all the Persons mentioned equally Divine. Moreover, the use of the singular, "name," and not the plural, shows that these Three Persons are that One Omnipotent God in whom the Apostles believed. Indeed the unity of God is so fundamental a tenet alike of the Hebrew and of the Christian religion, and is affirmed in such countless passages of the Old and New Testaments, that any explanation inconsistent with this doctrine would be altogether inadmissible.

The supernatural appearance at the baptism of Christ is often cited as an explicit revelation of Trinitarian doctrine, given at the very commencement of the Ministry. This, it seems to us, is a mistake. The Evangelists, it is true, see in it a manifestation of the Three Divine Persons. Yet, apart from Christ's subsequent teaching, the dogmatic meaning of the scene would hardly have been understood. Moreover, the Gospel narratives appear to signify that none but Christ and the Baptist were privileged to see the Mystic Dove, and hear the words attesting the Divine sonship of the Messias.

Besides these passages there are many others in the Gospels which refer to one or other of the Three Persons in particular and clearly express the separate personality and Divinity of each. In regard to the First Person it will not be necessary to give special citations: those which declare that Jesus Christ is God the Son, affirm thereby also the separate personality of the Father. The Divinity of Christ is amply attested not merely by St. John, but by the Synoptists. As this point is treated elsewhere (see JESUS CHRIST), it will be sufficient here to enumerate a few of the more important messages from the Synoptists, in which Christ bears witness to His Divine Nature.

• He declares that He will come to be the judge of all men (Matthew 25:31). In Jewish theology the judgment of the world was a distinctively Divine, and not a Messianic, prerogative.
• In the parable of the wicked husbandmen, He describes Himself as the son of the householder, while the Prophets, one and all, are represented as the servants (Matthew 21:33 sqq.).
• He is the Lord of Angels, who execute His command (Matthew 24:31).
• He approves the confession of Peter when he recognizes Him, not as Messias -- a step long since taken by all the Apostles -- but explicitly as the Son of God: and He declares the knowledge due to a special revelation from the Father (Matthew 16:16-17).
• Finally, before Caiphas He not merely declares Himself to be the Messias, but in reply to a second and distinct question affirms His claim to be the Son of God. He is instantly declared by the high priest to be guilty of blasphemy, an offense which could not have been attached to the claim to be simply the Messias (Luke 22:66-71).

St. John's testimony is yet more explicit than that of the Synoptists. He expressly asserts that the very purpose of his Gospel is to establish the Divinity of Jesus Christ (John 20:31). In the prologue he identifies Him with the Word, the only-begotten of the Father, Who from all eternity exists with God, Who is God (John 1:1-18). The immanence of the Son in the Father and of the Father in the Son is declared in Christ's words to St. Philip: "Do you not believe, that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me?" (14:10), and in other passages no less explicit (14:7; 16:15; 17:21). The oneness of Their power and Their action is affirmed: "Whatever he [the Father] does, the Son also does in like manner" (5:19, cf. 10:38); and to the Son no less than to the Father belongs the Divine attribute of conferring life on whom He will (5:21). In 10:29, Christ expressly teaches His unity of essence with the Father: "That which my Father hath given me, is greater than all . . . I and the Father are one." The words, "That which my Father hath given me," can, having regard to the context, have no other meaning than the Divine Name, possessed in its fullness by the Son as by the Father.

Rationalist critics lay great stress upon the text: "The Father is greater than I" (14:28). They argue that this suffices to establish that the author of the Gospel held subordinationist views, and they expound in this sense certain texts in which the Son declares His dependence on the Father (5:19; 8:28). In point of fact the doctrine of the Incarnation involves that, in regard of His Human Nature, the Son should be less than the Father. No argument against Catholic doctrine can, therefore, be drawn from this text. So too, the passages referring to the dependence of the Son upon the Father do but express what is essential to Trinitarian dogma, namely, that the Father is the supreme source from Whom the Divine Nature and perfections flow to the Son. (On the essential difference between St. John's doctrine as to the Person of Christ and the Logos doctrine of the Alexandrine Philo, to which many Rationalists have attempted to trace it, see Logos.)

In regard to the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity, the passages which can be cited from the Synoptists as attesting His distinct personality are few. The words of Gabriel (Luke 1:35), having regard to the use of the term, "the Spirit," in the Old Testament, to signify God as operative in His creatures, can hardly be said to contain a definite revelation of the doctrine. For the same reason it is dubious whether Christ's warning to the Pharisees as regards blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (Matthew 12:31) can be brought forward as proof. But in Luke 12:12, "The Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what you must say" (Matthew 10:20, and Luke 24:49), His personality is clearly implied. These passages, taken in connection with Matthew 28:19, postulate the existence of such teaching as we find in the discourses in the Cenacle reported by St. John (14-16). We have in these chapters the necessary preparation for the baptismal commission. In them the Apostles are instructed not only as the personality of the Spirit, but as to His office towards the Church. His work is to teach whatsoever He shall hear (16:13) to bring back their minds the teaching of Christ (14:26), to convince the world of sin (16:8). It is evident that, were the Spirit not a Person, Christ could not have spoken of His presence with the Apostles as comparable to His own presence with them (14:16). Again, were He not a Divine Person it could not have been expedient for the Apostles that Christ should leave them, and the Paraclete take His place (16:7). Moreover, notwithstanding the neuter form of the word (pneuma), the pronoun used in His regard is the masculine ekeinos. The distinction of the Holy Spirit from the Father and from the Son is involved in the express statements that He proceeds from the Father and is sent by the Son (15:26; cf. 14:16, 26). Nevertheless, He is one with Them: His presence with the Disciples is at the same time the presence of the Son (14:17, 18), while the presence of the Son is the presence of the Father (14:23).

In the remaining New Testament writings numerous passages attest how clear and definite was the belief of the Apostolic Church in the three Divine Persons. In certain texts the coordination of Father, Son, and Spirit leaves no possible doubt as to the meaning of the writer. Thus in II Corinthians 13:13, St. Paul writes: "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the charity of God, and the communication of the Holy Ghost be with you all." Here the construction shows that the Apostle is speaking of three distinct Persons. Moreover, since the names God and Holy Ghost are alike Divine names, it follows that Jesus Christ is also regarded as a Divine Person. So also, in I Corinthians 12:4-11: "There are diversities of graces, but the same Spirit; and there are diversities of ministries, but the same Lord: and there are diversities of operations, but the same God, who worketh all [of them] in all [persons]." (Cf. also Ephesians 4:4-6; I Peter 1:2-3.)

But apart from passages such as these, where there is express mention of the Three Persons, the teaching of the New Testament regarding Christ and the Holy Spirit is free from all ambiguity. In regard to Christ, the Apostles employ modes of speech which, to men brought up in the Hebrew faith, necessarily signified belief in His Divinity. Such, for instance, is the use of the Doxology in reference to Him. The Doxology, "To Him be glory for ever and ever" (cf. I Chronicles 16:38; 29:11; Psalm 103:31; 28:2), is an expression of praise offered to God alone. In the New Testament we find it addressed not alone to God the Father, but to Jesus Christ (II Timothy 4:18; II Peter 3:18; Revelations 1:6; Hebrews 13:20-21), and to God the Father and Christ in conjunction (Revelations 5:13, 7:10). Not less convincing is the use of the title Lord (Kyrios). This term represents the Hebrew Adonai, just as God (Theos) represents Elohim. The two are equally Divine names (cf. I Corinthians 8:4). In the Apostolic writings Theos may almost be said to be treated as a proper name of God the Father, and Kyrios of the Son (see, for example, I Corinthians 12:5-6); in only a few passages do we find Kyrios used of the Father (I Corinthians 3:5; 7:17) or Theos of Christ. The Apostles from time to time apply to Christ passages of the Old Testament in which Kyrios is used, for example, I Corinthians 10:9 (Numbers 21:7), Hebrews 1:10-12 (Psalm 101:26-28); and they use such expressions as "the fear of the Lord" (Acts 9:31; II Corinthians 5:11; Ephesians 5:21), "call upon the name of the Lord," indifferently of God the Father and of Christ (Acts 2:21; 9:14; Romans 10:13). The profession that "Jesus is the Lord" (Kyrion Iesoun, Romans 10:9; Kyrios Iesous, I Corinthians 12:3) is the acknowledgment of Jesus as Jahweh. The texts in which St. Paul affirms that in Christ dwells the plenitude of the Godhead (Colossians 2:9), that before His Incarnation He possessed the essential nature of God (Philemon 2:6), that He "is over all things, God blessed for ever" (Romans 9:5) tell us nothing that is not implied in many other passages of his Epistles.

The doctrine as to the Holy Spirit is equally clear. That His distinct personality was fully recognized is shown by many passages. Thus He reveals His commands to the Church's ministers: "As they were ministering to the Lord and fasting, the Holy Ghost said to them: Separate me Saul and Barnabas . . ." (Acts 13:2). He directs the missionary journey of the Apostles: "They attempted to go into Bithynia, and the Spirit of Jesus suffered them not" (Acts 16:7; cf. Acts 5:3; 15:28; Romans 15:30). Divine attributes are affirmed of Him.

• He possesses omniscience and reveals to the Church mysteries known only to God (I Corinthians 2:10);
• it is He who distributes charismata (I Cor., 12:11);
• He is the giver of supernatural life (II Cor., 3:8);
• He dwells in the Church and in the souls of individual men, as in His temple (Romans 8:9-11; I Corinthians 3:16, 6:19).
• The work of justification and sanctification is attributed to Him (I Cor., 6:11; Rom., 15:16), just as in other passages the same operations are attributed to Christ (I Cor., 1:2; Gal., 2:17).

To sum up: the various elements of the Trinitarian doctrine are all expressly taught in the New Testament. The Divinity of the Three Persons is asserted or implied in passages too numerous to count. The unity of essence is not merely postulated by the strict monotheism of men nurtured in the religion of Israel, to whom "subordinate deities" would have been unthinkable; but it is, as we have seen, involved in the baptismal commission of Matthew 28:19, and, in regard to the Father and the Son, expressly asserted in John 10:38. That the Persons are co-eternal and coequal is a mere corollary from this. In regard to the Divine processions, the doctrine of the first procession is contained in the very terms Father and Son: the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and Son is taught in the discourse of the Lord reported by St. John (14-17) (see Holy Ghost).

B. Old Testament

The early Fathers were persuaded that indications of the doctrine of the Trinity must exist in the Old Testament and they found such indications in not a few passages. Many of them not merely believed that the Prophets had testified of it, they held that it had been made known even to the Patriarchs. They regarded it as certain that the Divine messenger of Genesis 16:7, 18, 21:17, 31:11; Exodus 3:2, was God the Son; for reasons to be mentioned below (III. B.) they considered it evident that God the Father could not have thus manifested Himself (cf. Justin, "Dial.", 60; Irenaeus, "Adv. haer.", IV, xx, 7-11; Tertullian, "Adv. Prax.", 15-16; Theoph., "Ad Autol.", ii, 22; Novat., "De Trin.", 18, 25, etc.). They held that, when the inspired writers speak of "the Spirit of the Lord", the reference was to the Third Person of the Trinity: and one or two (Irenaeus, "Adv. haer.", II, xxx, 9; Theophilus, "Ad. Aut.", II, 15; Hippolytus, "Con. Noet.", 10) interpret the hypostatic Wisdom of the Sapiential books, not, with St. Paul, of the Son (Hebrews 1:3; cf. Wisdom, vii, 25, 26), but of the Holy Spirit. But in others of the Fathers is found what would appear to be the sounder view, that no distinct intimation of the doctrine was given under the Old Covenant. (Cf. Gregory Nazianzen, "Or. theol.", v, 26; Epiphanius, "Ancor." 73, "Haer.", 74; Basil, "Adv. Eunom.", II, 22; Cyril Alex., "In Joan.", xii, 20.)

Some of these, however, admitted that a knowledge of the mystery was granted to the Prophets and saints of the Old Dispensation (Epiph., "Haer.", viii, 5; Cyril Alex., "Con. Julian.," I). It may be readily conceded that the way is prepared for the revelation in some of the prophecies. The names Emmanuel (Isaias 7:14) and God the Mighty (Isaias 9:6) affirmed of the Messias make mention of the Divine Nature of the promised deliverer. Yet it seems that the Gospel revelation was needed to render the full meaning of the passages clear. Even these exalted titles did not lead the Jews to recognize that the Saviour to come was to be none other than God Himself. The Septuagint translators do not even venture to render the words God the Mighty literally, but give us, in their place,"the angel of great counsel." A still higher stage of preparation is found in the doctrine of the Sapiential books regarding the Divine Wisdom. In Proverbs 8, Wisdom appears personified, and in a manner which suggests that the sacred author was not employing a mere metaphor, but had before his mind a real person (cf. verses 22, 23). Similar teaching occurs in Ecclus., 24, in a discourse which Wisdom is declared to utter in "the assembly of the Most High", i. e. in the presence of the angels. This phrase certainly supposes Wisdom to be conceived as person. The nature of the personality is left obscure; but we are told thnt the whole earth is Wisdom's Kingdom, that she finds her delight in all the works of God, but that Israel is in a special manner her portion and her inheritance (Ecclus., 24:8-13).

In the Book of the Wisdom of Solomon we find a still further advance. Here Wisdom is clearly distinguished from Jehovah: "She is. . .a certain pure emanation of the glory of the almighty God. . .the brightness of eternal light, and the unspotted mirror of God's majesty, and the image of his goodness" (Wisdom 7:25-26. Cf. Hebrews 1:3). She is, moreover, described as "the worker of all things" (panton technitis, 7:21), an expression indicating that the creation is in some manner attributable to her. Yet in later Judaism this exalted doctrine suffered eclipse, and seems to have passed into oblivion. Nor indeed can it be said that the passage, even though it manifests some knowledge of a second personality in the Godhead, constitutes a revelation of the Trinity. For nowhere in the Old Testament do we find any clear indication of a Third Person. Mention is often made of the Spirit of the Lord, but there is nothing to show that the Spirit was viewed as distinct from Jahweh Himself. The term is always employed to signify God considered in His working, whether in the universe or in the soul of man. The matter seems to be correctly summed up by Epiphanius, when he says: "The One Godhead is above all declared by Moses, and the twofold personality (of Father and Son) is strenuously asuerted by the Prophets. The Trinity is made known by the Gospel" ("Haer.", Ixxiv).

III. PROOF OF THE DOCTRINE FROM TRADITION

A. The Church Fathers

In this section we shall show that the doctrine of the Blessed Trinity has from the earliest times been taught by the Catholic Church and professed by her members. As none deny this for any period subsequent to the Arian and Macedonian controversies, it will be sufficient if we here consider the faith of the first four centuries only. An argument of very great weight is provided in the liturgical forms of the Church. The highest probative force must necessarily attach to these, since they express not the private opinion of a single individual, but the public belief of the whole body of the faithful. Nor can it be objected that the notions of Christians on the subject were vague and confused, and that their liturgical forms reflect this frame of mind. On such a point vagueness was impossible. Any Christian might be called on to seal with his blood his belief that there is but One God. The answer of Saint Maximus (c. A.D. 250) to the command of the proconsul that he should sacrifice to the gods, "I offer no sacrifice save to the One True God," is typical of many such replies in the Acts of the martyrs. It is out of the question to suppose that men who were prepared to give their lives on behalf of this fundamental truth were in point of fact in so great confusion in regard to it that they were unaware whether their creed was monotheistic, ditheistic, or tritheistic. Moreover, we know that their instruction regarding the doctrines of their religion was solid. The writers of that age bear witness that even the unlettered were thoroughly familiar with the truths of faith (cf. Justin, "Apol.", I, 60; Irenaeus, "Adv. haer.", III, iv, n. 2).

(1) Baptismal formulas

We may notice first the baptismal formula, which all acknowledge to be primitive. It has already been shown that the words as prescribed by Christ (Matthew 28:19) clearly express the Godhead of the Three Persons as well as their distinction, but another consideration may here be added. Baptism, with its formal renunciation of Satan and his works, was understood to be the rejection of the idolatry of paganism and the solemn consecration of the baptised to the one true God (Tert., "De spect.", iv; Justin, "Apol.", I, iv). The act of consecration was the invocation over them of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The supposition that they regarded the Second and Third Persons as created beings, and were in fact consecrating themselves to the service of creatures, is manifestly absurd. St. Hippolytus has expressed the faith of the Church in the clearest terms: "He who descends into this laver of regeneration with faith forsakes the Evil One and engages himself to Christ, renounces the enemy and confesses that Christ is God . . . he returns from the font a son of God and a coheir of Christ. To Whom with the all holy, the good and lifegiving Spirit be glory now and always, forever and ever. Amen" ("Serm. in Theoph.", n. 10).

The doxologies

(2) The witness of the doxologies is no less striking. The form now universal, "Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost," so clearly expresses the Trinitarian dogma that the Arians found it necessary to deny that it had been in use previous to the time of Flavian of Antioch (Philostorgius, "Hist. eccl.", III, xiii). It is true that up to the period of the Arian controversy another form, "Glory to the Father, through the Son, in the Holy Spirit," had been more common (cf. I Clement, 58, 59; Justin, "Apol.", I, 67). This latter form is indeed perfectly consistent with Trinitarian belief: it, however, expresses not the coequality of the Three Persons, but their operation in regard to man. We live in the Spirit, and through Him we are made partakers in Christ (Galatians 5:25; Romans 8:9); and it is through Christ, as His members, that we are worthy to offer praise to God (Heb. 13:15). But there are many passages in the ante-Nicene Fathers which show that the form, "Glory be to the Father and to the Son, and to [with] the Holy Spirit," was also in use.

• In the narrative of St. Polycarp's martyrdom we read: "With Whom to Thee and the Holy Spirit be glory now and for the ages to come" (Mart. S. Polyc., n.14; cf. n. 22).
• Clement of Alexandria bids men "give thanks and praise to the only Father and Son, to the Son and Father with the Holy Spirit" (Paed., III, xii).
• St. Hippolytus closes his work against Noetus with the words: "To Him be glory and power with the Father and the Holy Spirit in Holy Church now and always for ever and ever. Amen" (Contra Noet., n. 18).
• Denis of Alexandria uses almost the same words: "To God the Father and to His Son Jesus Christ with the Holy Spirit be honour and glory forever and ever, Amen" (in St. Basil, "De Spiritu Sancto", xxix, n. 72).
• St. Basil further tells us that it was an immemorial custom among Christians when they lit the evening lamp to give thanks to God with prayer: Ainoumen Patera kai Gion kai Hagion Pneuma Theou ("We praise the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit of God").

(3) Other patristic writings

The doctrine of the Trinity is formally taught in every class of ecclesiastical writing. From among the apologists we may note Justin, "Apol." I, vi; Athenagoras, "Legat: pro Christ.", n. 12. The latter tells us that Christians "are conducted to the future life by this one thing alone, that they know God and His Logos, what is the oneness of the Son with the Father, what the communion of the Father with the Son, what is the Spirit, what is the unity of these three, the Spirit, the Son, and the Father, and their distinction in unity." It would be impossible to be more explicit. And we may be sure that an apologist, writing for pagans, would weigh well the words in which he dealt with this doctrine. Amongst polemical writers we may refer to Irenaeus, "Adv. haer.", I, xxii, IV, xx, 1-6. In these passages he rejects the Gnostic figment that the world was created by aeons who had emanated from God, but were not consubstantial with Him, and teaches the consubstantiality of the Word and the Spirit by Whom God created all things. Clement of Alexandria professes the doctrine in "Paedag." I, vi, and somewhat later Gregory Thaumaturgus, as we have already seen, lays it down in the most express terms in his creed (P.G., X, 986).

(4) As contrasted with heretical teachings

Yet further evidence regarding the Church's doctrine is furnished by a comparison of her teaching with that of heretical sects. The controversy with the Sabellians in the third century proves conclusively that she would tolerate no deviation from Trinitarian doctrine. Noetus of Smyrna, the originator of the error, was condemned by a local synod, about A.D. 200. Sabellius, who propagated the same heresy at Rome c. A.D. 220, was excommunicated by St. Callistus. It is notorious that the sect made no appeal to tradition: it found Trinitarianism in possession wherever it appeared -- at Smyrna, at Rome, in Africa, in Egypt. On the other hand, St. Hippolytus, who combats it in the "Contra Noetum," claims Apostolic tradition for the doctrine of the Catholic Church: "Let us believe, beloved brethren, in accordance with the tradition of the Apostles, that God the Word came down from heaven to the holy Virgin Mary to save man." Somewhat later (c. A.D. 260) Denis of Alexandria found that the error was widespread in the Libyan Pentapolis, and he addressed a dogmatic letter against it to two bishops, Euphranor and Ammonius. In this, in order to emphasize the distinction between the Persons, he termed the Son poiema tou Theou and used other expressions capable of suggesting that the Son is to be reckoned among creatures. He was accused of heterodoxy to St. Dionysius of Rome, who held a council and addressed to him a letter dealing with the true Catholic doctrine on the point in question. The Bishop of Alexandria replied with a defense of his orthodoxy entitled "Elegxhos kai apologia," in whioh he corrected whatever had been erroneous. He expressly professes his belief in the consubstantiality of the Son, using the very term, homoousios, which afterwards became the touchstone of orthodoxy at Nicaea (P. G., XXV, 505). The story of the controversy is conclusive as to the doctrinal standard of the Church. It shows us that she was firm in rejecting on the one hand any confusion of the Persons and on the other hand any denial of their consubstantiality.

The information we possess regarding another heresy -- that of Montanus -- supplies us with further proof that the doctrine of the Trinity was the Church's teaching in A.D. 150. Tertullian affirms in the clearest terms that what he held as to the Trinity when a Catholic he still holds as a Montanist ("Adv. Prax.", II, 156); and in the same work he explicitly teaches the Divinity of the Three Persons, their distinction, the eternity of God the Son (op. cit., xxvii). Epiphanius in the same way asserts the orthodoxy of the Montanists on this subject (Haer., lxviii). Now it is not to be supposed that the Montanists had accepted any novel teaching from the Catholic Church since their secession in the middle of the second century. Hence, inasmuch as there was full agreement between the two bodies in regard to the Trinity, we have here again a clear proof that Trinitarianism was an article of faith at a time when the Apostolic tradition was far too recent for any error to have arisen on apoint so vital.

B. Later Controversy

Notwithstanding the force of the arguments we have just summarised, a vigorous controversy has been carried on from the end of the seventeenth century to the present day regarding the Trinitarian doctrine of the ante-Nicene Fathers. The Socinian writers of the seventeenth century (e. g. Sand, "Nucleus historiae ecclesiastic", Amsterdam, 1668) asserted that the language of the early Fathers in many passages of their works shows that they agreed not with Athanasius, but with Arius. Petavius, who was at that period engaged on his great theological work, was convinced by their arguments, and allowed that at least some of these Fathers had fallen into grave errors. On the other hand, their orthodoxy was vigorously defended by the Anglican divine Dr. George Bull ("Defensio Fidei Nicaean", Oxford, 1685) and subsequently by Bossuet, Thomassinus, and other Catholic theologians. Those who take the less favourable view assert that they teach the following points inconsistent with the post-Nicene belief of the Church:

• That the Son even as regards His Divine Nature is inferior and not equal to the Father;
• that the Son alone appeared in the theophanies of the Old Testament, inasmuchas the Father is essentially invisible, the Son, however, not so;
• that the Son is a created being;
• that the generation of the Son is not eternal, but took place in time.

We shall examine these four points in order.

(1) In proof of the assertion that many of the Fathers deny the equality of the Son with the Father, passages are cited from Justin (Apol., I, xiii, xxxii), Irenaeus (Adv. haer., III, viii, n. 3), Clem. Alex. ("Strom." VII, ii), Hippolytus (Con. Noet., n. 14), Origen (Con. Cels., VIII, xv). Thus Irenaeus (loc. cit.) says: "He commanded, and they were created . . . Whom did He command? His Word, by whom, says the Scripture, the heavens were established. And Origen, loc. cit., says: "We declare that the Son is not mightier than the Father, but inferior to Him. And this belief we ground on the saying of Jesus Himself: "The Father who sent me is greater than I." Now in regard to these passages it must be borne in mind that there are two ways of considering the Trinity. We may view the Three Persons insofar as they are equally possessed of the Divine Nature or we may consider the Son and the Spirit as derivlng from the Father, Who is the sole source of Godhead, and from Whom They receive all They have and are. The former mode of considering them has been the more common since the Arian heresy. The latter, however, was more frequent previously to that period. Under this aspect, the Father, as being: tbe sole source of all, may be termed greater than the Son. Thus Athanasius, Basil, Gregory Nazianzen, Gregory of Nyssa, and the Fathers of the Council of Sardica, in their synodical letter, all treat our Lord's words, teaches "The Father is greater than I" as having reference to His Godhead (cf. Petavius, "De Trin.", II, ii, 7, vi, 11). From this point of view it may be said that in the creation of the world the Father commanded, the Son obeyed. The expression is not one which would have been employed by Latin writers who insist thst creation and all God's works proceed from Him as One and not from the Persons as distinct from each other. But this truth was unfamiliar to the early Fathers.

(2) Justin (Dial., n. 60) Irenaeus (Adv. haer., IV, xx, nn. 7, 11), Tertullian ("C. Marc.", II, 27; "Adv. Prax.", 15, 16), Novatian (De Trin., xviii, 25), Theophilus (Ad Autol., II, xxii), are accused of teaching that the theophanies were incompatible with the essential nature of the Father, yet not incompatible with that of the Son. In this case also the difficulty is largely removed if it be remembered that these writers regarded all the Divine operations as proceeding from the Three Persons as such, and not from the Godhead viewed as one. Now Revelation teaches us that in the work of the creation and redemption of the world the Father effects His purpose through the Son. Through Him He made the world; through Him He redeemed it; through Him He will judge it. Hence it was believed by these writers that, having regard to the present disposition of Providence, the theophanies could only have been the work of the Son. Moreover, in Colossians 1:15, the Son is expressly termed "the image of the invisible God" (eikon tou Theou rou aoratou). This expression they seem to have taken with strict literalness. The function of an eikon is to manifest what is itself hidden (cf. St. John Damascene, "De imagin.", III, n. 17). Hence they held that the work of revealing the Father belongs by nature to the Second Person of the Trinity, and concluded that the theophanies were His work.

(3) Expressions which appear to contain the statement that the Son was created are found in Clement of Alexandria (Strom., V, xiv; VI, vii), Tatian (Orat., v), Tertullian ("Adv. Prax." vi; "Adv. "Adv. Hermong.", xviii, xx), Origen (In Joan., I, n. 22). Clement speaks of Wisdom as "created before all things" (protoktistos), and Tatian terms the Word the "first-begotten work of (ergon prototokon) Of the Father. Yet the meaning of these authors is clear. In Colossians 1:16, St. Paul says that all things were created in the Son. This was understood to signify that creation took place according to exemplar ideas predetermined by God and existing in the Word. In view of this, it might be said that the Father created the Word, this term being used in place of the more accurate generated, inasmuch as the exemplar ideas of creation were communicated by the Father to the Son. Or, again, the actual Creation of the world might be termed the creation of the Word, since it takes place according to the ideas which exist in the Word. The context invariably shows that the passage is to be understood in one or another of these senses. The expression is undoubtedly very harsh, and it certainly would never have been employed but for the verse, Proverbs 8:22, which is rendered in the Septuagint and the old Latin versions, "The Lord created (ektise) me, who am the beginning of His ways." As the passage was understood as having reference to the Son, it gave rise to the question how it could be said that Wisdom was created (Origen, "Princ.", I, ii, n. 3). It is further to be remembered that accurate terminology in regard to the relations between the Three Persons was the fruit of the controversies which sprang up in the fourth century. The writers of an earlier period were not concerned with Arianism, and employed expressions which in the light of subsequent errors are seen to be not merely inaccurate, but dangerous. (4) Greater difficulty is perhaps presented by a series of passages which appear to assert that prior to the Creation of the world the Word was not a distinct hypostasis from the Father. These are found in Justin (C. Tryphon., lxi), Tatian (Con. Graecos, v), Athenagoras (Legat., x), Theophilus (Ad Autol., II, x, 22); Hippolytus (Con. Noet., x); Tertullian ("Adv. Prax.", v-vii; "Adv. Hermogenem" xviii). Thus Theophilus writes (op. cit., n. 22): "What else is this voice [heard in Paradise] but the Word of God Who is also His Son? . . . For before anything came into being, He had Him as a counsellor, being His own mind and thought [i.e. as the logos endiathetos, c. x]). But when God wished to make all that He had determined on, then did He beget Him as the uttered Word [logos prophorikos], the firstborn of all creation, not, however, Himself being left without Reason (logos), but having begotten Reason, and ever holding converse with Reason." Expressions such as these are undoubtedly due to the influence of the Stoic philosophy: the logos endiathetos and logos prophorikos were current conceptions of that school. It is evident that these apologists were seeking to explain the Christian Faith to their pagan readers in terms with which the latter were familiar. Some Catholic writers have indeed thought that the influence of their previous training did lead some of them into Subordinationism, although the Church herself was never involved in the error (see Logos). Yet it does not seem necessary to adopt this conclusion. If the point of view of the writers be borne in mind, the expressions, strange as they are, will be seen not to be incompatibIe with orthodox belief. The early Fathers, as we have said, regarded Proverbs 8:22, and Colossians 1:15, as distinctly teaching that there is a sense in which the Word, begotten before all worlds, may rightly be said to have been begotten also in time. This temporal generation they conceived to be none other than the act of creation. They viewed this as the complement of the eternal generation, inasmuch as it is the external manifestation of those creative ideas which from all eternity the Father has communicated to the Eternal Word. Since, in the very same works which contain these perplexing expressions, other passages are found teaching explicitly the eternity of the Son, it appears most natural to interpret them in this sense. It should further be remembered that throughout this period theologians, when treating of the relation of the Divine Persons to each other, invariably regard them in connection with the cosmogony. Only later, in the Nicene epoch, did they learn to prescind from the question of creation and deal with the threefold Personality exclusively from the point of view of the Divine life of the Godhead. When that stage was reached expressions such as these became impossible.

IV. THE TRINITY AS A MYSTERY

The Vatican Council has explained the meaning to be attributed to the term mystery in theology. It lays down that a mystery is a truth which we are not merely incapable of discovering apart from Divine Revelation, but which, even when revealed, remains "hidden by the veil of faith and enveloped, so to speak, by a kind of darkness" (Const., "De fide. cath.", iv). In other words, our understanding of it remains only partial, even after we have accepted it as part of the Divine messege. Through analogies and types we can form a representative concept expressive of what is revealed, but we cannot attain that fuller knowledge which supposes that the various elements of the concept are clearly grasped and their reciprocal compatibility manifest. As regards the vindication of a mystery, the office of the natural reason is solely to show that it contains no intrinsic impossibility, that any objection urged against it on Reason. "Expressions such as these are undoubtedly the score that it violates the laws of thought is invalid. More than this it cannot do.

The Vatican Council further defined that the Christian Faith contains mysteries strictly so called (can. 4). All theologians admit that the doctrine of the Trinity is of the number of these. Indeed, of all revealed truths this is the most impenetrable to reason. Hence, to declare this to be no mystery would be a virtual denial of the canon in question. Moreover, our Lord's words, Matthew 9:27, "No one knoweth the Son, but the Father," seem to declare expressly that the plurality of Persons in the Godhead is a truth entirely beyond the scope of any created intellect. The Fathers supply many passages in which the incomprehensibility of the Divine Nature is affirmed. St. Jerome says, in a well-known phrase: "The true profession of the mystery of the Trinity is to own that we do not comprehend it" (De mysterio Trinitatus recta confessio est ignoratio scientiae -- "Proem ad 1. xviii in Isai."). The controversy with the Eunomians, who declared that the Divine Essence was fully expressed in the absolutely simple notion of "the Innascible" (agennetos), and that this was fully comprehensible by the human mind, led many of the Greek Fathers to insist on the incomprehensibility of the Divine Nature, more especially in regard to the internal processions. St. Basil. "In Eunom.", I, n. 14; St. Cyril of Jerusdem, "Cat.", VI; St. John Damascene, "Fid. Orth.", I, ii, etc., etc.).

At a later date, however, some famous names are to be found defending a contrary opinion Anselm ("Monol.", 64), Abelard ("ln Ep. ad Rom."), Hugo of St. Victor ("De sacram." III, xi), and Richard of St. Victor ("De Trin.", III, v) all declare that it is possible to assign peremptory reasons why God should be both One and Three. In explanation of this it should be noted that at that period the relation of philosophy to revealed doctrine was but obscurely understood. Only after the Aristotelean system had obtained recognition from theologians was this question thoroughly treated. In the intellectual ferment of the time Abelard initiated a Rationalistic tendency: not merely did he claim a knowledge of the Trinity for the pagan philosophers, but his own Trinitarian doctrine was practically Sabellian. Anselm's error was due not to Rationalism, but to too wide an application of the Augustinian principle "Crede ut intelligas". Hugh and Richard of St. Victor were, however, certainly influenced by Abelard's teaching. Raymond Lully's (1235-1315) errors in this regard were even more extreme. They were expressly condemned by Gregory XI in 1376. In the nineteenth century the influence of the prevailing Rationalism manifested itself in several Catholic writers. Frohschammer and Günther both asserted that the dogma of the Trinity was capable of proof. Pius IX reprobated their opinions on more than one occasion (Denzinger, 1655 sq., 1666 sq., 1709 sq.), and it was to guard against this tendency that the Vatican Council issued the decrees to which reference has been made. A somewhat similar, though less aggravated, error on the part of Rosmini was condemned, 14 December, 1887 (Denz., 1915).

V. THE DOCTRINE AS INTERPRETED IN GREEK THEOLOGY

A. Nature and Personality

The Greek Fathers approached the problem of Trinitarian doctrine in a way which differs in an important particular from that which, since the days of St. Augustine, has become traditional in Latin theology. In Latin theology thought fixed first on the Nature and only subsequently on the Persons. Personality is viewed as being, so to speak, the final complement of the Nature: the Nature is regarded as logically prior to the Personality. Hence, because God's Nature is one, He is known to us as One God before He can be known as Three Persons. And when theologians speak of God without special mention of a Person, conceive Him under this aspect. This is entirely different from the Greek point of view. Greek thought fixed primarily on the Three distinct Persons: the Father, to Whom, as the source and origin of all, the name of God (Theos) more especially belongs; the Son, proceeding from the Father by an eternal generation, and therefore rightly termed God also; and the Divine Spirit, proceeding from the Father through the Son. The Personality is treated as logically prior to the Nature. Just as human nature is something which the individual men possesses, and which can only be conceived as belonging to and dependent on the individual, so the Divine Nature is something which belongs to the Persons and cannot be conceived independently of Them.

The contrast appears strikingly in regard to the question of creation. All Western theologians teach that creation, like all God's external works, proceeds from Him as One: the separate Personalities do not enter into consideration. The Greeks invariably speak as though, in all the Divine works, each Person exercises a separate office. Irenaeus replies to the Gnostics, who held that the world was created by a demiurge other than the supreme God, by affirming that God is the one Creator, and that He made all things by His Word and His Wisdom, the Son and the Spirit (Adv. haer., I, xxii; II, iv, 4, 5, xxx, 9; IV, xx, 1). A formula often found among the Greek Fathers is that all things are from the Father and are effected by the Son in the Spirit (Athanasius, "Ad Serap.", I, xxxi; Basil, "De Spiritu Sancto", n. 38; Cyril of Alexandria, "De Trin. dial.", VI). Thus, too, Hippolytus (Con Noet., x) says that God has fashioned all things by His Word and His Wisdom creating them by His Word, adorning them by His Wisdom (gar ta genomena dia Logou kai Sophias technazetai, Logo men ktizon Sophia de kosmon). The Nicene Creed still preserves for us this point of view. In it we still profess our belief "in one God the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth . . . and in one Lord Jesus Christ . . . by Whom all things were made . . . and in the Holy Ghost."

B. The Divine Unity

The Greek Fathers did not neglect to safeguard the doctrine of the Divine Unity, though manifestly their standpoint requires a different treatment from that employed in the West. The consubstantiality of the Persons is asserted by St. Irenaeus when he tells us that God created the world by His Son and His Spirit, "His two hands" (Adv. haer., IV, xx, 1). The purport of the phrase is evidently to indicate that the Second and Third Persons are not substantially distinct from the First. A more philosophical description is the doctrine of the Recapitulation (sygkephalaiosis). This seems to be first found in the correspondence between St. Denis of Alexandria and St. Dionysius of Rome. The former writes: "We thus [i.e., by the twofold procession] extend the Monad [the First Person] to the Trinity, without causing any division, and were capitulate the Trinity in the Monad without causing diminution" (outo men emeis eis te ten Triada ten Monada, platynomen adiaireton, kai ten Triada palin ameioton eis ten Monada sygkephalaioumetha -- P.G., XXV, 504). Here the consubstantiality is affirmed on the ground that the Son and Spirit, proceeding from the Father, are nevertheless not separated from Him; while they again, with all their perfections, can be regarded as contained within Him.

This doctrine supposes a point of view very different from that with which we are now familiar. The Greek Fathers regarded the Son as the Wisdom and power of the Father (I Cor., 1:24) in a formal sense, and in like manner, the Spirit as His Sanctity. Apart from the Son the Father would be without Hls Wisdom; apart from the Spirit He would be without His Sanctity. Thus the Son and the Spirit are termed "Powers" (Dynameis) of the Father. But while in creatures the powers and faculties are mere accidental perfections, in the Godhead they are subsistent hypostases. Denis of Alexandria regarding the Second and Third Persons as the Father's "Powers", speaks of the First Person as being "extended" to them, and not divided from them. And, since whatever they have and are flows from Him, this writer asserts that if we fix our thoughts on the sole source of Deity alone, we find in Him undiminished all that is contained in them.

The Arian controversy led to insistence on the Homoüsia. But with the Greeks this is not a starting point, but a conclusion, the result of reflective analysis. The sonship of the Second Person implies that He has received the Divine Nature in its fullness, for all generation implies the origination of one who is like in nature to the originating principle. But here, mere specific unity is out of the question. The Divine Essence is not capable of numerical multiplication; it is therefore, they reasoned, identically the same nature which both possess. A similar line of argument establishes that the Divine Nature as communicated to the Holy Spirit is not specifically, but numerically, one with that of the Father and the Son. Unity of nature was understood by the Greek Fathers as involving unity of will and unity of action (energeia). This they declared the Three Persons to possess (Athanasius, "Adv. Sabell.", xii, 13; Basil, "Ep. clxxxix," n. 7; Gregory of Nyssa, "De orat. dom.," John Damascene, "De fide orth.", III, xiv). Here we see an important advance in the theology of the Godhead. For, as we have noted, the earlier Fathers invariably conceive the Three Persons as each exercising a distinct and separate function.

Finally we have the doctrine of Circuminsession (perichoresis). By this is signified the reciprocal inexistence and compenetration of the Three Persons. The term perichoresis is first used by St. John Damascene. Yet the doctrine is found much earlier. Thus St. Cyril of Alexandria says that the Son is called the Word and Wisdom of the Father "because of the reciprocal inherence of these and the mind" (dia ten eis allela . . . ., hos an eipoi tis, antembolen). St. John Damascene assigns a twofold basis for this inexistence of the Persons. In some passages he explains it by the doctrine already mentioned, that the Son and the Spirit are dynameis of the Father (cf. "De recta sententia"). Thus understood, the Circuminsession is a corollary of the doctrine of Recapitulation. He also understands it as signifying the identity of essence, will, and action in the Persons. Wherever these are peculiar to the individual, as is the case in all creatures, there, he tells us, we have separate existence (kechorismenos einai). In the Godhead the essence, will, and action are but one. Hence we have not separate existence, but Circuminsession (perichoresis) (Fid. orth., I, viii). Here, then, the Circuminsession has its basis in the Homoüsia.

It is easy to see that the Greek system was less well adapted to meet the cavils of the Arian and Macedonian heretics than was that subsequently developedby St. Augustine. Indeed the controversies of the fourth century brought some of the Greek Fathers notably nearer to the positions of Latin theology. We have seen that they were led to affirm the action of the Three Persons to be but one. Didymus even employs expressions which seem to show that he, like the Latins, conceived the Nature as logically antecedent to the Persons. He understands the term God as signifying the whole Trinity, and not, as do the other Greeks, the Father alone: "When we pray, whether we say 'Kyrie eleison', or 'O God aid us', we do not miss our mark: for we include the whole of the Blessed Trinity in one Godhead" (De Trin., II, xix).

C. Mediate and Immediate Procession

The doctrine that the Spirit is the image of the Son, as the Son is the image of the Father, is characteristic of Greek theology. It is asserted by St. Gregory Thaumaturgus in his Creed. It is assumed by St. Athanasius as an indisputable premise in his controversy with the Macedonians (Ad Serap., I, xx, xxi, xxiv; II, i, iv). It is implied in the comparisons employed both by him (Ad Serap. I, xix) and by St. Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. xxxi, 31, 32), of the Three Divine Persons to the sun, the ray, the light; and to the source, the spring, and the stream. We find it also in St. Cyril of Alexandria ("Thesaurus assert.", 33), St. John Damascene ("Fid.orth." I, 13), etc. This supposes that the procession of the Son from the Father is immediate; that of the Spirit from the Father is mediate. He proceeds from the Father through the Son. Bessarion rightly observes that the Fathers who used these expressions conceived the Divine Procession as taking place, so to speak, along a straight line (P. G., CLXI, 224). On the other hand, in Western theology the symbolic diagram of the Trinity has ever been the triangle, the relations of the Three Persons one to another being precisely similar. The point is worth noting, for this diversity of symbolic representation leads inevitably to very different expressions of the same dogmatic truth. It is plain that these Fathers would have rejected no less firmly than the Latins the later Photian heresy that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father alone. (For this question the reader is referred to Holy Ghost.)

D. The Son

The Greek theology of the Divine Generation differs in certain particulars from the Latin. Most Western theologians base their theory on the name, Logos, given by St. John to the Second Person. This they understand in the sense of "concept" (verbum mentale), and hold that the Divine Generation is analogous to the act by which the created intellect produces its concept. Among Greek writers this explanation is unknown. They declare the manner of the Divine Generation to be altogether beyond our comprehension. We know by revelation that God has a Son; and various other terms besides Son employed regarding Him in Scripture, such as Word, Brightness of His glory, etc., show us that His sonship must be conceived as free from any relation. More we know not (cf. Gregory Nazianzen, "Orat. xxix", p. 8, Cyril of Jerusalem, "Cat.", xi, 19; John Damascene, "Fid. orth.", I, viii). One explanation only can be given, namely, that the perfection we call fecundity must needs be found in God the Absolutely Perfect (St. John Damascene, "Fid.orth.", I, viii). Indeed it would seem that the great majority of the Greek Fathers understood logos not of the mental thought; but of the uttered word ("Dion. Alex."; Athanasius, ibid.; Cyril of Alexandria, "De Trin.", II). They did not see in the term a revelation that the Son is begotten by way of intellectual procession, but viewed it as a metaphor intended to exclude the material associations of human sonship (Gregory of Nyssa, "C. Eunom.", IV; Gregory Nazianzen, "Orat. xxx", p. 20; Basil, "Hom. xvi"; Cyril of Alexandria, "Thesaurus assert.", vi).

We have already adverted to the view that the Son is the Wisdom and Power of the Father in the full and formal sense. This teaching constantly recurs from the time of Origen to that of St. John Damascene (Origen apud Athan., "De decr. Nic.", p. 27; Athanasius, "Con. Arianos", I, p. 19; Cyril of Alexandria, "Thesaurus"; John Damascene, "Fid.orth.", I, xii). It is based on the Platonic philosophy accepted by the Alexandrine School. This differs in a fundamental point from the Aristoteleanism of the Scholastic theologians. In Aristotelean philosophy perfection is always conceived statically. No actlon, transient or immanent, can proceed from any agent unless that agent, as statically conceived, possesses whatever perfection is contained in the action. The Alexandrine standpoint was other than this. To them perfection must be sought in dynamic activity. God, as the supreme perfection, is from all eternity self-moving, ever adorning Himself with His own attributes: they issue from Him and, being Divine, are not accidents, but subsistent realities. To these thinkers, therefore, there was no impossibility in the supposition that God is wise with the Wisdom which is the result of His own immanent action, powerful with the Power which proceeds from Him. The arguments of the Greek Fathers frequently presuppose this philosophy as their bssis; and unless it be clearly grasped, reasoning which on their premises is conclusive will appear to us invalid and fallacious. Thus it is sometimes urged as a reason for rejecting Arianism that, if there were a time when the Son was not, it follows that God must then have been devoid of Wisdom and of Power -- a conclusion from which even Arians would shrink.

E. The Holy Spirit

A point which in Western theology gives occasion for some discussion is the question as to why the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity is termed the Holy Spirit. St. Augustine suggests that it is because He proceeds from both the Father and the Son, and hence He rightly receives a name applicable to both (De Trin., xv, n. 37). To the Greek Fathers, who developed the theology of the Spirit in the light of the philosophical principles which we have just noticed, the question presented no difficulty. His name, they held, reveals to us His distinctive character as the Third Person, just as the names Father and Son manifest the distinctive characters of the First and Second Persons (cf. Gregory Thaumaturgus, "Ecth. fid."; Basil, "Ep. ccxiv", 4; Gregory Nazianzen, "Or. xxv", 16). He is autoagiotes, the hypostatic holiness of God, the holiness by which God is holy. Just as the Son is the Wisdom and Power by which God is wise and powerful, so the Spirit is the Holiness by which He is holy. Had there ever been a time, as the Macedonians dared to say, when the Holy Spirit was not, then at that time God would have not been holy (St. Gregory Nazianzen, "Orat. xxxi", 4).

On the other hand, pneuma was often understood in the light of John 10:22 where Christ, appearing to the Apostles, breathed on them and conferred on them the Holy Spirit. He is the breath of Christ (John Damascene, "Fid. orth.", 1, viii), breathed by Him into us, and dwelling in us as the breath of life by which we enjoy the supernatural life of God's children (Cyril of Alexandria, "Thesaurus"; cf. Petav., "De Trin", V, viii). The office of the Holy Spirit in thus elevating us to the supernatural order is, however, conceived in a manner somewhat different from that of Western theologians. According to Western doctrine, God bestows on man sanctifying grace, and consequent on that gift the Three Persons come to his soul. In Greek theology the order is reversed: the Holy Spirit does not come to us because we have received sanctifying grace; but it is through His presence we receive the gift. He is the seal, Himself impressing on us the Divine image. That Divine image is indeed realized in us, but the seal must be present to secure the continued existence of the impression. Apart from Him it is not found (Origen, "In Joan. ii", vi; Didymus, "De Spiritu Sancto", x, 11; Athanasius, "Ep. ad. Serap.", III, iii). This Union with the Holy Spirit constitutes our deification (theopoiesis). Inasmuch as He is the image of Christ, He imprints the likeness of Christ upon us; since Christ is the image of the Father, we too receive the true character of God's children (Athanasius, loc.cit.; Gregory Nazianzen, "Orat. xxxi", 4). It is in reference to this work in our regard that in the Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan Creed the Holy Spirit is termed the Giver of life (zoopoios). In the West we more naturally speak of grace as the life of the soul. But to the Greeks it was the Spirit through whose personal presence we live. Just as God gave natural life to Adam by breathing into his inanimate frame the breath of life, so did Christ give spiritual life to us when He bestowed on us the gift of the Holy Ghost.

VI. THE DOCTRINE AS INTERPRETED IN LATIN THEOLOGY

The transition to the Latin theology of the Trinity was the work of St. Augustine. Western theologians have never departed from the main lines which he laid down, although in the Golden Age of Scholasticism his system was developed, its details completed, and its terminology perfected. It received its final and classical form from St. Thomas Aquinas. But it is necessary first to indicate in what consisted the transition effected by St. Augustine. This may be summed up in three points:

• He views the Divine Nature as prior to the Personalities. Deus is for him not God the Father, but the Trinity. This was a step of the first importance, safeguarding as it did alike the unity of God and the equality of the Persons in a manner which the Greek system could never do. As we have seen, one at least of the Greeks, Didymus, had adopted this standpoint and it is possible that Augustine may have derived this method of viewing the mystery from him. But to make it the basis for the whole treatment of the doctrine was the work of Augustine's genius.
• He insists that every external operation God is due to the whole Trinity, and cannot be attributed to one Person alone, save by appropriation (see Holy Ghost). The Greek Fathers had, as we have seen, been led to affirm that the action (energeia) of the Three Persons was one, and one alone. But the doctrine of appropriation was unknown to them, and thus the value of this conclusion was obscured by a traditional theology implying the distinct activities of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
• By indicating the analogy between the two processions within the Godhead and the internal acts of thought and will in the human mind (De Trin., IX, iii, 3; X, xi, 17), he became the founder of the psychological theory of the Trinity, which, with a very few exceptions, was accepted by every subsequent Latin writer.

In the following exposition of the Latin doctrines, we shall follow St. Thomas Aquinas, whose treatment of the doctrine is now universally accepted by Catholic theologians. It should be observed, however, that this is not the only form in which the psychological theory has been proposed. Thus Richard of St. Victor, Alexander of Hales, and St. Bonaventure, while adhering in the main to Western tradition, were more influenced by Greek thought, and give us a system differing somewhat from that of St. Thomas.

A. The Son

Among the terms empIoyed in Scripture to designate the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity is the Word (John 1:1). This is understood by St. Thomas of the Verbum mentale, or intellectual concept. As applied to the Son, the name, he holds, signifies that He proceeds from the Father as the term of an intellectual procession, in a manner analogous to that in which a concept is generated by the human mind in all acts of natural knowledge. It is, indeed, of faith that the Son proceeds from the Father by a veritable generation. He is, says the Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan Creed, begotten before all worlds". But the Procession of a Divine Person as the term of the act by which God knows His own nature is rightly called generation. This may be readily shown. As an act of intellectual conception, it necessarily produces the likeness of the object known. And further, being Divine action, it is not an accidental act resulting in a term, itself a mere accident, but the act is the very substance of the Divinity, and the term is likewise substantial. A process tending necessarily to the production of a substantial term like in nature to the Person from Whom it proceeds is a process of generation. In regard to this view as to the procession of the Son, a difficulty was felt by St. Anselm (Monol., lxiv) on the score that it would seem to involve that each of the Three Persons must needs generate a subsistent Word. Since all the Powers possess the same mind, does it not follow, he asked, that in each case thought produces a similar term? This difficulty St. Thomas succeeds in removing. According to his psychology the formation of a concept is not essential to thought as such, though absolutely requisite to all natural human knowledge. There is, therefore, no ground in reason, apart from revelation, for holding that the Divine intellect produces a Verbum mentale. It is the testimony of Scripture alone which tells us that the Father has from all eternity begotten His consubstantial Word. But neither reason nor revelation suggests it in the case of the Second and Third Persons (I:34:1, ad 3).

Not a few writers of great weight hold that there is sufficient consensus among the Fathers and Scholastic theologians as to the meaning of the names Word and Wisdom (Proverbs 8), applied to the Son, for us to regard the intellectual procession of the Second Person as at least theologically certain, if not a revealed truth (cf. Suarez, "De Trin.", I, v, p. 4; Petav., VI, i, 7; Franzelin, "De Trin.", Thesis xxvi). This, however, seems to be an exaggeration. The immense majority of the Greek Fathers, as we have already noticed, interpret logos of the spoken word, and consider the significance of the name to lie not in any teaching as to intellectual procession, but in the fact that it implies a mode of generation devoid of all passion. Nor is the tradition as to the interpretation of Proverbs 8, in any sense unanimous. In view of these facts the opinion of those theologians seems the sounder who regard this explanation of the procession simply as a theological opinion of great probability and harmonizing well with revealed truth.

B. The Holy Spirit

Just as the Son proceeds as the term of the immanent act of the intellect, so does the Holy Spirit proceed as the term of the act of the Divine will. In human love, as St. Thomas teaches (I:27:3), even though the object be external to us, yet the immanent act of love arouses in the soul a state of ardour which is, as it were, an impression of the thing loved. In virtue of this the object of love is present to our affections, much as, by means of the concept, the object of thought is present to our intellect. This experience is the term of the internal act. The Holy Spirit, it is contended, proceeds from the Father and the Son as the term of the love by which God loves Himself. He is not the love of God in the sense of being Himself formally the love by which God loves; but in loving Himself God breathes forth this subsistent term. He is Hypostatic Love. Here, however, it is necessary to safeguard a point of revealed doctrine. It is of faith that the procession of the Holy Spirit is not generation. The Son is "the only begotten of the Father" (John 1:14). And the Athanasian Creed expressly lays it down that the Holy Ghost is "from the Father and the Son, neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding." If the immanent act of the intellect is rightly termed generation, on what grounds can that name be denied to the act of the will? The answers given in reply to this difficulty by St. Thomas, Richard of St. Victor, and Alexander of Hales are very different. It will be sufficient here to note St. Thomas's solution. Intellectual procession, he says, is of its very nature the production of a term in the likeness of the thing conceived. This is not so in regard to the act of the will. Here the primary result is simply to attract the subject to the object of his love. This difference in the acts explains why the name generation is applicable only to the act of the intellect. Generation is essentially the production of like by like. And no process which is not essentially of that character can claim the name.

The doctrine of the procession of the Holy Spirit by means of the act of the Divine will is due entirely to Augustine. It is nowhere found among the Greeks, who simply declare the procession of the Spirit to be beyond our comprehension, nor is it found in the Latins before his time. He mentions the opinion with favour in the "De fide et symbolo" (A.D. 393); and in the "De Trinitate" (A.D. 415) develops it at length. His teaching was accepted by the West. The Scholastics seek for Scriptural support for it in the name Holy Spirit. This must, they argue, be, like the names Father and Son, a name expressive of a relation within the Godhead proper to the Person who bears it. Now the attribute holy, as applied to person or thing, signifies that the being of which it is affirmed is devoted to God. It follows therefore that, when applied to a Divine Person as designating the relation uniting Him to the other Persons, it must signify that the procession determining His origin is one which of its nature involves devotion to God. But that by which any person is devoted to God is love. The argument is ingenious, but hardly convincing; and the same may be said of a somewhat similar piece of reasoning regarding the name Spirit (I:36:1). The Latin theory is a noble effort of the human reason to penetrate the verities which revelation has left veiled in mystery. It harmonizes, as we have said, with all the truths of faith. It is admirably adapted to assist us to a fuller comprehension of the fundamental doctrine of the Christian religion. But more than this must not be claimed. It does not possess the sanction of revelation.

C. The Divine Relations

The existence of relations in the Godhead may be immediately inferred from the doctrine of processions, and as such is a truth of Revelation. Where there is a real procession the principle and the term are really related. Hence, both the generation of the Son and the procession of the Holy Spirit must involve the existence of real and objective relations. This part of Trinitarian doctrine was familiar to the Greek Fathers. In answer to the Eunomian objection, that consubstantiality rendered any distinction between the Persons impossible, Gregory of Nyssa replies: "Though we hold that the nature [in the Three Persons] is not different, we do not deny the difference arising in regard of the source and that which proceeds from the source [ten katato aition kai to aitiaton diaphoran]; but in this alone do we admit that one Person differs from another" ("Quod non sunt tres dii"; cf. Gregory Nazianzen, "Or. theol.", V, ix; John Damascene, "F.O.", I, viii). Augustine insists that of the ten Aristotelean categories two, stance and relation, are found in God ("De Trin.", V, v). But it was at the hands the Scholastic theologians that the question received its full development. The results to which they led, though not to be reckoned as part of the dogma, were found to throw great light upon the mystery, and to be of vast service in the objections urged against it.

From the fact that there are two processions in Godhead, each involving both a principle and term, it follows that there must be four relations, two origination (paternitas and spiratio) and two of procession (filiatio and processio). These relations are what constitute the distinction between the Persons. They cannot be digtinguished by any absolute attribute, for every absolute attribute must belong to the infinite Divine Nature and this is common to the Three Persons. Whatever distinction there is must be in the relations alone. This conclusion is held as absolutely certain by all theologians. Equivalently contained in the words of St. Gregory of Nyssa, it was clearly enunciated by St. Anselm ("De process. Sp. S.", ii) and received ecclesiastical sanction in the "Decretum pro Jacobitis" in the form: "[In divinis] omnia sunt unum ubi non obviat relationis oppositio." Since this is so, it is manifest that the four relations suppose but Three Persons. For there is no relative opposition between spiration on the one hand and either paternity or filiation on the other. Hence the attribute of spiration is found in conjunction with each of these, and in virtue of it they are each distinguished from procession. As they share one and the same Divine Nature, so they possess the same virtus spirationis, and thus constitute a single originating principle of the Holy Spirit.

Inasmuch as the relations, and they alone, are distinct realities in the Godhead, it follows that the Divine Persons are none other than these relations. The Father is the Divine Paternity, the Son the Divine Filiation, the Holy Spirit the Divine Procession. Here it must be borne in mind that the relations are not mere accidental determinations as these abstract terms might suggest. Whatever is in God must needs be subsistent. He is the Supreme Substance, transcending the divisions of the Aristotelean categories. Hence, at one and the same time He is both substance and relation. (How it is that there should be in God real relations, though it is altogether impossible that quantity or quality should be found in Him, is a question involving a discussion regarding the metaphysics of relations, which would be out of place in an article such as the present.)

It will be seen that the doctrine of the Divine relations provides an answer to the objection that the dogma of the Trinity involves the falsity of the axiom that things which are identical with the same thing are identical one with another. We reply that the axiom is perfectly true in regard to absolute entities, to which alone it refers. But in the dogma of the Trinity when we affirm that the Father and Son are alike identical with the Divine Essence, we are affirming that the Supreme Infinite Substance is identical not with two absolute entities, but with each of two relations. These relations, in virtue of their nature as correlatives, are necessarily opposed the one to the other and therefore different. Again it is said that if there are Three Persons in the Godhead none can be infinite, for each must lack something which the others possess. We reply that a relation, viewed precisely as such, is not, like quantity or quality, an intrinsic perfection. When we affirm again it is relation of anything, we affirm that it regards something other than itself. The whole perfection of the Godhead is contained in the one infinite Divine Essence. The Father is that Essence as it eternally regards the Son and the Spirit; the Son is that Essence as it eternally regards the Father and the Spirit; the Holy Spirit is that Essence as it eternally regards the Father and the Son. But the eternal regard by which each of the Three Persons is constituted is not an addition to the infinite perfection of the Godhead.

The theory of relations also indicates the solution to the difficulty now most frequently proposed by anti-Trinitarians. It is urged that since there are Three Persons there must be three self-consciousnesses: but the Divine mind ex hypothesi is one, and therefore can possess but one self-consciousness; in other words, the dogma contains an irreconcilable contradiction. This whole objection rests on a petitio principii: for it takes for granted the identification of person and of mind with self-consciousness. This identification is rejected by Catholic philosophers as altogether misleading. Neither person nor mind is self-consciousness; though a person must needs possess self-consciousness, and consciousness attests the existence of mind (see Personality). Granted that in the infinite mind, in which the categories are transcended, there are three relations which are subsistent realities, distinguished one from another in virtue of their relative opposition then it will follow that the same mind will have a three-fold consciousness, knowing itself in three ways in accordance with its three modes of existence. It is impossible to establish that, in regard of the infinite mind, such a supposition involves a contradiction.

The question was raised by the Scholastics: In what sense are we to understand the Divine act of generation? As we conceive things, the relations of paternity and filiation are due to an act by which the Father generates the Son; the relations of spiration and procession, to an act by which Father and Son breathe forth the Holy Spirit. St. Thomas replies that the acts are identical with the relations of generation and spiration; only the mode of expression on our part is different (I:41:3, ad 2). This is due to the fact that the forms alike of our thought and our language are moulded upon the material world in which we live. In this world origination is in every case due to the effecting of a change. We call the effecting of the change action, and its reception passion. Thus, action and passion are different from the permanent relations consequent on them. But in the Godhead origination is eternal: it is not the result of change. Hence the term signifying action denotes not the production of the relation, but purely the relation of the Originator to the Originated. The terminology is unavoidable because the limitations of our experience force us to represent this relation as due to an act. Indeed throughout this whole subject we are hampered by the imperfection of human language as an instrument wherewith to express verities higher than the facts of the world. When, for instance, we say that the Son possesses filiation and spiration the terms seem to suggest that these are forms inherent in Him as in a subject. We know, indeed, that in the Divine Persons there can be no composition: they are absolutely simple. Yet we are forced to speak thus: for the one Personality, not withstanding its simplicity, is related to both the others, and by different relations. We cannot express this save by attributing to Him filiation and spiration (I:32:2).

D. Divine Mission

It has been seen that every action of God in regard of the created world proceeds from the Three Persons indifferently. In what sense, then, are we to understand such texts as "God sent . . . his Son into the world" (John 3:17), and "the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the Father" (John 15:26)? What is meant by the mission of the Son and of the Holy Spirit? To this it is answered that mission supposes two conditions:

• That the person sent should in some way proceed from the sender and
• that the person sent should come to be at the place indicated.

The procession, however, may take place in various ways -- by command, or counsel, or even origination. Thus we say that a king sends a messenger, and that a tree sends forth buds. The second condition, too, is satisfied either if the person sent comes to be somewhere where previously he was not, or if, although he was already there, he comes to be there in a new manner. Though God the Son was already present in the world by reason of His Godhead, His Incarnation made Him present there in a new way. In virtue of this new presence and of His procession from the Father, He is rightly said to have been sent into the world. So, too, in regard to the mission of the Holy Spirit. The gift of grace renders the Blessed Trinity present to the soul in a new manner: that is, as the object of direct, though inchoative, knowledge and as the object of experimental love. By reason of this new mode of presence common to the whole Trinity, the Second and the Third Persons, inasmuch as each receives the Divine Nature by means of a procession, may be said to be sent into the soul. (See also Holy Ghost; Logos; Monotheists; Unitarians.)

Among the numerous patristic works on this subject, the following call for special mention: ST. ATHANASIUS, Orationes quatuor contra Arianos; IDEM, Liber de Trinitate et Spiritu Sancto; ST. GREGORY NAZIANZEN, Orationes V de theologia; DIDYMUS ALEX., Libri III de Trinitate; IDEM, Liber de Spir. Sancto; ST. HILARY OF POITIERS, Libri XII de Trinitate; ST. AUGUSTINE, Libri XV de Trinitate; ST. JOHN DAMASCENE, Liber de Trinitate; IDEM, De fide orthodoxa, I.
Among the medieval theologians: ST. ANSELM, Lib. I. de fide Trinitatis; RICHARD OF ST. VICTOR, Libri VI de Trinitate; ST.THOMAS, Summa, I, xxvii-xliii; BESSARION, Liber de Spiritu Saneto contra Marcum Ephesinum.
Among more recent writers: PETAVIUS, De Trinitate; NEWMAN. Causes of the Rise and Success of Arianism in Theol. Tracts. (London, 1864).

G. H. JOYCE

Trinity College

An institution for the higher education of Catholic women, located at Washington, D.C., and empowered under the terms of its charter (1897) to confer degrees. The college originated in the desire of the Sisters of Notre Dame de Namur, who had been thirty-five years established in the city of Washington, to open a select day-school in the suburb of Brookland. Before requesting the necessary ecclesiastical sanction, it was proposed to them by the authorities of the Catholic University to make the new school a college equal in efficiency to the women's colleges already established in the United States. Cardinal Gibbons, chancellor of the university, heartily endorse this project, "persuaded", he wrote, "that such and institution, working in union with, though entirely independent of, the Catholic University, will do incalculable good in the cause of higher education" (5 April 1897). Sister Julia, then provincial superior of the Sisters of Notre Dame, secured a tract of thirty-three acres lying between Michigan and Lincoln Avenues, Brookland. The corner-stone was laid on 8 December, 1899; the South Hall of the building was dedicated by Cardinal Gibbons, on 22 November 1900, and the structure was completed in 1910. It contains residence halls for two hundred students, lecture rooms, laboratories, a museum, a library of 12,000 volumes, and a temporary chapel. The O'Connor Art Gallery and Auditorium, a hall provided by the generosity of Judge and Mrs. M.P. O'Connor of San Jose, California, houses a large and valuable collection of paintings, water colours, mosaics, photographs, and statuary, which was opened to visitors on 31 May, 1904, in the presence of the donors. The Holahan Social Hall contains some rare old paintings, a bequest to the college in 1907 by Miss Amanda Holahan of Philadelphia. The administration of the college is in the hands of an advisory board, of which Cardinal Gibbons is president, and the members comprise the rector, and vice-rector of the Catholic University, the provincial superior of the Sisters of Notre Dame, the president of the college, who is also the superior of the community, and the president of the auxiliary board of regents. The auxiliary board of regents and its associate boards draw their members from all parts of the United States, being composed of Catholic ladies who can help the cause of higher education by their influence and example. The college has no endowment. By the liberality of friends, seventeen scholarships have been established. The faculty of Trinity College is composed of six professors from the Catholic University in the departments of philosophy, education, apologetics, economics, and sociology, and seventeen Sisters of Notre Name in the departments of religion, Sacred Scripture, ancient and modern languages, English, history, logic, mathematics, the physical sciences, music, and art. The college opened its courses on 7 November 1900, with twenty-two students in the Freshman class and has grown only by promotion and admission. For 1911-1912, 160 were registered. Admission is by examination according to the requirements of the College Entrance Examination Board; no specialists are received; and there is no preparatory department. The number of degrees conferred (1904-1912) is 160, viz.: master of arts, 8; bachelor of arts, 130; bachelor of letters, 20; bachelor of science, 2.

Annals of Trinity College (Washington, D.C.); SISTER OF NOTRE DAME, The Life of Sister Julia, Provincial Superior of the Sisters of Notre Dame (Washington, D.C., 1911); MCDEVITT, Trinity College and the Higher Education in The Catholic World (June, 1904); HOWE, Trinity College in Donahoe's Magazine (October, 1900).

SISTER OF NOTRE DAME

Trinity Sunday

The first Sunday after Pentecost, instituted to honour the Most Holy Trinity. In the early Church no special Office or day was assigned for the Holy Trinity. When the Arian heresy was spreading the Fathers prepared an Office with canticles, responses, a Preface, and hymns, to be recited on Sundays. In the Sacramentary of St. Gregory the Great (P.L., LXXVIII, 116) there are prayers and the Preface of the Trinity. The Micrologies (P.L., CLI, 1020), written during the pontificate of Gregory VII (Nilles, II, 460), call the Sunda after Pentecost a Dominica vacans, with no special Office, but add that in some places they recited the Office of the Holy Trinity composed by Bishop Stephen or Liège (903-20) By other the Office was said on the Sunday before Advent. Alexander II (1061-1073), not III (Nilles, 1. c.), refused a petition for a special feast on the plea, that such a feast was not customary in the Roman Church which daily honoured the Holy Trinity by the Gloria, Patri, etc., but he did not forbid the celebration where it already existed. John XXII (1316-1334) ordered the feast for the entire Church on the first Sunday after Pentecost. A new Office had been made by the Franciscan John Peckham, Canon of Lyons, later Archbishop of Canterbury (d. 1292). The feast ranked as a double of the second class but was raised to the dignity of a primary of the first class, 24 July 1911, by Pius X (Acta Ap. Sedis, III, 351). The Greeks have no special feast. Since it was after the first great Pentecost that the doctrine of the Trinity was proclaimed to the world, the feast becomingly follows that of Pentecost.

NILLES, Kal. man. (Innsbruck, 1897); BINTERIM, Denkwürdig keiten, I. 264; KELLNER, Heortology (London, 1908). 116; BÄUMER, Geschichte des Breviers (Freiburg, 1895), 298.

FRANCIS MERSHMAN

Triple-Candlestick

A name given along with several others (e.g. reed, tricereo, arundo, triangulum, lumen Christi) to a church ornament used only in the office of Holy Saturday. The three candles of which it is composed are successively lighted, as the sacred ministers proceed up the church, from the fire consecrated in the porch, and at each lighting the deacon sings the acclamation "Lumen Christi", the assistants genuflecting and answering "Deo gratias". As this ceremony is fully discussed under the heading Lumen Christi (and cf. Liturgical Use of Fire) it will be sufficient to say a word here about the material instrument used for the purpose. Both the rubrics of the Missal and the "Caeremoniale Episcoporum" seem to assume that the so-called triple candlestick is not a permanent piece of furniture, but merely an arrangement of three candles temporarily attached to a reed or wand, such a reed for example as is used by the acolytes to light the candles with. "Praeparetur arundo cum tribus candelis in summitate positis" (Caer. Epis., II, xxvii, I). In practice, however, we often find a brass candlestick constructed for the purpose with a long handle. Barbier de Montault (Traité pratique, ete.,II,311) infers from the wording of the Missal rubric (arundo cum tribus candelis in summitate illius triangulo distinctis) that one of the three candles should stand higher than the other, so that the three flames may form a triangle in the vertical plane. A triple and double candlestick are used by bishops of the Greek Church to bless the people with, and an elaborate symbolism is attached to this rite.

Thurston, Lent and Holy Week (London, 1904).

HERBERT THURSTON

Tripolis

(Tripolitana).

A Maronite and Melchite diocese, in Syria. The primitive name of the town is not known; Dhorme (Revue biblique, 1908, 508 sqq.) suggests that it is identical witrh Shi-ga-ta mentioned in the El-Amarna letters between 1385 and 1368 B.C. The name Tripolis is derived from the fact that the city formed three districts separated from each other by walls, inhabited by colonists from Aradus, Tyre, and Sidon, and governed by a common senate. Almost nothing is known of its ancient history. Christianity was introduced there at an early date; mention may be made of a much frequented sanctuary there which was dedicated to the martyr St. Leontius, whose feast is observed on 18 June (Analecta bollandiana, XIX, 9-12). The see, which was in the Province of Tyre and the Patriarchate of Antioch, had a bishop, Helladicus, in 325; other bishops were: the Arian Theodosius; Commodus, who was present at the Council of Ephesus in 431; and Theodorus, at that of Chalcedon in 451 (Le Quien, "Oriens christ.", II, 821-24). After an earthquake Tripolis was restored by Emperor Marcianus about the middle of the fifth century, to be captured by the Arabs in 638, when it became a powerful centre of the Shiite religion, resisting all attacks by the Byzantines. It then had a university and a library of more than 100,000 volumes; the latter was burned on the arrival of the Crusaders. As early as 1103 Raymond, Count of Saint-Gilles, being unable to capture the city, built on a neighbouring hill the stronghold which still exists and compelled the inhabitants to pay him tribute. In 1109 the city was captured, made a countship, and given to Bertrand, Raymond's son, and to his descendants. The latter owned it until 1289, when it was taken from them by Sultan Qalaoun, who massacred the entire Christian population. Du Cange (Les familles d'outre-mer, 811-13) and Eubel (Hierarchia catholica medii ævi, I, 526: II, 281; III, 339) give the list of its Latin residential and titular bishops. In 1517 the Turks finally captured Tripoli and still retain possession of it. In 1697 the Maronite prince Younès was martyred there for the Faith, and in 1711 the Sheikh Canaan-Daher-Shhedid.

Tripolis is now a sanjak of the vilayet of Beirut, and contains two towns linked by a tramway: El-Mina, or maritime Tripolis, on the site of the ancient city, and Taraboulos, built since 1289, at the foot of Raymond's fortress. The two cities together contain 37,000 inhabitants, of whom 110 are Latins, 2200 Oriental Catholics of various rites, and 4000 schismatic Melchites; the remainder are Mussulmans. The Maronite bishop, Mgr. Antoine Arida, consecrated on 18 June, 1908, resides at Karrusadde. The Melchite bishop, Mgr. Joseph Doumani, was consecrated on 21 March, 1897. The Franciscans have the Latin parish and two establishments. In this parish are also established the Lazarists, the Carmelites, the Brothers of the Christian Schools, and the Sisters of Charity. The sanctuary of the Blessed Virgin is called Saïdyat el-Harah, Our Lady of the Quarter. The Maronite diocese has 48,000 faithful, 350 priests, and 70 churches. The Melchite diocese, created in 1897, has 1225 faithful, 14 priests, 10 churches or chapels, and 6 schools. The schismatic Melchite diocese has 50,000 members.

DU CANGE, Les familles d'outre-mer (Paris, 1869), 477-95; RENAN, Mission de PhÈnicie (Paris, 1864), 120-30; GUÉRIN, Description de la Palestine: Galilee, II, 23-30; GOUDARD, La Sainte Vierge au Liban, 269-77; Missiones catholicæ (Rome, 1907), 783, 819; CHARON in Annuaire pont. cath. (Paris, 1911), 430.

S. VAILHÉ

Giangiorgio Trissino

Italian poet and scholar, b. of a patrician family at Vicenza in 1478; d. at Rome, 8 December, 1550. He had the advantages of a good humanistic training, studying Greek under the noted Demetrius Chalcondylas at Milan and philosophy under Nicolò Leoniceno at Ferrara. His culture recommended him to the humanist Leo X, who in 1515 sent him to Germany as his nuncio; later on Clement VII showed him especial favour, and employed him as ambassador. In 1532 the Emperor Charles V made him a count palatine. In spite of the banishment from Vicenza pronounced upon him in 1509 because his family had favoured the plans of Maximilian, he was held in honour throughout Italy. Wherever he abode his home was a centre for gatherings of scholars, littérateurs, and the most cultured men of the time. His family life was far from happy, apparently through little fault of his own. In the history of modern European literature Trissino occupies a prominent place because of his tragedy "Sofonisba" (1515; recent ed., Bologna, 1884), the first tragedy in Italian to show deference to the classic rules. Constantly a partisan of Aristotelean regularity, he disapproved of the genial freedom of the chivalrous epic as written by Ariosto. In his own composition the "Italia liberata dai Goti" (1547-8), dealing with the campaigns of Belisarius in Italy, he sought to show that it was possible to write in the vernacular an epic in accordance with the classic precepts. The result is a cold and colourless composition.

He was one of the many who engaged in the discussion as to what is true literary Italian. Following the lead of Dante, he espoused in his "Castellano" (1529) the indefensible theory that the language is a courtly one made up of contributions from the refined centres in Italy, instead of being, as it is, fundamentally of Tuscan origin. For clearness he proposed that in writing Italian certain new characters (derived from the Greek alphabet) abe adopted to show the difference between open and close e and o and voiced and voiceless s and z. This wise proposition was ignored. "I Simillimi" (1548) which is a version of the "Menæchmi" of Plautus, "I Ritratti" (1524) which is a composite portrait of feminine beauty, and the "Poetica", which contains his summing up of the Aristotelean principles of literary composition, made up the rest of his important writings. An edition of his collected works was published by Maffei at Verona in 1729.

MORSOLIN, Giangiorgio Trissino (Florence, 1894); FLAMINI, Il Cinquecento 132 sqq.; CIAMPOLINI, La prima tragedia regolare della lett. ital. (Florence, 1896); ERMINI, L'Italia lib. di G.T. (Rome, 1893).

J.D.M. FORD

Tritheists

(TRITHEITES).

Heretics who divide the Substance of the Blessed Trinity.

(1) Those who are usually meant by the name were a section of the Monophysites, who had great influence in the second half of the sixth century, but have left no traces save a few scanty notices in John of Ephesus, Photus, Leontius, etc. Their founder is said to be a certain John Ascunages, head of a Sophist school at Antioch. But the principal writer was John Philoponus, the great Aristotelean commentator. The leaders were two bishops, Conon of Tarsus and Eugenius of Seleucia in Isauria, who were deposed by their comprovinicals and took refuge at Constantinople. There they found a powerful convert and protector in Athanasius the Monk, a grandson of the Empress Theodora. Philoponus dedicated to him a book on the Trinity. The old philosopher pleaded his infirmities when he was summoned by Justinian to the Court to give an account of his teaching. But Conon and Eugenius had to dispute in the reign of Justin II (565-78) in the presence of the Catholic patriarch, John Scholasticus (565-77), with two champions of the moderate Monophysite party, Stephen and Paul, the latter afterwards Patriarch of Antioch. The Tritheist bishops refused to anathematize Philoponus, and brought proofs that he agreed with Severus and Theodosius. They were banished to Palestine, and Philoponus wrote a book against John Scholasticus, who had given his verdict in favour of his adversaries. But he developed a theory of his own as to the Resurrection (see EUTYCHIANISM) on account of which Conon and Eugenius wrote a treatise against him in collaboration with Themistus, the founder of the Agnoctae, in which they declared his views to be altogether unchristian. The two bishops together with a deprived bishop named Theonas proceeded to consecrate bishops for their sect, which they established in Corinth and Athens, in Rome and Africa, and in the Western Patriarchate, while their agents travelled through Syria and Cilicia, Isauria and Cappadocia, converting whole districts, and ordaining priests and deacons in cities villages, and monasteries. Eugenius died in Pamphylia; Conon returned to Constantinople. We are assured by Leontius that it was the Aristoteleanism of Philoponus which made him teach that there are in the Holy Trinity three partial substances (merikai ousiai, ikikai theotetes, idiai physeis) and one common. The genesis of the heresy has been explained (for the first time) under MONOPHYSITES, where an account of Philoponus's writings and those of Stephen Gobarus, another member of the sect, will be found.

(2) In the Middle Ages Roscellin of Compiegne, the founder of Nominalism, argued, just like Philoponus, that unless the Three Persons are tres res, then the whole Trinity must have been incarnate. He was refuted by St. Anselm.

(3) Among Catholic writers, Pierre Faydit, who was expelled from the Oratory at Paris in 1671 for disobedience and died in 1709, fell into the error of Tritheism in his "Eclaireissements sur la doctrine et Phistoire ecclésiastiqes des deux premiers siecles" (Paris, 1696), in which he tried to make out that the earliest Fathers were Tritheists. He was replied to by the Premonstratensian Abbot Louis-Charles Hugo ("Apologie du système des Saints Pères sur la Trinité," Luxemburg, 1699). A canon of Trèves named Oembs, who was infected with the doctrines of the "Enlightenment", similarly attributed to the Fathers his own view of three similar natures in the Trinity, calling the numerical unity of God an invention of the Scholastics. His book, "Opuscula de Deo Uno et Trino" (Mainz, 1789), was condemned by Pius VII in a Brief of 14 July, 1804. Gunther is also accused of Tritheism.

(4) Among Protestants, Heinrich Nicolai (d. 1660), a professor at Dantzig and at Elbing (not to be confounded with the founder of the Familisten), is cited. The best known is William Sherlock, Dean of St. Paul's, whose "Vindication of the Doctrine of the Trinity" (London, 1690) against the Socinians was attacked by Robert South in "Animadversions on Dr. Sherlock's Vindication" (1693). Sherlock's work is said to have made William Manning a Socinian and Thomas Emlyn an Arian, and the dispute was ridiculed in a skit entitled "The Battle Royal", attributed to William Pittis (1694?), which was translated into Latin at Cambridge. Joseph Bingham, author of the "Antiquities", preached at Oxford in 1695 a sermon which was considered to represent the Fathers as Tritheists, and it was condemned by the Hebdomadal Council as falsa, impia et haeretica, the scholar being driven from Oxford.

For bibliography see MONOPHYSITES.

JOHN CHAPMAN

John Trithemius

A famous scholar and Benedictine abbot, b. at Trittenheim on the Moselle, 1 February, 1462; d. at Würzburg, 13 December, 1516. The abbot himself, in his "Nepiachus", gives an account of his youth, which was a time of hard suffering owing to the harsh treatment of his selfish stepfather, who allowed the talented boy to grow up in complete ignorance till the age of fifteen, when he learned reading and writing as well as the rudiments of Latin in a remarkably short time. But as his persecution at home did not cease, he ran away, and after a painful journey succeeded in reaching Würzburg, where the well-known humanist, Jacob Wimpheling, was teaching; here the ambitious youth pursued his classical studies till 1482. In order to revisit his home he determined to make an excursion to the neighbourhood of Trèves accompanied by a comrade; it was January and the young men travelled afoot. A short visit to the monastery of Sponheim was to prove of decisive importance for the young Trithemius; hardly had the travellers taken leave of the monks when a snowstorm obliged them to return to the monastery. At the invitation of the prior, Henry of Holzhausen, who had quickly discerned the talents of his young guest, Trithemius remained in Sponheim; eight days later he received the habit of the order and made his vows in the same year, 8 December. His life in the monastery was exemplary; he commanded the respect of his brethren, and the love of his superiors. The proof of the respect in which he was held by all was the fact that although he was the youngest member of the community, and had not yet been ordained, he was elected abbot at the age of twenty-two, during the second year of his life in the order. His election was a great blessing for Sponheim. With youthful vigour and a firm hand he undertook the direction of the much-neglected monastery. He first turned his attention to the material needs of his community, then set himself to the much more difficult task of restoring its discipline. Above all, his own example, not only in the conscientious observance of the rules of the order, but also in the tireless pursuit of scientific studies, brought about the happiest results.

In order to promote effectively scientific research, he procured a rich collection of books which comprised the most important works in all branches of human knowledge; in this way he built up the world-renowned library of Sponheim for the enriching of which he laboured unceasingly for twenty-three years till the collection numbered about 2000 volumes. This library, unique in those days, made Sponheim known throughout the entire world of learning. The attractive personality of the abbot also helped to spread the fame of the monastery. Among his friends he numbered, not only the most learned men of his time, such as Celtes, Reuchlin, and John of Dalberg, but also many princes -- including the Emperor Maximilian, who held him in great esteem. But the farther his reputation extended in the world the greater became the number of malcontents in the monastery who opposed the abbot's discipline. Finally he resigned as head of his beloved abbey, which he had ruled for twenty-three years, and which he had brought to a most flourishing condition; after his departure the monastery sank into its former insignificance. The Emperor Maximilian desired to bring the famous scholar to his Court, and to make him the historiographer of the Imperial House with a life-long pension; he was also promised rich abbeys. But Trithemius sought the quiet and peace of a more retired life, and this he found as abbot of the Scottish monastery of St. Jacob, at Würzburg (1506). Here he found only three monks, so he had ample opportunity to display the same activity he had shown at Sponheim. He spent the last ten years of his life in the production of many important writings. Only once did he leave his monastery (1508) for a short stay at the imperial Court. He died at fifty-five years of age and was buried in the Scottish church at Würzburg.

The Order of St. Benedict was indebted to this energetic abbot for his zealous promotion of the Bursfeld Congregation, for his encouragement of learning in the order, and for his earnest furtherance of monastic discipline. "The great abbot", says one of his biographers, "was equally worthy of respect as a man, as a religious, and as a writer." Of his more than eighty works only part have appeared in print. The greater number of these are ascetical writings which treat of the religious life and were published by John Busaeus, S.J., under the title "Joannis Trithemii opera pia et spiritualia" (Mainz, 1604); they are among the best works of devotional literature produced at the time. Marquard Freher published a part of his historical works as "Joannis Trithemii opera historica" (Frankfort, 1601). This collection, however, did not include the two famous folio volumes, published in 1690 under the title of "Annales Hirsaugiensis". Trithemius also wrote interesting contributions on points of natural science, then much debated, and on classical literature. The question whether he, by citing two otherwise unknown authorities (Megiahard and Kunibald), was guilty of intentional forgery, is still under debate by some critics. Surely the inscription on his tomb testifies to the truth:

Hanc meruit statuam Germanae gloria gentis Abbas Trithemius, quem tegit ista domus

(The Abbot Trithemius, the glory of the German race, whom this house covers, merited this statue).

[Note: A portrait of John Trithemius was printed in Thevet's Livre des Vrais Pourtraits, Paris, 1584.]

SILBERNAGEL, Joh. Trithemius (Landshut, 1868); RULAND in Chiliancum, new ser., I, 45-68 (Bonn, 1869); SCHNEEGANS, Abt. Joh. Trithemius u. Kloster Sponheim (Kreuznach, 1882); JANSSEN-PASTOR, Geschichte des Deutschen Volkes, I (Freiburg, 1897).

NICHOLAS SCHEID

Trivento

(Triventensis)

Diocese in southern Italy. The earliest bishop was St. Castus of an uncertain epoch, the local legend assigning him to the fourth century. Other bishops were: the monk Leo, intruded and deposed by Agapetus I (946); Alferius (1109); the Franciscan Luca (1226), exiled by King Manfred; Pietro dell' Aquila (1348), noted for his learning; Giulio Cesare Moriconda (1582), who restored the cathedral, rearranged the archives, and erected a seminary; Alfonso Moriconda (1717), O.S.B., a learned prelate who restored the cathedral and the episcopal residence. The diocese is suffragan of Beneventum; it has 58 parishes with 130,000 souls, 160 secular priests, and three religious houses.

CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, XXI (Venice, 1844), 469.

U. BENIGNI

Nicholas Trivet

(Or "Trevet" as he himself wrote it)

B. about 1258; d. 1328. He was the son of Thomas Trevet, a judge who came of a Norfolk or Somerset family. He became a Dominican in London, and studied first at Oxford, then at Paris, where he first took an interest in English and French chronicles. Little is known of his life except that at one time he was prior of his order in London, and at another he was teaching at Oxford. He was the author of a large number of theological and hstorical works and commentaries on the classics, more especially the works of Seneca. A large number of these exist in MS. in various libraries, but only two appear to have been printed, one being the work by which he is chiefly remembered, the chronicle of the Angevin kings of England, the other was the last twelve books of his commentary on St. Augustine's treatise "De civitate dei". The full title of the former work is "Annales sex regum Angliae qui a comitibus Andegavensibus originem traxerunt", an important historical source for the period 1136-1307, containing a specially valuable account of the reign of Edward I. Trivet also wrote a chronicle in French, parts of which were printed by Spelman, and from which Chaucer is believed to have derived the "Man of Law's Tale". His theological works include commentaries on parts of the Scripture, a treatise on the Mass and some writings on Scholastic theology.

HOG, preface to Trivet's Chronicle, Eng. Hist. Soc. (London, 1845); TRIVET, Annales sex Regum Angliae (Oxford, 1719); HARDY, Descriptive Catalogue (London, 1871); KINGSFORD in Dict. Nat. Biog., with exhaustive list of MSS.; CHEVALIER, Repertoire des sources historiques du moyen age (Paris, 1905), gives a list of earlier references.

EDWIN BURTON

Troas

A suffragan of Cyzicus in the Hellespont. The city was first called Sigia; it was enlarged and embellished by Antigonus, who peopled it with inhabitants drawn from other cities, and surnamed it Antigonia Troas (Strabo, 604, 607); it was finally enlarged by Lysimachus, who called it Alexandria Troas (Strabo, 593; Pliny, V, 124). The name Troas is the one most used. For having remained faithful to the Romans during their war against Antiochus, Troas was favoured by them (Titus Livius, XXXV, 42; XXXVII, 35); it became afterwards Colonia Alexandria Augusta Troas. Augustus, Hadrian and the rich grammarian Herodes Atticus contributed greatly to its embellishment; the aqueduct still preserved is due to the latter. Julius Caesar and Constantine the Great thought of making Troas the capital of the Roman Empire. St. Luke came to Troas to join St. Paul and accompany him to Europe (Acts, xvi, 8-11); there also many of St. Paul's friends joined him at another time and remained a week with him (Acts, xx, 4-12). A Christian community existed there and it was at that place that Eutychus was resuscitated by the Apostle. He mentions his sojourn there (II Cor., ii, 12), and he asks Timotheus to bring him his cloak and his books which he had left with Carpus (II Tim., iv, 13). St. Ignatius of Antioch stopped at Troas before going to Rome (Ad Philad., XI, 2; Ad Smyrn., XII, 1). Several of its bishops are known: Marinus in 325, Niconius in 344, Sylvanus at the beginning of the fifth century; Pionius in 451, Leo in 787, Peter, friend of the patriarch Ignatius, and Michael, his adversary, in the ninth century. In the tenth century Troas is given as a suffragan of Cyzicus and distinct from the famous Ilium (Gelzer, "Ungedruckte . . .Texte der Notitiae episcopatuum", 552; Idem, "Georgii Cyprii descriptio orbis romani", 64); it is not known when the city was destroyed and the diocese disappeared. To-day Troas is Eski- Stambul in the sanjak of Bigha.

LE QUIEN, Oriens christianus, I, 777; TEXIER, Asie mineure (Paris, 1862), 194-97; LEBAS-WADDINGTON, Asie mineure, 1035-37, 1730-40; PAULY-WISSOWA, Real-Encyclopadie fur clas. Altertumswissenschaft, s. v. Alexandria Troas.

S. VAILHÉ

Trocmades

(Trocmada)

Titular see of Galatia Secunda, suffragan of Pessinus. No geographer or historian mentions a city of this name; Hierocles (Synecemus, 698, 1) gives "regio Trocnades", instead of Regetnoknada, referring, doubtless, to the Galatian name of some tribe on the left bank of the Sangarius; its principal centre was probably in the present village of Kaimez, about twenty-four miles east of Eski Shehir, a vilayet of Broussa. All the "Notitiae episcopatuum" up to the thirteenth century mention the see Trokmadon among the suffragans of Pessinus; the two most recent (thirteenth century) call it Lotinou; perhaps it should be Plotinou, from St. Plotinus, venerated there. The official lists of the Roman Curia give Trocmadae. Le Quien (Oriens christianus, I, 493), gives Trocmada. From these erroneous forms arises a confusion of the name with the Galatian tribe of Trocmi. The last named author gives a list of the known bishops: Cyriacus, who represented his metropolitan at the Robber Synod of Ephesus (449), and was represented by a priest at the Council of Chalcedon (451); Theodore, present at the Council of Constantinople (681); Leo, at Nicaea (787); Constantine at the Photian Council of Constantinople (879). Cyriacus, said to have assisted at the Council of Nicaea (325), is not mentioned in the authentic lists of bishops present at that council.

S. PÉTRIDÈS

John de Trokelowe

(THROWLOW, or THORLOW)

A monastic chronicler still living in 1330, but the dates of whose birth and death are unknown. He was a Benedictine monk of St. Albans who in 1294 was living in the dependent priory of Tynemouth, Northumberland. The prior and monks endeavoured to sever connection with St. Albans and to obtain independence by presenting the advowson to the king; but abbot John of Berkamsted resisted this arrangement, visited Tynemouth, and sent Trokelow with other monks as prisoners back to St. Alban's. There Trokelowe wrote his "Annales" including the period 1259 to 1296 and a useful account of the reign of Edward II, from 1307 to 1323, after which date his chronicle was continued by Henry de Blaneford. A reference made by Trokelowe to the execution of Mortimer shows that he was writing after 1330.

RILEY, Johannis de Trokelowe et Henrici de Blaneforde chronica et annales in Rolls Series (London, 1866). See also RILEY, Introduction to RISHANGER, Chronicle in the Chronica monastica S. Albani in the same series. HARDY, Descriptive Catalogue (London, 1871); HUNT in Dict. Nat. Biog.

EDWIN BURTON

Ancient See of Trondhjem

(NIDAROS).

In Norway it was the kings who introduced Christianity, which first became known to the people during their martial expeditions (Hergenröther, "Kirchengeschichte", 1879, II, 721). The work of Christianization begun by Haakon the Good (d: 981) (Maurer, "Die Bekehrung des norwegischen Stammes", Munich, 1855, I, ii, 168) was carried on by Olaf Trygvesson (d. 1002) and Olaf Haraldsson (St. Olaf, d. 1030). Both were converted vikings, the former having been baptized at Andover, England, by Bishop Aelfeah of Winchester, and the latter at Rouen by Archbishop Robert (Bang, "Den norske Kirkes Historie under Katholicismen", Christiania, 1887, 44, 50). In 997 Olaf Trygvesson founded at the mouth of the River Nid the city of Nidaros, afterwards called Trondhjem, where he built a royal palace and a church; he laboured to spread the truths of Christianity in Norway, the Orkney and Shetland Islands, the Faroe Islands, Iceland, and Greenland (Maurer, op. cit., I, iii, 462). King Olaf Haraldsson created an episcopal see at Nidaros, installing the monk Grimkill as bishop. Moreover, many English and German bishops and priests laboured in Norway, and by degrees Christianity softened the rough instincts of the people. The Norwegian bishops were at first dependent on the Archbishop of Hamburg-Bremen, and afterwards on the Archbishop of Lund, Primate of Scandinavia. As the Norwegians nevertheless wanted an archbishop of their own, Eugene III, resolving to create a metropolitan see at Trondhjem, sent thither as legate (1151) Cardinal Nicholas of Albano (Nicholas Breakspeare), afterwards Adrian IV. The legate installed Jon Birgerson, previously Bishop of Stavanger, as Archbishop of Trondhjem. The bishops of Oslo (bishop 1073), Bergen (about 1060), Stavanger (1130), Hamar (1151), the Orkneys (1070), Iceland (Skalholt, 1056; Holar, 1105), and Greenland became suffragans.

Archbishop Birgerson was succeeded by Eystein (Beatus Augustinus, 1158-88), previously royal secretary and treasurer, a man of brilliant intellect, strong will, and deep piety (Daae, "Norges Helgener", Christiania, 1879, 170-6). Such a man was then needed to defend the liberty of the Church against the encroachments of King Sverre, who wished to make the Church a mere tool of the temporal power. The archbishop was compelled to flee from Norway to England. It is true that he was able to return and that a sort of reconciliation took place later between him and the king, but on Eystein's death Sverre renewed his attacks, and Archbishop Eric had to leave the country and take refuge with Archbishop Absalon of Lund. At last, when Sverre attacked the papal legate, Innocent III laid the king and his partisans under interdict (Baluze, "Epp. Innocentii III", Paris, 1682, I, i, 226, 227). King Haakon (1202), son and successor of Sverre, hastened to make peace with the Church, whose liberty had been preserved by the unflinching attitude of the pope and his archbishops. What would have happened, asks the Protestant ecclesiastical historian of Norway, Dr. A. Chr. Bang, "if the Church, deprived of all liberty, had become the submissive slave of absolute royalty? What influence would it have exercised at a time when its chief mission was to act as the educator of the people and as the necessary counterpoise to defend the liberty of the people against the brutal whims of the secular lords? And what would have happened when a century later royalty left the country? After that time the Church was in reality the sole centre about which was grouped the whole national life of our country" (op. cit., 109). To regulate ecclesiastical affairs, which had suffered during the struggles with Sverre, Innocent IV in 1247 sent Cardinal William of Sabina as legate to Norway. He intervened against certain encroachments on the part of the bishops, reformed various abuses, and abolished the ordeal by hot iron. Owing in great measure to the papal legates, Norway became more closely linked with the supreme head of Christendom at Rome. Secular priests, Benedictines, Cistercians, Augustinians, Dominicans, and Franciscans worked together for the prosperity of the Church. Archbishops Eilif Kortin (d. 1332), Paul Baardson (d. 1346), and Arne Vade (d. 1349) showed specially remarkable zeal. Provincial councils were held, at which serious efforts were made to eliminate abuses and to encourage Christian education and morality (Bang, op. cit., 297).

Nidaros (Trondhjem), the metropolis of the ecclesiastical province, was also the capital of Norway. The residence of the kings until 1217, it remained until the troubles of the Reformation the heart and centre of the spiritual life of the country. There was situated the tomb of St. Olaf, and around the patron of Norway, "Rex perpetuus Norvegiae", the national and ecclesiastical life of the country was centred. Pilgrims flocked from all quarters to the tomb. The feast of St. Olaf on 29 July was a day or reunion for "all the nations of the Northern seas, Norwegians, Swedes, Goths, Cimbrians, Danes, and Slavs", to quote an old chronicler ("Adami gesta pontificum Hammaburgensium", Hanover, 1876, II, 82), in the cathedral of Nidaros, where the reliquary of St. Olaf rested near the altar. Built in Roman style by King Olaf Kyrre (d. 1093), the dome had been enlarged by Archbishop Eystein in Ogival style. It was finished only in 1248 by Archbishop Sigurd Sim. Although several times destroyed by fire, the ancient dome was restored each time until the storms of the Reformation. Then Archbishop Eric Walkendorf was exiled (1521), and his successor, Olaf Engelbertsen, who had been the instrument of the royal will in the introduction of Lutheranism, had also, as a partisan of Christian II, to fly from Christian III (1537). The valuable reliquaries of St. Olaf and St. Augustine (Eystein) were taken away, sent to Copenhagen, and melted. The bones of St. Olaf were buried in the cathedral, and the place forgotten. But when Norway regained its liberty and resumed it placed among independent nations (1814), the memory of the glory of its ancestors awoke. It was resolved to rebuild the ancient dome, and the cathedral stands once more renewed, although not in possession of the religion which created it. But new churches have arisen in the city of St. Olaf, bearing witness that the Catholic Faith still lives in Scandinavia in spite of all its trials.

Besides the works cited above see: MUNCH, Throndhjems Domkirke (Christiania, 1859); KREFTING, Om Throndhjems Domkirke (Trondhjem, 1885); SCHIRMER, Kristkirken; Nidaros (Christiania, 1885); MATHIESEN, Det gamle Throndhjem (Christiani, 1897).

GUSTAF ARMFELT

Trope

Definition and Description

Trope, in the liturgico-hymnological sense, is a collective name which, since about the close of the Middle Ages or a little later, has been applied to texts of great variety (in both poetry and prose) written for the purpose of amplifying and embellishing an independently complete liturgical text (e.g. the Introit, the Kyrie, Gloria, Gradual, or other parts of the Mass or of the Office sung by the choir). These additions are closely attached to the official liturgical text, but in no way do they change the essential character of it; they are entwined in it, augmenting and elucidating it; they are, as it were, a more or less poetical commentary that is woven into the liturgical text, forming with it a complete unit. Thus in France and England, instead of the liturgical text "Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus, Dominus Deus Sabaoth" the lines sung were:

1. Sanctus ex quo sunt omnia;
2. Sanctus, per quem sunt omnia;
3. Sanctus, in quo sunt omnia; Dominus Deus Sabaoth, tibi gloria sit in saecula.

The most accurate definition, applicable to all the different kinds of Tropes, might be the following: A Trope is an interpolation in a liturgical text, or the embellishment brought about by interpolation (i.e. by introductions, insertions, or additions). Herein lies the difference between the Trope and the closely- related Sequence or Prose. The Sequence also is an embellishment of the liturgy, an insertion between liturgical chants (the Gradual and the Gospel), originating about the eighth century; the Sequence is thus an interpolation in the liturgy, but it is not an interpolation in a liturgical text. The Sequence is an independent unit, complete in itself; the Trope, however, forms a unit only in connection with a liturgical text, and when separated from the latter is often devoid of any meaning. Accordingly the several Tropes are named after that liturgical text to which they belong, viz. Trope of the Kyrie, Trope of the Gloria, Trope of the Agnus Dei, etc.

Originally there existed no uniform name for that which is now combined under the idea and name of Tropus. Only the interpolations of the Introit, the Offertory, and the Communion were called Tropi (trophi, tropos, trophos), and even that not exclusively but only predominantly; for the Introit Trope was frequently called "Versus in psalmis", the Offertory Trope also "Prosa [or prosula] ad [or ante] Offerenda". To all the other interpolations a great variety of names was applied, as "Prosae de Kyrieleison", or "Versus ad Kyrieleison", = Kyrie Tropes; "Laudes" (Lauda, laus), "Gloria cum laudes", "Laudes cum tropis", or simply "Ad Gloria", = Gloria Tropes; "Laudes ad Sanctus", "Versus super Sanctus", = Sanctus Tropes; "Laudes de Agnus Dei", "Prosa ad Agnus Dei", = Agnus Tropes; "Epistola cum Versibus", "Versus super epistolam", = Epistle Trope (Epître farcie); "Verba", or "Verbeta", or "Prosella", = Breviary Trope. How and when the general name of Tropus sprang up, has not yet been exactly ascertained. And just as little has the priority been established of the different kinds of interpolations, whether that in the Introit is the oldest, or that in the Gloria, or the Kyrie, or in any other part of the Mass; for that very reason it is not known yet which of the various designations (Versus, Prosae, Tropi, or Laudes) is the oldest and most original.

One thing is certain: the Latin Tropus is a word borrowed from the Greek tropos. The latter was a musical term, and denoted a melody (tropos lydios, phrygios = Lydian, Phrygian, Doric melody), or in general a musical change, like the Latin modus or modulus, similar to the international "modulation". It is quite conceivable that the name of the melody was transferred to the text which had been composed to it, as is the case with the word Sequentia. In reasoning thus, one would have to presuppose that over one syllable of a liturgical text, e.g. over the e of the Kyrie, a longer melisma was sung, which bore the name of tropus; furthermore, that to such a melisma a text was composed later on, and that this text was also called "Tropus". And it is an actual fact that from early times such melismata existed over a vowel of the Kyrie, the Gloria, the Sanctus, etc.; likewise there were many texts which were produced for these melismata, consequently they were interpolations. But the date when these melismata of the Kyrie, Gloria, Sanctus, etc., were first called "Tropi" is still a matter of research; what we know is that the texts under that kind of melisma which has just been described were not called "Tropi" from the earliest times. On the contrary, by the name of "Tropi" were originally designated the interpolations of precisely those parts of the Mass which do not exhibit any long melismata, as the Introit and Offertory. To give an example, an interpolation of the Christmas Introit written in prose, reads: Ecce, adest de quo prophetae cecinerunt dicentes;

Puer natus est nobis,

Quem virgo Maria genuit,

Et filius datus est nobis, etc.

The first introductory phrase of this and similar interpolations, particularly when it comprises an entire stanza, as, e.g.,

Laudemus omnes Dominum,
Qui virginis per uterum
Parvus in mundum venerat
Mundum regens, quem fecerat,
Puer natus est nobis, etc.

cannot possibly be considered as text to an already existing melisma which was called "Tropus", and which then gave its name to the text that was put to it. And yet, just such interpolations of the Introit and the Offertory were called "Tropi". In this article it must suffice to allude to these difficulties, on the solution of which will depend the theory of the origin and the early development of the "Tropi". As yet no definite theory can be advanced, although several writers on liturgy, music, and hymnology have been so confident as to make assertions for which there is absolutely no ground.

Division

On the basis of the two choir books for the Mass and the Breviary, namely the Gradual and the Antiphonal, Tropes are divided into two large classes: "Tropi Graduales" and "Tropi Antiphonales," i.e. Tropes of such parts of the Mass and of the Breviary as are chanted. The latter are of slightly later date, are chiefly limited to interpolations of the Responsory after the Lessons, and are almost exclusively insertions into one of the concluding words of such Responsory. Their entire structure resembles so much the structure of the Sequences of the first epoch, upon which they were undoubtedly modelled, that later on they were often used as independent Sequences. Such is the case with the oldest Breviary Trope of the Blessed Virgin, which is built upon the penultimate word, inviolata, of the Responsory of the Assumption: "Gaude Maria virgo . . . et post partum inviolata permansisti." The syllable la of inviolata was the bearer of a long melisma; to this melisma towards the close of the tenth century in France the following text was composed:

1a. Invio-lata integra et casta es, Maria, 1b. Quae es effecta fulgida regis porta. 2a. O mater alma Christi carissima, 2b. Suscipe pia laudum precamina 3a. Nostra ut pura pectora sint et corpora. 3b. Quae nunc flagitant devota corda et ora, 4a. Tu da per precata dulcisona, 4b. Nobis perpetua frui vita, 5. O benigna, quae sola inviolata permansisti.

Of a similar structure are all the Breviary Tropes or "Verbeta", and they are dovetailed, as shown above, more or less ingeniously, between the penultimate and last word of their Responsory.

The "Tropi Graduales" in their turn are divided into two classes, namely into "Tropi ad Ordinarium Missae" or to the unchangeable text of the Mass, i.e. to the Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, Sanctus, Agnus Dei, and Ite missa est, and into "Tropi ad Proprium Missarum" or to those parts of the text which change according to the respective feast, i.e. to the Introit, Lesson, Gradual, Offertory, and Communion. This latter class frequently differs from the former also in the external structure of its Tropes; and at first it was the most widespread; it might perhaps even claim to be the oldest and most original; but it disappeared at a relatively early date, whereas the "Tropi ad Ordinarium Missae" still kept their place in liturgy for a considerable time.

History and Significance

The origin of the Tropes, that is to say of the Gradual Tropes (since the Antiphonal Tropes are evidently of a later date), must almost coincide with that of the Proses or Sequences which are most closely related to them; this would mean that their history begins somewhere in the eighth century. Whether the Trope or the Sequence was the older form is all the more difficult to decide, since the Sequence itself is to a certain degree a kind of Trope. The St. Martial Troper, the oldest one known, of the middle of the tenth century (Cod. Parisin., 1240), abounds in Tropes to the Introit, Gradual, Offertory, and Communion; in other words it has a great many "Tropi ad Proprium Missarum". In addition it contains thirteen Gloria Tropes, but only two of the Sanctus, and not one of the Kyrie. Comparatively poor in Tropes are the St. Gall Tropers, and this fact alone makes it extremely doubtful whether Tutilo of St. Gall was the inventor of the Tropes. It appears that the Trope, like the Sequence, originated in France, where from the tenth century onward it enjoyed great popularity and was most eagerly cultivated. From there it soon made its way to England and to Northern Italy, later to Central and Southern Italy, and became widespread in all these countries, less so, however, in Germany. It was known there as early as in the ninth century, since Tutilo of St. Gall can rightly be considered a composer of Tropes. It remains a curious fact that in spite of the great number of Tropes no poet can be named who gained distinction as a composer of Tropes. In the thirteenth century this once important branch of literature began to decline and survived almost exclusively in Kyrie Tropes, particularly in France until the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.

Regarding the poetical contents, the Tropes, with few exceptions, are of no great value. But this peculiar poetical production is all the more interesting for the student of liturgy, and especially great is its significance in the development of music and poetry. It is worthy of note that, instead of short insertions into the liturgical text, as time went on several verses, entire stanzas, even a number of stanzas, were fitted in. The non-essential part developed into the main work; the liturgical text withdrew entirely into the background, and was scarcely even considered as the starting-point. In this manner the Tropes grew to be independent cantions, motets, or religious folk-songs. Also the dramatic character, which was quite peculiar to many Introit Tropes at Christmas and Easter, developed more and more luxuriantly until it reached its highest perfection in larger dramatic scenes, mystery plays, and plays of a purely religious character. Tropes finally left the liturgical and religious ground altogether, and wandered away from the spiritual to the profane field of songs of love, gambling, and drinking. And for that reason many specimens of religious as well as secular poetry of later date can be fully understood only when they are traced back to their source, the Tropes. The importance from a musical standpoint of both the Tropes and the Sequences has been most suitably characterized by Rev. Walter Howard Frere in his introduction to "The Winchester Troper" where he says: "For the musician the whole story is full of interest, for the Tropers practically represent the sum total of musical advance between the ninth and the twelfth century. . . . All new developments in musical composition, failing to gain admission into the privileged circle of the recognised Gregorian service-books, were thrown together so as to form an independent musical collection supplementary to the official books; and that is exactly what a Troper is" (op. cit., p. vi).

FRERE, The Winchester Troper (London, 1894); WOLF, Ueber die Lais (Heidelberg, 1841); GAUTIER, Les Tropes (Paris, 1886); REINERS, Tropen-Gesange u. ihre Melodien (Luxemburg, 1887); BLUME AND BANNISTER, Tropi Graduales ad ordinarium Missae in Analecta hymnica, XLVII (Leipzig, 1905); BLUME, Tropi Graduales ad Proprium Missarum in Anal. Hymn., XLIX (Leipzig, 1906).

CLEMENS BLUME

Scriptural Tropology

The theory and practice of interpreting the figurative meaning of Holy Writ. The literal meaning, or God-intended meaning of the words of the Bible, may be either figurative or non-figurative; for instance, in Canticles, the inspired meaning is always figurative. The typical meaning is the inspired meaning of words referring to persons, things, and actions of the Old Testament which are inspired types of persons, things, and actions of the New (cf. Exegesis).

WALTER DRUM

John Thomas Troy

Archbishop of Dublin; b. in the parish of Blanchardstown, near Dublin, 10 May, 1739; d. at Dublin, 11 May, 1823. He belonged to an Anglo-Norman stock, and received his early education at Liffey Street, Dublin, after which, in 1777 [This is probably a typo for 1757 or 1767 — Ed.], he joined the Dominican Order and proceeded to their house of St. Clement, at Rome. Amenable to discipline, diligent in his studies, and gifted with much ability, he made rapid progress, and while yet a student was selected to give lectures in philosophy. Subsequently he professed theology and canon law, and finally became prior of the convent in 1772. When the Bishop of Ossory died, in 1776, the priests of the diocese recommended one of their number, Father Molloy, to Rome for the vacant see, and the recommendation was endorsed by many of the Irish bishops. But Dr. Troy, who was held in high esteem at Rome, had already been appointed Bishop of Ossory. He arrived at Kilkenny in August, and for the next nine years he laboured hard for the spiritual interests of his diocese. They were troubled times. Maddened by excessive rents and tithes, and harried by grinding tithe-proctors, the farmers had banded themselves together in a secret society called the "Whiteboys". Going forth at night, they attacked landlords, bailiffs, agents, and tithe-proctors, and often committed fearful outrages. Bishop Troy grappled with them and frequently and sternly denounced them. It was not that he had any sympathy with oppression, but he had lived so long in Rome and had left Ireland at such an early age, that he did not quite understand the condition of things at home, and did not fully appreciate the extent of misery and oppression in which the poor Catholic masses lived.

The bent of his mind was to support authority, and he was therefore ready to condemn all violent efforts for reform, and had no hesitation in denouncing not only all secret societies in Ireland, but also "our American fellow-subjects, seduced by specious notions of liberty". This made him unpopular with the masses, but there could be no doubt that he was zealous in correcting abuses in his diocese and in promoting education. So well was this recognized at Rome that in 1781, in consequence of some serious troubles which had arisen between the primate and his clergy, Dr. Troy was appointed Administrator of Armagh. This office he held till 1782. In 1786 he was appointed Archbishop of Dublin. At Dublin, as at Ossory, he showed his zeal for religion, his sympathy with authority, and his distrust of popular movements, especially when violent means were employed; in 1798 he issued a sentence of excommunication against all those of his flock who would join the rebellion. He was also one of the most determined supporters of the Union. In 1799 he agreed to accept the veto of government on the appointment of Irish bishops; and even when the other bishops, finding that they had been tricked by Pitt and Castlereagh, repudiated the veto, Dr. Troy continued to favour it. The last years of his life were uneventful.

BRADY, Episcopal Succession (Rome, 1876); CARRIGAN, History of the Diocese of Ossory (Dublin, 1905); D'ALTON, History of the Archbishops of Dublin (Dublin, 1838); WYSE, History of the Catholic Association (London, 1829); MORAN, Spicilegium Ossoriense (Dublin, 1874-84).

E.A. D'ALTON

Troyes

(TRECENSIS).

Diocese comprising the Department of Aube. Re-established in 1802 as a suffragan of Paris, it then comprised the Departments of Aube and Yonne, and its bishop had the titles of Troyes, Auxerre, and Châlons-sur-Marne. In 1822 the See of Châlons was created and the Bishop of Troyes lost that title. When Sens was made an archdiocese the title of Auxerre went to it and Troyes lost also the Department of Yonne, which became the Archdiocese of Sens. The Diocese of Troyes at present covers, besides the ancient diocesan limits, 116 parishes of the ancient Diocese of Langres, and 20 belonging to the ancient Diocese of Sens. Since 1822 Troyes is a suffragan of Sens

The catalogue of bishops of Troyes, known since the ninth century, is in the opinion of Duchesne, worthy of confidence. The first bishop, St. Amator, seems to have preceded by a few years Bishop Optatianus who probably ruled the diocese about 344. Among his successors are: St. Melanius (Melain) (390-400); St. Ursus (Ours) (426); St. Lupus (Loup) (426-478), b. in 383, who accompanied St. Germanus of Auxerre to England, forced the Huns to spare Troyes, was led away as a hostage by Attila and only returned to his diocese after many years of exile; St. Camelianus (479-536); St. Vincent (536-46); St. Leuconius (Leucon) (651-56); St. Bobinus (Bobin) (750-66), previously Abbot of Monstier la Celle; St. Prudentius (845-61), who wrote against Gottschalk and Johannes Scotus; Blessed Manasses (985-93); Jacques BÈnigne Bossuet (1716-42, nephew of the great Bossuet; Etienne-Antoine de Boulogne (1809-25); Pierre-Louis Cæur, the preacher (1849-60).

Louis the Stammerer in 878 received at Troyes the imperial crown from the hands of Pope John VIII. At the end of the ninth century the counts of Champagne chose Troyes as their capital. In 1285, when Philip the Fair united Champagne to the royal domain, the town kept a number of privileges. John the Fearless, Duke of Burgundy and ally of the English, aimed in 1417 at making Troyes the capital of France, and he came to an understanding with Isabeau of Bavaria, wife of Charles VI of France, that a court, council, and parliament with comptroller's offices should be established at Troyes. It was at Troyes, then in the hands of the Burgundians, that on 21 May, 1420, the treatgy was signed by which Henry VI of England was betrothed to Catherine, daughter of Charles VI, and was to succeed him to the detriment of the dauphin. The dauphin, afterwards Charles VII, and Blessed Joan of Arc recovered the town of Troyes in 1429.

The cathedral of Troyes is a fine Gothic structure begun in the twelfth, and completed in the fifteenth, century; the ancient collegiate Church of St. Urban is a Gothic building whose lightness of treatment reminds one of La Sainte Chapelle at Paris. It was built by Urban IV at the close of the thirteenth century. He was a native of Troyes and on one of the stained-glass windows he caused his father to be depicted, working at his trade of tailor. The Abbey of Nesle la Riposte was founded before 545 near Villenauxe, perhaps by Queen Clotilde. In the sixteenth century the monks caused to be rebuilt at Villenauxe, with the actual stones which they brought from Nesle, the original doorway of Nesle Abbey, an interesting monument of French history. The Benedictine Mabillon undertook to interpret its carvings, among which might be seen the statue of a reine pÈdauque (i.e. a web-footed queen) supposed to be St. Clotilde. The Abbey of Notre Dame aux Nonnains, founded by St. Leucon, was an important abbey for women. Alcuin and St Bernard corresponded with its abbesses. At his installation the bishop went to the abbey on the previous evening; the bed he slept on became his property, but the mule on which he rode became the property of the abbess. The abbess led the bishop by the hand into the chapter hall; she put on his mitre, offered him his crozier, and in return the bishop promised to respect the rights of the abbey. The Jansenists in the eighteenth century made a great noise over the pretended cure by the deacon Paris of Marie Madeleine de MÈgrigny, a nun of Notre Dame aux Nonnains. The part of the Diocese of Troyes which formerly belonged to the Diocese of Langres contained the famous Abbey of Clairvaux (q. v.). Concerning the Abbey of the Paraclete, founded by Abelard and in which the Abbess Heloise died in 1163, and where her body and that of Abelard were buried until 1792, see ABELARD. On 20 June, 1353, Geoffroy de Charny, Lord of Savoisy and Lirey, founded at Lirey in honour of the Annunciation a collegiate church with six canonries, and in this church he exposed for veneration the Holy Winding Sheet. Opposition arose on the part of the Bishop of Troyes, who declared after due inquiry that the relic was nothing but a painting, and opposed its exposition. Clement VI by four Bulls, 6 Jan., 1390, approved the exposition as lawful. In 1418 during the civil wars, the canons entrusted the Winding Sheet to Humbert, Count de La Roche, Lord of Lirey. Margaret, widow of Humbert, never returned it but gave it in 1452 to the Duke of Savoy. The requests of the canons of Lirey were unavailing, and the Lirey Winding Sheet is the same that is now exposed and honoured at Turin (see TURIN).

Among the many saints specially honoured or connected with the diocese are: St. Mathia, virgin, period uncertain; her relics were found in Troyes in 980; St. Helena, virgin, whos life and century are unknown, and whose body was transferred to Troyes in 1209; these two are patronesses of the town and diocese; St. Oulph, martyr (second or third century); St. Savinianus, Apostle of Troyes; St. Patroclus (Parre), St. Julius, St. Claudius, and St. Venerandus, martyrs under Aurelian; St. Savina, martyred under Diocletian; St. Syra, the wonder-worker (end of third century); St. Ursion, pastor of Isle Aumont (c. 375); St. Exuperantia, a religious of Isle Aumont (c. 380); St Balsemius (Baussange), deacon, apostle of Arcis-sur-Aube, martyred by the Vandals in 407; St. Mesmin and his companions and Saints Germana and Honoria, martryred (451) under Attila; St. Aper (Evre), Bishop of Toul, and his sister Evronia, natives of the diocese (towards the close of the fifth century); St. Aventinus, disciple of St. Loup (d. c. 537); St. Romanus, Archbishop of Reims, founder of the Monastery of SS. Gervasus and Protasius at Chantenay in the Diocese of Troyes (d. c. 537); St. Maurelius, priest at Isle Aumont (d. C. 545); St. Lyæus (LyÈ), second Abbot of Mantenay (d. c. 545); St. Phal, Abbot at Isle Aumont (d. c. 549); St. Bouin, priest and solitary (d. c. 570); St. Potamius (Pouange), solitary (close of sixth century); St. Vinebaud, Abbot of St. Loup of Troyes (d. 623); St. Flavitus, solitary (563-630); St. Tancha, virgin and martyr (d. 637); St. Victor, solitary (d. 640); St. Frobert, founder and first Abbot of Montier le Celle (d. 688); St. Maura, virgin (827-850); St. Adalricus (slain by the Normans about 925); St Aderaldus, canon and archdeacon of Troyes, who died in 1004 on returning from the Crusade, and who founded the Benedictine monastery of the Holy Sepulchre in the diocese; St. Simon, Count de Bar-sur-Aube, solitary, acted as mediator between Gregory VII and Robert Guiscard, and died in 1082; St. Robert founder of Molesme and Cîteaux, a native of the diocese (1024-1108); St. Elizabeth of Chelles, foundress of the monastery of Rosoy (d. c. 1130); St Hombelina, first Abbess of Jully-sur-Sarce, and sister of St. Bernard (1092-1135); Blessed Peter, an Englishman, prior of Jully-sur-Sarce (d. 1139); St Malachy (q. v.), archbishop, Primate of Ireland, died at Clairvaux (1098-1148); St. Bernard (q. v.), first Abbot of Clairvaux (1091-1153); St. Belina, virgin, slain about 1153 in defence of her chastity; Blessed Menard and Blessed Herbert, abbots of the monastery at Mores founded by St. Bernard (end of the twelfth century); Blessed Jeanne, the recluse (d. 1246); Blessed Urban IV (1185-1264); Blessed John of Ghent, hermit and porphet, who died at Troyes in 1439; Ven. Margaret Bourgeois (1620-1700), foundress of the Congregation of Notre Dame at Montreal, a native of the diocese; Ven. Marie de Sales Chappuis, superioress of the Visitation Convent at Troyes (d. 1875). Cardinal Pierre de BÈrulle (1575-1629) was brought up on the BÈrulle estate in the diocese. He preached at Troyes before founding the Oratorians. An Oratory was opened at Troyes in 1617. Charles-Louis de Lantage, b. at Troyes in 1616, d. in 1694, was one of the chief helpers of M. Olier, founder of the Sulpicians. Among natives of the diocese may be mentioned: the Calvinist jurisconsult Pierrre Pithou (1539-1596), one of the editors of the "Satire MÈnippÈe", a native of Troyes; the painter Mignard (1610-95), born at Troyes; the revolutionary leader, Danton (1759-1794), b. at Arcis-sur-Aube.

The chief pilgrimages of the diocese are: Notre Dame du Chêne, near Bar-sur-Seine, dates from 1667; Notre Dame de la Sainte EspÈrance, at Mesnil-Saint-Loup; Notre Dame de Valsuzenay. Before the application of the Associations Law (1901) there were, in the Diocese of Troyes, Benedictines, Jesuits, Lazarists, Oblates of St. Francis of Sales, and Brothers of the Christian Schools. Many female congregations arose in the diocese, among others the Ursulines of Christian Teaching, founded at Moissy l'Evêque in the eighteenth century by Montmorin, Bishop of Langres; the Sisters of Christian Instruction, founded in 1819, with mother-house at Troyes; the Oblate Sisters of St. Francis of Sales, a teaching order, founded in 1870, with mother-house at Troyes; Sisters of Notre Dame de Bon Secours, a nursing community with mother-house at Troyes. In the diocese the religious congregations at the close of the nineteenth century had charge of one foundling hospital, 20 nurseries, 2 orphanages for boys, 17 orphanages for girls, 2 houses of mercy, 11 hospitals or hospices, 9 houses of district nursing sister, 1 epileptic home. In 1905 (at the breach of the Concordat) the diocese numbered 246,163 inhabitants, 40 parish priest, 383 chapels of ease, and 7 curacies supported by the State. In 1910 there were 239,299 inhabitants, and 344 priests.

Gallia Christ., nova, XII (1770), 483-532, instrum., 247-296; DUCHESNE, Fastes Èpiscopaux, II: DEFER, Vie des saints du diocÈse de Troyes, et hist. de leur culte (Troyes, 1865); LALORE, Documents sur l'abbaye de Notre Dame aux Nonnains (Troyes, 1874); PREVOST, Hist. du diocÈse de Troyes pendant la RÈvolution (3 vols., Troyes, 1908-9); CHEVALIER, Topobibl., 3177-83.

GEORGES GOYAU

Truce of God

The Truce of God is a temporary suspension of hostilities, as distinct from the Peace of God which is perpetual. The jurisdiction of the Peace of God is narrower than that of the Truce. Under the Peace of God are included only:

• consecrated persons -- clerics, monks, virgins, and cloistered widows;
• consecrated places -- churches, monasteries, and cemeteries, with their dependencies;
• consecrated times -- Sundays, and ferial days, all under the special protection of the Church, which punishes transgressors with excommunication.

At an early date the councils extended the Peace of God to the Church's protégés, the poor, pilgrims, crusaders, and even merchants on a journey. The peace of the sanctuary gave rise to the right of asylum. Finally it was the sanctification of Sunday which gave rise to the Truce of God, for it had always been agreed not to do battle on that day and to suspend disputes in the law-courts.

The Truce of God dates only from the eleventh century. It arose amid the anarchy of feudalism as a remedy for the powerlessness of lay authorities to enforce respect for the public peace. There was then an epidemic of private wars, which made Europe a battlefield bristling with fortified castles and overrun by armed bands who respected nothing, not even sanctuaries, clergy, or consecrated days. A Council of Elne in 1027, in a canon concerning the sanctification of Sunday, forbade hostilities from Saturday night until Monday morning. Here may be seen the germ of the Truce of God. This prohibition was subsequently extended to the days of the week consecrated by the great mysteries of Christianity, viz., Thursday, in memory of the Ascension, Friday, the day of the Passion, and Saturday, the day of the Resurrection (council 1041). Still another step included Advent and Lent in the Truce. Efforts were made in this way to limit the scourge of private war without suppressing it outright. The penalty was excommunication. The Truce soon spread from France to Italy and Germany; the oecumenical council of 1179 extended the institution to the whole Church by Canon xxi, "De treugis servandis", which was inserted in the collection of canon law (Decretal of Gregory IX, I, tit., "De treuga et pace"). The problem of the public peace which was the great desideratum of the Middle Ages was not solved at one stroke, but at least the impetus was given. Gradually the public authorities, royalty, the leagues between nobles (Landfrieden), and the communes followed the impulse and finally restricted war to international conflicts.

SEMICHON, La paix et la treve de Dieu (Paris 1869); HUBERTI, Gottes und Landfrieden (Ansbach, 1892).

CH. MOELLER

Otto Truchsess von Waldburg

Cardinal-Bishop of Augsburg (1543-73), b. at Castle Scheer in Swabia, 26 Feb., 1514; d. at Rome, 2 April, 1573. He studied at the Universities of Tubingen, Padua, Pavin, and Bologna, and received his degree of Doctor of Theology at Bologna. At an early age he received canonries at Trent, Spires, and Augsburg. In 1541 he became an imperial councillor and when on an embassy to Rome was made a papal chamberlain. On 10 May, 1543, he was elected Bishop of Augsburg; in 1544 he was appointed cardinal-priest of the Title of St. Balbina by Paul III for settling a long-continued dispute between the emperor and the pope. The condition of his diocese was mournful: the clergy were ignorant and depraved, and Protestantism was widespread. He sought to mend matters by visitations, edicts, synods, and the improvement of instruction. He founded the University of Dillingen, now a lyceum, and the ecclesiastical seminary at Dillingen (1549-55). In 1564 he transferred the management of these institutions to the Jesuits. In 1549-50 and again in 1555 he took part in the papal elections at Rome. In 1552 his diocese was devastated by the troops of Maurice of Saxony. He went once more to Rome in 1559 and was there made the head of the Inquisition and, in 1562, Cardinal-Bishop of Albang. In 1567 he held a diocesan synod at Dillingen. From 1568 he lived altogether at Rome. He was a moral, religious man, of much force of character, to whom half measures and shiftiness were foreign. He incurred the hatred of the Protestants for his protest against the Religious Peace of Augsburg (1555).

BRAUN, Gesch. der Bischofe von Augsburg, III (Augsburg, 1814); TRUCHSESS, Literae ad Hosium, ed. WEBER (Ratisbon, 1892); JANSSEN, Hist of the German People, tr. CHRISTIE, VI-IX (London, 1905-8), passim; WEBER, Card. Otto Truchsess in Hist.-pol. Blatter, CX (Munich, 1892)., 781-96; DUHR, Quellen zu einer Biogr. des Kard. Otto Truchsess von Waldburg in Hist. Jahrbuch, VII (Munich, 1886), 177-209, and XX (Munich, 1899), 71-4.

KLEMENS LÖFFLER

St. Trudo

(TRON, TROND, TRUDON, TRUTJEN, TRUYEN).

Apostle of Hasbein in Brabant; d. 698 (693). Feast 23 November. He was the son of Blessed Adela of the family of the dukes of Austrasia. Devoted from his earliest youth to the service of God, Trudo came to St. Remaclus, Bishop of Liège (Acta SS., I Sept., 678) and was sent by him to Chlordulph, Bishop of Metz. Here he received his education at the Church of St. Stephen, to which he always showed a strong affection and donated his later foundation. After his ordination he returned to his native district, preached the Gospel, and built a church at Sarchinium, on the River Cylindria. It was blessed about 656 by St. Theodard, Bishop of Liège, in honour of Sts. Quintinus and Remigius. Disciples gathered about him and in course of time the abbey arose. The convent for women, established by him at Odeghem near Bruges, later also bore his name ("Gallia Christiana", Paris, 1887, V, 281). After death he was buried in the church erected by himself. A translation of his relics, together with those of St. Eucherius, Bishop of Orleans, who had died there in exile in 743, was made in 880 by Bishop France of Liège. On account of the threatened inroads of the Normans the relics were later hidden in a subterranean crypt. After the great conflagration of 1085 they were lost, but again discovered in 1169, and on 11 Aug. of that year an official recognition and translation was made by Bishop Rudolph III. On account of these translations the dates 5 and 12 Aug. and 1 and 2 Sept. are noted in the martyrologies. The "Analecta Bollandiana" (V, 305) give an old office of the saint in verse. The life was written by Donatus, a deacon of Metz, at the order of his bishop, Angibram (769-91). It was rewritten by Theodoric, Abbot of St-Trond (d. 1107).

BUTLER, Lives of the Saints; WATTENBACH, Geschichtsquellen, Deutschl., I (Berlin, 1873), 146; HAUCK, Kirchengeschichte Deutschl., I (Leipzig, 1904), 306; FRIEDRICH, Kirchengeschichte Deutschl., II (Bamberg, 1869), 347; STADLER, Heiligenlexicon; Bulletin de la societe d'art et d'histoire du diocese de Lieuve, XIV (1904), 251; MABILLON, Acta SS. O.S.B., II, 1022.

FRANCIS MERSHMAN

St. Trudpert

Missionary in Germany in the seventh century. He is generally called a Celtic monk from Ireland, but some consider him a German. According to legend, he went first to Rome in order to receive from the pope authority for his mission. Returning from Italy he travelled along the Rhine to the country of the Alamanni in the Breisgau. A person of rank named Otbert gave him land for his mission about fifteen miles south of Freiburg in Baden. Trudpert cleared off the trees and built a cell and a little church which Bishop Martinus of Constance dedicated to Sts. Peter and Paul. Here Trudpert led an ascetic and laborious life. One day when he was asleep he was murdered by one of the serfs whom Otbert had given him, in revenge for severe tasks imposed. Otbert gave Trudpert an honourable burial. The Benedictine Abbey of St. Trudpert was built in the next century on the spot where Trudpert was buried. The story of his life is so full of legendary details that no correct judgment can be formed of Trudpert's era, the kind of work he did, or of its success. The period when he lived in the Breisgau was formerly given as 640-643; Baur gives 607 as the year of his death. The day of his death is 26 April. In 815 his bones were translated and the first biography of him was written; this biography was revised in the tenth and thirteenth centuries.

Acta SS., April, III, 424-40; Bibliotheca hagiagr. lat. (Brussels, 1898-1900), 1205-6; BAUR, Der Todestag es hl. Trudpert in Freiburger Dioesanar chiv, XI (Freiburg, 1877), 247-52.

KLEMENS LOFFLER

Antonio de Trueba

Spanish poet and folklorist, b. at Montellana, Biscay, in 1821; d. at Bilbao, 10 March, 1889. In 1836 he went to Madrid, hoping to make a livelihood by literary pursuits. To earn his daily bread he discharged the duties of a clerk in a small commercial house, but all the while he beguiled his leisure and his moments of regret by writing little poems and tales redolent of the yearnings and sympathies of a Basque transplanted to the busy cosmopolitan centre. Won over to him by the charm of his writings, Queen Isabella II made him historiographer of the Biscayan district, and he held this post until her flight in 1868. His popularity was fixed by the appearance of his first collection of lyrics, the "Libro de los cantares" (Madrid, 1852). Various collections of his tales, especially charming when they deal with his native region and its people, appeared in 1859, 1860, and 1866. In his more ambitious attempts at writing a novel, as in his work dealing with the Cid of history and legend, he failed signally; he was too conscientiously a recorder of the past and left his imagination no free play. He remains an amiable writer of second rank, but no one can read without sympathy and appreciation his pretty little songs fragrant with love for the landscape of his northern Spanish home. He deserves serious notice among the earlier writers who helped to develop the novel of manners in the Spain of the nineteenth century.

BLANCO GARCIA, La literature española del siglo XIX (Madrid, 1899); FITZMAURICE-KELLY, Hist. of Spanish Literature (London, 1898)

J.D.M. Ford

Trujillo

Diocese comprising the Departments of Lambayeque, Libertad, Pinra, and the Province of Tumbes, in North-west Peru, formed by Gregory XIII, 13 April, 1577, as suffragan of Lima, an arrangement confirmed by Paul V in 1611, when he appointed Alfonso de Guzman first bishop. The city of Truxillo (8000 inhabitants), formerly very flourishing, was founded in 1535 on the Río Muchi in the Valley of Chimu by Gonzalo Pizarro, who named it after his native place. It is the capital of the Department of Libertad, so named because Trujillo was the first Peruvian city to proclaim its independence from Spain. Most of the houses are but one story high, on account of frequent earthquakes, the severest of which occurred in 1619, 1759, and 1816. Its university was erected in 1831, a college having been founded there earlier in 1621. Near the city lie the ruins of the Gran Chimu, known originally as ChanChan — Chimu being the title of the Indian sovereign — one of the most stupendous extant monuments of a departed civilization. They extend over twelve miles north and south, and six miles east and west, and recall a highly civilized race — the Muchoen — which fell before the Incas. One may still see the ruined palace and factories, a necropolis, walls nine metres high, and a labyrinth of houses and pyramidal sepulchres (huacas), the most remarkable of which are the Toledo, Esperanza, and Obispo, the latter being 500 feet square and 150 high. From these ruins, over £5,500,000 in gold were recovered by the Spaniards. The Muchoen had reached a high degree of perfection in metal-work and in the art of decorating pottery, many specimens of the latter being unsurpassed since the days of early Greece. An account of the ancient religion has been preserved by Antonio de la Calancha, Augustinian prior of Trujillo in 1619; the chief deity was the moon (Si), her temple (Si-an) situated near the Río Muchi having had an area of about 42,000 square yards. A grammar of the native language — Mochica — now dead, was compiled by Padre Fernando de la Carrera (Lima, 1644). Diocesan statistics: 102 parishes; 350 churches and chapels; 160 priests; 2 boys' colleges; 3 girls' high schools; there are communities of Franciscans (2), Conceptionists, Carmelites, Poor Clares, Dominican Tertiaries, and Lazarists, the latter having charge of the seminary. The Catholic population numbers about 581,000. The bishop is Mgr. Carlos García Irigoyen, b. at Lima, 6 November, 1857, edited the "Revista católica", founded "El amigo del clero", succeeded Mgr. Manuel Jaime Medina, 21 March, 1910.

Mozans, Up the Andes and down the Amazon (New York. 1911); Feijoo, Relación de la ciudad de Truxillo (Madrid, 1763); Markham, The Incas of Peru (London, 1910).

A.A. MACERLEAN

Feast of Trumpets

The first day of Tishri (October), the seventh month of the Hebrew year. Two trumpets are mentioned in the Bible, the shophar and hacocerah. The latter was a long, straight, slender, silver clarion, liturgically a priestly instrument. The shophar was made of horn, as we see from its now and then being called qeren, "horn" (cf. Jos., vi, 5); in fact, in the foregoing passage, it is designated a "ram's horn", qeren yobel. The Mishna (Rosh hasshanah, iii, 2) allows the horn of any clean animal save the cow, and suggests the straight horn of the ibex. The Feast of Trumpets is ordained in the words: "The seventh month, on the first day of the month, you shall keep a sabbath, a memorial, with the sound of trumpets" (Lev., xxiii, 24). The Hebrew text has: "a memorial of the blast". The Septuagint adds "of trumpets" (salpiggon), a word which together with keratine (made of horn) always designates in the Septuagint, shophar and never the hacocerah. We find the feast also ordained in Numbers, xxix, 1: The first day also of the seventh month. . .is the day of the sounding of the trumpets. This text gives us no more light in the original, where we read only "the day of blast let it be unto you". Here, too, the Septuagint hemera semasias, "day of signaling", affords no light. The feast is called by Philo salpigges, "Trumpets". It would seem, then, that the shophar and not the hacocerah was in Biblical times used on the feast of the new moon of Tishri. In Rabbinical ritual the festival has come to be known as New Year's Day (rosh hasshnah), Day of Memorial (yom hazzikkaron), and Day of Judgment (yom haddin). The shophar gives the signal call to solitude and prayer. In preparation for the great feast, the shophar is sounded morning and evening excepting Sabbaths, throughout the entire preceeding month of Elul. According to the Mosaic Law, the special offerings of the Feast of Trumpets were a bullock, a ram and seven lambs for a burnt offering; a buck goat for sin offering (Num., xxix, 2, 5; Lev., xxii, 24, 25).

WALTER DRUM

St. Trumwin

(TRIUMWINI, TRUMUINI).

Died at Whitby, Yorkshire, England, after 686. He was consecrated by St. Theodore, Archbishop of Canterbury, as a missionary bishop among the Picts, and was consequently regarded later as the first Bishop of Whithorn, in Galloway. When the Picts reasserted their independence he retired with a few of his followers to the monastery of Streaneshalch, now Whitby. In 684 he was present at the synod recorded by Bede (IV, 28), known as the Synod on the Alne, possibly the same as the Synod of Twyford; and he accompanied King Ecgfrith to Lindisfarne to persuade St. Cuthbert to accept the bishopric. The one charter attributed to him is "a clear forgery" (Haddan and Stubbs, III, 166). St. Bede adds that he spent many years of useful labour at Whitby before he died and was buried in St. Peter's Church there.

Acta SS., Feb., II; BEDE, Hist. Ecc. Gent. Ang., IV, cc. 12, 26, and 28; RAINE in Dict. Christ. Biog., s. v.; BIRCH, Cartularium Saxonicum, I (London, 1885); KEMBLE, Codex Diplomaticus (London, 1839-48); HADDAN AND STUBBS, Councils and Documents (Oxford, 1869-78); SEARLE, Anglo-Saxon Bishops, Kings, and Nobles (Cambridge, 1899).

EDWIN BURTON

Trustee System

I. In the exercise of her inherent right of administering property, the Church often appoints deputies who are responsible to herself. Technically, such administrators, whether cleric or lay, are called the "fabric" of the Church. In very early times ecclesiastical goods were divided into three or four portions, and that part set aside for the upkeep of the Church began to take on the character of a juridical person. The Eleventh Council of Carthage (can. ii) in 407 requested the civil power to appoint five executors for ecclesiastical property, and in the course of time laymen were called on to take their share in this administration, with the understanding, however, that everything was to be done in the name and with the approbation of the Church. A number of early and medieval synods have dealt with the administration of curators of ecclesiastical property, e.g. can. vii, Conc. Bracar. (563); can. xxxviii, Conc. Mogunt. (813); can. x, Conc. Mogunt. (847); can. xxxv, Conc. Nation. Wirceburg. (1287). The employment of laymen in concert with clerics as trustees became common all over Christendom. In England such officials were called churchwardens. They were generally two in number, one being chosen by the parish priest, the other by the parishioners, and with them were associated others called sidesmen. The churchwardens administered the temporalities of the parish under the supervision of the bishop, to whom they were responsible. An annual report on the administration of church property was made obligatory in all countries by the Council of Trent (Sess. XXII, can. ix, "De Ref."): "The administrators, whether ecclesiastical or lay, of the fabric of any church whatsoever, even though it be a cathedral, as also of any hospital, confratemity, charitable institution called mont de piÈtÈ, and of any pious places whatsoever, shall be bound to give in once a year an account of their administration to the Ordinary."

II. At the present time, the Church nowhere absolutely forbids the employment of laymen in the administration of ecclesiastical property, but endeavours, generally by means of concordats, to have her own laws and principles carried out on this subject when laymen are among the trustees. According to the present discipline, the fabric of the church is distinct from the foundation of the benefice, and sometimes the fabric, in addition to the goods destined for the upkeep of divine worship, possesses also schools and eleemosynary institutions (S.C.C., 27 Apr., 1895, in caus. Bergom.). All lay trustees must be approved by the bishop, and he retains the right of removing them and of overseeing the details of their administration. In countries in which the church organization was entirely swept away in the troubles of the Reformation period, as in the British Isles, laymen are not generally employed as trustees at the present day. For the trustee system, as far as it can be called such, in use in the Catholic Church in England and Ireland see Taunton, "The Law of the Church", pp. 15, 316. In Holland, laymen were admitted to a share in the administration of church temporalities by a decree of the Propaganda (21 July, 1856). The bishop is to nominate the members of the board, over which the parish priest is to preside. Trustees hold office for four years and may be reappointed at the expiration of that term. When a vacancy occurs the board presents two names to the bishop, from which he selects one. In necessary cases the bishop may dismiss any member and even dissolve the entire board of trustees. In this instance, as in all others where laymen are in question, the Holy See is careful to guard the prescriptions of the sacred canons as to the management and ownership of church goods [see ADMINISTRATOR (OF ECCLESIASTICAL PROPERTY)].

III. In the United States the employment of lay trustees was customary in some parts of the country from a very early period. Dissensions sometimes arose with the ecclesiastical authorities, and the Holy See has intervened to restore peace (see CONWELL, HENRY; PHILADELPHIA, ARCHDIOCESE OF; NEW YORK, ARCHDIOCESE OF). Pius VII vindicated (24 Aug., 1822) the rights of the Church as against the pretensions of the trustees, and Gregory XVI declared (12 Aug., 1841): "We wish all to know that the office of trustees is entirely dependent upon the authority of the bishop, and that consequently the trustees can undertake nothing except with the approval of the ordinary." The Third Plenary Council of Baltimore (Tit. IX, no.287) laid down certain regulations concerning trustees: It belongs to the bishop to judge of the necessity of constituting them, their number and manner of appointment; their names are to be proposed to the bishop by the parish rector; the appointment is to be made in writing and is revocable at the will of the bishop; the trustees selected should be men who have made their Easter duty, who contribute to the support of the Church, who send their children to Catholic schools, and who are not members of prohibited societies; nothing can be done at a board meeting except by the consent of the rector who presides; in case of disagreement between the trustees and the rector, the judgment of the bishop must be accepted. A decree of the Congregation of the Council (29 July, 1911) declares that the vesting of the title to church property in a board of trustees is a preferable legal form, and that in constituting such boards in the United States, the best method is that in use in New York, by which the Ordinary, his vicar-general, the parish priest, and two laymen approved by the bishop form the corporation (see PROPERTY, ECCLESIASTICAL, IN THE U.S.).

IV. The legal standing of church trustees according to British law is treated by Taunton, "The Law of the Church", pp.15, 315. In the United States the legal rights of trustees vary slightly in different States, but the following prescriptions (selected from Scanlan, "The Law of Church and Grave") hold almost everywhere: When the statute provides that two lay members of the corporation shall be appointed annually by the committee of the congregation, the members of the congregation have no right to elect said two members, and those appointed in the proper manner are lawful officers. When the election of new trustees is invalid, the old trustees hold over until there shall have been a valid election of their successors. The president and secretary of a church corporation have no authority to make a promissory note unless authorized by the board of trustees. When the laws of the organization give control of matters to the board of trustees, the majority of the members of the church cannot control the action of the trustees contrary to the uses and regulations of the church. A court has no authority to control the exercise of the judgment or discretion of the officers of a church in the management of its funds so long as they do not violate its constitutions or by-laws. Excommunication does not always remove an officer of a church corporation. The legal rights of a bishop in regard to the temporalities of a church, where they are not prescribed by the civil law, must rest, if at all, upon the ecclesiastical law, which must be determined by evidence. When property is conveyed to a church having well-known doctrine, faith, and practice, a majority of the members has not the authority or power, by reason of a change of religions views, to carry the property thus designated to a new and different doctrine. The title to church property is in that part of the congregation which acts in harmony with the law of the denomination; and the ecclesiastical laws and principles which were accepted before the dispute began are the standard for determining which party is right.

Taunton, The Law of the Church (London, 1906), s. vv. Fabric; Administration; Ecclesiastical Property; Scanlan, The Law Of Church and Grave (New York, 1909); Smith, Notes on II Council of Baltimore (New York, 1874), x; Concilium Plenarium III Baltimorense (Baltimore, 1886); Wernz, Jus Decretalium, III (Rome, 1901).

WILLIAM H.W. FANNING

Trusts and Bequests

A trust has been defined, in its technical sense, as the right enforceable solely in equity to the beneficial enjoyment of property of which the legal title is in another (Bispham, "Equity", p. 68), and as a right of property, real or personal, held by one party for the benefit of another. (Bouvier, "Law Dict.", s. v. Trusts.) It implies two interests, one in equity and one in law — an individual to hold the legal title, who is known as the trustee, and another as beneficiary, known as the cestui que trust. The term "trust" is applied sometimes to the equitable title, the obligation of the trustee, or the right which is held in trust. For the creation of a valid trust there are three essentials: a definite subject matter within the disposal of the settlor; a lawful definite object to which the subject matter is to be devoted; clear and unequivocal words or acts devoting the subject matter to the object of the trust (28 Am. and Eng. Ency. of Law, 866, title "Trusts and Trustees"). No specific words are required in the creation of a trust, but they must be sufficient to express the present intent to place a beneficial interest in a specific property in the hands of a trustee beyond the control of the person or persons who are to enjoy the benefit thereof. Any property, real, personal, or equitable, may be the subject of a trust, except in a few cases where statutes have provided to the contrary.

The English Statute of Frauds, which has been enacted in most of the United States in some of its provisions, provides that all trusts of land should be proved and manifested by writing. But trusts of personal property are not within the statute; therefore a valid trust of such property may be created verbally, but transfers of existing trusts must be in writing. Under the Roman Law trusts were created for the purpose of empowering certain individuals to inherit property. These trusts were known as fidei commissa and for their benefit a separate equitable jurisdiction was established. There has been some controversy as to whether the English trust is an outcome of the Roman institution or not. The difference between the two is that the latter is a means of carrying out substitutions, while the former separates the ownership and enjoyment of the benefits of an estate, the fundamental idea at the root of both being much the same. This system seems to have appeared in England under the reign of Edward III, for the purpose of avoiding the Statutes of Mortmain, which had been passed to check the growth of landed estates in the hands of religious houses. These trusts were abolished, except as to certain gifts or grants, by the passage of the Statute of Uses, known as the 27th Henry VIII, which held that any person entitled to the use of an estate should have the title to it. This statute has either been recognized as part of the common law in most of the United States through judicial interpretation or been enacted by legislation.

Trusts are either executed or executory, express or implied. In an executed trust the instrument must be interpreted according to the rules of law, even though the intention may be defeated. A court of equity will take jurisdiction for the purpose of carrying out executory trusts and seeing that the instrument which purports to fulfil the intention of the settlor really does so, and will reform conveyances where the intentions of the settlor have not been clearly set out. An express trust is one which is created by the direct words of the settlor. Implied trusts are those which arise when the terms or circumstances do not specifically express but simply imply a trust. Where the entire intention of the trust cannot be carried out without violating some rule of law or public policy, equity will carry it out as nearly as possible. Constructive trusts arise by a construction put by a court of equity on the conduct of the parties. The Statute of Frauds 29th Charles II requires that declarations of trust of lands should be proved by writing.

WHO MAY BE A TRUSTEE

Any person worthy of confidence and possessed of the power to hold real or personal property may be a trustee, the sovereign in England, any of the states of the United States, and perhaps the Federal Government, a public officer in his private capacity or the settlor himself; even the beneficiary or cestui que trust may act as trustee providing there are other beneficiaries besides himself; so too a corporation may act in this capacity if not precluded by the terms of its charter. Municipal corporations have been trustees but the general trend of authority is to the contrary. Married women may be trustees and, acting under the direction of the court, an infant, alien, or lunatic. In cases where no trustee has been named, or for some reason the office has become vacant, the court will supply the deficiency rather than allow the trust to fall, it being inherent in a court of equity to exercise this power, while in many jurisdictions it has been specifically granted by statute. As a general rule, the trustee is appointed by the settlor and provision made for his successors. The settlor may designate whomsoever he wishes and vest in that person the power to appoint succeeding trustees, though sometimes the power is placed with the cestui que trust and sometimes with the settlor. The number of trustees is governed by the provisions of the instrument of the trust, but as a general thing the courts look unfavourably upon single trustees, particularly in the cases of large estates or those for infants or lunatics.

There is no particular method by which a trustee accepts a trust. His actions in the matter are usually equivalent to acceptance, although sometimes he joins in the instrument if it is a conveyance. There are, however, but three ways by which he may be relieved: first, the consent of all parties in interest; second, by virtue of the provisions of the instrument of trust; and third, with the consent of the court. The old rule in England forbade a trustee retiring on his own motion, but the modern rule is different except where it is impossible to provide a substitute. The conduct sufficient for the removal of a trustee from his office must be such as to endanger the trust funds, and the courts will not look favourably upon light or frivolous whims and disagreements among the parties. The powers of trustees are general and special — those which arise by construction of law incident to the office, and those provided by the settlor. Any person who has capacity to hold property may be a cestui que trust, although some jurisdictions restrict the rule to minors or other incompetents. He must be definitely ascertained either in person or as a class, but need not be actually in being at the date of the settlement. A sovereign, any of the states of the United States, or the Federal Government may be a beneficiary, or a corporation so far as personal property is concerned, and also as to real estate within the limits of its charter privilege or unless prohibited by statute. An unincorporated society, however, cannot be a cestui que trust except in the case of a charitable or religious society. The beneficiary has a right to alienate or encumber his estate unless the terms of the trust expressly or impliedly forbid or there is a statute which interferes; so too he may assign his interest or even alienate the income before it becomes due.

The cestui que trust or beneficiary has three remedies in the event of a breach of trust on the part of his trustee. He may follow the specific estate into the hands of a stranger to whom it has been wrongfully conveyed; he has the right of attaching the property into which the estate may have been converted; and the further right of action against the trustee personally for reimbursement. As between him and the trustee there is no time limit when an action may be brought. It is the rule that purchasers must see to the application of the purchase money in the cases of trust estates, such as where it is provided that the funds be for the payment of specific legacies or annuities or debts. In some jurisdictions this rule has been abrogated by statute. Technical terms are not necessary in a devise to create a trust but if used will be interpreted in their legal and technical sense. General expressions, however, will not establish a trust unless there appears a positive intention that they should do so. Bequests in trust for accumulation must be confined within the limits established against perpetuities. A settlor can only extend the trust for the life or lives in being and twenty-one years, and any attempt to extend the trust beyond this period vitiates it in toto. By statute, accumulations are forbidden in some jurisdictions excepting during the minority of the beneficiary or for other fixed periods (Bouvier, "Law Dict.", s. v. Perpetuity).

As a rule, the interest of a beneficiary is liable for the payment of his debts, but this does not prevail in a majority of the United States. Spendthrift trusts, as they are called, being for the protection of the beneficiary against his own improvidence, are sustained in these jurisdictions. Since the Statute of Wills equitable interests are devisable only in writing. How far a devisee of a trust estate can execute the trust depends on the intention of the settlor expressed in the instrument. General words will not pass a trust estate unless there is a positive intention that it should so pass. In order to create a valid trust by will, the instrument must be legally executed and admitted to probate. There is this distinction between wills and declarations of trusts. The former, being ambulatory, take effect only on the death of the testator, the latter at the time of execution. Formerly under the common law an executor had title to all personal property of the decedent, and was entitled to take the surplus after the payment of debts and legacies; now, by statute he is prima facie a trustee for the next of kin. Although a trustee is, in theory, allowed nothing for his trouble, his commissions are, in point of fact, generally fixed by statute and he is allowed his legitimate expenses. See CHARITABLE BEQUESTS; LEGACIES.

Bouvier, Law Dict. (Boston, 1897); Am. and Eng. Encycl. of Law (2nd ed., London, 1904); Lewin, On Trusts (l2th ed., London, 1911); Perry, Trusts and Trustees, (6th ed., Boston, 1911); Bispham, Principles of Equity (Philadelphia, 1882).

WALTER GEORGE SMITH

Truth

Truth (Anglo-Saxon tréow, tryw, truth, preservation of a compact, from a Teutonic base Trau, to believe) is a relation which holds (1) between the knower and the known -- Logical Truth; (2) between the knower and the outward expression which he gives to his knowledge -- Moral Truth; and (3) between the thing itself, as it exists, and the idea of it, as conceived by God -- Ontological Truth. In each case this relation is, according to the Scholastic theory, one of correspondence, conformity, or agreement (adoequatio) (St. Thomas, Summa I:21:2).

I. ONTOLOGICAL TRUTH

Every existing thing is true, in that it is the expression of an idea which exists in the mind of God, and is, as it were, the exemplar according to which the thing has been created or fashioned. Just as human creations -- a cathedral, a painting, or an epic -- conform to and embody the ideas of architect, artist, or poet, so, only in a more perfect way, God's creatures conform to and embody the ideas of Him who gives them being. (Q. D., De verit., a. 4; Summa 1:16:1.) Things that exist, moreover, are active as well as passive. They tend not only to develop, and so to realize more and more perfectly the idea which they are created to express, but they tend also to reproduce themselves. Reproduction obtains wherever there is interaction between different things, for an effect, in so far as it proceeds from a given cause, must resemble that cause. Now the cause of knowledge in man is -- ultimately, at any rate -- the thing that is known. By its activities it causes in man an idea that is like to the idea embodied in the thing itself. Hence, things may also be said to be ontologically true in that they are at once the object and the cause of human knowledge. (Cf. IDEALISM; and Summa, I:16:7 and 1:16:8; m 1. periherm., 1. III; Q.D., I, De veritate, a. 4.)

II. LOGICAL TRUTH

A. The Scholastic Theory

To judge that things are what they are is to judge truly. Every judgment comprises certain ideas which are referred to, or denied of, reality. But it is not these ideas that are the objects of our judgment. They are merely the instruments by means of which we judge. The object about which we judge is reality itself -- either concrete existing things, their attributes, and their relations, or else entities the existence of which is merely conceptual or imaginary, as in drama, poetry, or fiction, but in any case entities which are real in the sense that their being is other than our present thought about them. Reality, therefore, is one thing, and the ideas and judgments by means of which we think about reality, another; the one objective, and the other subjective. Yet, diverse as they are, reality is somehow present to, if not present in consciousness when we think, and somehow by means of thought the nature of reality is revealed. This being the case, the only term adequate to describe the relation that exists between thought and reality, when our judgments about the latter are true judgments, would seem to be conformity or correspondence. "Veritas logica est adaequatio intellectus et rei" (Summa, I:21:2). Whenever truth is predicable of a judgment, that judgment corresponds to, or resembles, the reality, the nature or attributes of which it reveals. Every judgment is, however, as we have said, made up of ideas, and may be logically analyzed into a subject and a predicate, which are either united by the copula is, or disjoined by the expression is not. If the judgment be true, therefore, these ideas must also be true, i.e. must correspond with the realities which they signify. As, however, this objective reference or significance of ideas is not recognized or asserted except in the judgment, ideas as such are said to be only "materially" true. It is the judgment alone that is formally true, since in the judgment alone is a reference to reality formally made, and truth as such recognized or claimed.

The negative judgment seems at first sight to form an exception to the general law that truth is correspondence; but this is not really the case. In the affirmative judgment both subject and predicate and the union between them, of whatever kind it may be, are referred to reality; but in the negative judgment subject and predicate are disjoined, not conjoined. In other words, in the negative judgment we deny that the predicate has reality in the particular case to which the subject refers. On the other hand, all such predicates presumably have reality somewhere, otherwise we should not talk about them. Either they are real qualities or real things, or at any rate somebody has conceived them as real. Consequently the negative judgment, if true, may also be said to correspond with reality, since both subject and predicate will be real somewhere, either as existents or as conceptions. What we deny, in fact, in the negative judgment is not the reality of the predicate, but the reality of the conjunction by which subject and predicate are united in the assertion which we implicitly challenge and negate. Subject and predicate may both be real, but if our judgment be true, they will be disjoined, not united in reality.

But what precisely is this reality with which true judgments and true ideas are said to correspond? It is easy enough to understand how ideas can correspond with realities that are themselves conceptual or ideal, but most of the realities that we know are not of this kind. How, then, can ideas and their conjunctions or disjunctions, which are psychical in character, correspond with realities which for the most part are not psychical but material? To solve this problem we must go back to ontological truth which, as we saw, implies the creation of the universe by One Who, in creating it, has expressed therein His own ideas very much as an architect or an author expresses his ideas in the things that he creates except that creation in the latter case supposes already existent material. Our theory of truth supposes that the universe is built according to definite and rational plan, and that everything within the universe expresses or embodies an essential and integral part of that plan. Whence it follows that just as in a building or in a piece of sculpture we see the plan or design that is realized therein, so, in our experience of concrete things, by means of the same intellectual power, we apprehend the ideas which they embody or express. The correspondence therefore, in which truth consists is not a correspondence between ideas and anything material as such, but between ideas as they exist in our mind and function in our acts of cognition, and the idea that reality expresses and embodies -- ideas which have their origin and prototype in the mind of God.

With regard to judgments of a more abstract or general type, the working of this view is quite simple. The realities to which abstract concepts refer have no material existence as such. There is no such thing, for instance, as action or reaction in general; nor are there any twos or fours. What we mean when we say that "action and reaction are equal and opposite", or that "two and two make four", is that these laws, which in their own proper nature are ideal, are realized or actualized in the material universe in which we live; or, in other words, that the material things we see about us behave in accordance with these laws, and through their activities manifest them to our minds.

Perceptual judgments, i.e. the judgments which usually accompany and give expression to acts of perception, differ from the above in that they refer to objects which are immediately present to our senses. The realities in this case, therefore, are concrete existing things. It is, however, rather with the appearance of such things that our judgment is now concerned than with their essential nature or inner constitution. Thus, when we predicate colours, sounds, odours, flavours, hardness or softness, heat or cold of this or that object, we make no statement about the nature of such qualities, still less about the nature of the thing that possesses them. What we assert is

• that such and such a thing exists, and
• that it has a certain objective quality, which we call green, or loud, or sweet, or hard, or hot, to distinguish it from other qualities -- red, or soft, or bitter, or cold -- with which it is not identical; while
• our statement further implies that the same quality will similarly appear to any normally constituted man, i.e. will affect his senses in the same way that it affects our own.

Accordingly, if in the real world such a condition of things obtains -- if, that is to say, the thing in question does exist and has in fact some peculiar and distinctive property whereby it affects my senses in a certain peculiar and distinctive way -- my judgment is true.

The truth of perceptual judgments by no means implies an exact correspondence between what is perceived and the images, or sensation -- complexes, whereby we perceive; nor does the Scholastic theory necessitate any such view. It is not the image, or sensation-complex, but the idea, that in judgment is referred to reality, and that gives us knowledge of reality. Colour and other qualities of objective things are doubtless perceived by means of sensation of peculiar and distinctive quality or tone, but no one imagines that this presupposes similar sensation in the object perceived. It is by means of the idea of colour and its specific differences that colours are predicated of objects, not by means of sensations Such an idea could not arise, indeed, were it not for the sensations which in perception accompany and condition it; but the idea itself is not a sensation, nor is it of a sensation. Ideas have their origin in sensible experience and are indefinable, so far as immediate experience goes, except by reference to such experience and by differentiation from experiences in which other and different properties of objects are presented Granted, therefore, that differences in what is technically known as the "quality" of sensation correspond to differences in the objective properties of things, the truth of perceptual judgments is assured. No further correspondence is required; for the correspondence which truth postulates is between idea and thing, not between sensation and thing. Sensation conditions knowledge, but as such it is not knowledge. It is, as it were, a connecting link between the idea and the thing. Differences of sensation are determined by the causal activity of things; and from the sensation-complex, or image the idea is derived by an instinctive and quasi-intuitive act of the mind which we call abstraction. Thus the idea which the thing unconsciously expresses finds conscious expression in the act of the knower, and the vast scheme of relations and laws which are de facto embodied in the material universe reproduce themselves in the consciousness of man.

Correspondence between thought and reality, idea and thing, or knower and known, therefore, turns out in all cases to be of the very essence of the truth relation. Whence, say the opponents of our theory, in order to know whether our judgments are true or not, we must compare them with the realities that are known -- a comparison that is obviously impossible, since reality can only be known through the instrumentality of the judgment. This objection, which is to be found in almost every non-Scholastic book dealing with the subject, rests upon a grave misapprehension of the real meaning of the Scholastic doctrine. Neither St. Thomas nor any other of the great Scholastics ever asserted that correspondence is the scholastic criterion of truth. To inquire what truth is, is one question; to ask how we know that we have judged truly, quite another. Indeed, the possibility of answering the second is supposed by the mere fact that the first is put. To be able to define truth, we must first possess it and know that we possess it, i.e. must be able to distinguish it from error. We cannot define that which we cannot distinguish and to some extent isolate. The Scholastic theory supposes, therefore, that truth has already been distinguished from error, and proceeds to examine truth with a view to discovering in what precisely it consists. This standpoint is epistemologieal, not criteriological. When he says that truth is correspondence, he is stating what truth is, not by what sign or mark it can be distinguished from error. By the old Scholastics the question of the criteria of truth was scarcely touched. They discussed the criteria of valid reasoning in their treatises on logic, but for the rest they left the discussion of particular criteria to the methodology of particular sciences. And rightly so, for there is really no criterion of universal application. The distinction of truth and error is at bottom intuitional. We cannot go on making criteria ad infinitum. Somewhere we must come to what is ultimate, either first principles or facts.

This is precisely what the Scholastic theory of truth affirms. In deference to the modern demand for an infallible and universal criterion of truth, not a few Scholastic writers of late have suggested objective evidence. Objective evidence, however, is nothing more than the manifestation of the object itself, directly or indirectly, to the mind, and hence is not strictly a criterion of truth, but its foundation. As Père Geny puts it in his pamphlet discussing "Une nouvelle théorie de la connaissance", to state that evidence is the ultimate criterion of truth is equivalent to stating that knowledge properly so called has no need of a criterion, since it is absurd to suppose a knowledge which does not know what it knows. Once grant, as all must grant who wish to avoid absolute sceptieism, that knowledge is possible, and it follows that, properly used, our faculties must be capable of giving us truth. Doubtless, coherence and harmony with facts are pro tanto signs of truth's presence in our minds; but what we need for the most part are not signs of truth, but signs or criteria of error -- not tests whereby to discover when our faculties have gone right, but tests whereby to discover when they have gone wrong. Our judgments will be true, i.e. thought will correspond with its object, provided that object itself, and not any other cause, subjective or objective, determines the content of our thought. What we have to do, therefore, is to take care that our assent is determined by the evidence with which we are confronted, and by this alone. With regard to the senses this means that we must look to it that they are in good condition and that the circumstances under which we are exercising them are normal; with regard to the intellect that we must not allow irrelevant considerations to weigh with us, that we must avoid haste, and, as far as possible, get rid of bias, prejudice, and an over-anxious will to believe. If this be done, granted there is sufficient evidence, true judgments will naturally and necessarily result. The purpose of argument and discussion, as of all other processes that lead to knowledge, is precisely that the object under discussion may manifest itself in its various relations, either directly or indirectly, to the mind. And the object as thus manifesting itself is what the Scholastic calls evidence. It is the object, therefore, which in his view is the determining cause of truth. All kinds of processes, both mental and physical, may be necessary to prepare the way for an act of cognition, but in the last resort such an act must be determined as to its content by the causal activity of the object, which makes itself evident by producing in the mind an idea that is like to the idea of which its own existence is the realization.

B. The Hegelian Theory.

In the Idealism of Hegel and the Absolutism of the Oxford School (of which Mr. Bradley and Mr. Joachim are the leading representatives) both reality and truth are essentially one, essentially an organic whole. Truth, in fact, is but reality qua thought. It is an intelligent act in which the universe is thought as a whole of infinite parts or differences, all organically inter-related and somehow brought to unity. And because truth is thus organic, each element within it, each partial truth, is so modified by the others through and through that apart from them, and again apart from the whole, it is but a distorted fragment, a mutilated abstraction which in reality is not truth at all. Consequently, since human truth is always partial and fragmentary, there is in strictness no such thing as human truth. For us the truth is ideal, and from it our truths are so far removed that, to convert them into the truth, they would have to undergo a change of which we know neither the measure nor the extent.

The flagrantly sceptical character of this theory is sufficiently obvious, nor is there any attempt on the part of its exponents to deny it. Starting with the assumption that to conceive is "to hold many elements together in a connexion necessitated by their several contents", and that to be conceivable is to be "a significant whole", i.e. a whole, "such that all its constituent elements reciprocally determine one another's being as contributory features in a single concrete meaning", Dr. Joachim boldly identifies the true with the conceivable (Nature of Truth, 66). And since no human intellect can conceive in this full and magnificent sense, he frankly admits that no human truth can be more than approximate, and that to the margin of error which this approximation involves no limits can be assigned. Human truth draws from absolute or ideal truth "whatever being and conservability" it possesses (Green, "Prolegom.", article 77); but it is not, and never can be, identical with absolute truth, nor yet with any part of it, for these parts essentially and intrinsically modify one another. For his definition of human truth, therefore, the Absolutist is forced back upon the Scholastic doctrine of correspondence. Human truth represents or corresponds with absolute truth in proportion as it presents us with this truth as affected by more or less derangement, or in proportion as it would take more or less to convert the one into the other (Bradley, "Appearance and Reality", 363). While, therefore, both theories assign correspondence as the essential characteristic of human truth, there is this fundamental difference between them: For the Scholastic this correspondence, so far as it goes, must be exact; but for the Absolutist it is necessarily imperfect, so imperfect, indeed, that "the ultimate truth" of any given proposition "may quite transform its original meaning" (Appearance and Reality, 364).

To admit that human truth is essentially representative is really to admit that conception is something more than the mere "holding together of many elements in a connexion necessitated by their several contents". But the fallacy of the "coherence theory" does not lie so much in this, nor yet in the identification of the true and the conceivable, as in its assumption that reality, and therefore truth, is organically one. The universe is undoubtedly one, in that its parts are inter-related and inter-dependent; and from this it follows that we cannot know any part completely unless we know the whole; but it does not follow that we cannot know any part at all unless we know the whole. If each part has some sort of being of its own, then it can be known for what it is, whether we know its relations to other parts or not; and similarly some of its relations to other parts can be known without our knowing them all. Nor is the individuality of the parts of the universe destroyed by their inter-dependence; rather it is thereby sustained.

The sole ground which the Hegelian and the Absolutist have for denying these facts is that they will not square with their theory that the universe is organically one. Since, therefore, it is confessedly impossible to explain the nature of this unity or to show how in it the multitudinous differences of the universe are "reconciled", and since, further, this theory is acknowledged to be hopelessly sceptical, it is surely irrational any longer to maintain it.

C. The Pragmatic Theory

Life for the Pragmatist is essentially practical. All human activity is purposive, and its purpose is the control of human experience with a view to its improvement, both in the individual and in the race. Truth is but a means to this end. Ideas, hypotheses, and theories are but instruments which man has "made" in order to better both himself and his environment; and, though specific in type, like all other forms of human activity they exist solely for this end, and are "true" in so far as they fulfil it. Truth is thus a form of value: it is something that works satisfactorily; something that "ministers to human interests, purposes and objects of desire" (Studies in Humanism, 362). There are no axioms or self-evident truths. Until an idea or a judgment has proved itself of value in the manipulation of concrete experience, it is but a postulate or claim to truth. Nor are there any absolute or irreversible truths. A proposition is true so long as it proves itself useful, and no longer. In regard to the essential features of this theory of truth W. James, John Dewey, and A.W. Moore in America, F.C.S. Schiller in England, G. Simmel in Germany, Papini in Italy, and Henri Bergson, Le Roy, and Abel Rey in France are all substantially in agreement. It is, they say, the only theory which takes account of the psychological processes by which truth is made, and the only theory which affords a satisfactory answer to the arguments of the sceptic.

In regard to the first of these claims there can be no doubt that Pragmatism is based upon a study of truth "in the making". But the question at issue is not whether interest, purpose, emotion, and volition do as a matter of fact play a part in the process of cognition. That is not disputed. The question is whether, in judging of the validity of a claim to truth, such considerations ought to have weight. If the aim of all cognitive acts is to know reality as it is, then clearly judgments are true only in so far as they satisfy this demand. But this does not help us in deciding what judgments are true and what are not, for the truth of a judgment must already be known before this demand can be satisfled. Similarly with regard to particular interests and purposes; for though such interests and purposes may prompt us to seek for knowledge, they will not be satisfied until we know truly, or at any rate think we know truly. The satisfaction of our needs, in other words, is posterior to, and already supposes, the possession of true knowledge about whatever we wish to use as a means to the satisfaction of those needs. To act efficiently, we must know what it is we are acting upon and what will be the effects of the action contemplated. The truth of our judgments is verified by their consequences only in those cases where we know that such consequences should ensue if our judgment be true, and then act in order to discover whether in reality they will ensue.

Theoretically, and upon Scholastic principles, since whatever is true is also good, true judgments ought to result in good consequences. But, apart from the fact that the truth of our judgment must in many cases be known before we can act upon them with success, the Pragmatic criterion is too vague and too variable to be of any practical use. "Good consequences", "successful operations on reality", "beneficial interaction with sensible particulars" denote experiences which it is not easy to recognize or to distinguish from other experiences less good, less successful, and less beneficial. If we take personal valuations as our test, these are proverbially unstable; while, if social valuations alone are admissible, where are they to be found, and upon what grounds accepted by the individual? Moreover, when a valuation has been made, how are we to know that it is accurate? For this, it would seem, further valuations will be required, and so on ad inflnitum. Distinctively pragmatic criteria of truth are both impractical and unreliable, especially the criterion of felt satisfaction, which seems to be the favourite, for in determining this not only the personal factor, but the mood of the moment and even physical conditions play a considerable part. Consequently upon the second head the claim of the Pragmatist can by no means be allowed. The Pragmatist theory is not a whit less sceptical than the theory of the Absolutist, which it seeks to displace. If truth is relative to purposes and interests, and if these purposes and interests are, as they are admitted to be, one and all tinged by personal idiosyncrasy, then what is true for one man will not be true for another, and what is true now will not be true when a change takes place either in the interest that has engendered it or in the circumstances by which it has been verified.

All this the Pragmatist grants, but replies that such truth is all that man needs and all that he can get. True judgments do not correspond with reality, nor in true judgments do we know reality as it is. The function of cognition, in short, is not to know reality, but to control it. For this reason truth is identified with its consequences -- theoretical, if the truth be merely virtual, but in the end practical, particular, concrete. "Truth means successful operations on reality" (Studies in Hum., 118). The truth-relation " consists of intervening parts of the universe which can in every particular case be assigned and catalogued" (Meaning of Truth, 234). "The chain of workings which an opinion sets up is the opinion's truth" (Ibid., 235). Thus, in order to refute the Sceptic, the Pragmatist changes the nature of truth, redefining it as the definitely experienceable success which attends the working of certain ideas and judgments; and in so doing he grants precisely what the Sceptic seeks to prove, namely, that our cognitive faculties are incapable of knowing reality as it is. (See PRAGMATISM.)

D. The "New" Realist's Theory

As it is a first principle with both Absolutist and Pragmatist that reality is changed by the very act in which we know it, so the negation of this thesis is the root principle of "New" Realism. In this the "New" Realist is at one with the Scholastic. Reality does not depend upon experience, nor is it modified by experience as such. The "New" Realist, however, has not as yet adopted the correspondence theory of truth. He regards both knowledge and truth as unique relations which hold immediately between knower and known, and which are as to their nature indefinable. "The difference between subjeet and object of consciousness is not a differenee of quality or substanee, but a differenee of office or place in a configuration" (Journal of Phil. Psychol. and Scientific Meth., VII, 396). Reality is made up of terms and their relations, and truth is just one of these relations, sui generis, and therefore reeognizable only by intuition. This account of truth is undoubtedly simple, but there is at any rate one point whieh it seems altogether to ignore, viz., the existence of judgments and ideas of which, and not of the mind as such, the truth-relation is predicable. We have not on the one hand objects and on the other bare mind; but on the one hand objects and on the other a mind that by means of the judgment refers its own ideas to objects -- ideas which as such, both in regard to their existence and their content, belong to the mind which judges. What then is the relation that holds between these ideas and their objects when our judgments are true, and again when they are false? Surely both logic and criteriology imply that we know something more about such judgments than merely that they are different.

Bertrand Russell, who has given in his adhesion to "The Program and First Platform of Six Realists", drawn up and signed by six American professors in July, 1910, modifies somewhat the naïveté of their theory of truth. "Every judgment", he says (Philos. Essays, 181), "is a relation of a mind to several objects, one of which is a relation. Thus, the judgment, 'Charles I died on the scaffold', denotes several objects or 'objectives' which are related in a certain definite way, and the relation is as real in this case as are the other objectives. The judgment 'Charles I died in his bed', on the other hand, denotes the objects, Charles I, death, and bed, and a certain relation between them, which in this case does not relate the objects as it is supposed to relate them. A judgment therefore, is true, when the relation which is one of the objects relates the other objects, otherwise it is false" (loc. cit.). In this statement of the nature of truth: correspondenee between the mind judging and the objects about which we judge is distinctly implied, and it is precisely this correspondcnce which is set down as the distinguishing mark of true judgments. Russell however, unfortunately seems to be at variance with other members of the New Realist school on this point. G.E. Moore expressly rejects the correspondence theory of truth ("Mind", N. S., VIII, 179 sq.), and Prichard, another English Realist, explicitly states that in knowledge there is nothing between the object and ourselves (Kant's Theory of Knowledge, 21). Nevertheless, it is matter for rejoicing that in regard to the main points at issue -- the non-alteration of reality by acts of cognition, the possibility of knowing it in some respects without its being known in all, the growth of knowledge by "accretion", the non-spiritual character of some of the objects of experience, and the necessity of ascertaining empirically and not by a priori methods, the degree of unity which obtains between the various parts of the universe -the "New" Realist and the Scholastic Realist are substantially in agreement.

III. MORAL TRUTH, OR VERACITY

Veracity is the correspondence of the outward expression given to thought with the thought itself. It must not be confused with verbal truth (veritas locutionis), which is the correspondence of the outward or verbal expression with the thing that it is intended to express. The latter supposes on the part of the speaker not only the intention of speaking truly, but also the power so to do, i.e. it supposes (1) true knowledge and (2) a right use of words. Moral truth, on the other hand, exists whenever the speaker expresses what is in his mind even if de facto he be mistaken, provided only that he says what he thinks to be true. This latter condition however, is necessary. Hence a better definition of moral truth would be "the correspondence of the outward expression of thought with the thing as conceived by the speaker". Moral truth, therefore, does not imply true knowledge. But, though a deviation from moral truth would be only materially a lie, and hence not blameworthy, unless the use of words or signs were intentionally incorrect, moral truth does imply a correct use of words or other signs. A lie therefore, is an intentional deviation from moral truth, and is defined as a locutio contra mentem; i.e. it is the outward expression of a thought which is intentionally diverse from the thing as conceived by the speaker. It is important to observe, however, that the expression of the thought, whether by word or by sign, must in all cases be taken in its context; for both in regard to words and to signs, custom and circumstances make a considerable difference with respect to their interprctation. Veracity, or the habit of speaking the truth, is a virtue; and the obligation of practising it arises from a twofold source. First, "since man is a social animal, naturally one man owes to another that without which human society could not go on. But men could not live together if they did not believe one another to be speaking the truth. Hence the virtue of veracity comes to some extent under the head of justice [rationem debiti]" (St. Thomas, Summa, II-II:109:3). The second source of the obligation to veracity arises from the fact that speech is clearly of its very nature intended for the communication of knowledge by one to another. It should be used, therefore, for the purpose for which it is naturally intended, and lies should be avoided. For lies are not merely a misuse, but an abuse, of the gift of speech, since, by destroying man's instinctive belief in the veracity of his neighbour, they tend to destroy the efficacy of that gift.

For Scholasticism see: scholastic treatises on major logic, s.v. Veritas; Etudes sur la Vérité (Paris, 1909); GENY, Une nouvelle théorie de la connaissance (Tournai, 1909); MIVART, On Truth (London, 1889); JOHN RICKABY, First Principles af Knowledge; ROUSSELOT, L'Intellectualisme de St. Thomas (Paris, 1909); TONQUEDEC, La notion de la vérité dans la philosophie nouvelle in Etudes (1907), CX, 721; CXI, 433; CXII, 68, 335; WALKER, Theories of Knowledge (2d ed., London, 1911); HOBHOUSE, The Theory of Knowledge (London, 1906).
Absolutism: BRADLEY, Appearance and Reality (London, 1899); IDEM, Articles in Mind, N.S., LT, LXXI, LXXII (1904, 1909, 1910); JOACHIM, The Nature af Truth (Oxford, 1906); TAYLOR, Elements of Metaphysics (London, 1903); Articles in Mind, N.S., LVII (1906), and Philos. Rev., XIV, 3.
Pragmatism: BERGSON, L'Evolution Créatrice (7th ed., Paris, 1911); DEWEY, Studies in Logical Theory (Chicago, 1903); JAMES, Pragmatism (London, 1907); IDEM, The Meaning af Truth (London, 1909); IDEM, Some Problems of Philosophy (London 1911); MOORE, Pragmatism and Its Critics (Chicago, 191O); ABEL REY, La théorie de la physique (Paris, 1907); SCHILLER, Axioms as Postulates in Personal Idealism (London, 1902); IDEM Humanism (London, 1902); IDEM, Studies in Humanism (London 1907); SIMMEL, Die Philosophie des Geldes (Leipsig, 1900), iii.
New Realism: Articles in Journal of Philosophy, Psychology, and Scientific Methods (1910, 1911), especially VII, 15 (July 1910); MOORE, The Nature of Judgment in Mind, VIII; PRICHARD, Kant's Theory af Knowledge (Oxford, 1910); RUSSELL, Philosophical Essays (London, 1910); IDEM, Articles in Mind N.S., LX (1906), and in Proceedings af the Aristotelian Society VII.

LESLIE J. WALKER

Catholic Truth Societies

This article will treat of Catholic Truth Societies in the chronological order of their establishment in various countries.

IN ENGLAND

The Catholic Truth Society has had two periods of existence. It was initiated by Dr. (afterwards Cardinal) Vaughan when he was Rector of St. Joseph's Missionary College, and, in the two or three years of its existence, issued a number of leaflets and penny books, some of which are still on sale; but when he became Bishop of Salford, in 1872, the society fell into abeyance and soon practically ceased to exist. Meanwhile, and quite independently, the need of cheap, good literature impressed itself upon some priests and laymen, who raised the sum of twelve pounds, which was expended in printing some little cards of prayers for daily use, and for confession and Communion. The scheme was brought before Dr. Vaughan, who suggested that the new body should take the name and place of the defunct Catholic Truth Society. Under that name it was formally established, 5 November, 1884, and the second period of its existence began under the presidency of Dr. Vaughan, the Rev. W.H. (now Monsignor) Cologan and Mr. James Britten being appointed honorary secretaries. At the death of Cardinal Vaughan, the present Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Bourne, became president. The aims of the society are: To spread among Catholics small devotional works; to assist the uneducated poor to a better knowledge of their religion; to spread among Protestants information regarding Catholic faith and practice; and to promote the circulation of good and cheap Catholic literature. These objects have been steadily kept in view throughout the society's existence, although its scope has from time to time been enlarged as necessity has dictated. From them it will be seen that the aim of the society is not controversial, as is sometimes supposed. The position of Catholics in England is such that controversy is unavoidable, and a certain proportion of the society's publications have been devoted to the consideration of the Anglican claims and to the exposure of the fictions assiduously promoted by the less intelligent and bigoted class of Protestants. But the chief aim of the society has been the instruction of Catholics by placing in their hands, at nominal prices, educational and devotional works. The sale of some of these has been phenomenal: the "Simple Prayer-book", for example, has reached a circulation of 1,380,000; the little penny books of daily meditation have reached 114,000; and nearly 200,000 penny copies of the Gospels have been sold. An account of the literary output of the society can be ascertained from the list of publications, to be obtained from the depot, 69 Southwark Bridge Road, London, S.E. Almost every subject of importance to Catholics is taken up in one or other of the society's works; and the number is increasing every month. Already there is an extensive list of books and pamphlets directed to meet and answer rationalist objections; among them may be mentioned a series of penny lives of Catholic men of science, and thirty-nine papers dealing with "The History of Religions"; of these last an aggregate of about 200,000 copies have been issued. For younger Catholics a large number of tales, dealing with the sacraments and other religious subjects, has been provided at the lowest possible price.

The society is mainly supported by subscriptions, ten shillings per annum entitling to membership, while ten pounds is a life subscription. Without these the work could not be carried on, as, although the officers have always taken their part gratuitously, the necessary expenses of rent, printing, and storing could not be defrayed out of the often infinitesimal profits accruing from the sale of publications. From the first there has been the heartiest co-operation between clergy and laity in every branch of the society's work; and the difficulties often arising from political differences have never in any way interfered with the work of the society. The society has the cordial approval and support of the highest ecclesiastical authorities, and is indulgenced by the Holy See. The movement has spread to Ireland, Scotland, the United States, and Australia. In addition to its literary work, for seventeen years the society held an annual Catholic conference, which formed an important event in English Catholic life. These gatherings, always largely attended by representative clergy and laity, were the occasion of important pronouncements by the archbishop or by other bishops, and afforded an opportunity for the elucidation and discussion of matters affecting the work and welfare of the Church in England. Their success paved the way for a development by which, from 1910, the society's conference has been merged in the National Catholic Congress. The important work of providing reading for blind Catholics has been taken up by the society, which has established a circulating library of books of instruction, devotion, and fiction, printed in Braille type. It has also provided a number of lectures on matters connected with history and art, illustrated by suitable lantern slides. A special committee was formed in 1891 to work for the spiritual welfare of Catholic seamen of all classes, through the instrumentality of which Catholic seamen's clubs and homes were opened. The society has also been the starting-point for other organizations which now have an independent existence — e.g. the Catholic Guardians' Association, which has become a centre of usefulness throughout the country, is the ultimate development of a local branch of the society, which made the distribution of literature to the inmates of workhouses and hospitals part of its work; the Catholic Social Guild took its rise in connection with one of the society's conferences; and the Catholic Needlework Guild was initiated by one of its secretaries. The realization of its importance is already growing, and the society is doing effective work for the Catholic Church in England.

IN IRELAND

The Catholic Truth Society of Ireland was organized at the meeting of the Maynooth-Union in 1899, with the stated purpose of diffusing "by means of cheap publications sound Catholic literature in popular form so as to give instruction and edification in a manner most likely to interest and attract the general reader", and which would "create a taste for a pure and wholesome literature, and will also serve as an antidote against the poison of dangerous or immoral writings". The society has received the earnest and practical support of the hierarchy and laity of Ireland, and has devoted its publications to sound national, historical, and biographical, as well as religious subjects in order to offset the demoralization of the output of the sensational press. In the first ten years of its existence 424 penny publications, with a circulation of over five million copies, were issued. It has also printed a prayer-book and other works in Gaelic. The annual conferences have brought together distinguished gatherings, and the addresses made and papers read at these meetings, printed in "The Catholic Truth Annual", make a valuable compilation in the interest of the object for which the society was started. The society has its main office in Dublin and has over 800 members.

IN AUSTRALIA

The Australian Catholic Truth Society was started in 1904, and has its headquarters in Melbourne. Its officers have been active in the dissemination of sound Catholic literature and in the spreading of publications that were an antidote to works subversive of faith and morals. On 1 Nov., 1910 the society had 423 annual and 164 life members distributed over the Commonwealth and New Zealand and had published 679,375 pamphlets. Of its prayer-book 42,016 copies were sold. In 1910 it sent the Rev. Dr. Cleary on a mission around the world to establish a chain of agents for an international news service.

IN THE UNITED STATES

The International Catholic Truth Society was incorporated in New York on 24 April, 1900, the particular objects for which it was formed being: to answer inquiries of persons seeking information concerning the doctrines of the Catholic Church; to supply Catholic literature gratis to Catholics and non-Catholics who make request for the same; to correct erroneous and misleading statements in reference to Catholic doctrine and morals; to refute calumnies against the Catholic religion; to secure the publication of articles promoting a knowledge of Catholic affairs; to stimulate a desire for higher education among the Catholic laity, by printing and distributing lists of Catholic books, and otherwise to encourage the circulation and reading of standard Catholic literature; to generally assist in the dissemination of Catholic truth; and to perform other educational and missionary work. The territory in which its operations are principally conducted is in the United States of America and in Canada. The office of the society is in Brooklyn, the bishop of which diocese is its honorary president, and the Rev. W. N. McGinnis. S.T.D., its president.

According to the annual report for the year from March, 1910, to March, 1911, the society had 1005 members, 618 subscribers, and 118 affiliated societies. It had distributed during the year 199,188 pamphlets. A part of its work found to be of special benefit is the remailing of Catholic papers and magazines to people in out of the way sections. During the year 11,579 such families were supplied with 475,000 copies of Catholic weekly papers and magazines. Catholic items are supplied twice a month to 31 daily papers in various parts of the United States. In affiliation with this society, and acting as distributing centres, 94 Councils of the Knights of Columbus and 24 other organizations in various localities have been of material assistance in refuting calumnies against the Catholic religion, in publishing in the daily press articles that tend to promote a knowledge of Catholic affairs; in securing the removal of objectionable textbooks from the public schools, or the expurgation from the textbooks of false and unjust statements concerning the Church; and generally assisting in the dissemination of Catholic truth. The society has established connections with agencies in fifteen foreign countries.

JAMES BRITTEN THOMAS F. MEEHAN

Tryphon, Respicius, and Nympha

Martyrs whose feast is observed in the Latin Church on 10 November. Tryphon is said to have been born at Kampsade in Phrygia and as a boy took care of geese. During the Decian persecution he was taken to Nicfa about the year 250 and put to death in a horrible manner after he had converted the heathen prefect Licius. Fabulous stories are interwoven with his legend. He is greatly venerated in the Greek Church which observes his feast on 1 February. In this Church he is also the patron saint of gardeners. Many churches were dedicated to him, and the Eastern Emperor, Leo VI, the Philosopher (d. 912), delivered a eulogy upon Tryphon. About the year 1005 the monk Theodoric of Fleury wrote an account of him based upon earlier written legends; in Theodoric s story Respicius appears as Tryphon s companion. The relics of both were preserved together with those of a holy virgin named Nympha, at the Hospital of the Holy Ghost in Sassia. Nympha was a virgin from Palermo who was put to death for the Faith at the beginning of the fourth century. According to other versions of the legend, when the Goths invaded Sicily she fled from Palermo to the Italian mainland and died in the sixth century at Savona. The feast of her translation is observed at Palermo on 19 August. Some believe that there were two saints of this name. The church of the Hospital of the Holy Ghost at Rome was a cardinal s title which, together with the relics of these saints, was transferred in 1566 by Pope Pius V to the Church of St. Augustine. A Greek text of the life of St. Tryphon was discovered by Father Franchi de Cavallieri, Hagio-graphica (Rome, 1908), in the series Studi e Texti, XIX. The Latin Acts are to be found in Ruinart, Acta Martyrum . Analecta Bollandiana, XXVII, 7-10, 15; XXVIII, 217.

GABRIEL MEIER

Johann Nepomuk von Tschiderer zu Gleifheim

Bishop of Trent, b. at Bozen, 15 Feb., 1777; d. at Trent, 3 Dec., 1860. He sprang from a family that had emigrated from the Grisons to the Tyrol in 1529 and to which the Emperor Ferdinand III had given a patent of nobility in 1620. Johann Nepomuk was ordained priest, 27 July, 1800, by Emmanuel Count von Thun, Bishop of Trent. After spending two years as an assistant priest, he went for further training to Rome, where he was appointed notary Apostolic. After his return he took up pastoral work again in the German part of the Diocese of Trent, and was later professor of moral and pastoral theology at the episcopal seminary at Trent. In 1810 he became parish priest at Sarnthal, and in 1819 at Meran. Wherever he went he gained a lasting reputation by his zeal and charitableness. In 1826 Prince-Bishop Luschin appointed him cathedral canon and pro-vicar at Trent; in 1832 Prince-Bishop Galura of Brixen selected him as Bishop of Heliopolis and Vicar-General for Vorarlberg. In 1834 the Emperor Francis I nominated him Prince-Bishop of Trent and on 5 May, 1835, he entered upon his office. During the twenty-five years of his administration he was distinguished for the exercise of virtue and charity, and for intense zeal in the fulfilment of the duties of his episcopal office. He was exceedingly simple and abstinent in his personal habits. On the other hand he loved splendour when it concerned the decoration of his cathedral, the procuring of ecclesiastical vestments, and the ornamentation of the churches. He devoted a considerable part of his revenues to the building of churches, and to the purchase of good books for the parsonages and chaplains' houses. His charity to the poor and sick was carried so far that he was often left without a penny, because he had given away everything he had. Twice the cholera raged in his diocese and on these occasions he set his clergy a shining example of Christian courage. He left his property to the institution for the deaf and dumb at Trent and to the seminary for students that he had founded, and that was named after him the Joanneum. Directly after his death he was honoured as a saint; the process for his beatification is now in progress.

Mitteilungen über das Leben des . . . J. N. Tschiderer (Bozen, 1876); TAIT, Leben des ehrwürdigen Dieners Gottes Johann Nepomuk von Tschiderer. Nach den Prozessakten und beglaubigten Urkunden (2 vols., Venice, 1904), Ger. tr. SCHLEGEL (Trent, 1908).

JOSEPH LINS

John Nepomuk Tschupick

A celebrated preacher, b. at Vienna, 7 or 12 April, 1729; d. there, 20 July, 1784. He entered the Jesuit novitiate on 14 October, 1744, and, shortly after, was appointed professor of grammar and rhetoric. In 1763 he became preacher at the cathedral of Vienna, a position which he filled during the remaining twenty-two years of his life with exceptional conscientiousness, prudence, and ability. His preaching was very successful and highly appreciated by Francis I (d. 1765), Maria Theresa (d. 1780), Joseph II (d. 1790), and the imperial Court. His sermons were remarkable for clearness and logical thought, strength and precision of expression, copiousness and skillful application of Patristic and Biblical texts. The first edition of his collected sermons was published in ten small volumes with an index volume (Vienna, 1785-7). This edition was supplemented by "Neue, bisher ungedruckte, Kanzelreden auf alle Sonn-und Festtage, wie auch für die heilige Fastenzeit" (Vienna, 1798-1803). A new edition of all his sermons was prepared recently by Johann Hertkens (5 vols., Paderborn, 1898-1903). An Italian translation was made by Giuseppe Teglio (4 vols., 4th ed., Milan, 1856).

SOMMERVOGEL, Bibl. de la Compagnie de JÈsus, VIII (Brussels, 1898), 261-3.

MICHAEL OTT

Tuam

(TUAMENSIS).

The Archdiocese of Tuam, the metropolitan see of Connacht, extends, roughly speaking, from the Shannon westwards to the sea, and comprises half of County Galway, and nearly half of Mayo, with a small portion of south Roscommon. It is territorially the largest diocese in Ireland, including in itself about one-fourteenth of the entire area of the country. At the census of 1901 the Catholic population was 193,768; the entire non-Catholic population was 4,194. There are several parishes in which all the inhabitants are Catholics. The mainland portion of the archdiocese is divided by a chain of lakes extending from the city of Galway to the Pontoon, near Foxford, Mayo. The largest of these lakes — Corrib, Mask, and Carra — form a magnificent and continuous watercourse, but are not connected by navigable rivers or canals. The country east of these lakes is a great undulating plain, mostly of arable land, interspersed here and there with bogs and smaller lakes. The country west of the great lakes is of entirely different character. It is nearly all rugged and heathery, with ranges of hills rising steeply from the lakes, especially from the shores of Lough Mask on one side, and from the shores of the Atlantic Ocean on the other, forming many lofty peaks with long-drawn valleys where the streams rushing down widen into deep and fishful lakes, which, especially in Connemara, attract fishermen from all parts of the United Kingdom. The population of this rugged lakeland is sparse and poor, but the scenery very picturesque, especially towards the west, where the bays of the ocean penetrate far in between the mountains, as at the beautiful Killary Bay. This western coast is bordered by many wind-swept islands, affording a precarious sustenance to the inhabitants. Of these the chief are the Isles of Aran in Galway Bay, and farther off, on the north-western coast, Inishark, Inisboffin, and Inisturk, Clare Island and Achill Island — all of which are inhabited and have schools and churches. There are three priests on the Aran Islands, one on Inisboffin, one on Clare Island, and three on Achill, which has a population of about 6000 souls.

The archdiocese comprises seven rural deaneries — Tuam, Dunmore, Claremorris, Ballinrobe, Castlebar, Westport, and Clifden. There are three vicars-general who preside over three divisions of the archdiocese which from time immemorial have been historically distinct, that is Galway east of the Corrib; West Galway, or the Kingdom of Connemara, and the Mayo portion. There are 143 secular priests, of whom eight are usually employed in the seminary. There are only two regulars, properly so called, who reside in the Augustinian monastery of Ballyhaunis; two priests of the order of St. Camillus have charge of the hospice for infirm clergy, Moyne Park, Ballyglunin, Galway, and four secular clergy of a preparatory college for the African Missions in the Co. Mayo, generously given for the purpose by Count Blake of Cloughballymore. There are four houses of the Christian Brothers, and one of the Brothers of the Christian schools. There are eleven monasteries of the Third Order Regular of St. Francis, who were formed by Archbishop MacHale to counteract the efforts of proselytizing institutions and to teach agriculture to their pupils. Of these schools the most successful has been the Agriculture College of Mount Bellew, which is working under the Agricultural Department. There are three Presentation convents, and ten convents of the Sisters of Mercy with schools. St. Jarlath's Diocesan Seminary has more than a hundred resident students.

St. Patrick in Tuam St. Patrick came into the Diocese of Tuam from Airtech in north-west Roscommon most likely in A.D. 440, and thence travelled almost due west from Aghamore, where he founded his first church, on the summit of Croaghpatrick. We have the names of some twelve churches which he established in this district; it is expressly stated that he placed bishops over several of these churches — at Cella Senes near Ballyhaunis; at Kilbenin, where he placed St. Benignus; at Donaghpatrick, which he gave to Bishop Felartus; at Aghagower, where he placed St. Senach, whom he called Agnus Dei on account of his meekness. His sojourn for forty days on ynod of Kells (1152), and the controversy was carried to Rome and finally decided in their favour. The primates, however, were allowed the rents of certain church lands in Tuam, but these claims they afterwards remitted in exchange for lands in the north of Ireland.

The Archdiocese of Tuam now comprises the territories of five of those ancient dioceses which at different periods were united to the original Diocese of Tuam. This original diocese, which may be taken as corresponding roughly with the modern deanery of Tuam, comprised the ancient territory known as the Conmaicne of Dunmore, and also the Ciarraigi of Loch nan-Airneadh, as well as a portion of Corcamogha and the Sodan territory. When the O'Conor kings of the twelfth century came to be the chief rulers of Connacht, and for a time of all Ireland, they resided mostly at Tuam and sought to control the spiritual as they did the temporal rulers of their principality. There can be no doubt that it was the influence of Turlough Mor, then King of Ireland, which induced the prelates and papal legate at Kells in 1152 to make his own Diocese of Tuam the archiepiscopal and metropolitan see of the province. This original See of Tuam was founded about A.D. 520 by St. Jarlath, son of Loga, the disciple of St. Benin of Kilbannon, and the preceptor for a time at Cloonfush near Tuam of St. Brendan the Navigator. The original cathedral known as Tempull Jarlath stood on the site of the present Protestant cathedral. After Jarlath's death his remains were enshrined and preserved in a church built for the purpose and called Tempull na Scrine, close to the spot on which the Catholic cathedral now stands. Around this cathedral, which was begun by Dr. Oliver Kelly in 1826, are grouped in a circle all the other ecclesiastical buildings — the college, the Presentation convent and schools, the Mercy convent and schools of the Sisters of Mercy, the Christian Brothers' House and schools, and the recently-erected archiepiscopal residence.

The ancient See of Annaghdown grew out of the monastery founded by St. Brendan for his sister St. Briga. Its jurisdiction extended over O'Flaherty's country around Lough Corrib and comprised in all some seventeen parishes. The see was independent down to the death of Thomas O'Mellaigh in 1250, when Archbishop MacFlionn seized and held it with the consent of the king. For the next 250 years a prolonged and unseemly conflict was carried on between the archbishops and abbots, the former declaring that Annahdown had been reduced by the pope and the king to the rank of a parish church, whilst the abbots stoutly maintained their independence. In 1484 the wardenship of Galway was established, and all the parishes on the south and west around the lake were placed under the warden's quasi-episcopal jurisdiction, Tuam still retaining eight parishes to the east of the lake. In 1830 the wardenship was abolished, and the See of Galway established as a regular episcopal see, suffragan to Tuam.

The Diocese of Cong included all the parishes subject to the Abbey of Cong, which was founded by St. Fechin in 626. The abbots seem to have exercised quasi-episcopal jurisdiction over nineteen parishes in the Baronies of Ballynahinch, Ross, and Kilmaine, which for the most part were served by the monks as vicars under the abbot. In the Synod of Rath Breasail Cong was counted as one of the five dioceses of Connacht, but there is no mention of it at the Synod of Kells in 1152. King Rory O'Conor retired to the abbey for several years and died there.

The Diocese of Mayo like that of Cong had its origin in Mayo Abbey, founded by St. Colman about 667 for Saxon monks who had followed him from Lindisfarne. In 1152 it was recognized by the Synod of Kells as one of the Connacht sees, and mention is made of the death of Gilla Isu O'Mailin, Bishop of Mayo, in 1184, but on the death of Bishop Cele O'Duffy in 1209 no successor was appointed and the see was merged in that of Tuam, probably through the influence of King Cathal O"Conor and his relative Archbishop Felix O'Ruadan of Tuam. But bishops of Mayo reappear from time to time in the annals down to 1579 when Bishop Patrick O'Healy coming home to take possession of his See of Mayo was seized with his companion Friar O'Rourke and hanged at Kilmallock by Drury, the English President of Munster. At one time Mayo had no fewer than twenty-eight parishes under its jurisdiction, which extended from the Dalgin River at Kilvine to Achill Head. At present this is a small rural parish, and the "City of Mayo" comprises not more than half a dozen houses.

Of the Diocese of Aghagower we need say little. It was founded in 441 by St. Patrick who placed over it Bishop Senach; the "Book of Armagh" tells us that bishops dwelt there in the time of the writer (early part of the ninth century). The jurisdiction of Aghagower extended over the "Owles", the territory around Clew Bay, comprising the modern deanery of Westport. But at an early date these churches were absorbed first into the Diocese of Mayo and afterwards into that of Tuam.

Monasteries

Besides the great monasteries of Annaghdown, Cong, and Mayo, there were others in the archdiocese that deserve mention. The monastery of St. Enda at Killeany in Aran become famous in the first quarter of the sixth century. Near it was the oratory Tempull Benain, which Benan, or Benignus, of Kilbannon, the disciple of St. Patrick, had built. It is very small but strikingly beautiful, and its cyclopean walls have not lost a stone for the last fourteen hundred years. There are in addition to the Aran Island many other holy islands around this wild western coast, as Island Mac Dara, which all the fishermen salute by dipping their sails, Cruach of St. Caelainn, Ardilaun of St. Fechin, St. Colman's Inisboffin, Caher of St. Patrick. The Cistercian Abbey of Knockmoy (de Colle Victoriae), six miles from Tuam, founded in 1189 by King Crovedearg, was one of the largest and the wealthiest in the West of Ireland. Mention, too, is made of a Bishop of Knockmoy. The ruins are full of interest, for some of its walls were frescoed and the sculptured tomb of King Felim O'Conor is well preserved. At its suppression in 1542 it was found to be in the possession of the rectories of several churches, and large estates in Galway, Roscommon, and Mayo. The same King Cathal of the Red Hand founded in 1215 the Abbey of Ballintubber close to St. Patrick's holy well. It was admirably built and has been partly restored as the parochial church of the district. It contains the tomb and monument of the first Viscount Mayo, the son of Sir Richard Burke and Grania Uaile, Queen of Clew Bay. The Dominican Abbey of Athenry was established in 1241 by Meyler De Bermingham who endowed it with ample possessions. It usually contained thirty friars. The "main" building was erected by Meyler; King Felim O'Conor built the refectory; Flann O'Flynn built the "Scholar House", for the friars kept a noted school; Owen O'Heyne built the dormitory; Con O'Kelly built the "chapter house", and so on with the guest chamber and the infirmary. In Queen Mary's reign this convent was selected to be a university college for Connacht, but the project was never realized. Buried there are many of the early Burkes of Clanrichard, who in life were benefactors and protectors of the convent.

The Benedictine Nuns had a convent at Kilereevanty, situated on the Dalgin River, four miles from Tuam. It was founded in 1200 by the same King Cathal O'Conor for the royal ladies of his family, and of other high chieftains by whom it was richly endowed. It held estates not only in Galway but also in Roscommpon, Mayo, Sligo, and Westmeath, and the rectories of score of different parishes. Its inmates at one time secured at Rome a curtailment of the archbishop's rights of visitations and procurations, but after a short experience, the pope found it necessary to restore his full rights to the archbishop. It was however the greatest and wealthiest convent in the West. There were many smaller religious houses in the archdiocese. The Augustinians had ten; the Dominicans three; the Franciscans three or four; the Cistericians two; the Templars one, and there were also three or four nunneries.

Archbishops

In the long list of the Archbishops of Tuam there are many illustrious names which can be referred to here only briefly.

• Hugh O'Hession was present at the Synod of Kells in 1152, where he received the pallium from the papal legate, and so became the first Archbishop of Tuam.
• He died in 1161 and was succeeded by Cathal or Catholicus, O'Duffy, who reigned for forty years. In 1172 he was present with his suffragans at the Concil of Cashel, which gave formal recognition to the claims of Henry II. Later, in 1175, he was deputed to sign the Treaty of Windsor on behalf of King Rory O'Conor, by which Rory consented to hold his Kingdom of Connacht in subjection to the English monarch. O'Duffy was also present at the Lateran Council in 1179, and in 1201 held a provincial synod at Tuam under the presidency of the Roman cardinal. He then retired to the Abbey of Cong where he died the following summer.
• His successor, Felix O'Ruadain, who previously had been a Cistercian, probably at Knockmoy, filled the sea for thirty-six years. He was a near relative of Rory O'Conor, which strengthened his great influence in the province. Next year he convoked a great synod of the province at Tuam in which it was decreed to unite the termon lands of the monasteries to their respective bishoprics. Tuam thereby acquired vast estates in Galway, Mayo, and even Roscommon. The archbishop also complained that Armagh claimed jurisdiction over the Diocese of Kilmore and Ardagh, which rightfully belonged to his province, and also over several parishes in the Archdiocese of Tuam, to which the primate had no claim. A composition was effected later, in 1211.
• In 1258 died Walter De Salerno, an Englishman, who was appointed by the pope but never got possession of his see.
• In 1286 Stephen de Fulnurn, who had been justiciary, was appointed to the See of Tuam, but he resided mostly at Athlone. There is extant an inventory of his effects which goes to show that he lived in much state and splendour.
• William de Bermingham, son of Meyler de Bermingham, Lord of Carbery, Dunmore, and Athenry, appointed in 1289. He was a powerful high-handed prelate, but the monks of Athenry and Annaghdown resisted him successfully.
• Maurice O'Fihely, called in his own time "Flos Mundi" on account of his prodigious learning, was consecrated Archbishop of Tuam by Julius II in 1506, but like Florence Conry in later times, he never beheld his see.
• In 1537 Christopher Bodkin, then bishop of Kilmaeduagh, was appointed archbishop of Tuam by Henry VIII, and it is said took the Oath of Supremacy. He managed to hold his ground in Tuam for thirty-five years under Henry VIII, Edward, Mary, and Elizabeth. Bodkin, thought a temporizing prelate, was always a Catholic and zealous in the service of his flock. In 1558 he held a visitation of his diocese, the account of which has been preserved and gives invaluable information regarding the state of the archdiocese at that time.
• Malachy O'Queely was one of the greatest Irish prelates of the seventeenth century — a patriot, a reformer, and a scholar; but he was not a general, and unwisely undertook to command the Confederate troops in Connacht during the wars of 1642-45. His forces were attacked unexpectedly during the night by Sir F. Hamilton near Sligo and the archbishop was slain on the field.
• Mention must be made too, of Florence Conry, though he never took possession of his see. He rendered signal service to Ireland by the foundation of St. Anthonyh's Convent of Louvain, whose scholars — Michael O'Clery, Ward, Fleming, Colgan, and many others — did so much for the preservation of the literature and the language and the history of Ireland both sacred and profane.
• John MacHale has a special article in this Encyclopedia.
• His immediate successor, John MacEvilly, was an indefatigable and zealous prelate; he found time to write commentaries in English on practically the whole of the New Testament. He was born in 1818, died in 1902, and lies buried before the high altar of Tuam cathedral beside John MacHale.

Moral and Social Condition

The moral state of the archdiocese is very good. Temperance is making rapid strides amongst all classes of the population. Grave public crimes of every kind have almost disappeared. Primary education is now universally diffused even in the remotest mountain valleys. The Christian Brothers' schools are remarkably efficient, St. Jarlath's College, Tuam, now holds a premier place amongst the diocesan colleges of Ireland. The social condition of the people also has been greatly improved mainly through he efforts of the Congested Districts Board. They are better housed and better fed; the land is better tilled, and much more is derived from the harvest of the seas around the coast. No part of Ireland suffered more during the famine years from starvation and proselytism than Connemara and the Island of Achill. The starving people were bribed during these years by food and money to go to the Protestant churches and send their children to the proselytizing schools. If they went they got food and money. "Silver Monday", as they called it, was the day fixed for these doles. If they refused to go to the church and to the school they got nothing; and to their honour it must be said, that most of them, but not all, preferred starvation to apostasy. The proselytizers have now completely disappeared, and have quite enough to do to take care of themselves.

The present archbishop, Most Rev. John Healy, a native of the Diocese of Elphin, was born in 14 Nov., 1841 at Ballinafad, Co. Sligo. His early education was received at an excellent classical school in the town of Sligo whence, at about fifteen years of age, he proceeded to the diocesan college, in those days situated at Summerhill near Athlone. On 26 August, 1860, he entered the class of rhetoric at Maynooth, and just before the completion of his course was called out by his bishop to be a professor in the college at Summerhill. Here he was ordained in Sept., 1867, and continued to teach for over two years. His missionary experiences were gained in the parish of Ballygar, near Roscommon, where he was curate for two years, and then at Grange, Co. Sligo, where he spent seven years. He was then for one year in charge of a deanery school in the town of Elphin. In 1879, he competed simultaneously for two vacant chairs — one of theology and the other of classics — in the national college of Maynooth, and had the unique honour conferred on him of being appointed to both and allowed to make his own choice between them. He naturally selected the chair of theology, which he filled till 1883, when he succeeded Dr. Murray, as prefect of the Dunboyne Establishment. During his tenure of this office, Dr. Healy acted as editor of the "Irish ecclesiastical Record", but this was only for a single year, for in 1884 he was appointed titular Bishop of Maera and Coadjutor Bishop of Clonfert. Here it may be interesting to note that no less than five members of Dr. Healy's class in Maynooth wear the episcopal purple in Irish sees. In 1896, on the death of the saintly Dr. Duggan, he succeeded to the see of Clonfert. Seven years after, by papal Brief, dated 13 Feb., 1903, he became Archbishop of Tuam, and on the following St. Patrick's Day took possession of his ancient see. On 31 August, 1909, he celebrated the silver jubilee of his episcopate.

The archbishop is a member of many Irish public bodies notably of the Agricultural Board, the Senate of the National University, the Board of Governors of University College, Galway. He is president of the Catholic Truth society of Ireland, and a Commissioner for the publication of the Brehon Laws. He acted on the Royal Commission of 1901 to inquire into and report on condition of University Education in Ireland. His principal published works are: "Ireland's Ancient Schools and Scholars", which has reached a fifth edition; "The Centenary History of Maynooth College"; "The Record of the Maynooth Centenary Celebrations"; "The Life and Writings of St. Patrick"; "Irish Essays: Literary and Historical"; "Papers and Addresses", a jubilee collection of fugitive periodical articles and reviews.

COLGAN, Acta sanctorum Hiberniae; KNOX, Notes on the Dioceses of Tuam, etc.; IDEM, Hist. of the County Mayo; HEALY, Ireland's Ancient Schools and Scholars; Annals of the Four Masters, ed. O'DONOVAN; BRADY, Episcopal Succession; D'ALTON, History of Ireland; HARDIMAN, Hist. of Galway; O'CONOR DON, The O'Conors of Connacht.

JOHN HEALY

School of Tuam

(Irish, Tuaim da Ghualann, or the "Mound of the two Shoulders").

The School of Tuam was founded by St. Jarlath, and even during his life (d. c. 540) became a renowned school of piety and sacred learning, while in the eleventh century it rivalled Clonmacnoise as a centre of Celtic art. St. Jarlath was trained for his work by St. Benignus, the successor and coadjutor of St. Patrick, and under this gentle saint's guidance he founded his first monastery at Cluainfois, now Cloonfush, about two miles west from Tuam, and a still shorter distance across the fertile fields from Benignus's own foundation at Kilbannon. Here at Cluainfois, according to a widespread tradition, Saints Benignus and Jarlath and Caillin, another disciple of Benignus, frequently met together to discuss weighty questions in theology and Scripture. The fame of this holy retreat brought scholars from all parts of Ireland, amongst whom were St. Brendan, the great navigator, who came from Kerry, and St. Colman, the son of Lenin, who came from Cloyne. One day Brendan in prophetic spirit told his master that he was to leave Cluainfois and go eastward, and where the wheel of his chariot should break on the journey "there you shall build your oratory, for God wills that there shall be the place of your resurrection, and many shall arise in glory in the same place along with you". Jarlath did not long delay in obeying this inspired instruction. He departed from Cluainfois, and at the place now called Tuam his chariot broke down, and there on the site of the present Protestant, but formerly Catholic, cathedral he built his church and monastic school. And he bade good-bye to Brendan saying, "O holy youth, it is you should be master and I pupil, but go now with God's blessing elsewhere", whereupon Brendan returned to his native Kerry. After the death of St. Jarlath there is little in the national annals about the School of Tuam. There is reference in the "Four Masters", under date 776 (recte 781), to the death of an Abbot of Tuam called Nuada O'Bolcan; and under the same date in the "Annals of Ulster" to the death of one "Ferdomnach of Tuaim da Ghualann", to whom no title is given. At the year 969 is set down the death of Eoghan O Cleirigh, "Bishop of Connacht", but more distinct reference to a Tuam prelate is found in 1085, when the death of Aedh O Hoisin is recorded. The "Four Masters" call him Comarb of Jarlath and High Bishop (Ard-epscoip) of Tuam.

COLGAN, Acta sanctorum Hiberniæ (Louvain, 1645); HEALY, Ireland's Ancient Schools and Scholars (Dublin, 1908); Martyrology of Donegal; Annals of Ulster; Annals of the Four Masters.

JOHN HEALY

University of Tübingen

Located in Würtemberg; founded by Count Eberhard im Bart on 3 July, 1477, after Pope Sixtus IV had first undertaken by the Bull of 13 Nov., 1476 to endow the university from the property of the Church. The imperial confirmation followed on 20 Feb., 1484. The university had four faculties: theology, law, medicine, and philosophy, and altogether fourteen professorships. Among the distinguished professors at the beginning were the theologians Gabriel Biel, Johannes Heynlin von Stein (a Lapide), Conrad Summenhart, and the jurist Johannes Vergenhans (Nauclerus). A distinguished physician was Johannes Widmann. In the philosophical faculty should be mentioned the mathematicians Paul Scriptoris and Johannes Stöffler, and the Humanists Johannes Reuchlin, Heinrich Bebel, and Melanchthon. Duke Ulrich of Würtemberg was deposed in 1519 on account of his misgovernment of the country, but in 1534 was restored to power by the Lutheran Landgrave Philip of Hesse. In 1535 Ulrich introduced the Reformation into the country and university, notwithstanding the stubborn opposition manifested at the university, especially by its chancellor Ambrosius Widmann. The most prominent of the new professors were the theologians Johannes Brenz, Erhard Schnepf, Jakob Andreæ, Jakob Heerbrand, Andreas and Luke Osiander. Among the other professors were the jurists Johannes Sichard, Karl Molinæus (Du Moulin), and Christopher Besold, the physician Leonhard Fuchs, the philologists Joachim, Camerarius and Martin Crusius, the cartographer Philip Apian, and the mathematician and astronomer Michael Mästlin. To secure capable preachers Duke Ulrich established the Lutheran seminary, and Duke Christopher founded the collegium illustre for the training of state officials.

The university, like the country, recovered only slowly from the injuries inflicted by the Thirty Years' War. At first the old rigid orthodoxy still prevailed in the theological faculty; but in the eighteenth century a greater independence of thought gradually gained ground, especially through the efforts of the chancellor, Christopher Matthäus Pfaff, the founder of what is called the collegiate system. Pietism also was represented in the theological faculty. Towards the end of the eighteenth century Christian Gottlieb Storr exerted a profound influence as a Biblical theologian and the founder of the early Tübingen School in opposition to the "Enlightenment' and the theories of Kant. Among his pupils were, in particular, Friedrich Gottlieb Süsskind, Johann Friedrich Flatt, and Karl Christian Flatt.

Prominent in the faculty of law were Wolfgang Adam Lauterbach, Ferdinand Christopher Harpprecht, and Karl Christopher Hofacker, and in the faculty of medicine, Johann Georg Gmelin, Karl Friedrich Kielmeyer, and Johann Heinrich Ferdinand Autenrieth. During this era, marked by the spread of the Wolffian and Kantian doctrines, the faculty of philosophy had few distinguished members. The chancellor Lebret, however, ranked high as a historian, and Bohnenberger as a mathematician. Towards the close of the eighteenth century the university was in danger of having the faculties of law and medicine transferred to the school established at Stuttgart by Duke Charles Eugene, after whom the new school was named. This loss was averted, however, by the suppression of the new seat of learning in 1794.

Two causes led to a great development of the university in the nineteenth century. First, the Catholic university for Würtemberg, which at the beginning of the century had been established at Ellwangen, was transferred in 1817 to Tübingen as a Catholic theological faculty, and a Catholic house of study called Wilhelmsstift was founded to counterbalance the Lutheran seminary; second, a faculty of political economy was organized in 1817 (called the faculty of political science since 1822), and a faculty of natural sciences in 1863. These changes led to the erection of new university buildings: the anatomical building (1832-35); the new aula, intended to replace the old one dating from 1547 and 1777, and the botanical and chemical institute (1842-45); the clinical hospital for surgical cases (1846); the physiological institute (1867); the institute for pathological anatomy (1873); ophthalmic hospital (1875); medical hospital (1878-79); the physico-chemical institute (1883-85); the institute for physics (1888); the new hospital for women (1888-91), in place of the old one built in 1803; the hospital for mental diseases (1892-94); the mineralogico-geological and zoological institute (1902); the institute for chemistry (1903-07); the new ophthalmological clinic (1907-09). A new building for the library, housed till now in the castle, is in course of construction; the library contains 4145 manuscripts and 513,313 volumes. The regular professors numbered 56 in the summer term of 1911; honorary and adjunct professors, Dozents, 71; matriculated students, 2118, and non-matriculated persons permitted to attend the lectures, 145, making a total of 2263. Since the reign of King Frederick I the university has become more and more a state institution; its income for 1911 was 439,499 marks ($104,382), while the grant from the State for the year was 1,366,847 marks ($324,626).

In the Protestant theological faculty the critical view of theological history held by Ferdinand Christian Baur led to the founding of the later Tübingen School, to which belong, besides the founder, Albert Schwegler, Karl Christian Planck, Albert Ritschl, Julius Köstlin, Karl Christian Johannes Holsten, Adolf Hilgenfeld, Karl Weizsäcker and Edward Zeller. Other distinguished theologians, who were somewhat more positive in their views, were Johann Tobias Beck, and Christian David Frederick Palmer. David Frederick Strauss, a follower of Hegel, wrote his "Life of Jesus" while a tutor at Tübingen. The distinguished teachers and scholars of the Catholic theological faculty are often called the Catholic Tübingen School. The characteristic of this school is positive and historical rather than speculative or philosophical. Above all should be mentioned the great Catholic theologian of the nineteenth century, Johann Adam Möhler; further: Johann Sebastian Drey, Johann Baptist Hirscher, Benedict Welte, Johann Evangelist Kuhn, Karl Joseph Hefele, Moritz Aberle, Felix Himpel, Franz Quirin Kober, Franz Xaver Linsenmann, Franz Xaver Funk, Paul Schanz, and Paul Vetter. Distinguished professors of law were: Karl Georg Wächter, Karl Friedrich Wilhelm Gerber, Alois Brins, Gustav Mandry, and Hugo Meyer. Among the noted members of the faculty of political science were: Robert Mohl, Albert Eberhard Friedrich Schäffle, Gustav Rümelin, Gustav Friedrich Schönberg, and Friedrich Julius Neumann. Among the noted members of the medical faculty were: Victor Bruns, Felix Niemeyer, Karl Liebermeister, and Johannes Säxinger. In natural science should he mentioned: Hugo Mohl, Theodore Eimer, and Lothar Meyer. Of the philosophical faculty should be mentioned Friedrich Theodor Vischer, writer on æsthetics; the philosopher Christopher Sigwart; the classical philologists Christian Wals and Wilhelm Sigismund Teuffel; the Orientalists Julius Mohl, Georg Heinrich Ewald, and Walter Rudolf Roth; the Germanists Ludwig Uhland and Heinrich Adalbert Keller; the historians Julius Weizsäcker and Hermann Alfred Gutschmid; and the geologist Friedrich August Quenstedt.

KlÜpfel and Eifert, Geschichte und Beschreibung der Stadt und Universität Tübingen (Tübingen, 1849); KlÜpfel, Die Universität Tübingen in ihrer Vergangenheit und Gegenwart (Leipzig, 1877); Urkunden zur Geschichte der Universität Tübingen aus den Jahren 1475-1550 (Tübingen, 1877); WeizsÄcker, Lehrer und Unterricht an der evangelisch-theologischen Fakultät der Universität Tübingen von der Reformation bis zur Gegenwart (Tübingen, 1877); Funk, Die katholische Landesuniversität in Ellwangen und ihre Verlegung nach Tübingen (Tübingen, 1877); Sproll, Freiburger Diözesanarchiv (1902), 105 sq.; RÜmelin, Reden und Aufsätze, III (Tübingen, 1894), 37 sq.; Hermelink, Die theologische Fakultät in Tübingen vor der Reformation 1477-1534 (Tübingen, 1906); Idem, Die Matrikeln der Universität Tübingen: vol. I, Die Matrikeln von 1477-1600 (Stuttgart, 1906). For further bibliography cf. Erman and Horn, Bibliographie der deutschen Universitäten, II (Leipzig, 1904), 996 sq.

JOHANNES BAPTIST SÄGMÜLLER

Tubunae

A titular see in Mauretania Caesariensis, according to the "Gerachia cattolica", or in Numidia according to Battandier, "Annuaire pontifical catholique" (Paris, 1910), 345. The official list of the Roman Curia does not mention it. The confusion is explained by the fact that it was located at the boundary of the two provinces. Bocking, in his notes to the "Notitia dignitatum" (Bonn, 1839); 523, and Toulotte ("Greg. de l'Afrique chret., Mauretanies", Montreuil, 1894, p. 171), speak of two distinct cities, while Muller ("Notes to Ptolemy", IV, 12, ed. Didot, I, 611) admits only one, and his opinion seems the more plausible. It was a municipium and also an important frontier post in command of a praepositus limitis Tubuniensis. St. Augustine and St. Alypius sojourned there as guests of Count Boniface (Ep. ccxx). In 479 Huneric exiled thither a large number of Catholics. Its ruins, known as Tobna, are in the Department of Constantine, Algeria, at the gates of the Sahara, west of the Chott el-Hodna, the "Salinae Tubunenses" of the Romans. They are very extensive, for three successive towns occupied different sites, under the Romans, the Byzantines, and the Arabs. Besides the remains of the fortress, the most remarkable monument is a church now used as a mosque.

Three bishops of Tubunae are known. St. Nemesianus assisted at the Council of Carthage in 256. St. Cyprian often speaks of him in his letters, and we have a letter which he wrote to St. Cyprian in his own name and in the name of those who were condemned with him to the mines. An inscription testifies to his cult at Tixter in 360, and the Roman Martyrology mentions him on 10 September. Another bishop was Cresconius, who usurped the see after quitting the Bulla Regia, and assisted at the Council of Carthage in 411, where his rival was the Donatist Protasius. A third, Reparatus, was exiled by Huneric in 484.

TOULOTTE, Geog. de l'Afrique chret., Numidie (Paris, 1894), 318-21; DIEHL, L'Afrique byzantine (Paris, 1896), passim.

S. PÉTRIDÈS

Tucson

(Tucsonensis).

Suffragan of the Archdiocese of Santa Fe. It comprises the State of Arizona and the southernmost counties of New Mexico, an extent of 131,212 sq. miles, most of which is desert land. The Catholic population is approximately 48,500, mostly Mexicans. There are 43 priests, 27 parishes, 43 missions, 100 stations, 7 academies, 10 parochial schools, 3 Indian schools, 1 orphanage, 5 hospitals.

Up to 1853, date of the Gadsden purchase, Arizona was part of the Mexican Diocese of Durango. In 1859 it was annexed by the Holy See to the Diocese of Santa Fe, made a vicariate Apostolic in 1868, and erected a diocese by Leo XIII in 1897. The first vicar Apostolic was the most Rev. J. B. Salpointe, followed by the Most Rev. P. Bourgade, who both died archbishops of Santa Fe, the former in 1898, the latter in 1908. They were succeeded by Bishop Henry Granjon, born in 1863, consecrated in the cathedral of Baltimore, 17 June, 1900. The mission founded by French missionaries has remained in charge of priests mostly of the same nationality, assisted by Franciscan Fathers of the St. Louis and Cincinnati provinces, who attend principally to the Indian missions, and by the Sisters of St. Joseph, of Mercy, of Loretto, of the Blessed Sacrament, of St. Dominic, and of the Precious Blood. The full-blood Indians in the diocese number 40,000: Apache, Chimehuivi, Hualpai, Maricopa, Mohave, Moqui, Navajo, Pápago Pima, Yava Supai. About 4000 are Catholics. They were visited by the Spanish missionaries as early as 1539 (Fray Marcos de Niza), and evangelized in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries by the Franciscans and the Jesuits. Of the churches then built two remain: Tumacacuri (now partly in ruins), and San Xavier del Bac, nine miles south of Tucson, founded by Father Kino, S.J., in 1699, and kept in a perfect state of preservation by the constant attention and liberal care of the clergy of Tucson. It is considered the best example of the Spanish Renaissance mission style north of Mexico, and the best preserved of all the old mission churches in America. The buildings have been completely restored (1906-10) by the Bishop of Tucson. The Pápago Indians, in whose midst stands the San Xavier mission, have received uninterrupted care from the clergy of Tucson. In 1866 the Rev. J.B. Salpointe founded there a school, which has since been maintained, with the Sisters of St. Joseph in charge, by the clergy of Tucson, at the expense of the parish. That school was the first established in Arizona for the Indians.

ORTEGA, Historia del Nayarit, Sonora, Sinaloa, y ambas Californias (Mexico, 1887); Rudo Ensayo, tr. GUITERAS, in Am. Cath. Hist. Soc., V (Philadelphia, June, 1894), no.2; JOLY, Histoire de la campagnie de JÈsus, V (Paris, 1859), ii; ARRICIVITA, Crónica seráfica del apostólico colegio de QuerÈtaro; SALPOINTE, Soldiers of the Cross (Banning, 1898); ENGELHARDT, The Franciscans in Arizona (Harbor Springs, 1899); Diary of Francisco Garces, tr. COUES (New York, 1900).

HENRY GRANJON

Tucumán

(Tucumanensis).

Suffragan to Buenos Aires, erected from the Diocese of Salta on 15 February, 1897, comprises the Province of Tucumán (area 8926 sq. miles; population 325,000), in the north-west of the Argentine Republic. The first and present bishop, Mgr. Pablo Padilla y Bárana (b. at Jujuy, 25 Jan., 1848), was consecrated titular Bishop of Pentacomia (17 Dec., 1891), transferred to Salta, (19 Jan., 1893), and to Tucumán (16 Jan., 1898). The episcopal city, Tucumán, or San Miguel de Tucumán (population 80,000), is situated on the Rio Dulce, 780 miles north-west of Buenos Aires, and was founded in 1565 by Diego de Villaruel; a Jesuit college was opened there in 1586. In 1680 Tucumán replaced Santiago del Estero as capital of the province. The Spanish forces were utterly defeated at Tucumán in 1812 by the Argentinos under Belgrano, whose statue has been erected in the city to commemorate the victory. One of the most interesting monuments in Tucumán is Independence Hall, where the Argentine delegates proclaimed (9 July, 1816) the Río de la Plata provinces free from Spanish domination. Of the twenty-seven members forming this National Congress fifteen were priests (as were two other delegates who were unavoidably absent, and the secretary of the assembly, JosÈ Agustín Molina, later Bishop of Camaco in partibus and Vicar Apostolic of Salta); two of the fifteen were afterwards raised to episcopal rank — JosÈ Colombres (Salta) and Justo Santa María de Oro (Cuyo). It is to be noted that the See of Córdoba, founded in 1570, was generally referred to in the seventeenth century as that of Tucumán (Córdoba de Tucumán).

On 21 January, 1910, the Province of Catamarca (area 47,531 sq. miles; population 107,000), which till then had been a vicariate forane of Tucumán, was erected into a separate see under Mgr. BernabÈ Piedrabuena (b. at Tucumán, 10 Nov., 1863; consecrated titular Bishop of Cestrus and coadjutor to Mgr. Padillo, 31 May, 1908; transferred to Catamarca, 8 Nov., 1910). Before the separation, Tucumán had 15 parishes, 67 churches and chapels, and Catamarca 15 parishes, 96 churches and chapels; there were 60 secular priests, assisted by Dominicans, Franciscans, and Fathers of Our Lady of Lourdes; there was a conciliar seminary with 3 students of philosophy and 60 rhetoricians; 7 theological students were studying at Buenos Aires and the Collegio Pio-Latino, Rome; in addition there were two Catholic colleges at Tucumán and one at Catamarca; there were communities of the Hermanas Esclavas, Dominican, Franciscan, Good Shepherd, and Josephine Sisters. A Catholic daily paper is published at Tucumán and two Catholic weeklies at Catamarca. A large number of the parishes have the usual Catholic sodalities and con-fraternities. Workingmen's circles are established in the two episcopal cities. Catamarca (San Fernando de Catamarca), lying 230 miles north-north-west of Córdoba, contains 8000 inhabitants. It was founded in 1680 by Fernando de Mendoza. The National College, which has a chair of mineralogy, is located in the old Merced Convent. Most of the inhabitants of the Province of Catamarca are mestizos, descendants of the Quilene, Cilian, Andagala, and Guafare Indians. Cholla (a suburb of Catamarca) is inhabited by Calchaqui Indians, but Spanish is now the only language spoken.

USSHER, Guía eclesiástica de la República Argentina (Buenos Aires, 1910).

A.A. MACERLEAN

Tudela

(TUTELÆ, TUTELENSIS).

Diocese in Spain. The episcopal city has a population of 9213. Tudela was taken from the Moors by Alfonso el Batallador (the Fighter) in March, 1115, and in 1117 he obtained the Fuero de Sobrarbe. In 1121 the king gave the mosque and the tithes of several towns to the prior and ecclesiastical chapter of Tudela and built the Church of Santa María, where a community of Canons Regular of St. Augustine was established, the ecclesiastical authority of Tudela being vested in its abbot and prior. In 1238 the priory was raised to the dignity of a deanery, the first dean being D. Pedro JimÈnez and the second D. Lope Arcez de Alcoz. The latter obtained from Alexander IV in 1258 the ring and mitre. In the sixteenth century the deans of Tudela obtained the use of "pontificalia", a favour granted by Julius II to the dean D. Pedro Villalón de Calcena who had been his chamberlain and who held the deanship for twenty-seven years. The rivalry between the deans of Tudela and the bishops of Tarazona and the dissatisfaction of the kings owing to the fact that until 1749 the appointment of the dean was not subject to the royal patronage, a fact finally accomplished in 1749, induced the Council and the Royal Chamber to petition for the erection of Tudela into a diocese, which was done by Pius VI in the Bull of 27 March, 1783. The first bishop was D. Francisco Ramón de Larumbe (1784). He was succeeded (1797) by D. Simón de Casaviella López del Castillo, who during the war of independence saved Tudela from severe measures of retaliation ordered by the French general Lefèvre. The third bishop was D. Juan Ramon Santos de Larumbe y Larrayoz (1817), and the fourth and last D. Ramón María Azpetitia Saenz de Santa María (1819), who founded the Seminary of Santa Ana in a former house of the Jesuits. The seminary was re-established in 1846 in a former Carmelite convent. The last bishop died at Viana on 30 June, 1844.

The Concordat of 1851 suppressed this diocese, since which time it has been administered by the bishops of Tarazona on whom the title of Administrator Apostolic of Tudela has been conferred. The cathedral dedicated to Nuestra Señora de la Blanca dates from the end of the twelfth and the beginning of the thirteenth century. It has a very notable facade. There are in Tudela a college of the Jesuits, charitable institutions conducted by the Sisters of Charity: the hospital of Nuestra Señora de Gracia, founded in the sixteenth century by D. Miguel de Eza; the Real Casa de Misericordia founded by Doña María Hugarte in 1771 and the "Hospitalillo" for orphan children founded in 1596 by D. Pedro Ortiz.

MADRAZO, Navarra y Logroño in España, sus monumentos y artes: III (Barcelona, 1886); DE LA FUENTE in España sagrada, I (Madrid, 1866).

RAMÓN RUIZ AMADÓ

Tuguegarao

(TUGUEGARAONENSIS).

Diocese in the Philippines; situated in the north-eastern section of the Island of Luzon, and embraces the three civil Provinces of Cagayan, Isabela, and Nueva Viscaya, and the two groups of the Batanes and Babuyanes Islands. It was erected on 10 April, 1910, being separated from the ancient Diocese of Nueva Segovia, erected in 1595. For two hundred years the seat of the Diocese of Nueva Segovia was located at Lalloc on the Cagayan River, a city which lies within the present limits of the new Diocese of Tuguegarao. The history of the Catholic Church in the Cagayan Valley for the three hundred years preceding the Spanish-American War is practically the history of the Spanish Dominican Fathers in this territory. The diocese counts (1912) 23 native secular priests, two Spanish seculars, 17 Spanish Dominicans and 7 Belgian missionaries. There is a boys' college in charge of the Dominican Fathers, and a girls' academy under the direction of the Sisters of St. Paul of Chartres. The population, which is entirely native, numbers about 200,000. With the exception of a few thousand Aglipayans they are all Catholics. The first bishop, the Rt. Rev. Maurice Patrick Foley, was appointed on 10 September, 1910.

MAURICE FOLEY

Tulancingo

(De Tulancingo).

Diocese in the Mexican Republic, suffragan of Mexico. Its area is about 8000 square miles, that is to say, almost that of the State of Hidalgo, in which the diocese is situated. It comprises the greater part of the State of Hidalgo, with the exception of a few parishes situated in the western part, and which belong to the Archbishopric of Mexico; but in return it has a few parishes in the State of Vera Cruz. Its population is 641,895 (1910). The bishop lives in the town of Tulancingo (population, 8000), although the capital of the state is the important mining town of Pachuca, situated 7962 feet above the level of the sea, with a population of about 38,620 inhabitants (1910). The Gospel was first preached in this territory in the first half of the sixteenth century by the Franciscan Fathers shortly after their arrival in Mexico; they then founded a convent at Tulancingo, whose first guardian was the venerable Father Juan Padilla, who died from the results of an assault made by the unfaithful Indians of New Mexico. The Augustinian Fathers also worked in this region.

On 16 March, 1863, Pius IX made this see suffragan of the Archbishopric of Mexico. When created, many asked that the episcopal see be in the city of Huejutla; preference was given, however, to the city of Tulancingo. This new see was formed from thirty-eight parishes of the Archbishopric of Mexico, and from sixteen taken from the Bishopric of Puebla. It has 1 seminary with 40 students; 39 parochial schools; 5 Catholic colleges, and about 2352 students; there are 6 Protestant colleges with 255 students, and 6 Protestant churches. The town of Tulancingo existed long before the conquest; it is said to have been founded by the Toltecas in A.D. 697 and bore the name of Tollantzinco. Its most noted building is the cathedral, built in the beginning of the nineteenth century.

Vera, Catecismo geográfico histórico estadístico de la igl. mÈx. (Amecameca, 1881).

CAMILLUS CRIVELLI

Louis-René Tulasne

A noted botanist, b. at Azay-le-Rideau, Dept of Indre-et-Loire, France, 12 Sept., 1815; d. at Hyères in southern France 22 Dec., 1885. He studied law at Poitiers, but later turned his attention to botany and worked until 1842 in company with Auguste de Saint-Hilaire on the flora of Brazil. He was an assistant naturalist at the Museum of Natural History at Paris 1842-72; after this he retired from active work. In 1845 he was elected a member of the Academy to succeed Adrian de Jussieu. Tulasne was a very industrious, skilful, and successful investigator. He published at Paris numerous botanical works, the first appearing in 1845; he first wrote on the phanerogamia, as for instance, on the leguminosæ of South America, then on the cryptogamia, and especially on the fungi. He gained a world-wide reputation by his microscopic study of fungi (the science of mycology), especially by his investigation of the small parasitic fungi, researches which threw much light on the obscure and complicated history of their evolution. In this science he worked in collaboration with his brother Charles (b. 5 Sept., 1816; from 1843 a physician at Paris; d. at Hyères, 21 Aug., 1885). The chief publications issued by the two brothers are: "Fungi hypogæi" (fol., Paris, 1851), and "Selecta fungorum carpologia" (3 vols. fol., Paris, 1861-65), a work of the greatest importance for mycology, particularly on account of the splendid illustrations in the sixty-one plates. Tulasne wrote numerous mycological treatises for various periodicals such as the "Annales des sciences nat."; "Archives du muséum"; "Comptes rendus"; "Botanische Zeitung". He left his botanical library to the Catholic Institute of Paris. Tulasne openly acknowledged his desire to glorify God by his scientific labours. Several genuses of fungi, as well as several species, are named after Tulasne, as Tulasneinia, Tulasnella.

SACHS, Gesch. der Botanik (Munich, 1875); MAGNUS, Nekrolog in Berichte der deutschen botanischen Gesellschaft, IV (Berlin, 1887).

J. S. ROMPEL

Tulle

(TUTELENSIS).

Diocese comprising the Department of Corrèze. It was suppressed by the Concordat of 1802, which joined it to the See of Limoges, but was theoretically re-established by the Concordat of 1817, and de facto re-erected by Bulls dated 6 and 31 October, 1822. It is suffragan of Bourges. According to legends which grew up in later years around the St. Martial cycle, that saint, who had been sent by St. Peter to preach, is said to have restored to life at Tulle the son of the governor, Nerva, and to have covered the neighbouring country with churches. By some of the legends St. Martin of Tours is made founder of the Abbey of Tulle; by others, St. Calmin, Count of Auvergne (seventh century). Robbed of its possessions by a powerful family, it recovered them in 930 through the efforts of a member of the same family, Viscount Adhemar, who left a reputation for sanctity. St. Odo, Abbot of Cluny, reformed it in the tenth century. John XXII by a Bull dated 13 August, 1317, raised it to episcopal rank; but the chapter remained subject to monastic rule and was not secularized until 1514. Among the bishops of Tulle were: Hugues Roger, known as Cardinal de Tulle (1342-43), who was never consecrated, and lived with his brother Clement VI; Jean Fabri (1370-71), who became cardinal in 1371; Jules Mascaron, the preacher (1671-79), who was afterwards Bishop of Agen; LÈonard Berteaud, preacher and theologian (1842-78). St. Rodolphe of Turenne, Archbishop of Bourges, who died in 866 founded, about 855, the Abbey of Beaulieu in the Diocese of Tulle. The Charterhouse of Glandier dates from 1219; the Benedictine Abbey of Uzerche was founded between 958 and 991; Meymac Priory, which became an abbey in 1146, was founded by Archambaud III, Viscount de Conborn.

Urban II on his way to Limoges from Clermont (1095) passed near Tulle. St. Anthony of Padua dwelt for a time at Brive, towards the end of October, 1226; and the pilgrimage to the Grotto of Brive is the only existing one in France in honour of that saint. Pierre Roger, who became pope under the name of Clement VI, was a native of Maumont in the diocese. In 1352 the tiara was disputed between Jean Birel, general of the Carthusians, who had been prior of Glandier, and Etienne Aubert, who became pope under the name Innocent VI, and was a native of Château-des-Monts in the Diocese of Tulle. In 1362 Hugues Roger, Cardinal of Tulle, brother of Clement VI, refused the tiara; in 1370 Pierre Roger, his nephew, became pope under the name of Gregory XI. At Tulle and in Bas (Lower) Limousin, every year, on the vigil of St. John the Baptist, a feast is kept which is known as le tour de la lunade (the change of the moon); it is a curious example of the manner in which the Church was able to sanctify and Christianize many pagan customs. Legend places the institution of this feast in 1346 or 1348, about the time of the Black Death. It would seem to have been the result of a vow made in honour of St. John the Baptist. M. Maximin Deloche has shown that this legend is baseless; that the worship of the sun existed in Gaul down to the seventh century, according to the testimony of St. Eligius, and that the feast of St. John's Nativity, 24 June, was substituted for the pagan festival of the summer solstice, so that the tour de la lunade was an old pagan custom, sanctified by the Church, which changed it to an act of homage to St. John the Baptist.

Among the saints specially honoured in, or connected with the diocese, besides those already mentioned, are: St. Fereola, martyr (date uncertain); St. Martin of Brive, disciple of St. Martin of Tours, and martyr (fifth century); St. Duminus, hermit (early sixth century); at Argentat, St. Sacerdos, who was Bishop of Limoges when he retired into solitude (sixth century); St. Vincentianus (Viance), hermit (seventh century); St. Liberalis, Bishop of Embrun, died in 940 at Brive, his native place; St. Reynier, provost of Beaulieu, died at the beginning of the tenth century; St. Stephen of Obazine, b. about 1085, founder of the monastery for men at Obazine, and that for women at Coyroux; St. Berthold of Malefayde, first general of the Carmelites, and whose brother Aymeric was Patriarch of Antioch (twelfth century). Etienne Baluze, the learned historian (1638-1718), was a native of Tulle, and the missionary Dumoulin Borie (1808-38), who was martyred in Tonquin, was born in the diocese. The chief pilgrimages of the diocese are: Notre-Dame-de-Belpeuch, at Camps, dating from the ninth or tenth century; Notre-Dame-de-Chastre at Bar, dating from the seventeenth century; Notre-Dame-du-Pont-du-Salut, which goes back to the seventeenth century; Notre-Dame-du-Roc at Servières, dating from 1691; Notre-Dame-d'Eygurande, dating from 1720; Notre-Dame-de-La-Buissière-Lestard, which was a place of pilgrimage before the seventeenth century; Notre-Dame-de-La-Chabanne at Ussel, dates from 1140; Notre-Dame-de-Pennacorn at Neuvic, dating from the end of the fifteenth century.

Before the application of the Law of 1901, the Diocese of Tulle contained Carthusians, Franciscans, Sulpicians, Assumptionists, Fathers of the Third Order of St. Francis of Assisi, and many teaching congregations of Brothers. The teaching Sisters of the Sacred Heart of Mary had their mother-house at Triegnac. The religious congregations were in charge of 6 nurseries, 2 orphanages for boys, 5 orphanages for girls, 1 Good Shepherd Home, 1 home for the poor, 15 hospitals or hospices, 10 district nursing institutions, and 1 lunatic asylum. At the time of the breach of the Concordat in 1905 the diocese had 318,422 inhabitants, 34 first-class parishes, 255 succursal parishes, and 71 curacies supported by the State.

Gallia Christiana (nova), II (1720), 661-80, instrum., 203, 320; Champeval, Le Bas Limousin historique et religieux; GÈographie de la Corrèze (2 vols., Limoges, 1894, 1899); PoulbriÈre, Histoire du diocèse de Tulle (Tulle, 1885); Idem, Dictionnaire archÈologique et historique des paroisses du diocèse de Tulle (2 vols., Tulle, 1894-99); Champeval, Cartulaire de l'abbaye bÈnÈdictine St-Martin de Tulle (Brive, 1903); Deloche, MÈmoire sur la procession dite de la Lunade et les feux de Saint Jean à Tulle in MÈmoires de l'AcadÈmie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, XXXII (1891); Les principaux sanctuaires consacrÈs à la Sainte Vierge au diocèse de Tulle (2d ed., Tulle, 1886); Niel, Hist. des Èvêques de T. in Bull. de la soc. hist. de la soc. hist. de la Corrèze (1880-4).

GEORGES GOYAU

Tunic

By tunic is understood in general a vestment shaped like a sack, which has in the closed upper part only a slit for putting the garment over the head, and, on the sides, either sleeves or mere slits through which the arms can be passed. The expressions under-tunic or over-tunic are used accordingly as the tunic is employed as an outer vestment or under another. A tunic that reaches to the feet is called a gown tunic (tunica talaris, Gr. poderes); a tunic without sleeves or with short sleeves is called colobium; one which leaves the right shoulder free, exomis. By tunic (tunicella) is understood in liturgical language that sacerdotal upper vestment of the subdeacon which corresponds to the dalmatic of the deacon. According to present usage the dalmatic and tunic are alike both as regards form and ornamentation. They also agree in the manner of use as well as in the fact that the tunic, like the dalmatic, is one of the essential vestments worn at the pontifical Mass by the bishop. It is unneccesary here to go into full details, but it will suffice in regard to form, ornamentation, and use to refer to what is said under dalmatic. As regards the form, according to the directions of the "Cæremoniale Episcoporum", the tunic should be distinguished from the dalmatic by narrower sleeves, but this is hardly observed even in the pontifical tunic, which is worn under the dalmatic. The bishop himself puts the tunic on the newly-ordained subdeacon with the words: "May the Lord clothe thee with the tunic of joy and the garment of rejoicing. In the name", etc.

History

According to a letter of Pope Saint Gregory the Great to Bishop John of Syracuse, the subdiaconal tunic was, for a time, customary at Rome as early as the sixth century. Gregory however suppressed it and returned to the older usage. From this time on, therefore, the Roman subdeacon once more wore the planeta (chasuble) as the outer garment until, in the ninth century, the tunic again came into use among them as the outer vestment. As early as the sixth century subdiaconal tunic was worn in Spian, which according to the ninth canon of the synod of Braga, was hardly or not at all distinguishable from the diaconal tunic, the so-called alb. No notice of a tunic worn by subdeacons has been preservcd from the pre-Carolingian era in Gaul, yet such a vestment was undoubtedly in use in France as in Spain. There is certain proof of its use in the Frankish kingdom at the beginning of the ninth century, both from the testimony of Amalar of Metz and from various inventories. About the close of the year one thousand the tunic was so universally worn by subdeacons as a liturgical upper vestment that it was briefly called vestis subdiaconalis or subdiaconale. As early as the first Roman Ordo the tunic is found as one of the papal pontifical vestments under the name of dalmatica minor, dalmatica linea. The Roman deacons also wore it under the dalmatic, while only the tunic and not the dalmatic was part of the liturgical dress of the Roman cardinal-priests and hebdomadal bishops. Outside of Rome also the pontifical vestments frequently included only the tunic, not tunic and dalmatic together, or, as was more often the case, the dalmatic without the tunic. Not until the twelfth century did it become general for the bishop to wear both vestments at the same time, that is, the tunic as well as the dalmatic. The granting to abbots of the privilege of wearing the tunic as well as the dalmatic, is very seldom mentioned, and even then not until the second half of the twelfth century. Before this era abbots never received more than the privilege of wearing the dalmatic. The acolytes at Rome wore the tunic as early as the ninth century; in the Frankish kingdom it was probably customary in some places in the tenth century for acolytes to wear the tunic; it was worn by acolytes at Farfa towards the close of the tenth century. In the late Middle Ages the wearing of the tunic by acolytes was a widespread custom. In the medieval period the tunic was called by various names. Besides tunica, it also bore the name of tunicella; dalmatica minor; dalmatica linea, or simply linea; tunica stricta, or merely stricta; subdiaconale; roccus; alba; and, especially in Germany subtile.

As to the original form of the vestment, it was at first a tunic in the shape of a gown with narrow sleeves and without the vertical ornamental strips (clavi). The material of which it was made was linen for ordinary occasions, but as early as the ninth-century inventories silk tunics are mentioned. The development that the vestment has undergone from the Carolingian period up to the present time has been in all points similar to that of the dalmatic; during the course of this development the distinction between the dalmatic and the tunic steadily decreased. Silk gradually became the material from which the tunic was regularly made; It grew continually shorter, and slits were made in the sides which, by the end of the Middle Ages, went the length of entire side up to the sleeve. Finally, outside of Italy, the sleeves were also slit, just as in the dalmatic which, already in the later Middle Ages, was hardly to be distinguished from the tunic, especially as in the meantime the red clavi of the dalmatic had been replaced by another form of ornamentation, which was also adopted for the tunic. When in the course of the twelfth century a canon was developed respecting the liturgical colours, the canon was naturally authoritative for the tunic as well as for the chasuble and dalmatic.

In the Middle Ages the use of the tunic at Mass corresponded throughout to that of the dalmatic consequently discussion of it here is unnecessary. The ceremony in which the bishop, after the ordination places the tunic upon the newly-ordained subdeacon had its origin in the twelfth century, but even in the thirteenth century it was only customary in isolated cases. It was not until the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries that the usage was universally adopted in the rite of ordination of subdeacons. As to the origin of the subdiaconal tunic it was, without doubt a copy of the dalmatic, in which the vertical trimming of the dalmatic was omitted, and the sleeves were made narrower.

The tunic (stickaphion) worn by the subdeacon in the Oriental Rites does not correspond to the subdiaconal tunic of Western Europe, which from the beginning had the fixed character of an outer tunic, but resembled the alb, even though, according to present custom, it is no longer exclusively white, but often coloured.

BOCK, Gesch. Der liturg. Gewänder, II (Bonn, 1866); ROHAULT DE FLEURY, La messe, VII (Paris, 1888); BRAUN, Die liturgische Gewandung im Occident und Orient (Freiburg, 1907).

JOSEPH BRAUN

Tunis

French protectorate on the northern coast of Africa. About the twelfth century before Christ Phoenicians settled on the coast of what is now Tunis and founded colonies there, which soon attained great economic importance. Among them were: Hippo Zarytus, Utica, Carthage, Hadrumetum, and Tunes. Ultimately all these cities were obliged to acknowledge the suzerainty of Carthage, which ruled a territory almost as extensive as the present Tunis. The fall of Carthage, b.c. 146, made the Romans masters of the country, which as the Province of Africa became one of the granaries of Italy. Numerous ruins of palaces, temples, Christian churches, amphitheatres, aqueducts, etc., which are still to be found, give proof of the high civilization existing under Roman sway. Christianity also flourished at an early era. In 439 the country was conquered by the Vandals, and in 533 Belisarius retook it and made it a part of the Eastern Empire. The supremacy of Constantinople was not of long duration. First the Patrician Gregorius, Governor of North Africa for the Emperor Heraclius, proclaimed his independence. However, on the incursion of the Arabs from the East, Gregorius was overthrown in 648 by the Arabian commander Abdallah, who returned to Egypt with enormous booty. In 670 the Arabs again entered the country, conquered Biserta, and founded the City of Kairwán in the region beyond Susa. In 697 they also took the City of Carthage, up to then successfully defended by the Eastern Empire, and reduced it to a heap of ruins. Tunis, a town formerly of small importance, now took the place of Carthage in commerce and traffic. When the Ommayyad dynasty was overthrown by the Abbassids, almost all Africa regained independence, and it was not until 772 that the caliphs again acquired control over it. Caliph Haroun al Raschid made the vigorous Ibrahim ibn el Aghlab Governor of Africa, but in 800 Ibrahim threw off the supremacy of the caliphate. Kairwán remained the capital of the Aghlabite Kingdom, which embraced Tripoli, Algiers, the greater part of Tunis, and also the Arabic possessions in Sicily and Sardinia. The last of the Aghlabite dynasty made Tunis the capital of the country, and gave the name of the city to the entire country. In 908 the Aghlabite dynasty was overthrown by Obeid Allah, founder of the dynasty of the Fátimites, which in the course of the tenth century conquered the whole of North Africa. After the conquest of Egypt the Fátimites transferred the seat of their power to Cairo and gave the regions in Western Africa in fief to the Zírite family in 972.

From the middle of the twelfth century Tunis was ruled by the Almohade dynasty, which, weakened by its struggles with the Christian kingdoms of Spain, was driven out of Tunis in 1206 by a Berber, Abù Hafs, who founded the dynasty of the Hafsites that ruled until 1574. In 1240 Eastern Algeria was united to Tunis. Thus in the course of time the great centralized Arabic Empire was replaced in North Africa by several independent states, such as Morocco, Algiers, and Tunis. In this way the strength of Islam, as contrasted with that of Christian Western Europe, was weakened, and the Christian countries were now able to prepare to attack the Mohammedan power. Thus, King St. Louis of France undertook a crusade against Tunis in 1270 which was unsuccessful; Louis himself died the same year during the siege of the City of Tunis. During the last centuries of the medieval era Tunis was the most flourishing of the North African countries; the cities of Tunis and Kairwán were centres of Eastern civilization and learning.

The rule of the Arabic Emirs in Tunis was overthrown by the Turks. Turkish corsairs led by the Greek renegade Horuk Barbarossa appeared in the western part of the Mediterranean about 1510. By gifts they won over the ruler of Tunis, Mulei Mohammed, who permitted them to make the City of Tunis the base for their piratical expeditions. In a short time Horuk Barbarossa gathered a large fleet manned chiefly by Turks, and became master of the City of Algiers and several towns along the African coast. His brother, Khair al-Dín Barbarossa, increased these possessions on the coast and sought to give his conquests permanence by placing them under the suzerainty of the Porte. When disputes over the succession to the throne arose in the Hafsite dynasty, Barbarossa skilfully used the opportunity to overthrow Mulei Hassan and to make himself the ruler of Tunis. Mulei Hassan appealed to the Emperor Charles V, who responded by landing near Carthage with a fleet, capturing Tunis and Goletta in July, 1535, and liberating nearly 20,000 Christian slaves. Mulei Hassan was restored to power in Tunis as a Spanish vassal, but was obliged to promise to suppress Christian slavery in his domain, to grant religious liberty, and to close his ports to the pirates. As a pledge Spain retained the citadels of Tunis and Goletta, which it garrisoned. On the way home the Spanish fleet completed the destruction of Carthage, but failed in an attack on Algiers. Mulei Hassan, who was hated by his people, was overthrown in 1542 by his own son Mulei Hamid. When in 1570 the Turks entered Tunis from Algiers Mulei Hamid appealed to Spain for aid, and as a result Tunis was captured by Don Juan of Austria in 1573. Jealous of his half-brother, however, King Philip recalled him and offered no resistance when the Turks conquered the entire country in 1574. Thus the military supremacy of the Turks was established in Tunis. The real masters of the country were the Turkish garrisons, beside whom the dey, appointed by the Sultan as the possessor of the highest authority, was a mere shadow. As early as the administration of the third dey, the bey, Murad, originally an officer to collect the tribute, gained the chief authority for himself and made it hereditary in his family.

Like Algiers and Morocco, Tunis developed in this period into a much dreaded pirate state. The Tunisian galleys sailed along all the coasts of the Mediterranean, devastating and plundering. They stopped foreign ships on the open sea and dragged them as prizes to Tunis, where the cargo would be discharged and the crew and passengers sold as slaves. For a long time Christian Western Europe did nothing to put an end to this impudent piracy. Although the English Admiral Blake in 1665 burned nine large Tunisian pirate ships in the harbour of Porto Farina, yet, as the struggle against the pirates was not continued, no permanent improvement of conditions was attained. At a later date treaties were made between Tunis and the powers interested in commerce in the Mediterranean. Venice, Spain, Portugal, England, Holland, Denmark, and even the United States paid an annual tribute to Tunis. In return Tunis bound itself not to attack the ships that sailed under the flag of the treaty-making powers. For two hundred years Europe endured this nest of pirates. For Tunis it was a brilliant period in which enormous treasures accumulated in the country, and during which the supremacy of the Porte was almost nominal.

The nineteenth century completely altered the situation. Sharp resolutions against piracy in the Mediterranean were passed by the Congress of Vienna and England was authorized by the powers to enforce these resolutions by sending a fleet against the piratical countries. In 1816 Lord Exmouth, by the bombardment and partial destruction of the City of Algiers, forced the ruler of Algiers to put an end to Christian slavery. The terrified Bey of Tunis also promised to do the same, yet, in spite of this, Christian ships were repeatedly attacked by Tunisian vessels. When in 1830 the French began the conquest of Algiers, Tunis at first aided the Algerian leader Abd el Kader, but in retaliation the French forced Tunis to suppress piracy completely, to yield an island on the coast, and to pay a sum of money. Alarmed at the danger from France, the Porte now sought to form closer relations with Tunis and to make the country an immediate Turkish province. These efforts, which were successful at that date in Tripoli, failed in Tunis on account of the opposition of French diplomacy. In order to be better able to maintain his position in regard to the Porte, the Bey Sidi Ahmed (1837-55) entered into closer relations with France, and even tried to introduce western reforms; in 1842 he abolished slavery, and in 1846 the slave-trade. Under French and English influence his cousin Sidi Mohammed (1855-59) introduced liberal legislation and reorganized the administration. His brother Mohammed es-Sadok (1859-82) even gave the country a liberal constitution in 1861, but had to withdraw it owing to the opposition of the Arabs and Moors. His extravagant tastes forced the bey to borrow money, thus bringing him into financial dependence on France, which showed more and more undisguisedly its desire to control Tunis. However, the Franco-German War (1870-71) forced France to restrain its hand.

In 1871 the sultan granted the hereditary right to rule according to primogeniture to the family of the bey and abandoned all claim to tribute, in return for which the bey promised not to go to war without the permission of the Porte, and to enter into no diplomatic negotiations with foreign powers. France protested against this and would not recognize the suzerainty of the Porte over Tunis, but could not enforce its protests. In the years succeeding the foreign element in Tunis constantly gained in importance, and the Italian Government, especially, sought to acquire a strong economic position in the country. France began to fear that she might be outwitted by Italy in Tunis, so in 1881 she used the disturbances on the boundary of Algiers and Tunis as a pretext for military interference. In April, 1881, in spite of the protests of the bey and the Porte, an army of 30,000 French soldiers advanced from Algiers into Tunis, and readily overcame the resistance of the tribes. A French fleet appeared before the capital, and a squadron landed at Biserta a brigade which advanced against the City of Tunis from the land side. Unable to oppose this force, the bey was obliged to sign on 12 May the Treaty of Kasr el-Said, also called the Bardo Treaty, which transformed Tunis into a French protectorate. The revolt of the native tribes against the French was crushed in the years 1881-82. Although at the beginning of the expedition France had declared that the occupation would only be a temporary one, yet ever since then the French have remained in the country. Economically the control by an European power has proved advantageous to the country. Mohammed es-Sadok was succeeded by his brother Sidi Ali Pasha (1882-1902), who was followed by his son Sidi Mohammed.

The regency of Tunis has an area of 45,779 sq. miles and contained, in 1911, 1,923,217 inhabitants, of whom 1,706,830 were natives, 49,245 Jews, 42,410 French, 107,905 Italians, 12,258 English and Maltese, 1307 Spanish. Politically, Tunis forms a French protectorate; France represents the country in foreign relations, makes all the treaties with foreign powers, decides as to peace and war. In return it protects the bey against any threatened attack upon his land and guarantees the state debt. In internal affairs the bey has nominally the legislative power, but decrees and laws are not valid until they have received the signature of the resident-general representing the French Government. The budget is not submitted to the hey for his approval until it has been discussed by the ministerial council and examined by the French Government. The resident-general is the representative of the French Government at Tunis, and is subordinate to the French minister of foreign affairs. He unites in his person all the authority of the French Government, is the official intermediary between the Tunisian Government and the representatives of foreign powers, is the presiding officer of the ministerial council, and of all the higher administration of Tunis. He can veto the actions of the bey, and in case the bey fails to act he can order the necessary regulations or open the way for them. The ministerial council consists of the resident-general, two native ministers, and seven French ministers; the council settles the most important matters and especially determines the budget. The two native ministers direct internal affairs, the administration of justice for the natives, and the supervision of the landed property of the natives. The other branches of the administration are directed by the French ministers. The administration of justice is a double one: all legal disputes in which Europeans are concerned are settled by French law; the natives are under Mohammedan law. As regards the Catholic Church Tunis forms the Archdiocese of Carthage; cf. also the article LAVIGERIE.

Ashbee, Bibl. of Tunisia (London, 1889); Broadley, Tunis Past and Present (London, 1882); Tissot, Exploration scientifique de la Tunisie (Paris, 1884-87); Faucon, La Tunisie avant et depuis l'occupation française (Paris, 1893); Fitzner, Die Regentschaft Tunis (Berlin, 1895); Clain de la Rive, Hist. gÈnÈrale de la Tunisie (Paris, 1895); Loth, Hist. de la Tunisie (Paris, 1898); Vivian, Tunisia and the Modern Barbary Pirates (London, 1899); Oliver and Dubois, La Tunisie (Paris, 1898); Hesse- Wartegg, Tunis, the Land and the People (2nd ed., London, 1899); Bahar, Le protectorat tunisien (Paris, 1904); La Tunisie au dÈbut du XXe siècle (Paris, 1904); SchÖnfeld, Aus den staaten der Barbaresken (Berlin, 1902); Schanz, Algerien, Tunisien u. Tripolitanien (Halle, 1905); Loth, La peuple italien en Tunisie et en AlgÈrie (Paris, 1905); Idem, La Tunisie et l'æuvre du protectorat français (Paris, 1907); Babelon, Cagnat and Reinach, Atlas archÈologique de la Tunisie (Paris, 1905-); Violard, La Tunisie du Nord (Paris, 1906); Sladen, Carthage and Tunis (London, 1907); Petrie, Tunis, Kairouan and Carthage (New York, 1909); Reclus, AlgÈrie et Tunisie (Paris, 1909).; Guadiani and Thiaucourt, La Tunisie (Paris, 1910); Gept, La Tunisie Èconomique (Paris, 1910); Statistique gÈnÈrale (Tunis, annually); Lecore- Charpentier, L'indicateur tunisien (Tunis, 1899-).

JOSEPH LINS

Tunja

(Tunquenensis).

Diocese established in 1880 as a suffragan of Bogotá, in the Republic of Colombia, South America. Its jurisdiction comprises the territory of the Department of Boyacá, with a Catholic population in 1911 of 400,000 souls; 145 priests; 153 parishes, and 159 churches and chapels. The capital of the department and see of the bishop is the City of Tunja, which before the arrival of the Spaniards was, under the name of Hunza, the residence of the zaque, the sovereign of the Muisca Indians. It was founded on 6 Aug., 1538, by Captain Gonzalo Suárez Rondón, by order of the conqueror Quesada. Emperor Charles V granted it the title of city in 1681. The wealth and luxury of its ancient founders can still be recognized in the coats-of-arms carved over the stone entrances of its beautiful mansions. Prominent among its public buildings are: the palace of the bishop, the cathedral, and the various churches; the monastery of the Dominicans, and the convent of the Santa Clara nuns. Public instruction in the Department of Boyacá is under the supervision of the governor of the department, assisted by a director of public instruction. There are in the department over 200 primary schools, with about 15,000 pupils of both sexes. Secondary instruction in Tunja is given at various colleges supported by the department, like the College of Boyacá and the normal school for women; and at several Catholic institutions such as the Christian Brothers' College, the Academy of Tertiary Sisters, and the College of the Presentation; for the education of the clergy there is the diocesan seminary. There are also several Catholic schools in other cities of the department, among them the College of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, under the Christian Brothers; the College of the Presentation, in charge of the Sisters of Charity; the College of Santa Rosa de Lima; and the College of St. Louis Gonzaga, in Chiquinquirá.

(See COLOMBIA.)

JULIAN MORENO-LACALLE

Tunkers

(German tunken, to dip)

A Protestant sect thus named from its distinctive baptismal rite. They are also called "Dunkards", "Dunkers", "Brethren", and "German Baptists". This last appellation designates both their national origin and doctrinal relationship. In addition to their admission of the teaching of the Baptists, they hold the following distinctive beliefs and practices. In the administration of baptism the candidate is required to kneel in the water and is dipped forward three times, in recognition of the three Persons of the Trinity. Communion after the manner of the primitive church is administered in the evening; it is preceded by the love-feast or agape, and followed by the kiss of charity. On certain occasions they also perform the rite of foot-washing. Their dress is characterized by unusual simplicity. They refuse to take oaths, to bear arms, and, in so far as possible, to engage in lawsuits. Their foundation was due to a desire of restoring primitive Christianity, and dates back to 1708. In that year their founder Alexander Mack (1679-1735) received believers' baptism with seven companions at Schwarzenau, in Westphalia. The little company rapidly made converts, and congregations were established in Germany, Holland, and Switzerland. As they were subjected to persecution, they all emigrated to America between the years 1719 and 1729.

The first families settled at Germantown, Pennsylvania, where a church was organized in 1723. Shortly after some members, led by Conrad Beissel who contended that the seventh day ought to be observed as the Sabbath, seceded and formed the "Seventh Day Baptists" (German; membership in 1911, 250). The Tunkers, nevertheless, prospered and, in spite of set-backs caused by the Revolutionary and Civil Wars, spread from Pennsylvania to many other states of the Union, and to Canada. Foreign missionary work and the foundation of educational institutions were inaugurated in the decade 1870-1880. About the same time the demands for the adoption of a more progressive and liberal church policy became more and more insistent, and in 1881-82 led to division. Two extreme parties, "the Progressives" and the "Old Order Brethren", separated from the main body, which henceforth was known as the "Conservative Tunkers". These obey the annual conference as the central authority, and have a ministry composed of bishops or elders, ministers, and deacons. They maintain schools in various states, own a printing plant at Elgin, Illinois, and publish the "Gospel Messenger" as their official organ. (Membership, 3006 ministers, 880 churches, 100,000 communicants.) The Progressives hold that the decisions of the annual conference do not bind the individual conscience, that its regulations concerning plain attire need not be observed, and that each congregation shall independently administer its own affairs. (Statistics, 186 ministers, 219 churches, 18,607 communicants.) The Old Order Brethren are unalterably attached to the old practices; they are opposed to high schools, Sunday schools, and missionary activity; they have still, according to the long prevalent custom of the sect, an unsalaried ministry and are extremely plain in dress. (228 ministers; 75 churches; 4000 communicants.)

The statistics throughout are those of CARROLL in Christian Advocate (New York, 26 Jan., 1911). Beside the minutes of the Annual Meeting, consult on the doctrine: MACK, A Plain View of the Rites and Ordinances of the House of God (Mt. Morris, 1888), and MILLER, Doctrine of the Brethren Defended (Indianapolis, 1876); BRUMBAUGH, History of the German Baptist Brethren in Europe and America (Elgin, 1899); FALKENSTEIN, History of the German Baptist Brethren Church (Lancaster, 1901); HOLSINGER, History of the Tunkers and the Brethren Churches (Oakland, 1901); GILLEN, The Dunkers (New York, 1906).

N.A. WEBER

Cuthbert Tunstall

Bishop of London, later of Durham, b. at Hackforth, Yorkshire, in 1474; d. at Lambeth Palace, 18 Nov., 1559. He studied both at Oxford and Cambridge, finally graduating LL.D. at Padua. Being an accomplished scholar both in theology and law, as well as in Greek and Hebrew, he soon won the friendship of Archbishop Warham, who on 25 Aug., 1511, made him his chancellor, and shortly after rector of Harrow-on-the-Hill. He became successively a canon of Lincoln (1514) and archdeacon of Chester (1515). He began his diplomatic career as ambassador at Brussels, in conjunction with Sir Thomas More, and there he lodged with Erasmus, becoming the intimate friend of both of them. Further preferments and embassies fell to his lot, till in 1522 he was appointed Bishop of London by papal provision. On 25 May, 1523, he became keeper of the privy seal; but neither the work this entailed nor fresh embassies prevented him from making a visitation of his diocese. A visit to Worms (1520-1) had opened his eyes to the dangers of the Lutheran movement and the evils arising from heretical literature. In the divorce question Tunstall acted as one of Queen Katherine's counsel, but he endeavoured to dissuade her from appealing to Rome. On 21 Feb., 1529-30, he was translated by the pope from the Diocese of London to the more important See of Durham, a step which involved the assumption of quasi-regal power and authority within the bishopric (see DURHAM, ANCIENT CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF). During the troubled years that followed, Tunstall was far from imitating the constancy of [St. John] Fisher and [St. Thomas] More, yet he ever held to Catholic doctrine and practices. He adopted a policy of passive obedience and acquiescence in many matters with which he could have had no sympathy. With regard to the suppression of the monasteries, the king's ministers so feared his influence that they prevented his attendance at Parliament.

In 1537 Tunstall was given the onerous position of President of the Council of the North, and Scottish affairs occupied much of his attention. Towards the end of Henry's reign he twice was sent on diplomatic business to France. Under the protectorate of Somerset his religious position became very difficult, but he yielded so far in compliance to the new changes that Gardiner protested. But the lengths to which the reformers went opened his eyes to the real significance of the royal supremacy; a change came over his attitude, and he staunchly maintained the Catholic side, steadily opposing the abolition of chantries, the Act of Uniformity, and the law permitting priests to marry. He seems to have hoped that Warwick might be induced to reverse the anti-Catholic policy of Somerset, but this hope soon failed, and in 1551 he was summoned to London and confined to his house there. During this captivity he composed his treatise, "De Veritate Corporis et Sanguinis Domini nostri Jesu Christi in Eucharistia", published at Paris in 1554. At the end of 1551 he was removed to the Tower, and a bill for his deprivation was introduced. When this failed, he was tried by a commission (4-5 Oct., 1552) and deprived of his bishopric. On Mary's accession he was liberated, and his bishopric, which had been dissolved by Act of Parliament in March, 1553, was re- established by a further Act in April, 1554. Through Mary's reign he, being now an octogenarian, ruled his diocese in peace, taking little part either in public affairs or in the persecution of heretics; but on the accession of Elizabeth his firmness in resisting the fresh innovations marked him out for the royal displeasure. He declined to take the oath of supremacy, was summoned to London, and when ordered to consecrate Parker refused to do so. Shortly afterwards he was deprived of his see (28 Sept., 1559) and committed to Parker's care as a prisoner at Lambeth Palace, where within a few weeks he died. He thus became one of the eleven confessor-bishops who died prisoners for the Faith.

His works, exclusive of published letters and sermons, are: "De Arte Supputandi Libri IV" (London, 1522); "Confutatio cavillationum quibus SS. Eucharistiae Sacramentum ab impiis Caphernaitis impeti solet" (Paris, 1552); "De veritate Corporis et Sanguinis Domini in Eucharistia Libri II" (Paris, 1554); "Compendium in decem libros ethicorum Aristotelis" (Paris, 1554); "Certaine godly and devout prayers made in Latin by C. Tunstall and translated into Englishe by Thomas Paynelle, Clerke" (London, 1558). Much of his political correspondence is preserved in the British Museum. Despite his weakness under Henry VIII, we may endorse the verdict of the Anglican historian, Pollard, who writes (op. cit. inf.): "Tunstall's long career of eighty-five years, for thirty-seven of which he was a bishop, is one of the most consistent and honourable in the sixteenth century. The extent of the religious revolution under Edward VI caused him to reverse his views on the royal supremacy and he refused to change them again under Elizabeth."

The State Papers, domestic and foreign, for the reigns of Henry VIII, Edward VI, and Mary, and the usual sources of information for those reigns, too numerous for citation here, must be referred to. No independent biography exists but among recent writers the following should be consulted: BRADY, Episcopal Succession (Rome, 1877); BRIDGETT-KNOX, Queen Elizabeth and the Catholic Hierarchy (London, 1889); POLLARD in Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v.; PHILLIPS, The Extinction of the Ancient Hierarchy (London, 1905); BIRT, The Elizabethan Religious Settlement (London, 1907).

EDWIN BURTON

Ven. Thomas Tunstall

Martyred at Norwich, 13 July, 1616. He was descended from the Tunstalls of Thurland, an ancient Lancashire family who afterwards settled in Yorkshire. In the Douay Diaries he is called by the alias of Helmes and is described as Carleolensis, that is, born within the ancient Diocese of Carlisle. He took the College oath at Douay on 24 May, 1607; received minor orders at Arras, 13 June, 1609, and the subdiaconate at Douay on 24 June following. The diary does not record his ordination to the diaconate or priesthood, but he left the college as a priest on 17 August, 1610. On reaching England he was almost immediately apprehended and spent four or five years in various prisons till he succeeded in escaping from Wisbech Castle. He made his way to a friend's house near Lynn, where is was recaptured and committed to Norwich Gaol. At the next assizes he was tried and condemned (12 July, 1616). The saintliness of his demeanor on the scaffold produced a profound impression on the people. There is a contemporary portrait of the martyr at Stonyhurst, showing him as a man still young with abundant black hair and dark moustache.

CHALLONER, Memoirs of Missionary Priests, II (London, 1742); Third Douay Diary, X, XI (Catholic Record Society, London, 1911); FOLEY, Records Eng. Prov. S.J., XII (London, 1879).

EDWIN BURTON

Simon Tunsted

English Minorite, b. at Norwich, year unknown; d. at Bruisyard, Suffolk, 1369. Having joined the Greyfriars at Norwich he distinguished himself for learning and piety and was made a doctor of theology. He filled several important ecclesiastical charges, being at different times warden of the Franciscan convent at Norwich, regent master of the Minorities at Oxford (1351), and twenty-ninth provincial superior of his order in England (1360). He wrote a commentary on the "Meteora" of Aristotle, improved the "Albeon" of Richard of Wallingford; and is the reputed author of another work, the "Quatuor Principalia Musicae", a clear, practical, and very valuable medieval treatise on music. Davey gives a thorough discussion of the authorship of this work, which has been ascribed by different writers on the history of music to Tunsted, to John Hanboys, and to Thomas of Tewkesbury; but the arguments brought forward by Davey show that it is certainly not the work of either Hanboys or Thomas of Tewkesbury, whilst his conclusion with regard to the first-named writer is that "the grounds for ascribing it to Tunsted are admittedly insufficient; and internal evidence point to the author being a foreigner either by birth or education".

DAVEY in Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v.; IDEM, Hist. of English Music.

EDWARD C. PHILLIPS

Anne-Robert-Jacques Turgot

Baron de L'Aulne, French minister, born at Parish, 10 May, 1727; died there, 20 March, 1781. In his youth he was destined for the Church; he composed a treatise on the existence of God, of which fragments remain, and one on the love of God, which is lost. The year 1750, during which he was prior of the Sorbonne, marks the transition between the two periods of his life: on the one hand, he delivered a discourse on the advantages accruing to the human race from the Christian religion, which showed him as still an ecclesiastic; on the other, he delivered a discourse on the successive progress of the human mind, in which the true and false ideas of the philosophers were mingled confusedly. In this discourse he foretold the separation from England of the North American colonies. Early in 1751 the influence of "philosophy" prevailed over Turgot's mind and he decided not to receive Holy orders. In 1752 he entered the magistracy, was master of rêquetes in 1753, spending his leisure time in the acquirement of further knowledge, and in 1761 became intendant at Limoges. In the Limousin government Turgot inaugurated certain attempts in conformity with the new ideas of the economists and philosophers: free trade in corn and the suppression of the taxes known as corvées.

When, after a short term in the ministry of marine, he was appointed by Louis XVI (24 Aug., 1774) controller-general of finances, he profited by the office which he held for twenty months to apply in his general policy the principles of economic Liberalism. This caused popular discontent, due especially to the rise in the price of corn, but Turgot flattered himself that he could quell all opposition. The edict, by which he substituted for the corvée a territorial tax bearing on landed property, displeased the privileged classes; that by which he suppressed the maîtrises and jurandes, an act which the philosophers regarded as an advance, destroyed the professional organization which in the Middle Ages, under the auspices of the Church, regulated economic activity and which at present the syndicalist movement in all countries is endeavouring to re-establish. By depriving the Hôtel Dieu of Paris of its privilege of selling meat on Friday to the exclusion of the butchers, by dispensing the owners of public vehicles from the obligation they were under of allowing their drivers time on Sunday to hear Mass, and by attempting to change the coronation oath which he found too favourable to the Catholics, Turgot displeased the clergy who accused him of indifference for the disciplinary precepts of the Church. He was disgraced by Louis XVI, 12 May, 1776. In his retirement he wrote for Price, "Réflexions sur la situation des Américains des Etats Unis", and for Franklin a treatise, "Des vrais principes de l'imposition". His works were edited by Dussard and Daire (2 vols., Paris, 1844).

DUPONT DE NEMOURS, Memoires sur la vie et les ouvrages de Turgot (2 vols., Paris, 1782); FONCIN, Essai sur le ministere de Turgot (Paris, 1877); SAY, Turgot (Paris, 1877; tr., London, 1888); SHEPHERD, Turgot and the Six Edicts (New York, 1903); DE SEGUR, Au couchant de la monarchie. Louis X VI et Turgot (Paris, 1910); STEPHENS, Life and Writings of Turgot (London, 1895).

GEORGES GOYAU

Turin

(Turino; Taurinensis)

The City of Turin is the chief town of a civil province in Piedmont and was formerly the capital of the Duchy of Savoy and of the Kingdom of Sardinia. It is situated on the left bank of the Po and on right of the Dora Riparia, which flows into the Po not far off. The surrounding flat country is fertile in grain, pasturage, hemp, and herbs available for use in the industries, while on the hills a delicious fungus, a species of truffle is found. The district is also rich in minerals (a species of gneiss and granite), and there are five mineral springs. The population is 270,000.

Besides the numerous elementary and intermediate schools, public and private, there are a university (see below), a musical lyceum, commercial and industrial schools. The Accademia Albertina (1652), for the fine arts, possesses the precious Mossi Gallery (Raphael, Dolci, Caravaggio, Rubens, Van Dyck, Giotto Andrea del Sarto, Correggio, Luca Giordano, Guercino, and others, with cartoons of Leonardo da Vinci and others). There is a royal academy of the sciences (1757) and a royal commission on studies in Italian history. The documents of the general archives go back as far as the year 934. Other institutions of sciences and arts are the military academy, the Scuola di Guerra, the practical school for the artillery and engineers, and eight public libraries, among them the National (1714). The last-named contains the precious Bobbio manuscripts and many Greek and Egyptian papyri; in 1904 it was ravaged by a fire in which valuable manuscripts perished, among them some which had not yet been thoroughly studied. The Museum of Antiquities is of great importance, containing a number of marbles collected throughout Piedmont besides one of the most complete Egyptian collections in existence, that made by Bernardino Drovetti, a French consul in Egypt. Worthy of note also are the Royal Gallery (Pinacoteca) and the zoölogical, mineralogical, geological, anatomical, and the rich numismatical museum (the king's medallion). Benevolent institutions are the Opera Pia di S. Paolo, which includes the Pious Institute (ufficio pio) of Alms for the poor and dowries for young girls, and the Monte di Pietà. The hospitals are those of S. Giovanni (fourteenth century), of the Order of Sts. Mauriceand Lazarus, the Opera Pia di S. Luigi (1792), the Ophthalmic Hospital, the Cottolengo (Piccola Casa della Divina Providenza, founded in 1827 for every kind of human misery, in which about 7000 sick, aged, and infirm persons have found shelter), the Royal General Charity Hospice, the asylum of the Infanzia Abbandonata, the Reale Albergo di Virtù (1580). The Opera Pia Barolo has under its direction various charitable and educational institutions. For the Rifugio and Oratory of St. Francis de Sales, see Bosco.

CHURCHES

The cathedral, dedicated to St. John the Baptist, stands on the site of three ancient churches, and was built (1492-98) by Meo del Caprino, with an octagonal dome. Attached to the cathedral is the chapel of the Santissimo Sudario, built by Guarini (1694), where is preserved in a casket a cloth believed to be the shroud in which the Body of Christ was wrapped when it was taken down from the Cross, The Church of Corpus Domini records a miracle which took place during the sack of the city in 1453, when a soldier was carrying off an ostensorium containing the Blessed Sacrament: the ostensorium fell to the ground, while the Host remained suspended in air. The present splendid church, erected in 1610 to replace the original chapel which stood on the spot, is the work of Ascanio Vittozzi. The Consolata, a sanctuary much frequented by pilgrims, stands on the site of the tenth-century monastery of S. Andrea, and is the work of Guarini. It was sumptuously restored in 1903. Outside the city, are: S. Maria Ausiliatrice, erected by Don Bosco; the Gran Madre di Dio, erected in 1818 on occasion of the return of King Victor Emanuel I; S. Maria del Monte (1583) on the Monte dei Cappucini; the Basilica of Superga, with a dome 244 feet high, the work of Juvara, built by Amedeo II ex voto for the deliverance of Turin (1706), and which has served since 1772 as a royal mausoleum.

PROFANE EDIFICES

The Royal Palace (1646-58) contains various splendidly decorated halls and an extremely rich collection of arms of all periods and all peoples, as well as the king's library. Under the palace the remains of a Roman theatre were discovered. The Palazzo Madama stands on the site of the old decuman gate, which became a castle in the Middle Ages and was repeatedly enlarged until, in 1718, it was finally prepared by Juvara for Madama Reale, as she was called, the widow of Charles Emanuel II. It is now occupied by the state archives and the observatory. The Palazzo Carignano (1680), a work of Guarini, is the residence of the younger branch of Savovy-Carignano, now the reigning house. This palace was occupied by the Parliament from 1848 to 1864, and now shelters the Museum of Natural History. The Academy of the Sciences, formerly a Jesuit College (1679), houses the Museum of Antiquities and the Pinaceoteca. The Palazzo di Città or City Hall (1669), the work of, Lanfranchi, contains the Biblioteca Civica. There is also a Museo Civico di Belle Arti; and the Mole Antenelliana, 580 feet high, contains the Museo di Risorgimento (1863). The city itself is laid out on a very regular plan.

HISTORY

Before the Roman conquest of the Graian and Cottian Alps, Taurasia was already an important city of the Taurini, a Ligurian people. In 218 B.C. Hannibal destroyed it. Under Augustus the conquest was completed, and the city was named Augusta Taurinorum; it probably continued, however, to form part of the dominions of Cottius, King of Secusio (the modern Susa). In the war between Otho and Vitellius, it was almost entirely burned down. None of the Roman monuments have survived except the Porta Palatina, commonly known as the Towers, near which are the remains of a monument erected early in the second century in honour of Attilius Agricola. In the fifth and sixth centuries the city suffered from the invasions of the Burgundians and of Odoacer, and in the Gothic War. After the Lombard invasion it became the capital of a duchy, and four of its dukes — Agilulfus (589), Arioaldus (590), Garibaldus (661), Ragimbertus (701) — became kings of the Lombards. When the Lombard kingdom fell, Turin became a residence of Frankish counts until, in 892, it passed to the marquesses of Ivrea, from whom, through the marriage of Adelaide with Odo of Savoy (1046), it passed into the possession of the latter house. In 1130 the city was constituted a commune, still remaining, however, under the influence now of the counts of Savoy, now of the marquesses of Saluzzo or of Monferrato, with whom, as also with the emperors, they were frequently at war. From 1280 on, it was almost constantly under the power of the House of Savoy, more particularly the Acaia branch (1295-1418). After 1459 it was the capital of the Duchy of Savoy. In 1536 it fell into the power of Francis I of France, who established a parliament there; in 1562 Emanuel Philibert reconquered it. In 1638, during the quarrel of the regency, the city was besieged by the French and defended by Prince Thomas of Savoy. Still more memorable the siege of Turin in 1706, again at the hands of the French, from which it was relieved by Prince Eugene and by the sacrifice of Pietro Micca. During the French occupation it was the capital of the Department of the Po (1798-1814), though it was in the hands of the Austro-Russian forces from May, 1799 until June 1800. In 1821 the revolution against Charles Emanuel broke out, and a provisional government was set up, the king abdicaing in favor of his brother Charles Felix. After that, Turin was the centre of all Italian movements for the union of the Peninsula, whether monarchical or republican. The transfer of the capital of the Kingdom of Italy from Turin to Florence, in 1864, caused another, though not important, revolution (21, 22 September).

The most ancient traditions of Christianity at Turin are connected with the martyrdom of Sts. Adventor, Solutor, and Candida, who were much venerated in the fifth century, and were in later times included in the Theban Legion. As to the episcopal see, it is certain that in the earlier half of the fourth century Turin was subject to Vercelli. Perhaps, however, St. Eusebius, Bishop of Vercelli, on his return from exile, provided the city with a pastor of its own. In any case St. Maximus can hardly be considered the first Bishop of Turin, even though no other bishop is known before him. This saint, many of whose homilies are extant, died between 408 and 423. It was another Maximus who lived in 451 and 465. In 494 Victor went with St. Epiphanius to France for the ransom of prisoners of war. St. Ursicinus (569-609) suffered much from the depredations of the French. It was then that the Diocese of Moriana (Maurienne) was detached from that of Turin. Other bishops were Rusticus (d. 691); Claudius (818-27), a copious, though not original, writer, famous for his opposition to the veneration of images; Regimirus (of uncertain date, in the ninth century), who established a rule of common life among his canons; Amolone (880-98), who incurred the ill-will of the Turinese and was driven out by them; Gezone (1000), who founded the monastery of the holy martyrs Solutor, Adventor, and Candida; Landolfo (1037), who founded the Abbey of Cavour and repaired the losses inflicted on his Church by the Saracen incursions; Cuniberto (1046-81), to whom St. Peter Damian wrote a letter exhorting him to repress energetically the laxity of his clergy; Uguccione (1231-43), who abdicated the bishopric and became a Cistercian; Guido Canale enlarged the cathedral; Thomas of Savoy (1328). Under Gianfrancesco della Rovere (1510), Turin was detached from the metropolitan obedience of Milan and became an archiepiscopal see with Mondovi and Ivrea for suffragans, other sees being added later on. In the time of Cesare Cibo the diocese was infested with the Calvinistic heresy, and his successors were also called upon to combat it. Cardinal Gerolamo della Rovere, in 1564, brought to Turin the Holy Shroud and the body of St. Maurice, the martyr.

From 1713 to 1727, owing to difficulties with the Holy See, the See of Turin remained vacant. After 1848 Cardinal Luigi Fransoni (1832-62) distinguished himself by his courageous opposition to the encroachments of the Piedmontese Government upon the rights of the Church, and in consequence was obliged to live in exile. Notable among his successors are Cardinal Alimonda (1883-91), a polished writer, and Cardinal Richelmy (1897), the present incumbent of the see. The dioceses suffragan to Turin are Acqui, Alba, Aosta, Asti, Cuneo, Fossano, Ivrea, Mondovi, Pinerolo, Saluzzo, and Susa. The archdiocese comprises 276 parishes with 680,600 souls, 1405 secular and 280 regular priests, 35 communities of male and 51 of female religious, 15 educational establishments for boys and 27 for girls. There are two Catholic daily newspapers, "Momento" and "Italia Reale", two weeklies, and many other instructive and edifying periodicals.

CAPPELLETTI, Chiese d'Italia, XIV; SAVIO, Gli antichi vescovi Piemonte (Turin, 1899), 281; CIBRARIO, Storia di Torino (Turin, 1846); ISAIA, Torino e dintorni (Turin, 1909); SEMERIA, Storia della chiesa di Torino (Turin, 1840); Guido Commerciale ed amministrativa di Torino (Turin, 1911); Cenni storico-statistici delle istituzioni publiche e private di beneficenza e di assistenza del Commune di Torino (Turin' 1906); RONDOLINO, I Visconti di Torino, in Bollettino Storico Subalpino (Pinerolo, 1901-02).

The University of Turin

The University of Turin was founded in 1404, when the lectures at Piacenza and Pavia were interrupted by the wars of Lombardy. Some of the professors of theology, medicine, and arts at Piacenza obtained permission from Louis of Savoy-Acaia to continue their courses at Turin. This prince had obtained from the antipope Benedict XIII, in 1405, the pontifical privilege for a studium generale, and in 1412 the permission of the emperor was likewise granted. In the following year John XXIII confirmed the concessions of Benedict XIII rendered necessary by the wars which had disturbed the studium of Turin. The studium then comprised three faculties: theology, law (canon and civil), medicine (with arts and philosophy). The Archbishop of Turin was always chancellor of the university. As at Bologna, the rector continued for a long time to be chosen from their own body by the students, who in 1679 represented thirteen nations. The professors' salaries were paid by the communes of Savoy; but from 1420 the clergy also contributed, and at a later period the dukes. In the seventeenth century the university levied a tax on the Jews. Under Duke Amedo VIII, the State began to restrict the autonomy of the studium by means of riformatori and subjected the professors and students in criminal matters to ordinary jurisdiction. From 1427 to 1436 the seat of the university was temporarily transferred to Chieri and Savignano (1434). The number of salaried professors in the years 1456 and 1533 was twenty-five (only two of theology), but the number of lecturers was much greater; e.g., in the statutes of the theological faculty (1427-36) nineteen masters — eleven Franciscans and and eight Dominicans — are named. Among the distinguished Professors of that age were the jurisconsult Claudio Beisello, a noted translator of many Greek classics, Pietro Carol Cristoforo Castiglione e Grassi, the physician Guainiero, and the theologian Francesco della Rovere, afterwards Sixtus IV.

In 1536 the university was closed, owing to the Franco-Spanish war in Piedmont; in 1560 it was re-established at Mondovi by Duke Emanuele Filiberto back to Turin, with laws permitting increasing state interference in the affairs of the univeristy. Ut acquired a great reputation, which, however declined under Charles Emanmuel I (1580-1630), who, owing to the expenses of the wars, had to suspend his financial contributions to the Studium. In the seventeenth century the officials of the respective nations granted the students the right to interrupt the professors' lectures. Studies naturally languished. In 1687 there were 3 professors of theology, 13 of law, 10 of medicine, 6 of arts. The art course did not then include the belles-lettres, which were taught in the Jesuit college. Victor Amedeo II granted a new constitution to the university (1720-29), which thence forward was a purely state institution; he also had the present building erected after the design of Gio. Antonio Ricca. A royal official was appointed to supervise the observance of the Statutes and to act as a censor of books. From 1729 the rector was chosen from among the professors. At the same time the Collegio delle Provincie was established for students not natives of Turin. The statutes contained a regulation strictly obliging the students to be present in the oratory of the university on holy days of obligation. On the other hand, the king ordered the professors of theology to observe neutrality concerning Gallicanism.

At the beginning of the French Revolution the university declined rapidly; the school of anatomy, for instance became a political club. Under Napoleon (1800-14) the studies were reorganized according to french methods; several new chairs were established, and the revival in this sense was continued by Prospero Balbo. In 1821 the students, under the impulse of the constitutional movement, rebelled, and severe measures were adopted. Lectures were continued outside of the university. In the third decade of the nineteenth century there were notable agitations in the theological faculty in favour of papal infallibility, and agitations brought about by the moralist Dettorri, who was afterwards exiled. During the Revolution of July 1830, the university was closed, and the schools dispersed among different cities. In 1845 the curriculum was re-organized. In the theological faculty chairs of ecclesiastical history, oratory, and Biblical exegesis were established. In 1860 this faculty was, here as elsewhere, abolished.

Among the distinguished professors of Turin since the sixteenth century the jurist Gian Francesco Balbo and the physician Giovanni Nevizzano are worthy of mention; after the restoration of the university, the jurists Cuiacius and Pancirolus, the physicians Blessed Giovenale Ancina (afterwards Bishop of Saluzzo) and Lucille Filalteo; the Greek scholar Teodoro Rendio, was called to the Collegio Greco by Gregory XIII. Distinguished in the eighteenth century were Vincenzo Gravina and Luigi Fantoni the jurisconsults, the Augustinian Giulio Accetta in mathematics, the Piarist Giambattista Beecaria, in physics, the Barnabite Sigismondo Gerdil, in ethics, Giambattista Carburi and Vitaliano Donati in medicine, the historian Carlo Denino, and Francesco Antonio Chionio, the professor of canon law whose work "De regimine ecclesiae" caused scandal by reducing all religion to internal worship, and leaving the control of the Church to the civil power; in the nineteenth century: Father Peyron, professor of Oriental languages a celebrated Egyptologist, the philologists Vallauri and Fabretti, the mathematician and physicist Galileo Ferrari, the historian Balbo, the physiologist Cesare Lombroso. The university has 22 chairs of jurisprudence with 18 professors and 20 docents; 24 chairs of physical and mathematical sciences with 17 professors and 17 docents; 28 chairs of medicine with 25 professors and 89 docents; 22 chairs of philosophy and literature with 19 professors and 21 docents. In connection with the medical faculty are a school of pharmacy, various clinics, laboratories, etc., as well as the laboratories, cabinets, and astronomical observatory of the other scientific faculties. In 1910-11 there were 2204 students enrolled.

Annuario della Universita di Torino (1876); VALLAURI, Storia delle Università degli Studi in Piemonte (Turin, 1875); BONA, Delle constituzioni dell' Università di Torino (Turin, 1852).

U. BENIGNI

Turkestan

I. CHINESE TURKESTAN

When Jenghiz Khan died (1227) his second son, Djagatai, had the greater part of Central Asia for his share of the inheritance: his empire included not only Mávará-un-Nahr, between the Syr Daria and the Amu Daria, but also Ferghana, Badakhshan, Chinese Turkestan, as well as Khorasan at the beginning of his reign; his capital was Almaliq, in the Ili Valley, near the site of the present Kulja; in the fourteenth century the empire was divided into two parts: Mávará-un-Nahr or Transoxina, and Moghulistan or Jabah, the eastern division. In 1759 the Emperor K'ien Lung subjugated the country north and south of the T'ienshan and divided the new territory into T'ien-shan Peh-lu and T'ien-shan Nan-lu; in 1762 a military governor was appointed and a new fortified town, Hwei-yuan-ching, was erected (1764) near the site of Kulja: a number of Manchus, from Peking and the Amu, and Mongols were drawn to the new place and later on there came a migration of Chinese from the Kan-su and Shen-si Provinces. The local Mohammedan chieftains are known as Pe-k'e (Beg); they are classed in five degrees of rank from the third to the seventh degree of the Chinese hierarchy: the most important titles are Akim Beg (local governor), Ishkhan Beg (assistant governor), Shang Beg (collector of revenue), Hatsze Beg (judge), Mirabu Beg (superintendent of agriculture).

The bad administration of the Chinese governors was the cause of numerous rebellions; a great rising took place against the Governor of Ili, Pi Tsing; at the head was Jihanghir, son of Saddet Ali Sarimsak and grandson of one of the Khaja, Burhan ed-Din; unfortunate at first, Jihanghir was victorious in October, 1825, and captured the four great towns of T'ien-shan Nan-lu: Kashgar, Yangi-hissar, Yarkand, and Khotan. The Chinese Emperor Tao Kwang sent General Chang Ling to fight the rebels. Jihanghir was defeated and made a prisoner at Kartiekai (1828) and sent to Peking where he was put to death in a cruel manner. On the other hand, the establishment of Orenburg by the Russians, the exploration of the Syr Daria by Batiakov, the foundation of Kazalinsk (1848) near the mouth of this river, the exertions of Perovsky, the attacks of the Cossacks against the Khanate of Khokand, had for result the arrival of the Russians in the valley of the Ili River. On 25 July, 1851, Col. Kovalevski signed with the Chinese on behalf of the Russians at Kashgar a treaty regulating the trade at Ili (Kulja) and at Tarbagatai (Chugutchak). In the meantime new rebellions broke out after the death of Jihanghir: in 1846 one of the Khoja, Katti Torah, with the help of his brothers took Kashgar, but was soon defeated by the Chinese; in 1857 Wali Khan captured Kashgar, Artosh, and Yangi-hissar; and at last, the son of Jihanghir, Burzuk Khan, with the help of Mohammed Yakub, son of Ismet Ulla, born about 1820 at Pskent in the Khanate of Khokand, taking advantage of the Mohammedan rebellion of Kan-su, began a new struggle against the Chinese. Yakub, having taken Burzuk's place, subjugated Kashgar, Khotan, Aksu, and the other towns south of the T'ien-shan, thus creating a new empire; his capital was Yarkand, and there he received embassies from England in 1870 and 1873 (Sir Douglas T. Forsyth) and from Russian in 1872 (Col. Baron Kaulbars).

To check the advance of Yakub to the west, the Russians who had captured Tashkent (27 June, 1865) took possession of Ili, i.e. the north of the T'ien-shan, on 4 July, 1871. When the Chinese had quelled the Yun-nan rebellion after the surrender of Ta-li, they turned their armies against the Mohammedans of the north-west; the celebrated Tso Tsung-tang, Viceroy of Kan-su and Shen-si, had been appointed commander-in-chief; he captured Su-chau (Oct., 1873), Urumtsi, Tih-hwa, and Manas (16 Nov., 1876) when a wholesale massacre of the inhabitants took place; the Russian Governor of Turkestan, General Kauffman, wrote a protest against these cruelties. The task of the Chinese was rendered easy by the death of Yakub (29 May, 1877); Aksu (19 Oct., 1877), Yar-kand (21 Dec.), Kashgar (26 Dec.), and at last Kohtan (14 Jan., 1878) fell into their hands. The Chinese then turned to the Russians to have Ili, occupied temporarily, restored to them. Ch'ung-hou, sent as an ambassador to St. Petersburg, signed at Livadia in Oct., 1879, a treaty ceding to the Russians a large portion of the contested territory including the Muz-Art Pass, giving them the privilege of selling their goods not only at T'ien-tsin and Han-kou but also at Kalgan, Kia-yu, Tang-shan, Si-ngan, and Hanchung; permission was also granted to the Russians not only at Ili, Tarbagatai, Kashgar, and K'urun, but also at Kiayü-kwan, Kobdo, Uliasut'ai, Hami, Turfan, Urumtsi, and Kushteng. The treaty was strongly attacked by the censor, Chang Chi-tung, and Ch'ung-hou, tried by a high court, was sentenced to death. War between Russia and China very nearly broke out, but, thanks to the good offices of foreign powers, a new embassy sent to Russia with the Marquis Tseng arranged matters. A new treaty was signed at St. Petersburg, 12 (24) Feb., 1881, and Russia kept but the western part of the contested territory, restoring the pass of Muz-Art and giving up some of the commercial privileges granted by the Livadia Treaty.

After the Mohammedan rebellion had been crushed, the territory was organized in 1878 and was called Sin-Kiang or New Dominion, the names Eastern Turkestan and Chinese Turkestan being also used; it is bounded on the north by Siberia, on the west by Russian Turkestan and India, on the south by Tibet, and on the east by Mongolia and the Chinese Province of Kan-su. Its area is 550,579 square miles, with a population of 1,200,000 inhabitants scattered over this immense desert varying in altitude from 3000 to 4000 feet above the level of the sea and surrounded by mountains: in the south the Kwen-lun and its two branches, the Nan-shan and the Altyn-Tagh; in the west, the Karakoram, the Pamirs and the Trans-Altai; in the north by the T'ien-shan, north of which chain the country is called T'ien-shan Peh-lu or Sungaria, and south of it T'ien-shan Nanlu or Kashgaria. The chief river of Chinese Turkestan is the Tarim or Tali- mu-ho, about 1250 miles in length, resulting from the junction of the rivers or darias, watering Yarkand, Khotan etc.; finally the Tarim empties its waters into the Lob-Nor, now more of a marsh but a lake in ancient times. The principal passes to enter Sin-Kiang are the following: the Tash-Davan (Kwen-lun range), south of Lob-Nor; the Karakoram Pass, road leading from Yarkand to Leh in Ladak; the Shishiklik Pass, in the Pamirs; the Kyzil Art Pass, in the Trans-Alai; the Muz-Art, road from Kulija to Aksu; the Terek-Davan, in the Western T'ien-shan, the Urumtsi Pass, in the Eastern T'ien-shan; the Talki Pass, to the north of the Ili Valley.

Sin-Kiang includes the following regions: Hami or Qomujl or Pa Shan; the great Gobi Desert or Shamo, the largest portion of Turkestan, the south-west part of it is the Takla-makan Desert; the region of oases (Khotan, Yarkand, Kashgar, Aksu, Uch-Turfan, Yangi-hissar); the Turfan region (Turfan, Karashar); Sungaria (Urumtsi, Kuch'êng); the Ili region (Kulja). Sin-Kiang is crossed by three main roads: (1) from Kan-su to Turfan, by Ngansi and Hami; (2) north from Urumtsi to Kulja, via Manas; (3) south from Turfan to Kashgar, via Karashar, Kurla, Kucha, Aksu, Maralbashi; there is also a route from Kashgar to Lob-Nor, via Khotan, Kiria, Charchan, Lob-Nor, thence to Sha Chou; this is Marco Polo's itinerary. The New Dominion is divided into four Tao or Intendancies: Chen Ti Tao (Tih-hwa Fu), in 1908 Jung Pei was Tao-t'ai and judge; Aksu Tao (Yenk'i Fu), Tao-t'ai vacant in 1908; Kashgar Tao (Sulofu), in 1910 Yuan Hung-yu was Tao-t'ai; and I T'a Tao (Ning yuan hien), in 1908 K'inghiu was Tao-t'ai. It includes six Fu or Prefectures: Tih-hwa or Urumtsi, Yenki or Karashar, Su lo or Kashgar, Soch'ê or Yarkand, Wensuh or Aksu, and Ili; two Chou, K'uch'ê or Kucha, and Hwotien or Khotan; and eight T'ing: Yingkihshaeul or Yangi-hissar, Wushih or Uch-Turfan, K'ueulk'ohlah Wusu or Kurkara-usu, Chensi or Barkul, Hami or Qomul, T'ulufan or Turfan, Tsingho, and T'ahch'êng or Tarbagatai.

The administration of Sin-Kiang has at its head a Fu-t'ai (in 1908, Lien K'uei), who resides at Urumtsi and is deputed by the Shen-Kan Tsung-tu (Viceroy of Kan-su and Shen-si) whose seat is at Lan-chou, Kan-su; the treasurer, Fan-t'ai (in 1908, Wang Shu-nan), who resides at Urumtsi (Tih-hwa); as well as the judge, Nieh-t'ai, who is also the Tao-t'ai of the circuit. The four Tao-t'ai have been mentioned. There are three Tsung Ping (brigade generals) at Aksu (Yênk'i), Palik'un (Barkul), and Ili. The Banner Organization includes: at Ili, a Tsiangkukn (Tatar general), a Futut'ung (deputy military lieut. governor), a Ts'an Tsan Ta Ch'ên (military assistant governor), and the Ling Tui Ta Ch'ên (commandants of forces) of Solun, Oalot, Chahar, Sibe; at Tarbagatai, a Futut'ung, and Ts'an Tsan Ta Chien; at Uliasut'ai, a Tsiang Kün and two Ts'an Tsan Ta Ch'ên; at Urga, a Panshi Ta Ch'ên (commissioner) and a Pangpan Ta Ch'ên (assistant commissioner); at Kobdo, a Ts'an Tsan Ta Ch'ên and a Panshi Ta Ch'ên; and at Si Ning, a Panshi Ta Ch'ên.

Mission

The Ili country is a part of the second ecclesiastical region of China; it was constituted as a distinct mission (Ili or Sin-Kiang mission) at the expense of the Vicariate apostolic of Kan-su by a decree of 1 October, 1888; it is placed under the care of the Belgian missionaries (Cong. Imm. Cord. B.M.V. de Scheutveld) with Jean-Baptiste Steeneman as their superior. The mission includes five European priests and 300 Christians.

II. RUSSIAN TURKESTAN

Russian Central Asia includes the two khanates under Russian protection, Bokhara and Khiva, and the Turkestan region with its five provinces: Syr Daria, Samarkand, Ferghana, Semirechensk, and Transcaspian; it extends from the Caspian Sea to China, and from Siberia to Persia and Afghanistan, with an area of 721,277 square miles for Turkestan and 63,012 square miles for the Khanates. To the east, towards China, the country is mountainous and contains numerous lakes, Balkash, Issyk-kul, etc.; to the west, it is a large plain with desiccated lakes, watered by the two large rivers, Amu Daria and Syr Daria which run into the Aral Sea. The conquest of this region began in 1867 with the annexation of the country south of Lake Balkash, and occupation of the valley of the Syr Daria, forming the provinces of Semirechensk and Syr Daria; in 1878 the Zarafshan district was added and became subsequently the Samarkand Province. Later on, in 1873, part of the Khanate of Khiva, on the right bank of the Amu Daria, was occupied and was incorporated with the Syr Daria Province. In 1875 and 1876 the Khanate of Khokand being annexed became the Province of Ferghana. The population is but 6,243,422 inhabitants including, on the one hand, Russians, Poles, Germans, etc.; on the other, the natives: Aryans, Sarts, Tajiks, Tzigans, Hindus, with Mongols: Kirghizs, Ubeks, Torbors, etc., and emigrated Jews and Arabs representative of the Semitic Race. The chief products are corn, barley, rice, jugara, cotton. Cattle-breeding is the main source of commerce. The trade of Turkestan amounts to about 320 millions and a half of rubles, of which 140 millions and a half are exportation and 180 millions are importation. The chief trading province is Ferghana with 120 millions. Tashkent, the chief city of the Syr Daria Province, is also the centre of the administration of Russian Turkestan with a population of 191,500 inhabitants, of which 150,622 are natives, for the most part (140,000) Sarts. The two main rivers of Russian Turkestan which flow into the Aral Sea are the Syr Daria, Sihun, or Jaxartes, and the Amu Daria, Tihun, or Oxus.

HENRI CORDIER

Turkish Empire

Created in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries on the ruins of the Byzantine Empire, from the caliphate of Baghdad and independent Turkish principalities. It occupies a territory of 1,114,502 sq. miles, with a population estimated at 25,000,000 inhabitants, and extends over parts of Asia, Africa, and Europe between the Eastern Mediterranean, the Black Sea, the Indian Ocean, and the Red Sea. The Turkish Empire thus possesses some of the most important highways by land and sea, between these three continents.

I. GEOGRAPHY

A. The Balkan Peninsula (European Turkey)

The Balkan Peninsula (European Turkey), divided into eight provinces or vilayets, comprises the plateaux and terraces which extend to the south-east of the uplands of the Alps between the Adriatic, the Archipelago, and the Black Sea. Turkey still possesses Albania and Epirus, a vast plateau covered with towering mountain ranges (Techar-Dagh, 10,000 ft.) and with uplands stretching from the north-west to the south-east which reach as far as the Pindus; the coastal plains of the Adriatic and the small inland levels (Scutari Lake, Lake Ochrida, plains of Monastir d'Uskuf and of Yanina) are separated by very high ridges; Macedonia, a plain richly cultivated with vines, cereals, and tobacco, includes within the mountains of Macedonia to the west, Rhodope (9842 feet) to the north, Olympus to the south-west, the sharp and rocky peninsula of Chalcidice to the southeast; its only outlet, the port of Salonica (144,000 inhabitants), situated at the opening of an historical trade highway which ascends to the valley of the Vardar as far as Uskub, and over a hill of 1640 feet leads to the valley of the Bulgarian Morawa and as far as the Danube (railway route from Belgrade to Salonica): the plain of Thrace, bordering on the Archipelago and the Sea of Marmora, forming the lower level of the valley of the Maritza, of which Eastern Rumelia represents the upper. Cultivation is broken by the great stretch of sterile plateaux; the only important city in the interior is Adrianople (125,000 inhabitants), but at the extremity of the peninsula situated between the Black Sea, the Archipelago, and the Sea of Marmora, stands Constantinople, which occupies, on the Bosporus, one of the finest strategetical positions of the old continent. This metropolis of 1,500,000 inhabitants is at the cross-roads formed by the great waterway which connects the Black Sea with the Mediterranean, and by the overland route (followed by a railway) which reaches the valley of the Danube by way of Adrianople, Philippopoli, Sofia, and Belgrade. It is composed of the Turkish city of Stamboul, of the European districts of Galata and Pera separated by the natural roadstead of the Golden Horn, and of the suburbs of Scutari, Haïdar-Pacha, and Kadi Keui. These settlements are on both sides of the Bosporus, in Europe and Asia. On account of its military and commercial importance and its population composed of all the races of the earth, Constantinople is a typical cosmopolitan city.

The Peninsula of Asia Minor, or Plateau of Anatolia

Important for the richness of its coastal plains and its geographical situation; the construction of the railway from Constantinople to Baghdad (in 1912, 781 miles of track open for traffic from Constantinople to Boulgourlou by Eski-Chehir and Konieh) will result in a rebirth of this ancient country; a German company is at present fertilizing the plain of Konieh, diverting for this purpose the waters of a lake.

C. Syria

A narrow strip of land, 500 miles long by 93 wide, lies between Asia Minor; Egypt, the Mediterranean, and the Desert. It is traversed by the two parallel ridges of Libanus (ranging from three or four thousand to nine thousand feet) and Anti-Libanus, separated by a deep depression, the Gôr bounded on the north by the valley of the Orontes, on the south by that of the Jordan, which abuts on the gorge of the Dead Sea, 1200 feet below the sea level. The most important centres are the ports of Beirut (185,000 inhabitants), St. Jean d'Acre, and Jaffa (55,000 inhabitants), whence starts the railway to Jerusalem (115,000 inhabitants). The largest city is Damascus (350,000 inhabitants) in the middle of an oasis of luxuriant vegetation, one of the chief industrial centres of the Orient.

D. Mesopotamia and Turkish Armenia, or Kurdistan

Separated from Syria by the Great Desert, extends on the north to Anatolia and Armenia by the vast mountain ranges of Kurdistan, 13,000 feet, intercepted from the plains in the interior by Lake Van, whence flow the Tigris and the Euphrates, whose alluvial valleys are marvelously fertile; corn, wheat, barley, grain, one might say, originated here. Cotton may be also found in abundance, rice and plantations of date palms, and fruit-trees of every kind. The leading centres of Armenia are Erzerum, Van, and Ourfa. In Mesopotamia Mossoul (69,000 inhabitants), Baghdad (125,000 inhabitants), and Bassorah give but a feeble idea of the once great cities of Ninive, Babylon, and Seleucia-Ctesiphon.

E. The Peninsula of Arabia

The Peninsula of Arabia is a spacious desert plateau, bounded by immense mountain ranges, which rise over 9000 feet above the Red Sea. Scarcely a seventh of this vast territory (over 1,000,000 sq. miles) is dependent on the sultan, and that more nominally than in reality. The volcanic plateau of the centre (Nedjed or Arabia Petraea) is almost a desert. The population has flocked to the coast districts (Hedjaz and Yemen, or Arabia Felix). The only important centres are the sacred cities of the Mussulmans: Mecca (60,000 inhabitants) with its port Djeddah, where the Caaba, which preserves the "black stone" of Abraham, draws each year numerous pilgrims from all points of the Moslem world, and Medina (50,000 inhabitants), where Mohammed resided and died. The possession of these cities lends great political importance to the Turkish Government. A railway, intended to unite Damascus to Mecca, was laid to Medina in 1908.

F. Tripolitana

Tripolitana, occupied largely at present (1912) by the Italians, is in reality the Saharan coast of the Mediterranean. It is composed of plains of sand and rocky plateaux, to the east the plateau of Barka(ancient Cyrenaica whose coasts in antiquity were very fertile), the oasis and city of Tripoli (30,000 inhabitants), and the inland the oasis of Ghadames. On this territory of 462,767 sq. miles there are scarcely one million inhabitants. The principal resources and in the oases date palms.

II. HISTORY

The countries which form this immense territory represent what remains of the conquests of the Ottomans, a Turkish tribe originally from Khorassan, which emigrated into Asia Minor about 1224, at the time of the cataclysm produced in Central Asia by the Mongolian invasion of Jenghiz-Khan. The chiefs of the tribe of the Kei-Kankali became the mercenaries of the Seljuk emirs of Asia Minor. One of them, Othman, proclaimed himself independent at the end of the thirteenth century, and took the title of sultan, or padishah. Under Orkhan was organized with some Christian captives the permanent militia of the Janissaries; and then began incessant war between the Ottomans and the Byzantine Empire. In 1359 Suleiman entered Europe by the occupation of Gallipoli. Murad established himself at Adrianople (1360) and attacked the Slavonic peoples of the Balkans. The battle of Kossovo (1389) gave him Servia. The struggle continued until the taking of Constantinople by Mahomet II, who put an end to the Byzantine Empire (1453) and conquered the Peloponnesus (1462), Negropont (1467), Trebzond (1470), Bosnia, and Wallachia. He died in 1481, after failing to take Belgrade and Rhodes, but achieving the conquest of Anatolia as far as the Euphrates, and the peninsula of the Balkans as far as the Danube. To these conquests Selim I added Azerbaidjan, Syria, and Egypt (1517), Diarbekir and Mesopotamia (1518); he received from Mecca the banner of the prophet, and took the title of caliph, which assures to the Sultan of Constantinople the spiritual authority over all the Mussulmans of the world.

Soliman I took Rhodes from the Knights of St. John (1522) and conquered Hungary while Khaireddin Barbarossa subjected the Barbary States (1522). Selim II took possession of the Island of Cyprus (1570), but the Turkish domination had reached the limits of its extension. Soliman had been unable to take either Vienna (1526) or Malta (1562), and in 1571 the great victory of the Christian fleet at Lepanto weakened the naval power of the Turks in the Mediterranean. At the end of the sixteenth century The Turkish Empire had attained the zenith of its power on land. The siege of Vienna of 1683, which failed thanks to the intervention of the King of Poland, John Sobieski, marks the last aggressive attempt of the Turks on the West. Henceforth the western powers encroach on the Turkish Empire and begin its dismemberment. In 1699 by the treaty of Karlovitz the Sultan ceded Hungary and Transylvania to Austria. It is true that in 1739 the Turks succeeded in retaking Belgrade, but this was their last military success. The powerful militia of the Janissaries was of no further use; the administration was corrupt and venal. Moreover, the Turks were unable to impede the progress of Russia; in 1774 by the treaty of Kainardji the Turks ceded to Russia the Crimea and the coasts of the Black Sea, and to Austria Rumanian Bukowina. The French Revolution of 1789 saved Turkey from the project of division planned by Catherine II; the Peace of Jassy (1792) restored only a part of Bessarabia of the Dniester. Egypt, occupied in 1789, surrendered to Turkey in 1800, but in the most precarious condition. After the nineteenth century began the forward movement of the Christian nationalities which had submitted up to that time to Turkish domination; public opinion in Europe upheld this movement, and the governments themselves were won over. Meanwhile the rival ambitions of the powers prevented the "Eastern Question" from being regulated in a definitive manner. In 1821 the insurrection of the Greeks, supported by Europe, ended in the creation of the Kingdom of Greece (Treaty of Adrianople, 1829; and Conference of London, 1831).

The Servians formed an autonomous principality as early as 1830, and in 1832 the Pasha of Egypt, Mehemet-Ali, revolted; his independence was conceded to him in 1841, on condition that he would recognize the suzerainty of the sultan. In vain the Turks tried to reform; after the massacre and the dissolution of the Janissaries (1826) Mahmoud organized an army resembling the European, established military schools and a newspaper, and imposed the European costume on his subjects. In 1839 Abdul-Medjid organized the Tanzimât (new regime) and accorded to his subjects a real charter, liberty, religious toleration and promises of a liberal government. In 1854 the Tsar Nicholas of Russia strove to take up again the project of Catherine II, and to do away with "the sick man". Protected by France and England, Turkey kept, at the Congress of Paris (1856), all of its territory save Moldavia and Wallachia, which were declared autonomous. The Hatti-Humayoun of 16 Feb., 1856, proclaimed the admission of Christians to all employments and equality with other subjects before the law, but after the Liberal government of Fuad Pasha they resumed their former ways. On all sides the provinces revolted, and about 1875 formed the party of Young Turkey, desirous of reforming the empire on the European model.

Two sultans, Abdul-Aziz and Murad, were successively deposed. A new sultan, Abdul-Hamid, proclaimed on 23 Dec., 1876, a constitution resembling the European with a parliament and responsible ministers; but the reforming grand vizier Midhat Pasha was strangled, and the opening of parliament was no more than a comedy. Europe decided to act, and in 1877 Russia took the lead and sent an army across the Balkans, after the difficult siege of Plevna and would have entered Constantinople had it not been for the intervention of an English fleet. The treaty of San Stefano (March, 1878) established a Grand Principality of Bulgaria, and cut Turkey in Europe into many sections. Bismarck, alarmed by the progress of Russia, had this treaty revised at the Congress of Berlin (1878); the independent Bulgarian principality was reduced to Moesia to the north of the Balkans; Eastern Rumelia alone was autonomous, and Macedonia remained Turkish. The independence of Servia, Montenegro, and Rumania was sanctioned. Greece received Thessaly; Austria occupied Bosnia and Herzegovina; England established herself in the Island of Cyprus. This treaty, ratified by all the powers, was followed by new dismemberments. In 1855 Eastern Rumelia was annexed to Bulgaria. In 1897 Crete revolted, and tried to reunite Greece. After the victorious campaign of his army in Thessaly the sultan kept the sovereignty of Crete, but with an autonomous Christian governor, a son of the King of Greece.

In contrast to his predecessors, who had sought to restore their country by reforming it, the Sultan Abdul-Hamid established a regime of ferocious repression against the Young Turks, who were partisans of the reforms. A formidable police pursued all those who were suspected of Liberal ideas, and an unpitying censorship undertook the impossible task of depriving Turkey of European publications; the introduction of the most inoffensive books, such as Baedeker's guides, was prohibited. Emissaries everywhere revived Mussulman fanaticism; to the claims of the Armenian revolutionaries the Sultan responded by frightful massacres of the Armenians of Constantinople (Sept., 1895), followed soon by the slaughter which in 1896 drenched Kurdistan with blood; everywhere Armenians were tracked, and isolated massacres of Christians became also the normal order of events in Macedonia

Educated in Western ideas, the Young Turks, especially the refugees at Paris, united as early as 1895, and succeeded in spite of prohibitions in circulating in Turkey their journal the "Mechveret". A Committee of Union and Progress was even formed at Constantinople, and by constant propaganda succeeded in gaining to its cause the greater number of the officials. The uprising, the preparation of which deceived the Hamidian police, began 23 July, 1908, at Salonica; an ultimatum was sent to the sultan, who, abandoned even by his Albanians, proclaimed the re-establishment of the constitution (24 July, 1908) in the midst of indescribable enthusiasm, and called a parliament (4 Dec., 1908).

In three months 300 journals were started. Abroad, the counterstroke to this revolution was the definitive annexation, proclaimed by the Emperor of Austria, of Bosnia and Herzegovina (3 Oct., 1908). At the same time the Prince of Bulgaria took the title of Tsar of the Bulgarians (6 Oct., 1908), and repudiated the vassalage which still connected him with the sultan.

This exterior check weakened the Young Turk party, and on 13 April, 1909, a counter-revolution of Softas and soldiers of the guard broke out in Constantinople. The Young Turks had to flee the capital, but immediately the troops of Salonica, Monastir, and Adrianople consolidated and marched against Constantinople and laid siege to it (17 April, 1909). Negotiations continued for six days; finally at the moment when the massacre of the Christians seemed imminent, the Salonican troops entered Constantinople, and after a short battle became masters of the place. On 27 April Abdul-Hamid was forced to sign his abdication, and banished to Salonica. A son of Abdul-Medjid was made sultan under the name of Mohammed V, and a new constitution was proclaimed, 5 Aug., 1909, the Committee of Union and Progress superintending its execution with dictatorial powers. To-day Turkey is on the road, to reform and political reorganization.

III. RACES, NATIONALITIES, AND RELIGIONS

According to a tradition which dates back to the earliest antiquity, Oriental nationalities did not commonly form compact groups settled within well-defined boundaries. As a result of violent transmigrations of peoples owing to hurricane-like invasions, or even by the simple chance of migrations due to economic causes, all the races of the Orient are mingled in an inextricable manner, and there is not a single city of the Ottoman Empire which does not contain specimens of all races, languages, and religions. The population has therefore an entirely heterogeneous character; the Turks have never made any effort to assimilate their subjects; they do not appear even to have attempted to propagate Islamism widely. Until the constitution of 1876, and in fact as late as the revolution of 1908, they have jealously striven to safeguard their privileges as conquerors. Up to the present time the population of the empire may be said to be divided into three classes:

• The Mussulmans (Turks, Arabs, Servians, Albanians), enjoying alone the right of holding office, the only landowners, but subject to military service.
• The Raias (flocks), or infidels, conquered peoples who have obtained the right of preserving their religion, but barred from all office and subjected to heavy tax. It was upon them that the despotism of the pashas was exercised. They are still, following the creed to which they belong, divided into "nations" governed by religious authorities, Christian bishops, Jewish rabbis, responsible to the sultan, but provided with certain jurisdiction over their faithful.
• European subjects, established in Turkey for religious or commercial reasons, and under the official protection and jurisdiction of the ambassadors of the Powers. Many of the raïas of class have, however, succeeded in obtaining this privilege.

In 1535 the first "capitulation" was signed between the King of France, Francis I, and the Sultan Soliman. It accorded to France the protectorate over all the Christians. This agreement was often renewed, in 1604, 1672, 1740, and 1802. At the treaty of Kainardji Russia obtained a similar right of protection over the Orthodox Christians. The rights of France to the protection of Catholics of all nationalities have been recognized repeatedly by the Holy See, and particularly by the Encyclical of Leo XIII "Aspera rerum conditio" (22 May, 1886). The treaty of Berlin left to each state the care of protecting its subjects, but in practice France preserves the protectorate over Catholics, and even the diplomatic rupture between France and the Holy See has not impaired these civil rights. Each of the Great Powers has therefore considerable interests in the Turkish Empire: each one its own postal autonomy, courts, schools, and organizations for propaganda, teaching, and charity.

The Young Turk party, in power to-day, dreams of overthrowing this arrangement. The new constitution granted by the Sultan Mohammed V, 5 Aug., 1909, proclaims the equality of all subjects in the matter of taxes, military service, and political rights. For the first time Christians are admitted into the army, and the parliament, which meets at Constantinople, is chosen indiscriminately by all the races. The effect of this new regime appears to be, in the view of the Young Turks, the establishment of a common law for all subjects, the suppression of all privileges and capitulations. But the religious communities, or millets, hold to the ancient statutes which have safe-guarded their race and religion; the three oldest, those of the Greeks, the Armenians, and Jews, date back to the day following the taking of Constantinople by Mohammed II.

The rest of the European powers have in the Turkish Empire, political, economic, and religious interests of considerable importance; a certain number of public services, such as that of the public debt, or institutions like the Ottoman Bank, have an international character. The same holds good of most of the companies which are formed to execute public works, docks, railways, etc. . . The trade in exports and imports involves large sums of money, as one may judge by the following table:

FOREIGN COMMERCE from 1 MARCH, 1908, to 28 FEBRUARY, 1909 (IN PIASTRES)

A veritable economic war is going on between the Powers, desirous of exploiting the riches of the Orient; to the secular ambitions which menace the existence of the "sick man" have been added new forms of greed. Neither the Russians nor the Greeks have ceased to consider Constantinople as the historic goal of their efforts, and Bulgaria, deprived of Macedonia is claimed by the treaty of Berlin, also finds in its traditions claims on the same heritage. Macedonia is claimed by the Greeks, Bulgarians, Servians, and the Kutzo-Vlachs or Rumanians; Salonica has become a commercial centre for Austrian exportation; and the annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina has by one and the same stroke reinforced Austro-Hungarian and German influence in the Balkan Peninsula. Italy has some clients in Albania, and is seeking at the present moment to take possession of Tripoli.

Finally, France, England, and Germany are fighting to establish their moral and economic influence. France has maintained an important position because of the protection that it has always exercised over Catholics; French in the Orient has become a kind of second vernacular; while the influence of Germany has increased in the last few years for political reasons, by which the development of German commerce has profited. The European Powers, anxious for the defence of their own interests, are not, however, ready to abandon their capitulations. The Turkish Empire has moreover entered into a period of transformation, the end of which no one can foresee, and what delays still more the task of the new power is the infinite diversity of races and religions which make up the empire.

Although the statistical documents are very incomplete, the total population of the empire, including Egypt and the dependencies (Crete, governed by Prince George under the control of the Powers; Samos, governed since 1832 by a Greek prince appointed by the sultan), can be estimated at 36,000,000. Under the direct government of the sultan there are only 25,926,000 subjects, who belong to the following races: (1) Turks, or Osmanlis, estimated at 10,000,000, are settled throughout Asia Minor, the cities of Europe and Syria, and some cantons of Macedonia; most of them are Mussulmans. (2) Arabs (7,000,000), in Arabia, Syria, Mesopotamia, and Tripoli, forming several sects of Mussulmans. (3) Jews, scattered almost everywhere (Jews of Spanish origin form half of the population of Salonica); compact Jerusalem and its outskirts, at Baghdad, Mossoul, and Beirut. Samaritans inhabit the sanjak of Naplouse. (4) Gipsies, a mysterious race, are scattered throughout the empire. (5) Armenians, who have swarmed outside of their country and form powerful colonies in Asia Minor, Mesopotamia, Constantinople, and Turkey in Europe. From a religious standpoint they are Catholics, Gregorians, or Protestants. (6) Caucasian races: Lazes of Trebizond, Mussulmans or Orthodox Greeks; Kurds, fanatical Mussulmans scattered around Erzerum, Angora, Mossoul, Sivas; Circassians, spread throughout Asia Minor, Mussulmans. (7) Syrians, The descendants of Aramaean peoples, divided into a multitude of communities of different language and religion; Chaldeans, in Baghdad, Mossoul, Aleppo, Beirut, or Nestorians, speaking partly Syrian and partly Arabic. The Melchites speak Arabic, but belong to the Greek Church. The Jacobites, or Monophysies, speak Arabic and Syriac. The Marionites of the Lebanon and of Beirut speak Arabic and are Catholics. The Druses of the Lebanon form an heretical Mussulman sect. (8) The Greeks have remained in their historic country; as in antiquity they are a maritime people; they form powerful groups at Constantinople, Adrianoyple, Salonica, in Macedonia, Asia Minor, in the isles, in Syria, and in Crete. They belong to the Orthodox or to the Greek Uniat Church. They are of considerable importance in the empire. (9) The Albanians appear to be the remnant of a very ancient race. They form in the west of the Balkan Peninsula (Albania) a compact group and still lead a semi-patriarchal life. A large part (1,000,000) is Mussulman, the others, (30,000) Catholic: among them may be found the Powerful tribe of the Mirdites. In 1911 the new government was obliged to direct an expedition against them to effect their disarmament. (10) The Slav peoples, Bulgarians and Servians, are scattered over Macedonia and Old Servia, where they oppose Greek influence; they are divided between Islamism, Orthodox Christianity, and Catholicism. (11) The Kutzo-Vlachs or Rumanians, Orthodox or Catholics, inhabit Macedonia, where they are mostly shepherds. (12) Finally, in all Turkish cities may be found a great number of families of European origin, settled in the country for a long period and who have lost their ethnical characters and their languages. Such are the Levantines, who seek to obtain from the ambassadors foreign naturalization for the sake of its privileges.

From a religious standpoint the Mussulmans may be estimated at 50 per cent of the population, the Orthodox Church 46 per cent, Catholics 3 per cent, other communities, Jews, Druses etc., at 1 per cent. In Turkey in Europe, on the contrary, there are 66 percent of Christians to 33 percent Mussulmans.

(1) Mussulmans

The Mussulman religion has remained the religion of the state. The sultan is always the caliph, the spiritual head of the Mussulmans of the whole world. The Mussulmans comprise the majority of Turks, Arabs, and a portion of the Albanians, Bulgarians, Greeks etc. Polygamy is always legal; four legitimate wives and an unlimited number of concubines are permitted to the believers. Under the influence of Western ideas and Christianity, monogamy tends to establish itself. Divorce exists, and the divorced woman can remarry. The sexes are always separated in the family home, which comprises the selamlik (male apartments) and the harem (female apartments). It is the same in the tramways, railways, ships etc. The women cannot go out except veiled, but circulate freely in the streets of the cities unaccompanied. Slavery is always active, but it has kept a patriarchal character. The master must endow his slave when the latter marries, and the Koran obliges him to provide for the needs of his slaves. Education is progressing. In principle it is obligatory. Primary education is free, a secondary school exists at the capital of each vilayet, as well as one free professional school. Instruction of women is developing at Constantinople; the Lyceum of Galata-Serai, organized by French professors, has 1100 pupils. Higher instruction is represented by the University of Constatinople and special schools. An Imperial museum of archaeology has been created at Tchilini-Kiosk.

As in all Mussulman countries the spiritual and temporal duties are blended, and civil relations are regulated by religious law which consists in the Koran and the Cheriat, collection of customs. The interpreters of this law are the ulemas, who form a powerful clergy whose head, the Sheikh-ul-islam, has the rank of vizier, and access to the council of ministers, or divan. At twelve years of age the future ulemas leaves the primary school and enters a medresse (seminary attached to the mosque) as a softa (student) where he learns grammar, ethics, and theology. He finally receives from the Sheikh-ul-islam the diploma of candidate (mulasim) and can be elevated to the rank of the ulemas; he may become cadi (judge). To advance further he must study for seven years, when he may become imam of a mosque. The ulemas wear a white turban, the hadjis, who have been at Mecca, have the green turban. The mesjids are simple places of prayer. In a large mosque or djami maybe found sheikhs in charge of the preaching; kiatibs, who direct the Friday prayer; imams, charged with the ordinary service of the mosque (daily prayer, marriages, burials); muezzins, who ascend four times a day to the minaret to call the faithful to prayer; kaims, a kind of sacristan. Several orders of dervishes form the regular clergy and devote themselves to special practices of which some are noted for their extravagance (howling and whirling); they are distinguished by a conical felt hat. The principal religious obligations, which the faithful perform with zeal are: prayer four times daily, the weekly Friday service, the observance of Ramadan (abstinence from eating, drinking, and smoking from the rising to the setting of the sun). Islam is going through a crisis by contact with the Western world, and under the influence of Christianity many of the enlightened Turks dream of reforming its morals. On the other hand there has always been a certain opposition between the Arabs, who pretend to represent the pure Mussulman tradition, and the Turks. The pan-lslamic policy of Abdul-Hamid had weakened this opposition, and he had availed himself of his title of caliph to form relations with Mussulmans of the entire world.

To-day the pan-Islamist movement, of which the University of El-Azhar at Cairo is one of the principal centres, and which has numerous journals at its command, seems to be unfavourable to the Turkish Caliphate. The society " Al Da' wat wal Irchad" is about to create in Egypt a new university destined to form Mussulman missionaries.

(2) Greek Orthodox Church

The principal indigenous Christian community is the Greek Church, which is the survival of the religious organization of the Byzantine Empire. Its head, the "OEcumenical Patriarch of the Romans" (such is his official title), resides at Constantinople, in the Phanar quarter. He presides over a Holy Synod formed of twelve metropolitans and a "mixed council", composed of four metropolitans and eight laymen. Two million souls obey him. The oecumenical territory is divided into 100 eparchies or dioceses (83 metropolitans and 17 bishops). Since the schisms of Photius (867) and of Michael Caerularius (1054), the Greek Church has been separated from Rome by a succession of ritual and disciplinary observances rather than by dogmatic differences. The tendency of the Greek Church to autonomy has brought about the crumbling of patriarchal authority and the forming of autocephalous churches; outside of the Ottoman Empire may be found the Russian Church, the Church of the Kingdom of Greece, the Servian Church, the Church of Cyprus: in the empire, even since the firman of Abdul-Aziz (11 March, 1870), the Bulgarians have organized an independent church under the name of "Exarchate". The Bulgarian Exarch resides at Orta-Keui on the Bosporus and governs 3,000,000 souls; Thrace and Macedonia are divided into 21 Bulgarian eparchies, but a Holy Synod resides at Sofia. The Arabic speaking Syrians, or Melchites who are attached to the Orthodox Church, are under the authority of the Patriarch of Antioch, who resides at Damascus, of the Patriarchs of Jerusalem and of Alexandria, and of the Archbishop of Sinai, all independent of Constantinople.

The Greek Church has two divisions of clergy, one consisting of the popes or papas, who marry before they take orders and cannot become bishops; the other, called the upper clergy, chosen from among the monks. The monasteries are quite numerous. Those of Mount Athos form a veritable independent Republic composed of twenty convents governed by the Council of the Holy Epistasia; its head, the protepistates, is chosen in turn from the monasteries of the great Laura, Iviron, Vatopedi, Khilandariou, and Dyonisiou. The Greek Church has no organized missions, but the Hellenic propaganda is maintained at least in the schools throughout Macedonia, where there is antagonism between the Greeks and Bulgarians: the latter have had often to defend their religions and national independence against the former.

(3) Dissenting Churches

A certain number of religious communities represent the early and schismatical heretical sects who have remained separate from the Greek Church: a portion of these Christians have, however, returned to the Catholic Church. The Gregorian Armenians (who connect themselves with St. Gregory the Illuminator) have been separated since the Council of Chalcedon (451). They have many heads, the Catholicos of Etschmiadzin in Russian territory, the Catholicos of Sis (200,000 faithful in Cilicia and Syria), and the Armenian Patriarch of Constantinople, who is assisted by a national assembly of 400 members and two councils, civil and ecclesiastical (800,000 faithful, divided among 51 dioceses); finally, the Armenian Patriarch of Jerusalem, in communion with Constantinople. On the Turco-Persian frontier may be found about 100,000 Nestorians, whose patriarch resides at Kotchanes; his dignity is hereditary from uncle to nephew; many have been reunited to the Roman Church. The Monophysites, or Jacobites, to the number of 80,000 in Syria, Mesopotamia, and Kurdistan, represent the remnants of a church that was once powerful; its head, who calls himself Patriarch of Antioch, resides at the Monastery of Dar-uz-Zafaran, between Diarbekir and Mardin.

(4) The Catholic Church in the Turkish Empire

The Catholic Church in the Turkish Empire comprises two classes of faithful: those of the Latin Rite, and those who preserve their traditional rites, and are united to the Holy See, whence the name Greek-Uniats, Armenian-Uniats, etc. Turkey, a missionary country, depends directly on the Congregation of the Propaganda which has as representatives three apostolic delegates, at Constantinople, Beirut, and Bagdad; assisting them are vicars and prefects Apostolic, heads of the mission and provided with episcopal powers (except the power of conferring major orders). The Latin Catholics are scattered over the entire empire, although 148,000 Albanians form an important group under the Archbishops of Durazzo, Uskub, Scutari, and the Abbot of St. Alexander of Orochi for the Mirdites.

The Uniats comprise many distinct groups: (a) the Greeks, whose union was proclaimed by the Council of Florence in 1438, live in Italy and Corsica (Albanian colony of Cargese). In the Turkish Empire there are only some hundred or so placed under the authority of the Apostolic delegate of Constantinople. Among the popes who have striven most to bring about a union with the Greeks Benedict XIV must be remembered, and Leo XIII (Encyclical "Orientalium dignitas", 30 Nov., 1894). (b) The Melchite Greeks (110,000), in Syria, Palestine, Egypt; their patriarch resides at Damascus, and has under his jurisdiction three vicariates (Tarsus, Damietta, and Palmyra) and eleven bishops. (c) The Bulgarian-Uniats, converted about 1860 to escape from the Phanariot despotism. There remain 13,000 directed by the vicarsApostolic of Adrianople and Salonica. (d) The Armenian-Uniats, organized since 1724 under the Patriarch of Cilicia and Little Armenia, who reside at Zmar in the Lebanon. ln 1857 Pius IX conferred this title on the Armenian Archbishop of Constantinople (70,000 faithful, 2 archbishops, of Aleppo and Sivas, 12 bishops, the most of whom are in Persia and Egypt). (e) The Syrian-Uniats, converted by Latin missionaries in 1665; a firman of 1830 has recognized its autonomy (40,000 faithful, a patriarch residing at Beirut, and 12 dioceses). (f) The Chaldean-Uniats, Nestorians converted to Catholicism in 1552. Their Patriarch of Babylon resides at Mossoul (80,000 faithful). (g) The Maronites of the ancient Lebanon, a Monothelite community which abjured its heresy entirely in 1182. Its head, Patriarch of Antioch, resides at Bekerkey, near Beirut; he has 7 archbishops under his jurisdiction. The 300,000 faithful have remained particularly attached to Catholicism.

V. CATHOLIC AND PROTESTANT MISSIONS

The Christian propaganda has been carried on in the Turkish Empire by means of the missions, the oldest of which date back to the time of the Crusades. As early as 1229 Franciscan and Dominican missions were established in Palestine and as far as Damascus. In 1328 the Franciscans received the "custody" of the Holy Places, and constructed their convents of the Mount of Sion, of the Holy Sepulchre, and of Bethlehem. To-day the Franciscan custody of the Holy Land numbers 338 religious. The missionaries have, however, encountered great obstacles in their work, and they have been unable even to consider a direct propaganda in regard to the Mussulmans. Nevertheless, their moral influence is considerable; it manifests itself by social works due to their initiative (schools, hospitals, dispensaries, etc.) which are very prosperous, and are maintained by numerous organizations founded in Europe: the Society of Foreign Missions of Paris, founded in 1658; the Propagation of the Faith, founded at Lyons in 1822; the Society of St. Francis Xavier, founded at Aachen in the year 1832; the Leopoldsverein, founded in Austria in 1839; the Society of the Holy Childhood, etc.

Among the religious orders represented in the Turkish Empire must be mentioned: the Jesuits, who have established the University of St Joseph of Beirut, whose faculty of letters numbers distinguished Orientalists and epigraphists, and whose school of medicine, placed under the control of the University of France, forms a nursery for native physicians; it has a library and a printing-press supplied with Latin and Arabic characters; it publishes a journal and an Arabic review, El-Bachir, and ElMachriq; the Assumptionists, at Constantinople; many of whom devote themselves successfully to the study of archaeology and Byzantine antiquities; the Brothers of the Christian Schools, who had, in 1908, 3449 pupils (8 colleges at Constantinople, 8 at Smyrna, others at Salonica, Angora etc.); the Capuchins, established in Armenia, Asia Minor, Syria etc.; the Lazarists, at Beirut; the Carmelites, at Bagdad, Tripoli, etc.; the Salesians, in Palestine; the Sisters of St. Vincent de Paul, who have opened in almost every district schools, hospitals, and workshops, and who are respected by the Mussulmans for their self-sacrifice; the Sisters of Notre Dame of Sion, with schools in Constantinople; the Dominicans, established at Mossoul and Jerusalem, with a Biblical school. In 1910 a normal school was established at Rhodes to educate members of religious congregations to act as teachers in the East.

All these missions are officially placed under the protectorate of France. For the most part the missionaries are French, but there are also a large number of Germans, Italians, and English. Besides these Catholic missionaries, rival societies display immense activity. First of all, the Jewish Alliance, which has founded schools in most of the large cities; the Zionist movement has for its object the repeopling of Palestine by Jews; a few colonists have been attracted thither from Russia. There are throughout the empire Protestant missions from England, Germany, and America. In 1842 an Anglican bishopric was established at Jerusalem, whose titular is alternately English and German. All the large societies of Protestant missions are represented in the Orient (American Board of Foreign Missions, American U.P. Mission, Church Missionary Society, Deutsche Orientmission, German Pioneer Mission, Evangelical Missionary Society of Basle, etc.). All seek to establish their influence by the same propaganda: distribution of Bibles and Gospels translated into the native languages, hospitals, dispensaries, schools etc. At Beirut there is an American University, and more than 30 schools, comprising 3000 pupils. At Constantinople there is the American Robert College.

DUTTAND, Empire Ottoman, Turquie d'Europe, Turguie d'Asie, Nouvelle carte administrative, economique et consulaire (Paris, 1908); CUINET, La Turquie d'Asie (5 vols., Paris, 1891-94): Syrie, Liban, Palestine (Paris, 1896-98); BERARD, La Turquie et L'hellenisme contemporain (Paris, 1893); La revolution torque (Paris, 1909); DURAND, Jeune Turquie, vieille France (Paris, 1909); PINON, L'Europe et l'empire ottoman (Paris, 1910); IMBERT, La renovation de l'empire ottoman (Paris, 1909); VON OPPENHEIM, Von Mittelmeer zum persischen Golfe (2 vols., Berlin, 1899-1900); MARK-SYKES, Dar-el-islam (London, 1903); TINAYRE, Notes d'une voyageuse en Orient in Revue des deux Mondes (July-Nov., 1909); Du RAUZAS, Le regime des capitulations dans l'empire ottoman (2nd ed., Paris, 1910); JANIN, Les groupements chretiens en Orient in Echos d'Orient (1906-07); FORTESCUE, The Orthodox Eastern Church (London, 1907); DE MEESTER, Voyage de deux benedictins aux monasteres du mont Athos (Paris, 1908); BERTRAND, La melee des religions en Orient in Revue des deux Mondes (Oct., 1909); DOWLING, The patriarchate of Jerusalem (London, 1909); JEHAY, De la situation legale des sujets ottomans non musulmans (Brussels, l9O6); BERTRAND, Les ecoles d'Orient in Revue des deux Mondes (Sept., Oct., 1909); Carte des ecoles chretiennes de Macedoine (Paris, 1905); LOUVET, Les missions catholiques au XIX siecle (Lyons, 1900); KROSE, Katholische Missionsstaistik (1908); STREIT, Katholischen Missionatlas (1908); BERRE, L'action sociale des missionnaires et les dominicains francais en Turqizie d'Asie (Paris, 1910); Les massacres d'Adana et nos missionnaires (Lyons, 1909); NOPCSA, A Katolikus Eszak-Albania, XXXV (Foldrajzi Kozlemenyek, 1907); MALDEN, Foreign missions (London, 1907); BLISS, DWIGHT, AND TUPPER, The Encyclopedia of missions (2nd ed., London, 1904); BLISS, The missionary enterprise (2nd ed., New York, 1911); WHERRY AND BARTON, The Mohammedan World of To-day (New York, 1911).

Periodicals: Missiones Catholicoe cura S. Congregationis de Propaganda Fide descriptoe (Rome); Revue du Monde musulman (Paris; see Nov., 1911, La conquete du monde musulman); Echos d'Orient (Paris, 1897--). BEACH, Statistical atlas of missions (London and New York, 1910); HUBER, Carte statistique des Cultes chretiens: I, Turquie d'Europe; II, Turquie d'Asie (Cairo, 1910-11).

LOUIS BRÉHIER

Adrian Turnebus

Philologist, b. at Andely in Normandy in 1512; d. in Paris, 12 June, 1565. The accounts of the life of the great scholar are scanty and in part even contradictory. Neither is it easy to interpret the name Turnebus, in French Turnèbe. It is said that his father was a Scottish gentleman named Turnbull, who settled in Normandy and gave his name the French form of Tournebæuf. From this it became Tournebu, then Turnèbe, in Latin Turnebus. Whatever may have been the derivation of his name, Turnebus came from a noble though poor family. When eleven years old he was sent to Paris to study. Here his ability and industry enabled him not only to surpass his fellow-pupils but even also his teachers. In 1532 he received the degree of Master of Arts at the University of Paris, and one year later he became professor of humanities at Toulouse. Having held this position for fourteen years, he next became professor of Greek at Paris, and in 1561 exchanged this professorship for that of Greek philosophy. For a time (1552-55) he and his friend William Morel supervised the royal printing press for Greek works. It is said, and can easily be believed of so distinguished a scholar, that important professorships in other places were declined by him while he taught at Paris. As an illustration of his remarkable industry a well-authenticated story is told, that he devoted several hours to study even on his wedding-day. Over-study, however, wore out his strength prematurely, and he died at the age of fifty-three. In accordance with his own testamentary directions, his body was placed in the ground without any religious ceremony on the very evening of his death. This curious proceeding, as well as various utterances and a severe poem on the Jesuits, raised the much controverted question, whether Turnebus remained a Catholic or became an adherent of the new heresy. It seems at least probable that he inclined to Protestant views, even though he did not break completely with the Church, as his Catholic friends steadily maintained. In other respects his character was blameless. His reputation rests not only on his lectures, but also in equal measure on his writings. His numerous works, including commentaries on the ancient classics, short treatises, and poems, were collected and published (2 vols., Strasburg, 1600) with the co-operation of his three sons.

De Thou, Histoire universelle; JÖcher, Allg. Gelehrten-Lexikon; Iselin, Neu vermehrtes histor. u. geographisches Lexikon, VI.

N. SCHEID

Turpin

Archbishop of Reims, date of birth uncertain; d. 2 Sept., 800. He was a monk of St. Denis when, about 753, he was called to the See of Reims. With eleven other bishops of France he attended the Council of Rome in which Pope Stephen III condemned the antipope Constantine to perpetual confinement. He enriched the library of his cathedral by having numerous works copied, and obtained from Charlemagne several privileges for his diocese. Legends grew up around his life, so that by degrees he becomes an epic character who figures in numerous chansons de geste, especially in the "Chanson de Roland". Furthermore, a chronicle known as the "Historia Karoli Magni et Rotholandi" has been attributed to him; but that he was not the author is proved by the use in the chronicle of the word "Lotharingia" which did not exist prior to 855, the mention of the musical chant written on four lines, a custom which does not date back further than 1022, and finally the silence of all the writers of the ninth and tenth centuries regarding this so-called book of Turpin's. The first to mention him is Raoul de Tortaine, a monk of Fleury, who wrote from 1096 to 1145. At the same time Calistus II regarded the book as authentic, and its diffusion revived the fervour of the pilgrimages to St. James of Compostella. In it is related an apparition of St. James to Charlemagne; the saint orders the emperor to follow with his army the direction of the Milky Way, which was thenceforth called the "Path of St. James". Gaston Paris considers that the first five chapters of the chronicle attributed to Turpin were written about the middle of the eleventh century by a monk of Compostella, and that the remainder were written between 1109 and 1119 by a monk of St. AndrÈ de Vienne. This second part has a real literary importance, for the monk who wrote it derived his inspiration from the chansons de geste and the epic traditions; hence there may be seen in this compilation a very ancient form of these traditions. The chronicle was translated into Latin and French as early as 1206 by the cleric Jehan, in the service of Renaud de Dammartin, Count of Boulogne. Editions according to various MSS. have been issued at Paris by Castets (1880) and at Lund by Wulff (1881).

Gaston Paris, De pseudo Turpino (Paris, 1865); Auracher, Der altfranzösische Pseudo-Turpin der Arsenalhandschrift in Romanische Forschungen, V (1889-90); Fisquet, La France potificale: Reims (Paris, 1864).

GEORGES GOYAU

Tuscany

Tuscany, a division of central Italy, includes the provinces of Arezzo, Florence, Grosseto, Livorno, Massa and Carrara, Pisa, and Siena; area, 9304 sq. miles; population in 1911, 2,900,000. Ecclesiastically it is divided into the provinces of Florence, with 6 suffragan dioceses; Pisa, with 4 suffragans; Siena, with 5 suffragans, the Archdiocese of Lucca; and the immediate Dioceses of Arezzo, Cortona, Montalcino, Montepulciano, and Pienza. The territory is essentially the same as that of ancient Etruria. In the sixth and fifth centuries B.C. the Etruscans were the dominant power in northern and central Italy, and brought Latium and Rome under their supremacy. Towards the end of the sixth century B.C. Rome regained its independence, and from the second half of the fifth century it began a struggle for supremacy. There were many changes of fortune during the long war, but it ended about 280 B.C. with the overthrow of Etruria. During the Empire Etruria formed the seventh region of Italy. After the fall of the Western Empire, Tuscany was ruled successively by the Germans under Odoacer, by the Ostrogoths, by the Eastern Empire through Narses, and by the Lombards. Tuscany, or Tuscia as it was called in the Middle Ages, became a part of the Frankish Empire. during the reign of Charlemagne and was formed a margravate, the margrave of which was also made the ruler several times of the Duchy of Spoleto and Camerino. In 1030 the margravate fell to Boniface, of the Canossa family. Boniface was also Duke of Spoleto, Count of Modena, Mantua, and Ferrara, and was the most powerful prince of the empire in Italy. He was followed by his wife Beatrice, first as regent for their minor son who died in 1055, then as regent for their daughter Matilda; in 1076 Beatrice died. Both she and her daughter were enthusiastic adherents of Gregory VII in his contest with the empire, After Matilda's death in 1115 her hereditary possessions were for a long time an object of strife between the papacy and the emperors.

During the years 1139-45 Tuscany was ruled by Margrave Hulderich, who was appointed by the Emperor Conrad III. Hulderich was followed by Guelf, brother of Henry the Lion. In 1195 the Emperor Henry VI gave the margravate in fief to his brother Philip. In 12O9 Otto IV renounced in favour of the papacy all claim to Matilda's lands, as did also the Emperor Frederick II in the Golden Bull of Eger of 1213, but both firmly maintained the rights of the empire in the Tuscan cities. During the struggle between the popes and the emperors' and in the period following the fall of the Hohenstaufens when the throne was vacant, Florence, Siena, Pisa, Lucca, Arezzo, and other Tuscan cities attained constantly increasing independence and autonomy. They acquired control also of Matilda's patrimony, so far as it was situated in Tuscany. In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries all Tuscany, except Siena and Lucca, came under the suzerainty of Florence and the Medici. In 1523 the Emperor Charles V made Alessandro Medici hereditary Duke of Florence. The last Tuscan towns that still enjoyed independence were acquired by Alessandro's successor Cosimo I (1537-74) partly by cunning and bribery, partly with Spanish aid by force of arms. In 1557 Philip II, who required Cosimo's aid against the pope, granted him Siena which in 1555 had surrendered to the emperor. Only a small part of Sienese territory remained Spanish as the Stato degli presidi. Thus the Medici acquired the whole of Tuscany, and in 1569 the pope made Cosimo Grand Duke of Tuscany. Although at the beginning of Cosimo's reign there were several conspiracies, especially by the exiled families, the Fuorisciti, the Florentines gradually became accustomed to the absolute government of the ruler. Cosimo had created a well-ordered state out of the chaos existing previously, and had established this state on the foundation of justice, equality of all citizens, good financial administration, and sufficient military strength. Art, literature, and learning also enjoyed a new era of prosperity during his reign. After long negotiations his son Francesco I (1574-87) received in 1576 from the Emperor Maximilian the confirmation of the grand ducal title which had been refused his father. In his foreign policy Francesco was dependent on the Habsburg dynasty. During his weak reign the power was in the hands of women and favourites, and the corruption of the nobility and officials gained ground again, while the discontent of the common people was increased by heavy taxes. After the death of his first wife the grand duke married his mistress, the Venetian Bianca Capello. As he had only daughters, one of whom was the French queen, Maria de Medici, and the attempt to substitute an illegitimate son failed, he was followed by his brother Cardinal Ferdinand (1587-1605, who has been accused without any historical proof of poisoning his brother and sister-in-law.

In foreign policy Ferdinand made himself independent of the emperor and Spain and as an opponent of the preponderance of the Habsburgs supported the French King Henry IV. Henry's return to the Catholic Church was largely due to Ferdinand's influence. Ferdinand benefited his duchy by an excellent administration and large public works, e.g. the draining of the Mianatales and the Maremma of Siena, the construction of the port of Leghorn, etc. He re-established public safety by repressing brigandage. In 1589 he resigned the cardinalate with the consent of Sixtus V, and married Christine, daughter of Henry III of France. His relations with the papacy were almost always of the best; he promoted the reform of the Tuscan monasteries and the execution of the decrees of the Council of Trent. His son Cosimo II (1609-21) married Margareta, sister of the Emperor Ferdinand II. Cosimo II ruled in the same spirit as his father and raised the prosperity of the country to a height never before attained. He was succeeded by a minor son of eleven years, Ferdinand II (1621-70), the regent being the boy's mother. Margareta's weakness led to the loss of Tuscany's right to the Duchy of Urbino, which fell vacant, and which Pope Urban VII took as an unoccupied fief of the Church. From 1628 Ferdinand ruled independently; to the disadvantage of his country he formed a close union with the Habsburg dynasty which involved him in a number of Italian wars. These wars, together with pestilence, were most disastrous to the country. Cosimo III (1670-1723) brought the country to the brink of ruin by his unlucky policy and his extravagance. His autocratic methods, inconsistency, and preposterous measures in internal affairs place upon him the greater part of the responsibility for the extreme arbitrariness that developed among the state officials, especially among those of the judiciary. Although he sought to increase the importance of the Church, yet he damaged it by using the clergy for police purposes, proceeded against heretics with undue severity, and sought to aid the conversion of non-Catholics and Jews by all means, even, very material ones. During the War of the Spanish Succession the grand duke desired to remain neutral, although he had accepted Siena in fief once more from Philip V. In this era the land was ravaged by pestilence, and the war-taxes and forced contributions levied on it by the imperial generals completely destroyed its prosperity. Neither of Cosimo's two sons had male heirs, and finally he obstinately pursued the plan, although without success, to transfer the succession to his daughter. Before this, however, the powers had settled in the Peace of Utrecht that when the Medici were extinct the succession to Tuscany was to fall to the Spanish Bourbons. Cosimo III was followed by his second son Giovan Gastone (1723-37), who permitted the country to be governed by his unscrupulous chamberlain, Giuliano Dami. When he died the Medici dynasty ended.

In accordance with the Treaty of Vienna of 1735 Francis, Duke of Lorraine, who had married Maria Theresa in 1736, became grand duke (1737-65) instead of the Spanish Bourbons. Francis Joseph garrisoned the country with Austrian troops and transferred its administration to imperial councillors. As Tuscany now became an Austrian territory, belonging as inheritance to the second son, Tuscany was more or less dependent upon Vienna. However, the country once more greatly advanced in economic prosperity, especially during the reign of Leopold I (1765-90), who, like his brother the Emperor Joseph I, was full of zeal for reform, but who went about it more slowly and cautiously. In 1782 Leopold suppressed the Inquisition, reduced the possessions of the Church, suppressed numerous monasteries, and interfered in purely internal ecclesiastical matters for the benefit of the Jansenists. After his election as emperor he was succeeded in 1790 by his second son, Ferdinand III, who ruled as his father had done. During the French Revolution Ferdinand lost his duchy in 1789 and 1800; it was given to Duke Louis of Parma on 1 October, under the name of the Kingdom of Etruria. In 1807 Tuscany was united directly with the French Empire, and Napoleon made his sister Eliza Bacciocchi its administrator with the title of grand duchess. After Napoleon's overthrow the Congress of Vienna gave Tuscany again to Ferdinand and added to it Elba, Piombino, and the Stato degli presidi. A number of the monasteries suppressed by the French were re-established by the Concordat of 1815 but otherwise the government was influenced by the principles of Josephinism in its relations with the Catholic Church. When the efforts of the Italian secret societies for the formation of a united national state spread to Tuscany, Ferdinand formed a closer union with Austria, and the Tuscan troops were placed under Austrian officers as preparation for the breaking-out of war. The administration of his son Leopold II (1824-60) was long considered the most liberal in Italy, although he reigned as an absolute sovereign. The Concordat of 1850 also gave the Church greater liberty. Notwithstanding the economic and intellectual growth which the land enjoyed, the intrigues of the secret societies found the country fruitful soil, for the rulers were always regarded as foreigners, and the connection they formed with Austria made them unpopular.

In 1847 a state council was established; on 15 Feb., 1848, a constitution was issued, and on 26 June was opened. Notwithstanding this, the sedition against the dynasty increased, and in August there were street fights at Leghorn in which the troops proved untrustworthy. Although Leopold had called a democratic ministry in October, with Guerrazzi and Montanelli at its head, and had taken part in the Piedmontese war against Austria, yet the Republicans forced him to flee from the country and go to Gaeta in Feb., 1849. A provisional republican government was established at Florence; this before long was forced to give way to an opposing movement of moderated Liberalism. After this by the aid of Austria Leopold was able in July, 1849, to return. In 1852 he suppressed the constitution issued in 1848 and governed as an absolute ruler, although with caution and moderation. However, the suppression of the constitution and the fact that up to 1855 an Austrian army of occupation remained in the country made him greatly disliked. When in 1859 war was begun between Sardinia-Piedmont and Austria, and Leopold became the confederate of Austria, a fresh revolution broke out which forced him to leave. For the period of the war Victor Emmanuel occupied the country. After the Peace of Villa Franca had restored Tuscany to Leopold, the latter abdicated in favour of his son Ferdinand IV. On 16 Aug., 1859, a national assembly declared the deposition of the dynasty, and a second assembly (12 March, 1860) voted for annexation to Piedmont, officially proclaimed on 22 March. Since then Tuscany has been a part of the Kingdom of Italy, whose capital was Florence from 1865 to 1871.

GALLUZZI, Storia del granducato di Toscana sotto il governo della casa Medici (5th ed., 18 vols., Florence, 1830); NAPIER, Florentine History (6 vols. London, 1847); ZOBI, Storia civile della Toscana (5 vols. Florence, 1850-52); IDEM, Memorie e documenti officiali (2 vols., Florence, 1860); IDEM, Cronaca degli avvenimenti nel 1859 (2 vols., Florence, 1859-60); Giornale storico degli archivi toscani (7 vols., Florence, 1857-68; CANESTRINI, Négociations diplontatiques de la France avec la Toscane, ed. DESJARDINS (6 vols., Paris, 1859-86); POGGI, Memorie storiche del governo della Toscana 1859-60 (3 vols., Pisa, 1871); Leopoldo II e i suoi tempi (Florence, 1871); REUMONT, Geschichte Toscanas (2 vols., Gotha, 1876-77); REUCHLIN, Geschichte Italiens, III-IV (Leizig, 1870-73); ROHAULT DE LA FLEURY, La Toscane au moyen âge (2 vols., Paris, 1874); MERKEL, Bibliografia degli anni 1859-91 in Bulletino storico italiano (1892); WURZBACH, Die Grossherzöge von Tosk (Vienna, 1883); MÜNTZ, Florence et la Toscane (2nd ed. Paris, 1901).

JOSEPH LINS

Tuy

(Tudensis.)

Suffragan diocese of the Archdiocese of Santiago, comprises the civil provinces of Orense and Pontevedra, is bounded on the north by Pontevedra, on the east by Orense, on the south by Portugal, and on the west by the Atlantic Ocean. The city has a population of 3000, and is of very ancient origin. Ptolemy calls it Toudai and attributes its foundation to Diomedes, son of Tydeus (just as the foundation of Lisbon is attributed to Ulysses). During the Roman period it belonged to the conventus juridicus or judicial district of Braga. The city seems to have been at first situated on the top of Mount Alhoya whence it was moved to its base, where it was in the time of the Goths. When King Egica shared the government with his son Wittiza he made him live at Tuy, probably at the site known as Pazos de Reyes (palaces of the kings). The See of Tuy is very ancient; one of the four bishops of Galicia at the first Council of Braga (561) was Bishop of Tuy. The first historically known bishop was Anila who attended the second Council of Braga (572); he signed as suffragan of Lugo. Neuphilias lived under the Arian King Leovigild, by whom he was exiled and the Arian Gardingus put in his place. Gardingus abjured his heresy at the third Council of Toledo. Anastasius was present at the fourth and sixth Councils of Toledo; Adimirus at the seventh; and Beatus sent the cleric Victorinus to represent him at the eighth. Genetivus was present at the third Council of Braga (675) as a suffragan of Braga, and also at the twelfth Council of Toledo. Oppa was present at the thirteenth, and Adelphius at the fifteenth.

Tuy fell into the hands of the Mahommedans, but was not entirely destroyed as it is numbered among the cities reconquered by Alfonso I, but not recolonized until the time of Ordono I. The exiled Bishop of Tuy took refuge in Iria (Compostella), and a parish was assigned to him for his support. The first known Bishop of Tuy after the Saracen invasion is Diego (890-901), present at the consecration of the Church of St. James the Apostle (899), also at the Council of Oviedo in which this see was raised to the rank of a metropolitan (900). Hermoigius founded the monastery of San Cristóbal of Labrugia, resided in Tuy, and in 915 began the reconstruction of the cathedral. At the battle of Valdejunquera he was made prisoner by the Arabs and taken to Cordova where he was forced to leave as a hostage his nephew, St. Pelagius, a child of thirteen. The latter suffered martyrdom in defence of his chastity; his relics were transferred to Oviedo and he was declared the patron of Tuy. Naustianus (926) retired to the monastery of Labrugia to avoid the assaults of the Norsemen who had come up as far as Tuy along the River Miño. His successor, Vimaranus (937-42), retired to the monastery Rivas de Sil, as did the next bishop, Viliulfus (952-70). The Norsemen led by Olaf were encamped at different times at Tuy and ravaged it cruelly (1014), on which account Alfonso V placed it under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Compostella. Bishop Alfonso I and his priests had been made captive, and thereafter, until the time of Doña Urraca, a sister of Alfonso VI, a period of forty-seven years, the See of Tuy was vacant. Doña Urraca re-established it and made Jorge (Georgius) bishop. He took up his residence in the monastery of San Bartolomé, whose monks were canons of the cathedral. The decree of the restoration of the see is dated 13 Jan., 1071. Bishop Adericus (1072-95) succeeded Jorge. The bishops, by concession of Raymond of Burgundy and Alfonso VII, were lords of the city, and Bishop Alfonso II began building the new cathedral, which was finished a hundred years later by Esteban Egea (1218-39). In the time of Bishop Pelayo Meléndez (1131-55) the canons adopted the Rule of St. Augustine. Among the bishops who deserve special mention are: Lucas de Tuy, called "El Tudense", annalist of Doña Berenguela, to whom we owe the compilation known as the "Cronicón de España"; Juan Fernandez de Sotomayor, councillor of Queen Doña Mariá de Molina, who was present at the Council of Vienna (1312); and Prudencio de Sandoval, a Benedictine, celebrated annalist of Charles V.

The Western Schism caused a division in the ranks of the clergy of Tuy, the bishop giving allegiance to the Avignon pope, others to the pope at Rome, whom Portugual also obeyed. Martin V commanded the latter to recognize the legitimate bishop, and when some resisted this order their churches were allowed to be governed by vicars residing in Portugal (1441). The cathedral of the diocese, which is dedicated to the Blessed Virgin, resembles a medieval fortress, as it is built on the crown of the ancient castle fort (Castellum Tude). It belongs to the early Gothic period and, on account of its height, the importance of its side naves, its clerestory (now walled up, but preserving its ancient arches and columns), the interior is well worthy of note. The ground plan is that of a Latin cross (the four arms being extremely short) with four naves, those on the side terminating in the apse. The chapel of San Telmo (San Pedro Gonzalez), built by Bishop Diego de Torquemada (1564-82) who transferred to it the relics of the saint, is worthy of note. Between the altar of the Visitation and that of the Seven Dolours is the unique sepulchre of Lope de Sarmiento (d. 1607). To the cathedral is attached a handsome Gothic cloister. The churches of the old Dominican and Franciscan convents have been converted into parish churches, the convent of Santo Domingo being used for a barracks and that of San Francisco for primary and secondary schools. Tuy has a fine hospital (built by Bishop Rodríguez Castañon) and a home for the aged in charge of the Little Sisters of the Poor. The seminary, which is dedicated to St. Francis of Assisi and the Immaculate Conception, was founded in 1850 by Bishop Francisco Garcia Casarrubios y Melgar. Among the illustrious men of the diocese may be mentioned St. Teutonius, the humanist Alvaro Cadaval y Sotomayor, and Francisco Avila y La Creva, author of a history of the diocese.

Florez, Esp. Sagrada, XXII-XXIII (Madrid, 1798-99); Marguia, Esp., sus monumentos: Galicia (Barcelona, 1888); Davila, Teatro ecles. de Tuy; Sandoval y Argaiz, Episcopologios.

RAMÓN RUIZ AMADO

St. John Twenge

Last English saint canonized, canon regular, Prior of St. Mary's, Bridlington, b. near the town, 1319; d. at Bridlington, 1379. He was of the Yorkshire family Twenge, which family in Reformation days supplied two priest-martyrs and was also instrumental in establishing the Institute of the Blessed Virgin Mary (q. v.) at Bar Convent, York. John completed his studies at Oxford and then entered the Priory of Bridlington. Charged successively with various offices in the community, he was finally despite his reluctance elected prior, which office he held until his death. Even in his lifetime he enjoyed a reputation for great holiness and for miraculous powers. On one occasion he changed water into wine. On another, five seamen from Hartlepool in danger of shipwreck called upon God in the name of His servant, John of Bridlington, whereupon the prior himself appeared to them in his canonical habit and brought them safely to shore. After his death the fame of the miracles wrought by his intercession spread rapidly through the land. Archbishop Neville charged his suffragans and others to take evidence with a view to his canonization, 26 July, 1386; and the same prelate assisted by the Bishops of Durham and Carlisle officiated at a solemn translation of his body, 11 March, 1404, de mandato Domini Papae. This pope, Boniface IX, shortly afterwards canonized him. The fact has been doubted and disputed; but the original Bull was recently unearthed in the Vatican archives by Mr. T.A. Twemlow, who was engaged in research work there for the British Government. St. John was especially invoked by women in cases of difficult confinement. At the Reformation the people besought the royal plunderer to spare the magnificent shrine of the saint, but in vain; it was destroyed in 1537. The splendid nave of the church, restored in 1857, is all that now remains of Bridlington Priory. The saint's feast is observed by the canons regular on 9 October.

BUTLER, Lives of the Saints; GASQUET, Henry VIII and the English Monasteries (London, 1889); STANTON, Menology (London and New York, 1892); State Papers, Rolls Series, Northern Registers; WALSINGHAM, Historia Anglicana (London, 1863-76); SURIUS, De probatis Sanctorum Historiis (Turin, 1875-80).

VINCENT SCULLY

Twiketal of Croyland

(THURCYTEL, TURKETUL).

Died July, 975. He was a cleric of royal descent, who is said to have acted as chancellor to Kings Athelstan (d. 940), Edmund (d. 946), and Edred (d. 955), but as this statement rests on the authority of the pseudo-Ingulf, it must be received with caution. Leaving the world in 946 he became a monk of Croyland Abbey, which had been devastated by the Danes and lay in a ruinous and destitute state. He endowed it with six of his own manors, and, being elected abbot, restored the house to a flourishing condition. He was a friend both of St. Dunstan and St. Ethelwold of Winchester, and like them a reformer. The real authority for his life is Ordericus Vitalis; for no reliance can be placed on the long and fictitious account in the fourteenth-century forgery which is published under the name of Ingulf of Croyland (q.v.).

EDWIN BURTON

Tyana

A titular metropolitan see of Cappadocia Prima. The city must first have been called Thoana, because Thoas, a Thracian king, was its founder (Arrianus, "Periplus Ponti Euxini", vi); it was in Cappadocia, but at the foot of Taurus and near the Cilician Gates (Strabo, XII, 537; XIII, 587). The surrounding plain received the name of Tyanitis. There in the first century A.D. was born the celebrated magician Apollonius. Under Caracalla the city became the "Antoniana colonia Tyana". After having taken sides with Queen Zenobia of Palmyra it was captured by Aurelian in 272, who would not allow his soldiers to pillage it (Homo, "Essai sur le règne de l'Empereur Aurélien", 90-92). In 371 Valens created a second province of Cappadocia, of which Tyana became the metropolis, which aroused a violent controversy between Anthimus, Bishop of Tyana, and St. Basil, Bishop of Caesarea, each of whom wished to have as many suffragan sees as possible. About 640 Tyana had three, and it was the same in the tenth century (Gelzer, "Ungedruckte . . . Texte der Notitiae episcopatum", 538, 554). Le Quien (Oriens christ., I, 395- 402) mentions 28 bishops of Tyana, among whom were Eutychius, at Nice in 325; Anthimus, the rival of St. Basil; Aetherius, at Constantinople in 381; Theodore, the friend of St. John Chrysostom; Eutherius, the partisan of Nestorius, deposed and exiled in 431; Cyriacus, a Severian Monophysite. In May, 1359, Tyana still had a metropolitan (Mikelosich and Müller, "Acta patriarchatus Constantinopolitani", I, 505); in 1360 the metropolitan of Caesarea secured the administration of it (op. cit., 537). Thenceforth the see was titular. The ruins of Tyana are at Kilisse-Hissar, three miles south of Nigde in the vilayet of Koniah; there are remains of a Roman aqueduct and of sepulchral grottoes.

S. VAILHÉ

St. Tychicus

A disciple of St. Paul and his constant companion. He was a native of the Roman province of Asia (Acts, xx, 4), born, probably, at Ephesus. About his conversion nothing is known. He appears as a companion of St. Paul in his third missionary journey from Corinth through Macedonia and Asia Minor to Jerusalem. He shared the Apostle's first Roman captivity and was sent to Asia as the bearer of letters to the Colossians and Ephesians (Eph., vi, 21; Col, iv, 7, 8). According to Tit., iii, 12, Paul intended to send Tychicus or Artemas to Crete to supply the place of Titus. It seems, however, that Artemas was sent, for during the second captivity of St. Paul at Rome Tychicus was sent thence to Ephesus (II Tim., iv, 12). Of the subsequent career of Tychicus nothing certain is known. Several cities claim him as their bishop. The Menology of Basil Porphyrogenitus, which commemorates him on 9 April, makes him Bishop of Colophon and successor to Sosthenes. He is also said to have been appointed Bishop of Chalcedon by St. Andrew the Apostle (Lipsius, "Apokryphe Apostelgesch.", Brunswick, 1883, 579). He is also called bishop of Neapolis in Cyprus (Le Quien, "Oriens christ.", Paris, 1740, I, 125; II, 1061). Some martyrologies make him a deacon, while the Roman Martyrology places his commemoration at Paphos in Cyprus. His feast is kept on 29 April.

FRANCIS MERSHMAN

Tynemouth Priory

Tynemouth Priory, on the east coast of Northumberland, England, occupied the site of an earlier Saxon church built first in wood, then in stone, in the seventh century, and famous as the burial-place of St. Oswin, king and martyr. Plundered and burnt several times by the Danes, and frequently rebuilt, it was granted in 1074 to the Benedictine monks of Yarrow, and, with them, annexed to Durham Abbey. In the reign of William Rufus, Robert de Mowbray, Earl of Northumberland, re-peopled Tynemouth with monks from St. Albans, and it became a cell of that abbey, remaining so until the Dissolution. The Norman Church of Sts. Mary and Oswin was built by Earl Robert about 1100, and 120 years later was greatly enlarged, a choir 135 feet long with aisles being added beyond the Norman apse, while the nave was also lengthened. East of the choir and chancel was added about 1320 an exquisite Lady-chapel, probably built by the Percy family, which had lately acquired the great Northumberland estates of the de Vescis. The first prior of the re-founded monastery was Remigius, and the last was Robert Blakeney, who on 12 Jan., 1539, surrendered the priory to Henry VIII, he himself, with fifteen monks and four novices, signing the deed of surrender, which is still extant, with the beautiful seal of the monastery appended to it. A pension of £80 was granted to Blakeney, and small pittances to the monks; and the priory site and buildings were bestowed first on Sir Thomas Hilton, and later, under Edward VI, on the Duke of Northumberland. Colonel Villars, governor of Tynemouth Castle under William III and Anne, had a lease of the priory, and id irreparable damage to the remaining buildings. Practically nothing is now left except the roofless chancel, one of the most beautiful fragments of thirteenth-century architecture in England.

D.O. HUNTER-BLAIR

Types in Scripture

Types, though denoted by the Greek word typoi, are not coextensive with the meaning of this word. It signifies in John 20:25, the "print" of the nails in the risen Lord's hands; in Romans 6:17, the "form" of the Christian doctrine; in Acts 7:43, "figures" formed by a blow or impression, "images" of idols made for adoration; in Acts 7:44, and Hebrews 8:5, the "form", or "pattern", according to which something is to be made; in Philippians 3:17, I Timothy 4:12, etc., the "model" or "example" of conduct. It is to be noted that, in all instances in which the word typos indicates the similarity between something future and something past in either the physical or the moral order, this similarity is intended, and not a matter of chance resemblance. It is, therefore, antecedently probable that in another series of texts, e.g. Romans 5:14, in which a type is a person or thing prefiguring a future person or thing, the connection between the two terms is intended by him who foresees and arranges the course of history. The types in the Bible are limited to types understood in this sense of the word. But while they do not extend to all the various meanings of the word typos, they are not restricted to its actual occurrence. In Galatians 4:24, for instance, the type and its antitype are represented as allegoroumena, "said by an allegory"; in Colossians 2:17, the type is said to be skia ton mellonton "a shadow of things to come"; in Hebrews 9:9, it is called parabole, a "parable" of its antitype. But the definition of the type is verified in all these cases: a person, a thing, or an action, having its own independent and absolute existence, but at the same time intended by God to prefigure a future person, thing, or action.

I. NATURAL BASIS OF TYPES

It has been pointed out that in the various degrees of nature the higher forms repeat the laws of the lower forms in a clearer and more perfect way. In history, too, the past and present often resemble each other to such an extent that some writers regard it as an axiom that history repeats itself. They point to Nabuchodonosor and Napoleon, to the fleet of Xerxes and the armada of Philip. After Plutarch has informed his reader (De fortuna Alexandri, x) that among all the expressions of Homer the words "both a good king, and an excellent fighter in war" pleased Alexander most, he adds that in this verse Homer seems not merely to celebrate the greatness of Agamemnon but also to prophesy that of Alexander. What is true of nature and history in general is especially applicable to the economy of salvation; the state of nature was superseded and surpassed in perfection by the Mosaic Law, and the Mosaic Law yielded similarly to the Christian dispensation.

II. FIGURISTS

In the two earlier periods of Revelation there is no lack of men, things, and actions resembling those of the Christian economy; besides, the New Testament expressly declares that some of them typify their respective resemblances in the new dispensation. Hence the question arises whether one is justified in affirming to be a type anything which is not affirmed to be so in Revelation, either by direct statement or manifest implication. Witsius Cocceius (d. 1669) were of opinion that the types actually indicated in Revelation were to be considered rather as examples for our guidance in the interpretation of others than as supplying us with an entire list of all that were designed for this purpose. Cocceius and his followers contended that every event in Old Testament history which had any formal resemblance to something in the New was to be regarded as typical. This view opened the door to frivolous and absurd interpretation by the followers of the Cocceian and Witsian school. Cramer, for instance, in his "De ara exteriori" (xii, 1) considers the altar of holocausts as a type of Christ, and then asks the question, "quadratus quomodo Christus fuerit"; van Till (De tabernaculo Mosis, xxv) presents the snuffers of the sacred candlestick as a type of sanctified reason which destroys our daily occurring errors. Hulsius, d'Outrein, Deusing, and Vitringa (d. 1722) belong to the same school.

III. PIETISTS

In the Würtemberg school of pietism the types of the Old Testament were no longer considered an isolated phenomena, intended to instruct and confirm in the faith, but were regarded as members of an organic development of the salvific economy in which each earlier stage prefigures the subsequent. Bengel points out (Gnomon, preface, 13) that as there is symmetry in God's works down to the tiniest blade of grass, so there is a connection in God's works, even in the most insignificant ones. In his "Ordo temporum" (ix, 13) the same writer insists on the unity of design, which makes one work out of all the books of Scripture, the source of all times, and has measured the past and the future alike. One of Bengel's disciples, P. M. Hahn, compares (Theologische Schriften, ii, 9) the development of revelation to the growth of a flower. The formative power hidden in the seed manifests itself more and more by the addition of each pair of leaves. This view was followed also by Ph. Hiller in his work ("Neues System aller Vorbilder Christi im Alten Testament" (1758), and by Crusius in his treatise "Hypomnemata theol. propheticae" (1764-78). The last-named writer is of the opinion that the figurative development of God's kingdom changes into an historical growth at the time of David; he considers the Kingdom of David as the embryo of the Kingdom of Christ.

IV. MODERATE USE OF TYPES

Owing to their lack of a clear distinction between type and allegory, Martin Luther and Melanchthon did not esteem the typical sense of Scripture at its true value. Andreas Rivetus attempted to draw a line of distinction between type and allegory (Praef. ad ps., 45), and Gerhard (Loci, II, 67) closely adhered to his definition. But practically types were used for parenetic rather than theological purposes by Baldwin (Passio Christi typica; Adventus Christi typicus), Bacmeister (Explicatio typorum V. T. Christum explicantium), and other writers of this school. They would have had more confidence in the typical sense of Scripture had they followed the view of Bishops von Mildert and Marsh. For these writers did not leave the typical sense to the imagination of the individual expositor, but rigidly required competent evidence of the Divine intention that a person or an event was to prefigure another person or event. Even in the Bible they distinguish between examples that are used for the sake of illustration only and those when there is a manifest typical relationship and connection. It is true that Calovius (Sytem. theol., I, 663) and Aug. Pfeifer (Thes. herm., iii, can. 10) insist on admitting only one sense, the literal, in Scripture; but as the literal sense clearly indicates several types, writers like Buddeus, Rambach, and Pfaff point out that such an insistence on the literal sense differs only in words from the admission of a limited typical sense. Rambach goes further than this; in order to increase the parenetic force of Scripture, he attributes to each word as wide a meaning and as much importance as the nature of the subject matter allows (Instit. herm., 319). The "Mysterium Christi et christianismi in fasciis typicis antiquitatum V.T." by Joachim Lange, "Jüdische Heiligthümer" by Lundius, and "Der Messias im A.T." by Schöttegen are other works in which the element of edification is chiefly kept in view.

V. SOCINIAN INFLUENCE

While in Cocceian and Lutheran circles typology flourished either unrestrictedly or within certain bounds, it began to be considered as a mere accommodation or as a subjective work of parallelizing a number of Scripture passages by the Socinians and by all those who failed to see the unity of God's work in our history of Revelation. Clericus, writing on Galatians 4:22, refers typology to a Jewish manner of interpreting Scripture. The derivation of the Mosaic worship from Egyptian and Oriental cults, as explained by Spencer, rendered void the typical sense advocated in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Hence, Henke considers typology as an exploded system; Semler (Versuch einer freieren theologischen Lehrart, 1777, p. 104), does not wish that types should be considered any longer as belonging to the true religion; Döderlein (Institutiones, 1779, n. 229) requires in a type not a mere resemblance, but also that it should have been expressly represented in the Old Testament as a figure of the future; moreover, he believes that at the time of Moses no one would have understood such figures. But how explain the fact that the Apostles and Christ Himself employed the typical sense of the Old Testament? They adapted themselves, we are told, in their use of the Old Testament to the condition of the Jewish people, and to the hermeneutical principles prevalent in the Jewish schools. It followed, therefore, that the use of the typical sense in the New Testament is nothing but Rabbinic trifling. This point of view is followed in Döpke's "Hermeneutik der neutestamentlichen Schriftsteller" (Part I, 1829), and also in the exegetical works of Ammon, Fritzsche, Meyer, Rückert, and others.

VI. REACTION AGAINST THE SOCINIAN VIEW

On the other hand, there was no lack of defenders of the typical sense of Scripture. Michaelis (Entwurf der typischen Gottesgelährtheir, 1752) points out that, even if we follow Spencer's view of the origin of the Mosaic worship, borrowed rites too may have a symbolic meaning; but the writer's blindness to the distinction between type and symbol is the vulnerable side of his treatise. Blasche shows himself a stout adherent of typology in his "Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews" (1782). Herder in his thirty-ninth letter on the study of theology (1780) believes that, though each stone of a building does not see either itself or the whole building, it would be narrow-mindedness on our part to pretend that we do not see more than any given part can see; it is only in the light of historic development that we can appreciate the analogy of the whole to each of its parts. Rau (Freimüthige Untersuchung über die Typologie, 1784) reverts to a study of Spencer's derivation of the Mosaic worship; and grants that the Jewish rites may be symbols of the New Testament, but denies that they are types in the stricter sense of the word.

VII. REVIVAL OF SYMBOLISM AND PIETISM

At the beginning of the nineteenth century there was a revival of taste for symbolism, and of an appreciation of Bengel's typicism. Starting from symbolism, de Wette ("Beitrag zur Characteristic des Hebraismus" in "Studien von Daub und Creuzer", 1807, III, 244) concludes that the whole of the Old Testament is one great prophecy, one great type of what was to come, and what has come to pass. F. von Meyer and Stier wrote in the same strain, but they are men of less note. Influenced by Bengel's view, Menken explained in a typical sense Daniel 2 (1802-1809), the brazen serpent (1812), Hebrews 8-10 (1821); from the same point of view, Beck wrote his "Bemerkungen über messianische Weissagungen" (Tübinger Zeitschrift für Theologie, 1831, part 3), and also explained Romans 9 (Christliche Lehrwissenschaft, I, 1833, p. 360). The same principle underlies the view of Biblical history as presented by Hofmann, Franz Delitzsch, Kurtz, and Auberlen. Ed. Böhmer in his treatise "Zur biblishcen Typik" (1855) adopts a similar point of view: One idea prevails through the whole of creation; in nature the lower grades are types of the higher; the material order is a type of the spiritual; and man is the antitype of universal nature. The same law prevails in history; for the earlier age is always the type of the subsequent. Thus the Kingdom of God, which is the climax of Creation, has its types in nature and its types in history.

VIII. RATIONALISTIC CONTENTION AND CATHOLIC DOCTRINE

Needless to say rationalistic writers repudiate the typical sense of Sacred Scripture. The Catholic doctrine as to the nature of the typical sense, its existence, its extent, its theological value, has been stated in EXEGESIS. -- (2).

A.J. MAAS

Tyrannicide

Tyrannicide literally is the killing of a tyrant, and usually is taken to mean the killing of a tyrant by a private person for the common good. There are two classes of tyrants whose circumstances are widely apart -- tyrants by usurpation and tyrants by oppression. A tyrant by usurpation (tyrannus in titula) is one who unjustly displaces or attempts to displace the legitimate supreme ruler, and he can be considered in the act of usurpation or in subsequent peaceful possession of the supreme power. A tyrant by oppression (tyrannus in regimine) is a supreme ruler who uses his power arbitrarily and oppressively.

I. TYRANT BY USURPATION

While actually attacking the powers that be, a tyrant by usurpation is a traitor acting against the common weal, and, like any other criminal, may be put to death by legitimate authority. If possible, the legitimate authority must use the ordinary forms of law in condemning the tyrant to death, but if this is not possible, it can proceed informally and grant individuals a mandate to inflict the capital punishment. St. Thomas (In II Sent., d. XLIV, Q. ii, a. 2), Suarez (Def. fidei, VI, iv, 7), and the majority of authorized theologians say that private individuals have a tacit mandate from legitimate authority to kill the usurper when no other means of ridding the community of the tyrant are available. Some, however, e.g. Crolly (De justitia, III, 207), hold that an express mandate is needed before a private person can take on himself the office of executioner of the usurping tyrant. All authorities hold that a private individual as such, without an express or tacit mandate from authority, may not lawfully kill an usurper unless he is actually his unjust aggressor. Moreover, it sometimes happens that an usurper is accorded the rights of a belligerent, and then a private individual, who is a non-combatant, is excluded by international law from the category of those to whom authority is given to kill the tyrant (Crolly, loc. cit.).

If an usurper has already established his rule and peacefully reigns, until the prescriptive period has run its course the legitimate ruler can lawfully expel him by force if he is able to do so, and can punish him with death for his offence. If, however, it is out of the legitimate ruler's power to re-establish his own authority, there is nothing for it but to acquiesce in the actual state of affairs and to refrain from merging the community in the miseries of useless warfare. In these circumstances, subjects are bound to obey the just laws of the realm, and can lawfully take an oath of obedience to the de facto ruler, if the oath is not of such a nature as to acknowledge the legitimacy of the usurper's authority (cf. Brief of Pius VIII, 29 Sept., 1830). This teaching is altogether different from the view of those who put forward the doctrine of accomplished facts, as it has come to be called, and who maintain that the actual peaceful possessor of the ruling authority is also legitimate ruler. This is nothing more or less than the glorification of successful robbery.

II. TYRANT BY OPPRESSION

Looking on a tyrant by oppression as a public enemy, many authorities claimed for his subjects the right of putting him to death in defence of the common good. Amongst these were John of Salisbury in the twelfth century (Polycraticus III, 15; IV, 1; VIII, 17), and John Parvus (Jehan Petit) in the fifteenth century. The Council of Constance (1415) condemned as contrary to faith and morals the following proposition:

"Any vassal or subject can lawfully and meritoriously kill, and ought to kill, any tyrant. He may even, for this purpose, avail himself of ambushes, and wily expressions of affection or of adulation, notwithstanding any oath or pact imposed upon him by the tyrant, and without waiting for the sentence or order of any judge." (Session XV)

Subsequently a few Catholics defended, with many limitations and safeguards, the right of subjects to kill a tyrannical ruler. Foremost amongst these was the Spanish Jesuit Mariana. In his book, "De rege et regis institutione" (Toledo, 1599), he held that people ought to bear with a tyrant as long as possible, and to take action only when his oppression surpassed all bounds. They ought to come together and give him a warning; this being of no avail they ought to declare him a public enemy and put him to death. If no public judgment could be given, and if the people were unanimous, any subject might, if possible, kill him by open, but not by secret means. The book was dedicated to Philip III of Spain and was written at the request of his tutor Garcias de Loaysa, who afterwards became Bishop of Toledo. It was published at Toledo in the printing-office of Pedro Rodrigo, printer to the king, with the approbation of Pedro de Oñ, Provincial of the Mercedarians of Madrid, and with the permission of Stephen Hojeda, visitor of the Society of Jesus in the Province of Toledo (see JUAN MARIANA). Most unfairly the Jesuit Order has been blamed for the teaching of Mariana. As a matter of fact, Mariana stated that his teaching on tyrannicide was his personal opinion, and immediately on the publication of the book the Jesuit General Aquaviva ordered that it be corrected. He also on 6 July, 1610, forbade any member of the order to teach publicly or privately that it is lawful to attempt the life of a tyrant.

Though Catholic doctrine condemns tyrannicide as opposed to the natural law, formerly great theologians of the Church like St. Thomas (II-II, Q. xlii, a.2), Suarez (Def. fidei, VI, iv, 15), and Bañez, O.P. (De justitia et jure, Q. lxiv, a. 3), permitted rebellion against oppressive rulers when the tyranny had become extreme and when no other means of safety were available. This merely carried to its logical conclusion the doctrine of the Middle Ages that the supreme ruling authority comes from God through the people for the public good. As the people immediately give sovereignty to the ruler, so the people can deprive him of his sovereignty when he has used his power oppressively. Many authorities, e.g. Suarez (Def. fiedei, VI, iv, 18), held that the State, but not private persons, could, if necessary, condemn the tyrant to death. In recent times Catholic authors, for the most part, deny that subjects have the right to rebel against and depose an unjust ruler, except in the case when the ruler was appointed under the condition that he would lose his power if he abused it. In proof of this teaching they appeal to the Syllabus of Pius IX, in which this proposition is condemned: "It is lawful to refuse obedience to legitimate princes, and even to rebel" (prop. 63). While denying the right of rebellion in the strict sense whose direct object is the deposition of the tyrannical ruler, many Catholic writers, such as Crolly, Cathrein, de Bie, Zigliara, admit the right of subjects not only to adopt an attitude of passive resistance against unjust laws, but also in extreme cases to assume a state of active defensive resistance against the actual aggression of a legitimate, but oppressive ruler.

Many of the Reformers were more or less in favour of tyrannicide. Luther held that the whole community could condemn the tyrant to death (Sämmtliche Werke", LXII, Frankfort-on-the-Main and Erlangen, 1854, 201, 206). Melanchthon said that the killing of a tyrant is the most agreeable offering that man can make to God (Corp. Ref., III, Halle, 1836, 1076). The Calvinist writer styled Junius Brutus held that individual subjects have no right to kill a legitimate tyrant, but that resistance must be authorized by a representative council of the people (Vindiciae contra Tyrannos, p. 45). John Knox affirmed that it was the duty of the nobility, judges, rulers, and people of England to condemn Queen Mary to death (Appellation).

J.M. HARTY

Tyre

(TYRUS.)

Melchite archdiocese and Maronite diocese. The city is called in Hebrew, Zor, and in Arabic, Sour, from two words meaning rock. It is very ancient. If we are to believe priests of Melkart quoted by Herodotus (II, 44) it was founded in the twenty-eighth century B.C. Isaias himself (xxiii, 7) says that its origin was ancient. According to the authors cited by Josephus (Ant. jud., VIII, iii, 1) and according to Justin (Hist., xviii, 3) its foundation dates from the thirteenth century B.C., but this is manifestly erroneous, for Tyre is mentioned under the name of Sour-ri in the tablets of El-Amarna, between 1385 and 1368 B.C. (Revue Biblique, 1908, 511). King Abimelech was then reigning there independently, though his capital was much coveted by the Egyptians, who forced the Tyrians to ally themselves with their neighbours, especially the Philistines (see Ecclus., xlvi, 21). Ancient writers, particularly Isaias (xxiii, 12), call Tyre "daughter of Sidon", that is, they make it a colony of the latter city. Despite objections which have been made to this, the statement is correct, and on its coins Sidon claims to be the mother of Hippo Regius, in Africa, of Tyre etc. It is true that in a short time the colony overshadowed the mother, but the inhabitants continued to call themselves Sidonians. On the other hand, it is impossible to state which of the two cities, Palaetyrus, on the sea-coast, or Tyrus, built on a rocky island 1968 feet above the sea, existed first. It is generally held, however, that the continental preceded the insular city. The reference in Josue (xix, 29) is not exactly identified, but in the El-Amarna Letters the island is referred to, unless the Egyptians who occupied all the seaboard cities had not subjected it also to their dominion.

Tyre seems always to have had kings, like the other Chanaanite cities. It was its sovereigns who made it the "queen of the sea", as it loved to call itself, and its merchants nobles of the earth, as Isaias says (xxiii, 3-8). The city was very proud of its wealth and ships, which plied along the whole of the Mediterranean coast, in Africa as well as in Europe, and the pride of Tyre became almost as proverbial among the prophets of Israel as that of Moab. King Hiram was one of its greatest sovereigns. He sent to David the stone- cutters and carpenters to build his palace (II Kings, v, 11), and to Solomon Lebanon cedar and cypress wood for the construction of the Temple (III Kings, ix, 11; II Par., ii, 3 sq.). The architect and his master workmen were Tyrians. In return Solomon gave Hiram the district of Cabul (Chabul) in Galilee, which included twenty small cities, but the gift seems not to have been to the taste of the King of Tyre (III Kings, ix, 11-14). Nevertheless, the two kings were allies and their combined fleets left the ports of the Red Sea for Ophir and Tharsis to obtain gold (III Kings, ix, 26-28; x, 11 sq.; II Par., ix, 10, 21). Hiram accomplished great works in his capital. He united the two parts of the island hitherto separated by a canal which to a certain extent made them two cities, and besides he built a great aqueduct which brought the waters of Ras- el-Ain to the land.

Shortly afterwards court intrigues disturbed the city and gave rise to a bloody revolution. Phalia, an intruder, usurped the power; he was dethroned in turn by his brother Ithobael or Ethbael, high priest of Astarte, a goddess who, with the god Melkart, was much venerated in Tyre. It was Ethbael's daughter, Jezabel, who married Achab, King of Israel. Jezabel was undoubtedly a Tyrian princess; Menander in Josephus ("Ant. jud.", VIII, xiii, 2; "Contra Appionem", I, 18; also III Kings, xvi, 31) calls her father "Kind of the Sidonians", another allusion to the Sidonian origin of Tyre. In 814 B.C. a group of Tyrians went to the coast of Africa and founded Carthage, the most famous colony of Tyre. The very amicable relations of Tyrians and Jews did not last always; they waned especially when Tyre sold as slaves the Israelitish prisoners of war (Joel, iii, 4-8; Amos, I, 9). On the other hand, the luxury and corrupt morals which prevailed in the Phoenician city could not but have a baneful influence on the Jews of the tribe of Aser and other Israelites; so that the Prophets, such as Isaias (xxiii), Ezechiel (xxvi-xxix), Joel (iii, 4-8), and Amos (I, 9), never ceased to thunder against it and predict its ruin. Salmanasar, King of Assur, and Sargon besieged it in vain for five years after the fall of Samaria; although they cut the aqueduct of Hiram and compelled the people of Sidon and Palaetyrus to place their fleets at their service, that of the Tyrians completely vanquished them (Josephus, "Ant. Jud.", IX, xiv, 2). Sennacherib likewise attempted the siege in vain. Although paying him a light tribute, Tyre remained a powerful state with its own kings (Jer., xxv, 22; Ezech., xxvii and xxviii), and was enabled to develop its mercantile proclivities and attain the great prosperity spoken of by the prophets and all ancient writers. On his return from his expedition against Egypt, Asarhaddon, like his predecessors, blockaded Tyre, but the Tyrians, isolated on their rock, with their powerful fleet and valiant mercenaries, laughed at all his efforts. After having received tribute from King Bael, Asarhaddon was compelled to retire. The same was true of Nabuchodonosor after a severe blockade lasting thirteen years. According to custom the Tyrians offered him a light tribute, and the honour of the proud sovereign was declared satisfied. Nevertheless, this long isolation greatly injured the Tyrians, for during this interval a portion of the commerce passed to Sidon and other Phoenician and Carthaginian peoples. Furthermore, the Tyrian colonies, which for thirteen years had broken all links of subjection to the mother country, were in no wise eager to resume the yoke. Finally, as King Ithobael had died during the siege, regents had assumed the authority (Josephus, "Contra App." I, 21) and caused many trouble, as did also the dikastai, or Suffetes, elected for seven years. The monarchy was subsequently restored.

As the domination had passed from the Chaldeans to the Persians, Tyre, a vassal or rather an ally of the former, readily assumed the same relations with the latter and continued to prosper. The Tyrians with their numerous ships assisted Xerxes against the Greeks, who moreover were their commercial rivals, and Darius against Alexander the Great. The King of Tyre himself fought in the Persian fleet. Tyre refused submission to the Macedonian hero, as well as authorization to sacrifice to the god Melkart, whose temple was on the island; Alexander, taking offence, determined to capture the island at any cost. The siege lasted seven months. While the fleets of the submissive Cypriots and Phoenicians blockaded the two ports at north and south, Alexander, with materials from Palaetyrus, which he had just destroyed, built an enormous causeway 1968 feet long by about 197 feet wide which connected the island with the continent. He then laid siege to the ramparts of the city which on one side reached a height of 150 feet. Tyre was captured in 332; 6000 of its defenders were beheaded, 2000 crucified, more than 30,000 women, children, and servants sold as slaves. Although Alexander razed the walls, the city was restored very quickly, since seventeen years later it held out for fourteen months against Antigonus, father of Demetrius Poliorcetes. From the power of Egypt, Tyre in 287 passed under the dominion of the Seleucids in 198 B.C., obtaining self-government from them in 126 B. c. This year begins the era special to Tyre. Augustus was the first to rob it of its liberty (Dion Cassius, LIV, 7), for by his command its coins ceased to bear the inscription "autonomous". Various monuments were erected during the Roman period. Herod the Great built a temple and adorned the public places. A colony under Septimius Severus, Tyre subsequently became the capital of Phoenicia; at the time of St. Jerome it was regarded as the richest and greatest commercial city of the province (Comment. in Ezech., xxvi, 6; xxvii, 1). Its factory of purple cloth was foremost in the empire. It was a curious fact that under one of the predecessors of Diocletian, Dorotheus, a learned priest of Antioch, the master of Eusebius of Caesarea, was appointed director without having to renounce his religion (Eusebius, "H. E.", VII, 32).

In A.D. 613 the Jews of Tyre formed a vast conspiracy against the Greek Empire, and subsequently ransomed from the troops of Chosroes numerous captive Christians in order to sacrifice them. In 638 the city fell into the hands of the Arabs. Baldwin I, King of Jerusalem, besieged it in vain from 29 Nov., 1111, till April, 1112. Baldwin II captured it, 27 June, 1124, after five months' siege and made it the seat of a countship. When the crusaders lost the Kingdom of Jerusalem in 1187 by the defeat of Tiberias, Tyre remained in the hands of the Franks and became one of their chief fortresses. There in 1210 John of Brienne was crowned king, and in 1225 his daughter Isabella was crowned queen. Tyre was captured in May, 1291, after the fall of Saint-Jean- d'Acre, by the Mussulmans, who completely destroyed it, and it was never wholly restored afterwards. Occupied by the Turks in 1516 it has always belonged to them, save for a brief appearance of the French in 1799. It is now a caza of the vilayet of Beirut. The city has 6500 inhabitants, of whom 4000 are Mussulmans of various races, 200 Latin Catholics, 350 Maronites, 1750 Melchite Catholics, 25 Protestants, and about 100 Jews. The Franciscans, established since 1866, have a parochial church and a school for boys, the Sisters of St. Joseph a school for girls; two other Catholic schools for boys are kept by a Melchite priest and the religious of Saint-Sauveur; the Russians have a school and the American Protestants have one for boys and one for girls. Sour is no longer an island, but a peninsula; Alexander s causeway had grown larger as a result of sand formations, and is now an isthmus, one mile and a quarter wide. There are still to be seen the medieval city wall and a portion of the church of the Crusaders, built by the Venetians and measuring 213 feet by 82 feet. It is generally regarded as containing the tomb of Conrad de Montferrat, slain in the street by two members of the sect of the Assassins (1192), and the tomb of the Emperor Frederick Barbarossa (d. 1190). However, a German deputation sent by Bismarck in 1874 to conduct excavations discovered nothing.

Among the glories of Tyre were: Ulpianus, the celebrated jurisconsult, slain at Rome by the praetorians in 228; the neo-Platonic philosopher, Porphyry, whose true name was Malchus (b. 233; d. 304), the determined enemy of the Christians, against whom he wrote a work in fifteen books; some hold that he was born not at Tyre, but at Balanaia; Origen, who was not born at Tyre, but who died there in 253 in consequence of the tortures which he underwent under Decius, and was buried in the church destroyed under Diocletian; St. Methodius, spoken of by St. Jerome as a martyr and Bishop of Tyre under Decius, was in reality Bishop of Olympus in Lycia, and died about 311; as for Dorotheus, a martyr and the author of a work on the Apostles and the seventy disciples, he never existed, and the work is a forgery compiled in the eighth century by a cleric of Byzantium.

Although the corruption of Tyre had become proverbial in the time of Christ (Matt., xi, 21 sq.; Luke, x, 13 sq.), there were Tyrians eager to hear the preaching of Jesus and who came as far as the vicinity of Tiberias to listen to Him. (Mark, iii, 8; Luke, vi, 17). This is perhaps why Jesus went to the neighbourhood of Tyre to cure the sick and convert sinners (Matt., xv, 21-29; Mark, vii, 24-31). A Christian community was formed there at an early date, which St. Paul and St. Luke visited and where they remained seven days (Acts, xxi, 3-7). About 190 the Church in this city was directed by Bishop Cassius, who with the bishops of Ptolemais, Caesarea, and Aelia assisted at the council held in Palestine to deal with the Paschal controversy (Eusebius, "H. E.", V, 25). About 250 we know of the Bishop Marinus mentioned in a letter of Dionysius of Alexandria (Euseb., op. cit., VII, 5). About 250 we know of the Bishop Marinus mentioned in a letter of Dionysius of Alexandria (Euseb., op. cit., VII, 5). The community suffered greatly during the last persecution. After the edict of Diocletian the church was burnt and was only rebuilt after religious peace had been obtained. It was Eusebius of Caesarea who pronounced the discourse at the dedication of the new basilica and who describes the oldest basilica known to us (op. cit., X, 4). Tyrannius, Bishop of Tyre, was captured and drowned at Antioch (op. cit., VIII, 13). Eusebius himself assisted in the amphitheatre of this city at the execution of five Christians of Egyptian origin (op. cit., VIII, 7). In 306 St. Ulpianus was shut up with a dog and an asp in a calfskin and thrown into the sea (Euseb., "De Martyr. Paleaestinae" V, 2). At Caesarea Maritima one of the first victims was St. Theodosia, a young Tyrian girl of eighteen, who was horribly tortured and then thrown into the sea on Easter Sunday, 2 April, 307 (Euseb., "H. E.", VII, I). In 311 a municipal decree forbidding Christians to stay in the city was posted up in Tyre, together with a message of congratulations from the Emperor Maximin (Eusebius, "H. E.", IX, vii). This did not prevent the Church of Tyre from subsisting and developing after peace was granted to the disciples of Christ.

Shortly afterwards Tyre furnished Ethiopia with its first and greatest missionary, St. Frumentius, who went to Africa with a philosopher who was his master and was consecrated by St. Athanasius the first bishop of that country. Three councils were held at Tyre. The first, convened by Constantine (335), which had about 310 members, judged the cause of St. Athanasius, who was in Tyre with 48 Egyptian bishops, and after a series of injustices it deposed him. Eusebius of Caesarea presided over the assembly (Hefele-Leclercq, "Hist. des conciles", I, 656-66). Another council was held in February, 449, to examine the cause of Ibas, Bishop of Edessa, who was accused by the clerics of his church and absolved by this council. This sentence had serious consequences at Chalcedon and especially at the Council of the Three Chapters in 553 (Hefele-Leclercq, op. cit., II, 493-98). Finally, in 514 or 515 was held a council under the presidency of Severus, Patriarch of Antioch, and of Philoxens, metropolitan of Hierapolis, and which assembled the bishops of the provinces of Antioch, Apamaea, Augusta Euphratensis, Osrhoene, Mesopotamia, Arabia, and Phoenicia Libanensis. it rejected the Council of Chalcedon, and the Henoticon of the Emperor Zeno was explained in a sense clearly opposed to the latter council (Lebon, "Le monophysisme sévérien", Louvain, 1909, 62-4).

Le Quien (Oriens christ., II, 801-12) mentions 20 bishops of this see, some of whom have no right to figure in the list. Besides those already mentioned were: Paulinus, friend of Eusebius of Caesarea, mentioned by Arius in a letter as being one of his partisans (Theodoret, "H.E.", I, v) and who subsequently became Patriarch of Antioch; Irenaeus, previously a count, a partisan of Nestorius exiled in 449 to Petra, and who compiled a collection of very valuable documents which have reached us under the title of "Tragaedia Irenaei"; Photius, very active in the religious quarrels of his time, and who assisted at the Councils of Tyre and Chalcedon, as well as at the Robber Council of Ephesus; John Codonatus, a Monophysite and friend of Peter Fullo, Patriarch of Antioch; Thomas, who at the Eighth Ecumenical Council represented the Patriarch of Antioch.

Included at first in the Province of Syria, the Diocese of Tyre formed part of Phoenicia, at the creation of that province by Septimius Severus shortly before 198, when it became the religious as well as the civil metropolis; its bishop, Marinus, had the title of metropolitan as early as 250 (Euseb., "H. E.", VII, v). When between 381 and 425 Phoenicia was subdivided into two provinces, Phoenicia Maritima and Phoenicia Libanensis, Tyre remained the metropolis of the former. At the Council of Chalcedon in 451 Photius had to defend his rights as metropolitan against the Bishop of Berytus, formerly his suffragan, who divided Phoenicia Prima into two parts and assumed authority over all the bishoprics of the north. The council recognized the rights of Photius and gave him jurisdiction over all the dioceses with the exception of Berytus, which remained an autocephalous metropolis. Some years later Tyre became the chief see of the Patriarchate of Antioch, I. e. it attained first rank among the metropolitan sees. The reason for this was that, about 480, John Codnatus, Patriarch of Antioch, having resigned in favour of Calandion, the latter appointed him Metropolitan of Tyre, with the right for himself and his successors of thenceforth sitting immediately after the patriarch (Theophanes, "Chronographia"). In the "Notitia episcopatuum" of Antioch in the sixth century Tyre had 13 suffragan sees (Echos d'Orient, X, 145). In the tenth century the western boundaries of the archdiocese went from the great spring of Zip (Az-Zib) to Nahr-Laitani, the ancient Leontes (Echos d'Orient, X, 97). The Greek archdiocese was retained even during the Latin occupation, but the titular resided at Constantinople.

Odo, the first Latin archbishop, was appointed in 1122 and died two years later when the Franks were besieging the city; his successor, William, was of English origin. In disregard of the ancient canon law, the new metropolitan was subjected to the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, which aroused protest on the part of the See of Antioch. The dispute which followed was referred to the tribunal of Pope Innocent II, who decided in favour of the Patriarch of Jerusalem in virtue of a Decree of his predecessor, Paschal II, who granted to King Baldwin the right to subject to Jerusalem all the episcopal sees he should succeed in conquering from the Mussulmans. Hence two letters of Innocent II obliged the Archbishop of Tyre to submit to the jurisdiction of Jerusalem together with his six suffragans, the Bishops of Tripoli, Tortosa (or Antaradus), Byblos, Berytus, Sidon, and Ptolemais. Later, when the cities of Tripoli, Tortosa, and Byblos came into the power of the Prince of Antioch, their bishops also became dependent on the Latin Patriarch of Antioch. For long lists of Latin archbishops see Le Quien (Oriens christ, III, 1309-20) and Eubel (Hierarchia catholica medii aevi, I, 534; II, 284; III, 342). The most famous was William II, the historian of the crusades. The Latins evacuated Tyre in 1291 and the archbishop, by the pope's command, having left the city, 8 Oct., 1294, there were thenceforth only titular archbishops.

The Melchite Archdiocese of Tyre is bounded on the north by Nahr el-Laitani, on the east by a line of wooded hills separating the District of Beharre from that of Merdjaioun, on the south by the Diocese of St.-Jean d'Acre, and on the west by the sea. It has 14 churches and chapels, 13 stations with or without residential priests, 16 priests, of whom 6 are seculars and 10 religious of Saint-Sauveur, 16 primary schools for boys and girls, half of which are in charge of Latin missionaries and European sisters. The number of faithful is 5300. Besides their mission at Tyre, the American Protestants have two schools in the Diocese at Almat and Cana. The Maronite diocese, founded in 1906 to the detriment of that of Saida, is bounded on the west by the sea, on the north by the River Zaharani, on the east by the Jordan, and on the south by the Sinaitic peninsula. It has 10,000 faithful, 20 priests, and 20 churches; the number of schools is unknown. The schismatic Graeco-Arabic Archdiocese of Tyre and Sidon has about 9000 faithful.

S. VAILHÉ

James Tyrie

Theologian, b. at Drumkilbo, Perthshire, Scotland, 1543; d. at Rome, 27 May, 1597. Educated first at St. Andrews, he joined Edmund Hay (q. v.) at the time of de Gouda's mission in 1526. In his company he then went to Rome, was there admitted into the Society of Jesus, and was eventually sent to Clermont College, Paris, in June, 1567, where Hay had become rector; and remained there in various posts, e.g. professor, head of the Scottish Jesuit Mission (1585), till 1590. During this period he was once engaged in a controversy with Knox, against whom he wrote "The Refutation of ane Answer made be Schir Johne Knox to ane letter be James Tyrie" (Paris, 1573). Next year he discussed several points of religion with Andrew Melville privately in Paris. In 1585 he was summoned to Rome as the representative of France on the Committee of Six, who eventually drew up Father Acquaviva's first edition of the "Ratio Studiorum", printed in 1586. He was rector of Clermont College during the great siege of Paris (May to September, 1590). His anxieties and difficulties must then have been great, as he had over a hundred scholars as well as a large community to feed, and at a time when men were perishing with hunger in the streets. After the Duke of Parma had revictualled the town (September), Tyrie was again sent to Rome, as French deputy for the congregation, which finally supported the government of Father Acquaviva.

On his return in December, Tyrie was sent to the University of Pont-à- Mousson, as professor of Scripture and head of the Scots College, and two years later, on the successive deaths of Fathers Edmund Hay and Paul Hoffaeus, he was again called to Rome (22 May, 1592), where he became Assistant for France and Germany, and played his part in the important Sixth General Congregation of the Society of Jesus (1593). He also supported at Rome the vain endeavours in Scotland of the three Catholic Earls of Huntly, Erroll, and Angus to maintain themselves, with King James's connivance, by force of arms against the Kirk (1594). The earls asked and obtained a subsidy from Clement VIII; and Father Tyrie's advice and opinion were constantly taken by both the papal and the Scottish negotiators. He also took steps to restore the Scottish hospital at Rome, which eventually (1600) became the Scots College there. Rare as it was to keep on good terms with adversaries in those days, Tyrie won praise from such men as David Buchanan, both for his ability and for his courtesy. Part of his cursus is preserved in manuscript at the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris.

J.H. POLLEN

Casimir Ubaghs

Born at Bergélez-Fauquemont, 26 November, 1800; died at Louvain, 15 February, 1875, was for a quarter of a century the chief protagonist of the Ontologico-Traditionalist School of Louvain. In 1830, while professor of philosophy at the lower seminary of Rolduc, he was called to Louvain, which under his influence became a centre of Ontologism. In 1846 he undertook the editorship of the "Revue catholique", the official organ of Ontologism, in conjunction with Arnold Tits, who had taught with him at Rolduc and joined him at Louvain in 1840, and Lonay, professor at Rolduc. La Forêt, Claessens, the Abbé Bouquillon, Père Bernard Van Loo, and others followed the doctrines of Ubaghs. But opponents soon appeared. The "Journal historique et littéraire", founded by Kersten, kept up an incessant controversy with the "Revue catholique". Kersten was joined by Gilson, dean of Bouillon, Lupus, and others. From 1858 to 1861 the controversy raged. It was at its height when a decision of the Roman Congregation (21 Sept., 1864) censured in Ubaghs's works, after a long and prudent deliberation, a series of propositions relating to Ontologism. Already in 1843 the Congregation of the Index had taken note of five propositions and ordered M. Ubaghs to correct them and expunge them from his teaching, but he misunderstood the import of this first decision. When his career was ended in 1864 he had the mortification of witnessing the ruin of a teaching to which he had devoted forty years of his life. From 1864 until his death he lived in retirement.

The theories of Ubaghs are contained in a vast collection of treatises on which he expended the best years of his life. Editions followed one another as the range of his teaching widened. The fundamental thesis of Traditionalism is clearly affirmed by Ubaghs, the acquisition of metaphysical and moral truths is inexplicable without a primitive Divine teaching and its oral transmission. Social teaching is a natural law, a condition so necessary that without a miracle man could not save through it attain the explicit knowledge of truths of a metaphysical and a moral order. Teaching and language are not merely a psychological medium which favours the acquisition of these truths; its action is determinant. Hence the primordial act of man is an act of faith; the authority of others becomes the basis of certitude. The question arises: Is our adhesion to the fundamental truths of the speculative and moral order blind; and, is the existence of God, which is one of them, impossible of rational demonstration? Ubaghs did not go as far as this; his Traditionalism was mitigated, a semi-Traditionalism; once teaching has awakened ideas in us and transmitted the maxims (ordo acquisitionis) reason is able and apt to comprehend them. Though powerless to discover them it is regarded as being capable of demonstrating them once they have been made known to it. One of his favourite camparisons admirably states the problem: "As the word 'view' chiefly expresses four things, the faculty of seeing, the act of seeing, the object seen, e.g. a landscape, and the drawing an artist makes of this object, so we give the name idea, which is derived from the former, chiefly to four different things: the faculty of knowing rationally, the act of rational knowledge, the object of this knowledge, the intellectual copy or formula which we make of this object in conceiving it" (Psychologie, 5th ed., 1857, 41-42). Now, the objective idea, or object-idea (third acceptation), in other words, the intelligible which we contemplate, and contact with which produces within us the intellectual formula (notion), is "something Divine" or rather it is God himself. This is the core of Ontologism. The intelligence contemplates God directly and beholds in Him the truths or "objective ideas" of which our knowledge is a weak reflection. Assuredly, if Ubaghs is right, skepticism is definitively overcome. Likewise if teaching plays in the physical life the part he assigns to it, the same is true of every doctrine which asserts the original independence of reason and which Ubaghs calls Rationalism. But this so-called triumph was purchased at the cost of many errors. It is, to say the least, strange that on the one hand Ontologistic Traditionalism is based on a distrust of reason and on the other hand it endows reason with unjustifiable prerogatives. Surely it is an incredible audacity to set man face to face with the Divine essence and to attribute to his weak mind the immediate perception of the eternal and immutable verities.

Ubaghs's principal works are:

• "Logicae seu philosophiae rationalis elementa" (6 editions, 1834-60);
• "Ontologiae sive metaph. generalis specimen" (5 editions, 1835-63);
• "Theodicae seu theologiae naturalis" (4 editions);
• "Anthropoligicae philosoph. elementa" (1848);
• "Précis de logique élémentaire" (5 editions);
• "Précis d'anthropol. psychologique" (5 editions);
• "Du réalisme en théologie et en philosophie" (1856);
• "Essai d'idéologie ontologique" (1860);
• numerous articles in the Louvain "Revue catholique".

M. DE WULF

St. Ubaldus

Confessor, Bishop of Gubbio, born of noble parents at Gubbio, Umbria, Italy, towards the beginning of the twelfth centry; died there, Whitsuntide, 1168. Whilst still very young, having lost his father, he was educated by the prior of the cathedral church of his native city, where he also became a canon regular. Wishing to serve God with more regularity he passed to the Monastery of St. Secondo in the same city, where he remained for some years. Recalled by his bishop, he returned to the cathedral monestary, where he was made prior. Having heard that Vienna Blessed Peter de Honestis some years before had established a very fervent community of canons regular, to whom he had given special statutes which had been approved by Paschall II, Ubaldus went there, remaining with his brother canons for three months, to learn the details and the practice of their rules, wishing to introduce them among his own canons of Gubbio. This he did at his return. Serving God in great regularity, poverty (for all his rich patrimony he had given to the poor and to the restoration of monasteries), humility, mortification, meekness, and fervour, the fame of his holiness spread in the country, and several bishoprics were offered to him, but he refused them all. However, the episcopal See of Gubbio becoming vacant, he was sent, with some clerics, by the population to ask for a new bishop from Honorius II who, having consecrated him, sent him back to Gubbio. To his people he became a perfect pattern of all Christian virtues, and a powerful protector in all their spiritual and temporal needs. He died full of merits, after a long and painful illness of two years. Numerous miracles were wrought by him in life and after death. At the solicitation of Bishop Bentivoglio Pope Celestine III canonized him in 1192. His power, as we read in the Office for his feast, is chiefly manifested over the evil spirits, and the faithful are instructed to have recourse to him "contra omnes diabolicas nequitias".

The life of the saint was written by Blessed Theobaldus, his immediate successor in the episcopal see, and from this source is derived all the information given by his numerous biographers. The body of the holy man, which had at first been buried in the cathedral church by the Bishops of Perugia and Cagli, at the time of his canonization was found flexible and incorrupt, and was then placed in a small oratory on the top of the hill overlooking the city, where in 1508, at the wish of the Duke of Urbino, the canons regular built a beautiful church, frequented to this day by numerous pilgrims, who come to visit the relics of their heavenly protector from near and far. The devotion to the saint is very popular throughout Umbria, but especially at Gubbio, where in every family at least one member is called Ubaldus. The feast of their patron saint is celebrated by the inhabitants of the country round with great solemnity, there being religious and civil processions which call to mind the famous festivities of the Middle Ages in Italy.

A. ALLARIA

Prefecture Apostolic of Belgian Ubanghi

In Belgian Congo, separated on 7 April, 1911, from the Vicariate of the Belgian Congo and entrusted to the Capuchins. Its boundaries are: west and north, the river Ubanghi from 1° 30' N. lat. to the meeting of the Mbomu and the Uelle at Yakoma; east, a line drawn from that point towards the junction of the Itimbri (Rubi) and the Congo, as far as the southern limits of the village of Abumombasi; south, the parallel passing through Abumombasi, then the watersheds of the Ubanghi and the Congo, and of the Ubanghi and the Ngiri to 1° 30' N. Lat., and thence to the Ubanghi. R.P. Fulgence de Gérard-Montes was appointed first prefect Apostolic 11 July 1911.

A.A. MACERLEAN

Ubanghi

(UPPER FRENCH CONGO.)

Vicariate Apostolic; formerly part of the Vicariate of French Congo, erected on 14 Oct., 1890. It has an area of about 386,000 sq. miles, and is bounded south and east by the Congo and the Ubanghi; north by the Prefecture Apostolic of Ubanghi-Chari; west by the Vicariates of Loanga, Gabon, and Camerun; the mission of Linzolo lying south-west of Brazzaville was transferred from Loanga to Ubanghi on 14 Feb., 1911. The principal tribes in the vicariate are the Batekes, Bavanzis, and Bondjos, the last two being cannibals. The French representatives, especially M. de Chavannes and M. Dolisie, have greatly aided in the establishment and development of the mission. The first attempt to gain a foothold in the territory of the vicariate was made by Father (now Bishop) Augouard in 1883 at Brazzaville, but it failed owing to the unhappy experiences of the natives at the hands of Stanley; in July, 1887, however, Mgr. Carrie succeeded, owing to the help of M. de Chavannes. The Sisters of St. Joseph of Cluny arrived at Brazzaville on 21 August, 1892, and have a convent, chapel, and school there on a site presented by the French Government. Brazzaville, the centre of French interests in the Congo and in which the bishop resides, is situated on a plateau 120 ft. high at the place where the Congo leaves Stanley Pool. Its cathedral, 37 metres long, 12 broad, and 9 high, surmounted by a steeple and cross rising 20 metres, was dedicated on 3 May, 1894. In 1895 the first two Christian marriages in Ubanghi were solemnized before the vicar apostolic. The mission spread to the surrounding villages and later to the Alima, 300 kilometres up the Congo; still higher up are the stations at Liranga (at the junction of the Congo and the Ubanghi), founded by Fathers Paris and Allaire on 3 April, 1889; at Bangui (1125 miles from the coast), established among the cannibal Bondjos and Buzerus and pastoral Ndris, by Fathers Sallaz and Rémy, in January, 1894; and at Sainte-Famille among the Banziris, in 1895, by Father Moreau, -- this is now the headquarters of the Prefecture of Ubanghi Chari. Near these stations have been established "free villages" where natives escaping from the clutches of the cannibal or slave owners can reside in safety. Bishop Augouard was awarded a prize of $3000 in April, 1912, by the French Academy of Moral and Political Sciences in appreciation of his work during thirty-four years in French Congo. Mission statistics: The vicariate, of which Bishop Philippe-Prosper Augouard, titular Bishop of Sinidos (b. 16 Sept., 1852; joined the Congregation of the Holy Ghost, to whom the mission is entrusted; and was consecrated, 23 November, 1890), is in charge, has 12 priests; 25 lay brothers; 12 Sisters of St. Joseph of Cluny; 8 churches; 4 stations; 23 chapels; 23 schools with 1534 children; 7 orphanages with 902 orphans; 8 hospitals; 5 workshops; Catholic population, 3500; 2500 catechumens; and 5,000,000 pagans. The hot damp climate is very severe, and in one year (1897-8) 14 of the 31 missionaries died.

A.A. MACERLEAN

Ubanghi-Chari

Prefecture Apostolic in Equatorial Africa, lies west of the Bahr-el-Ghazal territory and south of the Tchad district, and extends from 4°30' to 10° N. lat., and from 12° to 26°30' E. longitude. This region was formerly part of the Vicariate Apostolic of Ubanghi or Upper French Congo; its first mission post was established at Sainte-Famille on the Upper Ubanghi, about 1375 miles from the western coast by river, by R. P. Moreau, C.S.Sp., in 1895, among the Banzus or Banziris, in an almost unknown country. At the request of Mgr. Philippe-Prosper Augouard, C.S.Sp., titular Bishop of Sinide and Vicar Apostolic of Ubanghi, Ubanghi- Chari was withdrawn from his jurisdiction in May, 1909, and formed into a new prefecture Apostolic under the care of the Fathers of the Holy Ghost, R. P. Pierre Catel, C.S.Sp., being appointed prefect Apostolic. He resides at Sainte-Famille. The mission contains: 23 priests; 14 lay brothers; 11 nuns; 18 catechists; 15 stations; 17 churches and chapels; 22 schools, with 1756 pupils and 902 orphans; 3500 Catholics; and 2500 catechumens Boundaries: north and east, the Vicariate of the Sudan; south, the Prefectures of Uelle and Belgian Ubanghi, the Vicariate of Upper French Congo; west, the Vicariate of Camerun and the Prefecture of Northern Nigeria.

A.A. MACERLEAN

Uberaba

(DE UBERABA.)

Suffragan diocese of Marianna, in Brazil, created by the Consistorial Decree of 29 September, 1907, separating it from the Diocese of Goyaz, and placing under its jurisdiction the part of Minas Geraes known as Triangulo Mineiro and the following parishes which formerly belonged to the Diocese of Diamantina: Urcuia or Burity, Capim Branco or Rio Preto, Paracatú, Alegres, Santa Rita de Patos, Capã Redondo, and São Romão. The diocese is bounded: on the north by the Urucuia River; east, the São Francisco River; south, the Marcella and Canastra mountain ranges and the Rio Grande; west, the Paranahyba and Jacaré rivers, and the Geral mountain range. The Catholic population numbered 200,000 souls in 1911. Rt. Rev. Eduardo Duarte Silva, the first and present bishop, was born at Florianopolis, 27 Jan., 1852; studied in the Pio-Latino College of Rome; was ordained priest, 19 Dec., 1874; chaplain of the Florianopolis hospital and canon of the imperial chapel; elected Bishop of Goyaz, 23 Jan., 1891, and consecrated on 8 Feb., 1891; preconized Bishop of Uberaba, 19 Dec., 1908. The following religious orders are in the diocese: Dominicans, Recollects, Lazarists, Dominican nuns, Franciscan Missionary nuns of Egypt. There are 45 churches. The Catholic educational institutions are: the Gymnasio Diocesano, a school of secondary instruction with the privileges of a federal college, directed by the Marist Brothers; and the Collegio de Nossa Senhora das Dôres, for girls, under the Dominican nuns. The principal Catholic charitable associations are: the Sociedade de S. Vicente de Paula; the Irmandade da Santa Casa de Misericordia; and the Associação das Damas de Caridade. The official organ of the diocese is the "Correio Catholico" (Uberaba).

JULIAN MORENO-LACALLE

Ubertino of Casale

Leader of the Spirituals, born at Casale of Vercelli, 1259; died about 1330.

He assumed the Franciscan habit in a convent of the province of Genoa in 1273, and was sent to Paris to continue his studies, where he remained nine years, after which he returned to Italy. In 1285 he visited the sanctuaries of Rome, and thence proceeded to Greccio, near Rieti, to see the Blessed John of Parma, who was considered as the patriarch of the Spiritual Friars. Afterwards he settled in Tuscany and in 1287, at Florence, was the companion and disciple of Brother Pierre-Jean Olivi. He held a lectorship at Santa Croce, Florence, but abandoned it after a few years to dedicate himself to preaching, especially at Florence. Being a man of genius, but of an eccentric and restless character, he soon became the leader of the famous Spirituals in Tuscany, professed strange ideas regarding evangelical and Franciscan poverty, and attacked the government of the order, although some of these ideas had been reproved by Olivi in his letter of Sept., 1295, to Blessed Conrado da Offida, a moderate Zelante of Franciscan poverty. The Spirituals of Tuscany were so fanatical as publicly to blame Gregory IX and Nicholas III, and even to condemn them as heretics, for having interpreted the Rule of St. Francis as regards poverty according to justice and moderation; they also condemned Innocent III, who had strongly disapproved of the teaching of Joachim of Flora, whom they regarded as an oracle of the Holy Ghost, and whose theories were the cause of the discord in the Franciscan Order in the first half of the fourteenth century.

On account of his excessive and satirical criticism, Ubertino was summoned before Benedict XI and forbidden to preach at Perugia, and was banished to the Convent of La Verna, where in 1305 he conceived and wrote, in only three months and seven days (if he can be believed on this point), his chief work, "Arbor vitae crucifixae Jesu Christi". This work is a collection of allegorical, theological, and political theories regarding civil society and the Church of those days, and expounds also his ideal of the near future. In this work he criticises everything and everyone, the popes and the Church, especially for pretended abuses of riches in the ecclesiastical and civil states, and finally the Franciscan Order for not practising the extremest poverty. In the same work, (book I, chap. iv) is the first mention of the legend of the resurrection of St. Francis, as he affirms to have heard from Blessed Conrado da Offida, and the latter from Blessed Brother Leo, that Christ had raised up St. Francis with a glorious body to console his poor friars, who, according to Ubertino, were of course the Spirituals only. Notwithstanding the Utopian theories of Ubertino, he had many protectors and admirers, and in 1307, after having written the "Arbor vitae", he was chosen chaplain and familiar to Cardinal Napoleone Orsini, nephew of Nicholas III, who had been created by Celestine V protector of the Spirituals of the Marches of Ancona, but which protectorate soon ceased by the election of Boniface VIII in Dec., 1294. Orsini, who in 1306-08 had been pontifical legate in central Italy, deputed Ubertino on 10 Sept., 1307, to absolve the inhabitants of Siena, who had incurred ecclesiastical censure. When Orsini went to Germany in 1308, Ubertino did not accompany him, being then called to France. In the years 1309-12, which witnessed the greatest struggle in the Franciscan Order, Ubertino was called to Avignon with other chiefs of the Spirituals to discuss before the pope the questions at issue between the two parties in the order.

Four points were discussed:

1. the relations of the order with the sect of the so-called Followers of the Free Spirit;
2. the condemnation and doctrine of Olivi;
3. the poverty and discipline in the Order of Friars Minor; and
4. the supposed persecutions of the Spirituals of the order.

During the discussions Ubertino behaved in a very boisterous and insolent manner against the whole body of the order, accusing it of many false and unjust things; however, he was forced to acknowledge that regular discipline substantially existed in the order; but as regards poverty he attacked openly the pontifical declarations as contrary to the rule and as a cause of ruin to the order. He pretended that the Friars Minor should be compelled to observe ad litteram St. Francis's Testament and Rule, and even all the evangelical counsels taught by Christ. And because all this was not possible to obtain from the majority of the order, he exacted that convents and provinces should be erected for the reform party. But this was absolutely denied, whilst on the other hand the question of practical observance of poverty was settled by the famous Bull, "Exivi de paradiso", 6 May, 1312, partly called forth by the polemical writings of Ubertino.

Ubertino thereon retired to Avignon in 1313, and stayed with Cardinal Giacomo Colonna till he had obtained from John XXII (1 Oct., 1317) permission to leave the order and to enter the Benedictine Abbey of Gembloux, Diocese of Liège. Some have doubted whether the Benedictines would have received in their community a person of such a restless character, but we are assured of it by Clareno and a notary of King James II of Aragon in the year 1318. Notwithstanding this, Ubertino did not desist from mixing himself up in the question that troubled the Franciscan Order till he was excommunicated by John XXII. While still a favourite of this pope and a familiar of Cardinal Orsini, he was invited by the sovereign pontiff to give his opinion regarding the other famous question discussed between the Dominicans and Franciscans, that is, concerning the poverty of Jesus Christ and that of the Apostles. This latter question, far more than the one concerning the Spirituals, caused the disastrous schism in the order headed by Michael of Cesena, general of the order, and seconded by the rebellious Louis IV of Bavaria. Ubertino was at Avignon in 1322; on the request of the Pope he wrote his answer to the question then in controversy, asserting that Christ and the Apostles have to be considered in a two-fold condition: as private persons they had repudiated all property, but as ministers of religion they made use of goods and money for necessaries and alms. John XXII was satisfied with the answer, but Ubertino returned again to the service of Cardinal Orsini, and continued his writings to concern himself in the question, which meanwhile had been settled, 1322-23. However this may be, it is certain that in 1325 he was accused of heresy, especially of having obstinately sustained some errors of Olivi.

Ubertino, foreseeing the condemnation that hung over him, fled from Avignon, and the pope in a letter dated 16 Sept., 1325, commanded the general of the Franciscans to have him arrested as a heretic; but Ubertino probably went to Germany under the protection of Louis the Bavarian, whom he is said to have accompanied on his way to Rome in 1328. From this time Ubertino disappeared from history, so that nothing more is known of him. Some suppose that he left the Benedictines in 1332 to join the Carthusians, but this is not certain. The Fraticelli of the fifteenth century, who venerated him as a saintly man, spread the news that he had been killed. The end of this famous leader of the Spirituals, remembered by even Dante in the twelfth canto of the "Paradise", will probably remain an obscure point in history.

Besides the "Arbor vitae", his principal work, printed once only at Venice in 1485, and of which scarcely thirteen manuscripts are known in the principal libraries of Europe, Ubertino also wrote other works of a polemical kind:

• the "Responsio" to the questions of Clement V (1310);
• the "Rotulus" (1311);
• the "Declaratio" against the Franciscan Order (1311);
• the apology of Olivi "Sanctitati Apostolicae", and
• the treatise "Super tribus sceleribus" on poverty, compiled also in 1311.

HIERON. GOLUBOVICH

Ubiquitarians

Also called Ubiquists, a Protestant sect started at the Lutheran synod of Stuttgart, 19 December, 1559, by John Brenz, a Swabian (1499-1570). Its profession, made under the name of Duke Christopher of Würtemberg, and entitled the "Würtemberg Confession," was sent to the Council of Trent, in 1552, but had not been formally accepted as the Ubiquitarian creed until the synod at Stuttgart. Luther had upset the peace of Germany by his disputes. In the effort to reconcile and unite the contending forces against the Turks, Charles V demanded of the Lutherans a written statement of their doctrines. This -- the "Augsburg Confession" -- was composed by Melanchthon, and read at a meeting at Augsburg in 1530. Its tenth article concerned the Real Presence of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament, a burning question among the Protestants. In 1540, Melanchthon published another version of the "Augsburg Confession", in which the article on the Real Presence differed essentially from what had been expressed in 1530. The wording was as follows:

• Edition of 1530: "Concerning the Lord's Supper, they teach that the body and blood of Christ are truly present, and are distributed (communicated) to those that eat in the Lord's Supper; and they disapprove of those that teach otherwise."
• Edition of 1540: "Concerning the Lord's Supper, they teach that with bread and wine are truly exhibited the body and blood of Christ to those that eat in the Lord's Supper."

Johann Eck was the first to call attention to the change, in a conference at Worms, 1541. Debates followed, and the Ubiquitarian controversy arose, the question being: Is the body of Christ in the Eucharist, and if so, why? The Confession of 1540 was known as the Reformed doctrine. To this Melanchthon, with his adherents, subscribed, and maintained that Christ's body was not in the Eucharist. For, the Eucharist was everywhere, and it was impossible, they contended, for a body to be in many places simultaneously. Adopting Luther's false interpretation of the communicatio idiomatum, Brenz argued that the attributes of the Divine Nature had been communicated to the humanity of Christ which thus was deified. If deified, it was everywhere, ubiquitous, just as His divinity, and therefore really present in the Eucharist. Brenz was in harmony with Catholic Faith as to the fact, but not as to the explanation. His assertion that Christ's human nature had been deified, and that His body was in the Eucharist as it was elsewhere, was heretical. Christ, as God, is everywhere, but His body and blood, soul and divinity, are in the Eucharist in a different, special manner (sacramentally). In 1583, Chemnitz, who had unconsciously been defending the Catholic doctrine, calmed the discussion by his adhesion to absolute Ubiquitarianism. In 1616 the heresy arose again as Kenoticism and Crypticism, but sank into oblivion in the troubles of the Thirty Years War.

JOSEPH HUGHES

Ucayali

(SAN FRANCISCO DE UCAYALI.)

Prefecture Apostolic in Peru.

At the request of the Peruvian Government, desirous of civilizing and converting the Indian tribes inhabiting a large and secluded mountainous region in the east of Peru, known as La Montaña, in which a few Franciscan missionaries had been labouring, the Holy See on 5 February, 1900, erected the district in to three prefectures Apostolic, depending directly on Propaganda. The central prefecture, San Francisco de Ucayali, remained under the control of the Franciscans, who were placed under the immediate jurisdiction of their master-general. The prefecture comprises (a) Chauchamayo, the district drained by the Perené and Pachitea, together with the Gran Pajonal to its eastern valleys, and as far as the Tambo and the upper Ucayali; (b) Apurimac, the territory drained by the Ené, Mantaro, and Tambo, as far as the confluence of the latter and the Urubamba; (c) Ucayali, the region drained by the Ucayali to the meeting of the Tambo and Urubamba. The Indians belong to the Amuescho, Chipivi, and Cunivi tribes, 5140 being Catholics. The mission contains 12 priests, 10 lay brothers, 6 chief stations, 24 churches and chapels, 6 having resident pastors; 11 schools. The first prefect Apostolic, R.P. Augustin Alemany (14 February, 1905), was succeeded by R. P. Bernardo Irastorza (September, 1905). To prevent disputes concerning the jurisdictional limits of the neighbouring prelates, Propaganda decreed that the mission was confined strictly to the forest districts.

A.A. MACERLEAN

Uccello

Painter, born at Florence, 1397; died there, 1475. His real name was Paolo di Dono, but from his love of painting birds he received the nickname of Uccello, and has been most frequently called by that name ever since. He was apprenticed to Ghiberti, and was one of the assistants engaged in preparing the first pair of bronze gates made for the baptistery in Florence. Vasari tells us that his special love was for geometry and perspective. Manetti taught him geometry, but where he learned painting we do not know, nor are we acquainted with the reasons which led him to leave the botega of Ghiberti and set up for himself. Vasari scoffs at Uccello's study of perspective, regarding it as waste of time, and saying that the artist became "more needy than famous". His skill in foreshortening and proportion, and in some of the complex difficulties of perspective, was quite remarkable, and his pictures for this reason alone are well worth careful study, for they display an extraordinary knowledge of geometric perspective. His most important work is the colossal equestrian figure of Sir John Hawkwood, a chiaroscuro in terraverde, intended to imitate a stone statue, seen aloft, standing out from the wall of the cathedral. One of the most precious possessions of the National Gallery, London, is a battle-picture by this artist. For a long time this was wrongly entitled the "Battle of Sant' Egidio of 1416", but it really represents the rout of San Romano of 1432. Instead of Malatesta, the picture gives us a representation of Nicolò da Tolentino. Mr. Herbert Horne gave considerable attention to the history of this picture some twelve years ago, and was able to arrive at a very accurate determination regarding it. There are very few paintings by Uccello in existence, although he must have painted a considerable number. There is a panel by him in the Louvre, containing his own portrait, associated with those of Giotto, Donatello, Brunelleschi, and Manetti, representing perspective associated with painting, sculpture, architecture, and geometry. Many of the frescoes he executed for Santa Maria Novella have been destroyed. The only other picture of his that need be mentioned here is a predella in a church near Urbino, relating to the theft of a pax, which is attributed to him by many critics. He is said to have studied the works of Pisanello with great advantage, and it is probable that it was from Pisanello that he first learned painting, but he may be practically regarded as one of the founders of the art of linear perspective. There are very few dates known in his history beyond those of his birth and death. But we know that in 1425 he was at work at Venice, in 1436 painting his portrait of Sir John Hawkwood, and in 1468 residing at Urbino.

GEORGE CHARLES WILLIAMSON

Archdiocese of Udine

(UTINENSIS)

The city of Udine, the capital of a province and archdiocese in Friuli, northern Italy, is situated in a region mainly agricultural. its cathedral, built in 1236 by the Patriarch Bertoldo, was altered several times, most recently, in 1706, through the munificence of the Manin family, whose tombs adorn the choir. It contains paintings by Pordenone, Tiepolo (chapel of the Blessed Sacrament), Matteo da Verona, etc.; statutes by Torretto (St. Bertrand), Linardi (Pius IX), Minisini (Archbishop Bricato). In the baptistery is a font by Giovanni da Zuglio (1480) and paintings by Tiepolo. The oldest church at Udine is that of S. Maria di Castello, transformed in the sixteenth century. S. Antonio Abbate contains the tombs of the patriarchs Francesco and Ermolao Barbaro; SS. Filippo e Giacomo, statutes by Contieri; S. Peitro Martire and the Zitelle e S. Chiara contain noteworthy pictures; the Madonna delle Grazie preserves a much venerated Byzantine Madonna and is rich in sculpture and paintings. Among the profane edifices, the Castelo, which acquired its present form in 1517, was the residence of the patriarchs of Aquileia, then of the Venetian governor, and is now a barrack; it contains a great parliament chamber painted by Amalteo, Tiepolo, and others. The city hall (1457), the work of Nicolo Lionello, in a sober and graceful Gothic style, is rich in paintings by the most celebrated Venetian masters, as is also the archiepiscopal palace, built by the Patriarch Francesco Barbaro, especially remarkable for the salon of Giovanni da Udine. The city hospital was built in 1782 by Archbishop Gradenigo. Many of the private residences also are rich in works of art.

Where the city of Udine now stands there existed, in the Roman period, a fortified camp, probably for the defence of the Via Julia Agusta leading from Aguileia to the Carnic Alps. Narses also made use of this fort after the Gothic War. No mention, however, is found of Utinum until 983, when Otho II granted its stronghold to Radoalso, Patriarch of Aquileia, Prince of Friuli and Istria. A centre of population went on forming here from that time, and successive patriarchs provided it with water-supply and other institutions. The population was notably increased by the arrival of Tuscan exiles in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. In the thirteenth century the patriarch was represented by a gastaldo, while twelve nobles and twelve commons represented the people in the government. The privileges of the citizens were augmented by the Patriarchs Ramondo della Torre (1291) and Bertrando di Saint Genais (1340) on account of the loyalty displayed by the Udinese in the wars against the Visconti of Milan and against the small feudatories. As early as the thirteenth century Udine was the ordinary residence of the patriarchs, and in 1348, when Aquileia was destroyed by an earthquake, the see was definitively transferred to Udine. In 1381 the city opposed Cardinal Philip of Alencon, who had been given the See of Aquileia in commendam; they wished to have an effective prince and patriarch, and the consequent war ended only with the cardinal's renunciation (1387). There was also a popular rising against Giovanni, Margrave of Moravia, who wished to revise the Constitution. In 1420 Udine, after a long siege, surrendered to the Venetians, and thenceforward it belonged to the republic, being the capital of Friuli. However, it retained in substance its ancient form of government. Udine was the birthplace of the military leaders Savorgnano and Colloredo and the painters Giovanni da Udine, Pellegrino da S. Daniele, Giovanni di Martino, and Odorico Politi.

In 1752 the Patriarchate of Aquileia was suppressed, and the two Archbishoprics of Udina and Gorizia were formed, the former embracing that part of the patriarchate which was subject to the Republic of Venice. The first archbishop was Daniele Dolfin (1752- 62), who retained the title of patriarch. In 1818 Udine became a bishopric, subject to the metropolitan See of Venice; Pius IX, however, in 1846, re-established the Archbishopric of Udine, though without suffragans. The archdiocese contains 201 parishes, with 438,000 souls; 703 priests, 3 houses of male and 6 of female religious; 2 educational establishments for boys, and 6 for girls.

CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, VIII; CICONI, Udine e sua provincia (Udine, 1862).

U. BENIGNI

Diocese of Ugento

(UXENTIN)

The city of Ugento, with its small harbour, is situated in the Province of Leece, in Apulia, on the Gulf of Tarentum. It is the ancient Uxentum, and claims to have been founded by Uxens, who is mentioned in the Eighth Book of the Æneid. In ancient times it was an important city. In 1537 it was destroyed by the Turks. Under the Byzantine domination it had Greek bishops. Of the Latin bishops the first known was the Benedictine Simeon, of unknown date.

Others worthy of mention are: St. Charles Borromeo (1530-37); Antonio Sebastiano Minturno, poet (1559); the Carmelite Desiderio Mazzapica (1566), who was distinguished at the Council of Trent; and the great canonist Agostino Barbosa (1649). In 1818 the diocese of Alessano (the ancient Leuca) was united to that of Ugento. The Greek rite flourished in many places in this diocese until 1591, when it was abolished by Bishop Ercole lancia. The diocese is suffragan of Otranto, and contains 30 parishes, 60,000 souls, 129 priests, secular and regular, 1 house of male religious, 4 houses of female religious, and 3 schools for girls.

CAPPELLETI, Le Chiese d'Italia, XXI.

U. BENIGNI

Ferdinando Ughelli

Historian, born at Florence, 21 March, 1595; died 19 May, 1670. Having entered the Cistercian Order in his native city, he was sent to the Gregorian University, Rome, where he studied under the Jesuits, Francesco Piccolomini and John de Lugo. He filled many important posts in his order, being Abbot of Settimo (Florence), and from 1638 Abbot of Tre Fontane, Rome. He was skilled in ecclesiastical history. To encourage him in this work and to defray the expense of the journeys it entaile d Alexander VII granted him an annual pension of 500 scudi. He was a consultor of the Index and theologian to Cardinal Carlo de'Medici, and was frequently offered the episcopal dignity, which he refused to accept. He was buried in his abbatial ch urch. His chief work is "Italia sacra sive de episcopis Italae" (9 vols., Rome, 1643-62), abridged by Ambrogio Lucenti (Rome, 1704); re-edited with corrections and additions by Nicola Coleti (Venice, 1717-22), with a tent! h volume. In compiling this work, he frequently had to deal with matters not previously treated by historians; as a result, the "Italia sacra", owing to the imperfections of historical science in Ughelli's day, especially from the point of view of criticism and diplomatics, contains serious errors, particularly as the author was more intent on collecting than on weighing documents. Nevertheless his work with all its imperfections was necessary to facilitate the labours of critical historians of a later day, and is consulted even now. Among his other writings are:

• "Cardinalium elogia ex sacro ordine cisterciensi" (Florence, 1624), on the writers and saints of his order and the papal privileges granted to it;
• "Columnensis familiae cardinalium imagines" (Rome,1650), and genealogical works on the "Counts of Marsciano" and the "Capizucchi" (Rome, 1667,1653);
• "Aggiunte" to the "Vitae pontificum" of Ciaconius.

In the last volume of the "Italia sacra" he published various historical sources until then unedited.

U. BENIGNI

Uhtred

(Also spelled: Uhtred or Owtred), an English Benedictine theologian and writer, born at Boldon, North Durham, about 1315; died at Finchale Abbey, 24 Jan., 1396. He joined the Benedictines of Durham Abbey about 1332 and was sent to London in 1337. Three years later he entered Durham College, a house which the Durham Benedictines had established at Oxford for those of their members who pursued their studies at the University of Oxford. He was graduated there as licentiate in 1352 and as doctor in 1357. During the succeeding ten years, and even previously, he took part in numerous disputations at Oxford University, many of which were directed against members of the mendicant orders. It is on this account that Bale (loc. cit. below) wrongly designates him as a supporter of Wyclif. In 1367 he became prior of Finchale Abbey, a position to which he was appointed three other times, in 1379, 1386, and 1392. In 1368 and in 1381 he was subprior at Durham Abbey. Along with Wyclif he was one of the delegates sent by Edward III to the papal representatives at Bruges in 1374, with the purpose of reaching an agreement concerning the vexed question of canonical provision in England. In the same year he represented Durham Abbey at a council held by Edward, Prince of Wales, for the purpose of determining whether the king was obliged to recognize the papal suzerainty which had been granted to Innocent III by King John. On this occasion Uhtred defended the pope's right of overlordship, but, when on the following day the assembly cast its vote contrarily, he followed their example. Among his literary works, none of which have as yet been printed, are worthy of mention: "De substantialibus regulae monachalis", preserved in the Durham Cathedral Library; "Contra querelas Fratrum", written about 1390, extant in the British Museum; and a Latin translation of the "Ecclesiastical History" of Eusebius, which is also preserved in the British Museum.

MICHAEL OTT

Cornelius Ujejski

Polish poet, born at Beremiany, Galicia, 1823; died at Cholojewie, 1897. His father was a prosperous landowner, member of an ancient noble family. Cornelius completed his studies at Lemberg, and while still a student at the university there wrote "Maraton" (1843), a patriotic lyric poem of excellent form. In 1846, at the instigation of the Austrian Government, the Galician peasants massacred several thousand of the nobility. Ujejski then gave utterance to the universal feeling of indignation in his powerful poem "Choral", which has become the national hymn of Poland. At Paris, 1847, he published a volume of poems entitled "Skargi Jeremiego" (Lamentations of Jeremias). He made the acquaintance of the most distinguished men in the Polish colony at Paris, among them Mickiewicz, and devoted himself with youthful ardor to the poet Julius Slowacki. In 1848 he returned home, and won great popularity. He was regarded and beloved by the people as their national poet. Ujejski wrote a number of other poems of fine sentiment and perfect poetical form, among them "Kwiaty bez woni" (Flowers without perfume), 1848, and "Zwiedle liscie" (Faded leaves) in 1849. In 1852 he published a second volume of poems entitled "Melodye Biblijne" (Biblical Melodies). Ujejski never achieved anything finer than his youthful works, though his later poems are distinguished by strong patriotic feeling, elegance of form, and fine poetic taste.

S. TARNOWSKI

Kaspar Ulenberg

Convert, theological writer and translator of the Bible, born at Lippstadt on the Lippe, Westphalia, in 1549; died at Cologne, 16 Feb., 1617. He was the son of Lutheran parents and was intended for the Lutheran ministry. He received his grammar-school education in Lippstadt, Soest, and Brunswick, and from 1569 studied theology at Wittenberg. While studying Luther's writings there his first doubts as to the truth of the Lutheran doctrines were awakened, and were then increased by hearing the disputes between the Protestant theologians and by the appearance of Calvinism in Saxony. After completing his studies he taught for a short time in the Latin school at Lunden in Dithmarschen; he was then sent by his family to Cologne to bring back to Protestantism a kinsman who had become Catholic. After accomplishing this task he remained in Cologne, where, through his friendship with Johann Nopelius and Gerwin Calenius (Catholic countrymen of his), he had an opportunity of becoming acquainted with Catholic life and teaching. In 1572 he became a Catholic, and soon afterwards, upon obtaining degrees in philosophy at the University of Cologne, became professor at the Gymnasium Laurentianum at Cologne. In 1575 he was ordained priest and became parish priest at Kaiserswerth. In 1583 he was made parish priest of St. Cunibert's in Cologne, where he laboured zealously by preaching and catechetical exercises, and made many conversions. In 1593 he became regent of the Laurentian gymnasium, retaining this position for twenty-two years. From 1600 to 1606 he directed the education of princes Wilhelm and Hermann of Baden, sons of Margrave Edward Fortunatus of Baden-Baden. In 1605 he became parish priest of St. Columba's in Cologne, and from 1610 to 1612 was also rector of the university.

Ulenberg began his literary career at Kaiserwerth with the work, "Die Psalmen David's in allerlei deutsche Gesangreime gebracht" (Cologne, 1582), an excellent hymn book for the common people, which was widely circulated and often reprinted; the last and revised edition was by M. Kaufmann (Augsburg, 1835). To the first edition was appended a "Katechismus oder kurzer Bericht der ganzen christl. kathol. Religion sammt Warnung wider allerlei unserer Zeit Irrthumb". He completed at Cologne (1589) his chief theological work, "Erhebliche und wichtige Ursachen, warumb die altgläubige Catholische Christen bei dem alten wahren Christenthumb bis in ihren Tod beständiglich verharren", of which he also issued a Latin edition entitled: "Causae graves et justae, cur Catholicis in communione veteris ejusque veri Christianismi constanter usque ad finem vitae permanendum, cur item omnibus, qui se Evangelicos vocant, relictis erroribus ad ejusdem Christianismi consortium vel postliminio redeundum sit". This is one of the best controversial treatises of the sixteenth century and is still instructive reading. A new and revised edition was prepared by M.W. Kerp entitled: "Zweiundzwanzig Beweggründe. Ein buch für Katholische und Evangelische" (Mainz, 1827, 1833, and 1840). Other works worthy of mention are:

• "Trostbuch für die Kranken und Sterbenden" (Cologne, 1590), often reprinted;
• "Historia de vita, moribus, rebus gestis, studiis ac denique morte Praedicantium Lutheranorum, D. Martini Lutheri, Philippi Melanchthonis, Matthiae Flacii Illyrici, Georgii Maioris, et Andraea Osiandri", which was edited after Ulenberg's death by Arnold Meshovius (1622), a German edition being issued at Mainz (2 vols., 1836-37).
• Ulenberg also wrote various shorter polemical and ascetical treatises. His last and most important literary work (Sacra Biblia, das ist, die gantze Heilige Schrifft, Alten und Neuen Testaments, nach der letzten Römisch Sixtiner Edition mit fleiss übergesetxt), the German translation of the Bible, he began (1614) at the request of the Archbishop and Elector of Cologne, Ferdinand Duke of Bavaria, and finished shortly before his death. The first edition appeared at Cologne in 1630; eleven other editions were published at Cologne up to 1747, and eleven more at Nuremberg, Bamberg, Frankfort, and Vienna.
• The German Bible which was published (Mainz, 1662) at the command of the Archbishop and Elector of Mainz, Johann Philip Count of Schönborn, was a revision of Ulenberg's translation. This revision, entitled "Die catholische Mainzer Bibel", is still frequently printed and until Allioli's translation appeared was the most popular German translation of the Bible.

FRIEDRICH LAUCHERT

Ulfilas

(Also: Ulphilas), apostle of the Goths, missionary, translator of the Bible, and inventor of an alphabet, born probably in 311; died at Constantinople in 380 or 381. Though Ulfilas in speech and sympathies was thoroughly Gothic, he was descended not from Teutonic ancestors, but from Cappadocians captured, in the reigns of Valerian and Gallienus, during the raids in Asia Minor made by the Goths from the north of the Danube. There seems to be no valid reason for thinking Ulfilas was not born a Christian (Hodgkin places his conversion during his residence at Constantinople). As a young man he was sent to that city either as a hostage or an ambassador, and, after occupying for some time the position of lector in the church, he was consecrated bishop in his thirtieth year by the celebrated Arian bishop of Nicomedia, Eusebius. Shortly after his consecration he returned to Dacia and during the remaining forty years of his life he laboured among his fellow-countrymen as a missionary. The first eight or ten years of his missionary life were spent in Dacia, after which because of the persecution of his pagan countrymen he was compelled with many of his Christian converts to seek refuge in Moesia. It was at this period in his life that he conceived the idea of translating the Bible into the language of the Goths, a task demanding as a preliminary that he should invent a special alphabet. His familiarity with Greek made the task comparatively simple, only a few letters being borrowed from other sources, Runic or Latin. Despite his many other activities Ulfilas translated "all the books of Scripture with the exception of the Books of Kings, which he omitted because they are a mere narrative of military exploits, and the Gothic tribes were especially fond of war, and were in more need of restraints to check their military passions than of spurs to urge them on to deeds of war" (Philostorgius, "Hist. eccl.", II, 5). The Books of the Old Testament were translated from the Septuagint; those of the New Testament from the original Greek. Ulfilas was at the Synod of Constantinople in 360 when the sect of Acacius triumphed and issued its compromise creed as a substitute for the formularies of the Orthodox as well as the Arian parties. It is unfortunate that the career of Ulfilas was marred by his adherence to the Arian heresy. It may be said in extenuation of this fault that he was a victim of circumstances in coming under none but Arian and semi-Arian influences during his residence at Constantinople; but he persisted in the error until the end of his life. The lack of orthodoxy deprived the work of Ulfilas of permanent influence and wrought havoc among some of his Teutonic converts. His labours were impressed not only on the Goths, but on other Teutonic peoples, and because of the heretical views they entertained they were unable to maintain themselves in the kingdoms which they established. Only a few chapters of Ulfilas's translation of the Old Testament are in existence. Of the New Testament we have the greater portion of the Gospels in the beautiful Silver Codex (a purple parchment with silver and gold letters) now at Upsala, and dating from the fifth century perhaps; nearly all of St. Paul's Epistles in a Milanese Codex edited by Cardinal Mai, and a large fragment of the Epistles to the Romans on a Wofenbüttel palimpsest.

PATRICK J. HEALY

William Bernard Ullathorne

English Benedictine monk and bishop, b. at Pocklington, Yorkshire, 7 May, 1806; d. at Oscott, Warwickshire, 21 March, 1889. His father was a lineal descendant from [Saint] Thomas More, but had fallen in life and was then the chief tradesman of the village. His mother, a distant connection of Sir John Franklin, the Arctic explorer, was a convert. When he was ten years old, the whole family removed to Scarborough, where young Ullathorne made his first acquaintance with the sea. His lively imagination and adventurous spirit led him to desire to be on the ocean and to see the world; and for three and a half years his wish was gratified, during which time he made several voyages in the Mediterranean and the Baltic Sea and elsewhere. It was on one of these voyages that a chance opportunity of attending Mass at Memel, a port in the Baltic, proved the turning-point of his life, for he then and there made up his mind to devote his life to the service of God. On his return to England, therefore, he entered as a novice of the well- known Benedictine community at Downside, near Bath, in February, 1823. He received the habit in March, 1824, and was professed a year later, taking the name of Bernard. Later on he spent a year as prefect at Ampleforth College, near York, and was ordained priest at Ushaw College in 1831. Soon after his return to Downside, in response to an invitation from Dr. Morris, O.S.B., Vicar Apostolic of the Mauritius, Ullathorne offered himself as a volunteer for the Australian mission, which then formed part of that vicariate. His offer was accepted, and in view of the difficulty there had always been of governing the colony from such a distance, Dr. Morris gave him full powers as his vicar-general there.

Ullathorne landed in Australia in February, 1833, and his connection with the colony lasted eight years. During the first part of that time he devoted himself to organizing the beginnings of the mission there. When he first landed there were only three priests, Father Therry and Father McEncroe at Sydney, and Father Connolly in Van Diemen's Land (Tasmania). At both places they were working independently and without any kind of supervision. There were internal dissensions among the Catholics, as well as difficulties with the colonial authorities, both due to the want of proper ecclesiastical government. Ullathorne, by his tact and strength of character, soon succeeded in adjusting these, both at Sydney and in Tasmania. He likewise visited the convict settlement on Norfolk Island, which he describes as "the most beautiful spot in the universe", and his ministrations to those who were condemned to death, as well as to the others, had most consoling results. In 1835 Bishop Polding, O.S.B., arrived as Vicar Apostolic of Australia, accompanied by three priests and four ecclesiastical students. Ullathorne, being thus set free, set out soon afterwards to visit England and Ireland, to obtain further help for the mission. During his stay he was called upon to give evidence before the Parliamentary Commission on the evils of transportation, and, at the request of the Government, he wrote a tract on the subject. He was also summoned to Rome, at the instance of Cardinal Weld, to report on the state of the Australian mission.

In 1838 he once more set sail for Sydney, with several priests and nuns who had offered themselves for the work. On his landing, he found himself the centre of obloquy, on account of his evidence on the convict question, for it was supposed to be detrimental to the colony, which thrived on the free labour of the convicts. Nevertheless, his views in the end prevailed, and transportation was abolished. In 1840 Ullthorne left Australia, as it turned out, for good, travelling to England in company with Bishop Polding. He had already drawn out a scheme for a regular hierarchy, rendered possible by the remarkable and rapid increase in numbers and organization, and when Dr. Polding went to Rome he obtained its substantial adoption. Dr. Polding himself became Archbishop of Sydney; but though Ullathorne was more than once pressed to accept a bishopric there, he remained staunch in his refual, and retired to the mission of Coventry. Here he used his energy in building a handsome new church; but after a stay of three years he had once more to move, being appointed Vicar Apostolic of the Western District of England, with the title of Bishop of Hetalona. Two years later, however, he was transferred to the Central District, in which he was destined to spend the remaining forty-one years of his life. He soon acquired influence among his brother bishops, and in 1848 he went to Rome as their delegate, to negotiate the restoration of the English hierarchy—a task for which he was specially qualified, in view of the part he had taken in the similar scheme already carried out in Australia.

His negotiations were successful, and after a delay of two years, due to the Revolution in Rome, the new English hierarchy was proclaimed by Pius IX on 29 September, 1850. Cardinal Wiseman became the first Archbishop of Westminster, Dr. Ullathorne being appointed Bishop of Birmingham. He ruled that diocese for thirty-seven years. On the death of Cardinal Wiseman, he was chosen by Propaganda to succeed him; but Pius IX overruled their choice and appointed Cardinal Manning, and Dr. Ullathorne remained at Birmingham. He took part in all the four provincial synods of Westminster, and in 1870 he attended the Vatican Council; but for the most part his episcopate was free from incident beyond the steady growth and administration of his diocese. When he first took up his residence in the Midlands, he found the finances in a deplorable condition: he lived to see his diocese thoroughly organized, and many new missions established, as well as new communities of men, the most famous of which was [Ven. John Henry] Newman's Congregation of Oratorians at Edgbaston. Oscott was at that time a mixed college, and in 1873 Bishop Ullathorne established a regular diocesan seminary—St. Bernard's, Olton. He also devoted himself in a special manner to the convents of his diocese, in all of which he took a personal interest. One of his chief assistants was the well-known Mother Margaret Hallahan, who founded a convent of the Dominican Order at Stone, from which there were several branch houses. In 1888 Dr. Ullathorne obtained leave from the Holy See to resign his diocese, being given the title of Archbishop of Cabasa. He retired to Oscott College, where he died the following year on the feast of St. Benedict, and was buried in St. Dominic's Convent, Stone.

His chief works, written during his last years, are: "Endowments of Man" (London, 1880); "Groundwork of Christian Virtues" (1882); "Christian Patience" (1886). He also published "Reply to Judge Burton on Religion in Australia" (Sydney, 1835); "La Salette" (1854); "The Immaculate Conception" (1855); "History of Restoration of English Hierarchy" (1871); "The Dollingerites" (1874); "Answer to Gladstone's 'Vatican Decrees'" (1875); and a large number of sermons, pastorals, pamphlets, etc.

For the first half of his life (to 1850), see his Autobiography, edited after his death by THEODOSIA DRANE, of Stone Convent (1891); for the second half, see his Letters, edited by the same (1892).
Other authorities: COOPER in Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v.; GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., s. v., with fuller enumeration of Ullathorne's works; MAZIERE BRADY, Catholic Hierarchy; Bishop Ullathorne Number of The Oscotian (London, 1886); GLANCEY, Characteristics from the Writings of Archbishop Ullathorne (London, 1889); KENNY, Hist. of Catholicity in Australia (1886); PURCELL, Life of Manning (London, 1896); WARD, Life of Wiseman (London, 1897); BIRT, Benedictine Pioneers in Australia (London, 1911); WARD, Life of Newman (London, 1912).

BERNARD WARD

Richard Ullerston

B. in the Duchy of Lancaster, England; d. in August or September, 1423. Having been ordained priest in December, 1383, he became fellow of Queen's College, Oxford (1391-1403), holding office in the college, and proceeding doctor of divinity in 1394. In 1408 he became chancellor of the university and in the same year wrote at the request of the Bishop of Salisbury a sketch of proposed ecclesiastical reforms: "Petitiones pro ecclesiae militantis reformatione". He also wrote a commentary on the Creed (1409), one on the Psalms (1415), another on the Canticle of Canticles (1415), and "Defensorium donationis ecclesiasticae", a work in defence of the donation of Constantine. At the request of Archbishop Courtenay he wrote a treatise, "De officio militari", addressed to Henry, Prince of Wales. From 1403 he held the prebend of Oxford in Salisbury cathedral, and from 1407 the rectory of Beeford in Yorkshire.

TANNER, Bibl. Brit.-Heb. (London, 1748); A WOOD, Hist. and Antiq. of Oxford (Oxford, 1792-6); PITTS, De illust. Angliae scriptoribus (Paris, 1619).

EDWIN BURTON

Antonio de Ulloa

Naval officer and scientist, born at Seville, Spain, 12 Jan., 1716; died near Cadiz, Spain, 5 July, 1795. He entered the navy in 1733. In 1735 he was appointed with Jorge Juan, another young Spaniard, a member of a scientific expedition which the French Academy of Sciences was sending to Peru to measure a degree of the meridian at the equator. They remained there for nearly ten years. In 1745, having finished their scientific labours, he and Jorge Juan prepared to return to Spain, agre eing to travel on different ships in order to minimize the danger of losing the important fruits of their labours. The ship upon which Ulloa was travelling was captured by the British, and he was taken as a prisoner to England. In that country, through his scientific attainments, he gained the friendship of the men of science, and was made a Fellow of the Royal Society of London. In a short time, through the influence of the president of this society, he was released ! and was able to return to Spain. He became prominent as a scientist and was appointed to serve on various important scientific commissions. In 1766 he was sent as Governor to "La Florida Occidental" (Louisiana), where he remained two years, and in 1779 he became lieutenant-general of the na val forces. He is to be credited with the establishment of the first museum of natural history, the first metallurgical laboratory in Spain, and the observatory of Cadiz. As a result of his scientific work in Peru, he published (Madrid, 1784) "Relación histórica del viaje á la América Meridional", which contains a full, accurate, and clear description of the greater part of South America geographically, and of its inhabitants and natural history. In collaboration with the Jorge Juan mentioned above, he also wrote "Noticias secretas de América", giving valuable information regarding the early religious orders in Spanish America. This work was published by David Barry in London, 1826.

VENTURA FUENTES

Francisco de Ulloa

Died 1540. It is not known when he came to Mexico nor if he accompanied Hernan Cortés in his first expedition to California. Authorities are divided upon these questions. Diaz del Castillo relates that during the absence of Cortés, his wife, Doña Juana de Zuñiga (Juñeja), sent letters to him by Ulloa, begging him to return. Ulloa, in charge of two ships loaded with provisions, reached Cortés when he was sorely straitened, and he returned to Mexico in 1537. Ulloa soon followed. Eager for new discoveries, Cortés undertook an expedition at his own expense in 1538, dispatching a fleet of three boats under the command of Francisco de Ulloa. According to Clavigero, Ulloa sailed along the coasts of the California peninsula until he was obliged by the scarcity of provisions to return to New Spains, where, in 1540, according to Diaz del Castillo, he was stabbed by a soldier and killed. Other historians relate, however, that of the three boats which sailed from the port of Acapulco the "S. Tomás" was soon lost; the "S. Agueda" was obliged to seek port in Manzanillo to repair damages, was afterwards driven by a tempest to the shores of Culiacan, where it joined the "Trinidad," returning shortly with the discontented members of the expedition, and the ship "Trinidad," under command of Ulloa, was lost, no trace having been found of her.

CAMILLUS CRIVELLI

St. Ulrich

Bishop of Augsburg, born at Kyburg, Zurich, Switzerland, in 890; died at Augsburg, 4 July, 973. He was the son of Count Hucpald and Thetbirga, and was connected with the dukes of Alamannia and the imperial family of the Ottos. As a child he was sickly; when old enough to learn he was sent to the monastic school of St. Gall, where he proved to be an excellent scholar. He resolved to enter the priesthood, but was in doubt whether to enter the Benedictine Abbey of St. Gall or to become a secular priest. He was sent before April, 910, for his further training to Adalbero, Bishop of Augsburg, who made him a chamberlain. On Adalbero's death (28 April, 910) Ulrich returned home, where he remained until the death of Bishop Hiltine (28 November, 923). Through the influence of his uncle, Duke Burchard of Alamannia, and other relatives, Ulrich was appointed Bishop of Augsburg by King Henry, and was consecrated on 28 Dec., 923. He proved himself to be a ruler who united severity with gentleness. He sought to improve the low moral and social condition of the clergy, and to enforce a rigid adherence to the laws of the Church. Ulrich hoped to gain this end by periodical visitations, and by building as many churches as possible, to make the blessings of religion more accessible to the common people. His success was largely due to the good example he set his clergy and diocese. For the purpose of obtaining relics he went on two journeys to Rome, in 910, and in 952 or 953.

Ulrich demanded a high moral standard of himself and others. A hundred years after his death, a letter apparently written by him, which opposed celibacy, and supported the marriage of priests, suddenly appeared. The forger of the letter counted on the opinion of the common people, who would regard celibacy as unjust if St. Ulrich, known for the rigidity of his morals, upheld the marriage of priests (cf. "Analecta Boll.", XXVII, 1908, 474). Ulrich was also steadfastly loyal, as a prince of the empire, to the emperor. He was one of the most important props of the Ottonian policy, which rested mainly upon the ecclesiastical princes. He constantly attended the judicial courts held by the king and in the diets. He even took part in the Diet held on 20 September, 972, when he defended himself against the charge of nepotism in regard to his nephew Adalbero, whom he had appointed his coadjutor on account of his own illness and desire to retire to a Benedictine abbey. During the struggle between Otto I and his son Duke Ludolf of Swabia, Ulrich had much to suffer from Ludolf and his partisans. When in the summer of 954 father and son were ready to attack each other at Illertissen in Swabia, at the last moment Ulrich and Bishop Hartbert of Chur were able to mediate between Otto and Ludolf. Ulrich succeeded in persuading Ludolf and Konrad, Otto's son-in-law, to ask the king's pardon on 17 December, 954. Before long the Magyars entered Germany, plundering and burning as they went, and advanced as far as Augsburg, which they besieged with the fury of barbarians. It was due to Ulrich's ability and courage that Augsburg was able to hold out against the besiegers until the Emperor Otto arrived. On 10 August, 955, a battle was fought in the Lechfeld, and the invaders were finally defeated. The later assertion that Ulrich himself took part in the battle is incorrect, as Ulrich could not have broken through the ranks of the Magyars, who were south of him, although north of the emperor.

As morning dawned on 4 July, 973, Ulrich had ashes strewn on the ground in the shape of a cross; the cross sprinkled with holy water, and he was placed upon it. His nephew Richwin came with a message and greeting from the Emperor Otto II as the sun rose, and immediately upon this, while the clergy sang the Litany, St. Ulrich passed away. His body was placed in the Church of St. Afra, which had been rebuilt by him. The burial was performed by Bishop Wolfgang of Ratisbon. Many miracles were wrought at his grave; and in 993, he was canonized by John XV. As early as the tenth century, there is a very beautiful miniature, in a manuscript now in the library of Einsiedeln (no. 261, fol. 140). Other miniatures are at the Royal Library of Munich, in manuscripts of 1454 (Cgm., 94, fo. 26v, and Cgm., no. 751).

ULRICH SCHMID

Ulrich of Bamberg

(Udalricus Babenbergensis), a cleric of the cathedral church of Bamberg, of whom nothing more is known than that he lived about 1100 at Bamberg. He is probably identical with the priest of Bamberg of the same name (d. 7 July, 1127), wh o is often mentioned in official documents and who bestowed large benefits on the monastery of Michelsberg. Ulrich's work is called "Codex epistolaris, continens variorum pontificum et imperatorum Romanorum, ut et S.R.E. cardinalium et S.R.I. principum e cclesiasticorum seculariumque epistolas". This collection of documents was completed in 1125 and dedicated to Bishop Gebhard of Würzburg. It contains letters from the year 900 on and was undoubtedly intended for the training of chancellors and statesmen, giving examples as models for the form of letters and public documents. Numerous important letters and charters of that period, which are preserved in it, offer rich material for the history of the relations between the emperors and popes; in particular the letters exchanged by Emperor Lothair, Henry the Proud, and Innocent I give an animated and instructive picture of conditions at that time. These letters also show how the statesmen at the episcopal courts and probably also the bishops were trained. After the collection had been closed by Ulrich several supplements were added that extend to 1134; these additional documents are generally addressed to Bishop Otto of Bamberg.

PATRICIUS SCHLAGER

Ulrich of Richenthal

Chronicler of the Council of constance, date of birth unknown; died about 1438. Ulrich was a citizen of Constance, well educated and a good latinist. He was a landowner and a layman, perhaps a son of the town clerk of Constance, Johannes Richenthal, who lived in the second half of the fourteenth century. During the session of the Ecumenical Council of Constance Ulrich frequently came into connection with the fathers assembled. He met the papal delegates who had to provide quarters for the members of the council. He was employed in business matters by princes who were present in the city during the council, and a bishop lived in his house. Ulrich followed the council, the great events that took place in it, the festivities, and all the celebrations of which his native town was the theatre. He wrote in the German dialect of Constance an exact and careful account of all, introducing much statistical matter. This chronicle is preserved in several manuscripts, of which one at St. Petersburg is in Latin. The Manuscripts contain coats-of-arms and other illustrations valuable for the history of civilization.

J. P. KIRSCH

St. Ulrich of Zell

(Wulderic; called also of Cluny, and of Ratisbon), born at Ratisbon, at the beginning of 1029; died at Zell, probably on 10 July, 1093. Feast, 14 July (10). Two lives of him are extant: the first, written anonymously c. 1109 by a monk of Zell at the request of Adalbert, a recluse near Ratisbon; the other, also anonymous, written between 1109 and 1130. Particulars of his life are also contained in his writings. His parents, pious and rich, were Bernhold and Bucca, niece of Bishop Gebhard II. Ulrich probably received his education at St. Emmeram, but in 1044 he was called to the court of his godfather, Henry IV, and acted as page to the Empress Agnes. Ordained deacon by his uncle Nidger, Bishop of Freising, he was made archdeacon of the cathedral. On his return from a journey to Rome he distributed his posessions to the poor, made a pilgrimage to the Holy Land, and, after another short visit to Rome, entered the Abbey of Cluny in 1061, during the reign of St. Hugo. Here he soon excelled in piety and diligence, made his profession, was ordained priest and appointed confessor to the convent at Mareigny in the Diocese of Autun, and prior of the community of men in the same place. Here he lost an eye and was obliged to return to Cluny.

He was then named prior at Peterlingen (Payerne) in the Diocese of Lausanne, but on account of troubles caused by Bishop Burchard von Oltingen, a partisan of Henry IV, Ulrich again went to Cluny, where he acted as adviser to his abbot. A nobleman had donated to Cluny some property at Grüningen near Breisach, and Ulrich was sent to inspect the place and eventually to lay the foundation of a monastery. Not finding the locality suitable, he with his monks in 1087 retired to Zell (Sell, Sella, Villmarszelle) in the Black Forest, where the report of his virtues soon brought him many disciples. He enjoyed the esteem of Blessed Gebhard III, Bishop of Basle, who frequently visited him. In 1090 he established a convent for nuns at Bolesweiler (now Bollschweil), about a mile from Zell. God granted him the gift of miracles. The last two years of his life he was blind. He was buried in the cloister, but three years later his body was brought into the church. His feast was celebrated for the first time 14 July, 1139.

His life of Hermann von Zähringen, Margrave of Baden, later a monk of Cluny, is also lost. His "Consuetudines cluniacenses" (in P.L., CXLIX, 657) were composed at the request of William, Abbot of Hirschau, in three books. The first two, written between 1079 and 1082, treat of liturgy and the education of novices; the third, written not later than 1087, speaks of the government of monasteries.

FRANCIS MERSHMAN

St. Ultan of Ardbraccan

St. Ultan of Ardbraccan, Ireland, was the maternal uncle of St. Brigid, and collected a life of that great Irish saint for his pupil, St. Brogan Cloen of Rostuirc, on Ossory. There seems to be some difficulty in his chronology inasmuch as the assumption of his relation to St. Brigid must involve an extraordinary longevity, namely 180 years, because his death is not chronicled till 657. Windisch, however, explains away the seeming inconsistency. The Irish Annals describe St. Ultan as of the royal race of O'Connor, and he succeeded St. Breccan as Abbot-Bishop of Ardbraccan about the year 570. From O'Clery's "Irish Calendar" we learn that he educated and fed thousands of poor students from all parts of Ireland. Of his literary powers there are several specimens, among others, lives of St. Patrick and St. Brigid. His exquisite Latin hymn of the latter saint, commencing "Christus in nostra insula", is incorporated in the Solesmes Chant books. The exact year of his death is uncertain, the various annalists giving 653, 656, 657, and 662, but probably we are safe in following the "Annals of Ulster", wherein his obit is recorded under the year 657. He died on 4 September, on which day his feast has always been celebrated. St. Ultan's Well is still at Ardbraccan.

W. H. GRATTAN-FLOOD

Ultramontanism

A term used to denote integral and active Catholicism, because it recognizes as its spiritual head the pope, who, for the greater part of Europe, is a dweller beyond the mountains (ultra montes), that is, beyond the Alps. The term "ultramontane", indeed, is relative: from the Roman, or Italian, point of view, the French, the Germans, and all the other peoples north of the Alps are ultramontanes, and technical ecclesiastical language actually applies the word in precisely this sense. In the Middle Ages, when a non-Italian pope was elected he was said to be a papa ultramontano. In this sense the word occurs very frequently in documents of the thirteenth century; after the migration to Avignon, however, it dropped out of the language of the Curia.

In a very different sense, the word once more came into use after the Protestant Reformation, which was, among other things, a triumph of that ecclesiastical particularism, based on political principles, which was formulated in the maxim: Cujus regio, ejus religio. Among the Catholic governments and peoples there gradually developed an analogous tendency to regard the papacy as a foreign power; Gallicanism and all forms of French and German regalism affected to look upon the Holy See as an alien power because it was beyond the Alpine boundaries of both the French kingdom and the German empire. This name of Ultramontane the Gallicans applied to the supporters of the Roman doctrines--whether that of the monarchical character of the pope in the government of the Church or of the infallible pontifical magisterium--inasmuch as the latter were supposed to renounce "Gallican liberties" in favour of the head of the Church who resided ultra montes. This use of the word was not altogether novel; as early as the time of Gregory VII the opponents of Henry IV in Germany had been called Ultramontanes (ultramontani). In both cases the term was intended to be opprobrious, or at least to convey the imputation of a failing in attachment to the Ultramontane's own prince, or his country, or his national Church.

In the eighteenth century the word passed from France back to Germany, where it was adopted by the Febronians, Josephinists, and Rationalists, who called themselves Catholics, to designate the theologians and the faithful who were attached to the Holy See. Thus it acquired a much wider signification, being applicable to all Roman Catholics worthy of the name. The Revolution adopted this polemical term from the old regime: the "Divine State", formerly personified in the prince, now found its personification in the people, becoming more "Divine" than ever as the State became more and more laic and irreligious, and, both in principle and in fact, denied any other God but itself. In presence of this new form of the old state-worship, the "Ultramontane" is the antagonist of the atheists as much as the non-Catholic believers, if not more--witness the Bismarckian Kulturkampf, of which the National Liberals rather than the orthodox Protestants were the soul. Thus the word came to be applied more especially in Germany from the earliest decades of the nineteenth century. In the frequent conflicts between Church and State the supporters of the Church's liberty and independence as against the State are called Ultramontanes. The Vatican Council naturally called forth numerous written attacks upon Ultramontanism. When the Centre was formed as a political party it was called by preference the Ultramontane party. In a few years the "Anti-Ultramontane Reichsverband" came into existence to combat the Centre and, at the same time, Catholicism as a whole.

As our present purpose is to state what Ultramontanism is, it is beside our scope to expound the Catholic doctrine on the power of the Church and, in particular, of the pope, whether in spiritual or temporal matters, these subjects being treated elsewhere under their respective titles. It is sufficient here to indicate what our adversaries mean by Ultramontanism. For Catholics it would be superfluous to ask whether Ultramontanism and Catholicism are the same thing: assuredly, those who combat Ultramontanis are in fact combating Catholicism, even when they disclaim the desire to oppose it. One of the recent adversaries of Ultramontanism among Catholics was a priest, Professor Franz Xaver Kraus, who says ("Spektatorbrief", II, quoted in the article Ultramontanismus in "Realencycl. für prot. Theol. u. Kirche", ed. 1908): "1. An Ultramontane is one who sets the idea of the Church above that of religion; 2. ...who substitutes the pope for the Church; 3. ...who believes that the kingdom of God is of this world and that, as medieval curialism asserted, the power of the keys, given to Peter, included temporal jurisdiction also; 4. ...who believes that religious conviction can be imposed or broken with material force; 5. ...who is ever ready to sacrifice to an extraneous authority the plain teaching of his own conscience." According to the definition given in Leichtenberger, "Encycl. des sciences religieuses" (ed. 1882): "The character of Ultramontanism is manifested chiefly in the ardour with which it combats every movement of independence in the national Churches, the condemnation which it visits upon works written to defend that independence, its denial of the rights of the State in matters of government, of ecclesiastical administration and ecclesiastical control, the tenacity with which it has prosecuted the declaration of the dogma of the pope's infallibility and with which it incessantly advocates the restoration of his temporal power as a necessary guarantee of his spiritual sovereignty."

The war against Ultramontanism is accounted for not merely by its adversaries' denial of the genuine Catholic doctrine of the Church's power and that of her supreme ruler, but also, and even more, by the consequences of that doctrine. It is altogether false to attribute to the Church either political aims of temporal dominion among the nations or the pretence that the pope can at his own pleasure depose sovereigns that the Catholic must, even in purely civil matters, subordinate his obedience towards his own sovereign to that which he owes to the pope, that the true fatherland of the Catholic is Rome, and so forth. These are either pure inventions or malicious travesties. It is neither scientific nor honest to attribute to "Ultramontanism" the particular teaching of some theologian or some school of times past; or to invoke certain facts in medieval history, which may be explained by the peculiar conditions, or by the rights which the popes possessed in the Middle Ages (for example, their rights in conferring the imperial crown). For the rest, it is sufficient to follow attentively, one by one, the struggle kept up in their journals and books to be convinced that this warfare by the Rationalist-Protestant-Modernist coalition against "Clericalism" or "Ultramontanism" is, fundamentally, directed against integral Catholicism--that is, against papal, anti-Liberal, and counter-Revolutionary Catholicism. (See also STATE AND CHURCH; FEBRONIANISM; SYLLABUS.)

U. BENIGNI

Unam Sanctam

(Latin the One Holy, i.e. Church), the Bull on papal supremacy issued 18 November, 1302, by Boniface VIII during the dispute with Philip the Fair, King of France. It is named from its opening words (see BONIFACE VIII). The Bull was promulgated in connection with the Roman Council of October, 1302, at which it had probably been discussed. it is not impossible that Boniface VIII himself revised the Bull; still it also appears that Aegidius Colonna, Archibishop of Bourges, who had come to the council at Rome notwithstanding the royal prohibition, influenced the text. The original of the Bull is no longer in existence; the oldest text is to be found in the registers of Boniface VIII in the Vatican archives ["Reg. Vatic.", L, fol. 387]. It was also incorporated in the "Corpus juris canonici" ("Extravag. Comm.", I, vii, 1; ed. Friedberg, II, 1245). The genuineness of the Bull is absolutely established by the entry of it in the official registers of the papal Briefs, and its incorporation in the canon law. The objections to its genuineness raised by such scholars as Damberger, Mury, and Verlaque are fully removed by this external testimony. At a later date Mury withdrew his opinion.

The Bull lays down dogmatic propositions on the unity of the Church, the necessity of belonging to it for eternal salvation, the position of the pope as supreme head of the Church, and the duty thence arising of submission to the pope in order to belong to the Church and thus to attain salvation. The pope further emphasizes the higher position of the spiritual in comparison with the secular order. From these premises he then draws conclusions concerning the relation between the spiritual power of the Church and secular authority. The main propositions of the Bull are the following: First, the unity of the Church and its necessity for salvation are declared and established by various passages from the Bible and by reference to the one Ark of the Flood, and to the seamless garment of Christ. The pope then affirms that, as the unity of the body of the Church so is the unity of its head established in Peter and his successors. Consequently, all who wish to belong to the fold of Christ are placed under the dominion of Peter and his successors. When, therefore, the Greeks and others say they are not subject to the authority of Peter and his successors, they thus acknowledge that they do not belong to Christ's sheep.

Then follow some principles and conclusions concerning the spiritual and the secular power:

• Under the control of the Church are two swords, that is two powers, the expression referring to the medieval theory of the two swords, the spiritual and the secular. This is substantiated by the customary reference to the swords of the Apostles at the arrest of Christ (Luke, xxii, 38; Matt., xxvi, 52).
• Both swords are in the power of the Church; the spiritual is wielded in the Church by the hand of the clergy; the secular is to be employed for the Church by the hand of the civil authority, but under the direction of the spiritual power.
• The one sword must be subordinate to the other: the earthly power must submit to the spiritual authority, as this has precedence of the secular on account of its greatness and sublimity; for the spiritual power has the right to establish and guide the secular power, and also to judge it when it does not act rightly. When, however, the earthly power goes astray, it is judged by the spiritual power; a lower spiritual power is judged by a higher, the highest spiritual power is judged by God.
• This authority, although granted to man, and exercised by man, is not a human authority, but rather a Divine one, granted to Peter by Divine commission and confirmed in him and his successors. Consequently, whoever opposes this power ordained of God opposes the law of God and seems, like a Manichaean, to accept two principles.

"Now, therefore, we declare, say, determine and pronounce that for every human creature it is necessary for salvation to be subject to the authority of the Roman pontiff" (Porro subesse Romano Pontifici omni humanae creaturae declaramus, dicimus, definimus, et pronuntiamus omnino esse de necessitate salutis).

The Bull is universal in character. As its content shows, a careful distinction is made between the fundamental principles concerning the Roman primacy and the declarations as to the application of these to the secular power and its representatives. In the registers, on the margin of the text of the record, the last sentence is noted as its real definition: "Declaratio quod subesse Romano Pontifici est omni humanae creaturae de necessitate salutis" (It is here stated that for salvation it is necessary that every human creature be subject to the authority of the Roman pontiff). This definition, the meaning and importance of which are clearly evident from the connection with the first part on the necessity of the one Church for salvation, and on the pope as the one supreme head of the Church, expresses the necessity for everyone who wishes to attain salvation of belonging to the Church, and therefore of being subject to the authority of the pope in all religious matters. This has been the constant teaching of the Church, and it was declared in the same sense by the Fifth Ecumenical Council of the Lateran, in 1516: "De necessitate esse salutis omnes Christi fideles Romano Pontifici subesse" (That it is of the necessity of salvation for all Christ's faithful to be subject to the Roman pontiff). The translation by Berchtold of the expression humanae creaturae by "temporal authorities" is absolutely wrong. The Bull also proclaims the subjection of the secular power to the spiritual as the one higher in rank, and draws from it the conclusion that the representatives of the spiritual power can install the possessors of secular authority and exercise judgment over their administration, should it be contrary to Christian law.

This is a fundamental principle which had grown out of the entire development in the early Middle Ages of the central position of the papacy in the Christian national family of Western Europe. It had been expressed from the eleventh century by theologians like Bernard of Clairvaux and John of Salisbury, and by popes like Nicholas II and Leo IX. Boniface VIII gave it precise expression in opposing the procedure of the French king. The main propositions are drawn from the writings of St. Bernard, Hugh of St. Victor, St. Thomas Aquinas, and letters of Innocent III. Both from these authorities and from declarations made by Boniface VIII himself, it is also evident that the jurisdiction of the spiritual power over the secular has for its basis the concept of the Church as guardian of the Christian law of morals, hence her jurisdiction extends as far as this law is concerned. Consequently, when King Philip protested, Clement V was able, in his Brief "Meruit", of 1 February, 1306, to declare that the French king and France were to suffer no disadvantage on account of the Bull "Unam Sanctam", and that the issuing of this Bull had not made them subject to the authority of the Roman Church in any other manner than formerly. In this way, Clement V was able to give France and its ruler a guarantee of security from the ecclesiastico-political results of the opinions elaborated in the Bull, while its dogmatic decision suffered no detriment of any kind. In the struggles of the Gallican party against the authority of the Roman See, and also in the writings of non-Catholic authors against the definition of Papal Infallibility, the Bull "Unam Sanctam" was used against Boniface VIII as well as against the papal primacy in a manner not justified by its content. The statements concerning the relations between the spiritual and the secular power are of a purely historical character, so far as they do not refer to the nature of the spiritual power, and are based on the actual conditions of medieval Western Europe.

J. P. KIRSCH

Ungava

A Canadian territory lying north of the Province of Quebec, detached (1876) from the Great Labrador peninsula. Ungava, whose area (354,961 sq. m.) surpasses that of Quebec (351,873 sq. m.), was annexed to the latter province (1912) by the Federal Government. It is bounded on the west by Hudson's Straits, comprising Ungava Bay, on the north-east and east by Labrador proper, on the south by the Province of Quebec, on the west by Hudson and James' Bays. This land was visited by the Basques, by Cabot (1493), Weymouth (1602), Hudson (1610), and by the Jesuits Dablon (1661) and Albanel (1672), on their journey by land to Hudson Bay. During the last century the Oblates of Mary Immaculate, Babel (1866 and 1870) and Lacasse (1875), evangelized the Indians of the interior. The Moravian Brothers began proselytizing the Esquimaux in 1770. Ungava now depends spiritually on the Vicariate Apostolic of the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Its immense forest and mineral resources, fertile soil, and unparalleled hydraulic power reveal a bright prospect for colonization and industry. Railway lines are in preparation between Quebec and Western Canada and Hudson Bay. The census of 1901 gave a population of 5113 souls, comprising the aborigines (Esquimaux on the coast, Montagnais and Nascaupis in the interior) and whites.

LIONEL LINDSAY

Uniformity Acts

These statutes, passed at different times, were vain efforts to secure uniformity in public worship throughout England. But as the principle of unity had been lost when communion with the See of Peter was broken off, all such attempts were foredoomed to failure. They were resisted by Catholics on the one hand and the Nonconformists on the other. The first of these Acts (2 and 3 Edward VI, c. 1) was called "An Act for Uniformity of Service and Administration of the Sacraments throughout the Realm". After a long preamble setting forth the reasons which had led to the drawing up of "The Book of the Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments, and other rites and ceremonies of the Church after the use of the Church of England", and the desirability of having one uniform rite and order in use in all churches through England and Wales, the statute enacts that after Pentecost, 1549, all ministers shall be bound to follow the same in all public services. Then follow penalties against such of the clergy as shall substitute any other form of service, or shall not use the "Book of Common Prayer", or who shall preach or speak against it. Further penalties are decreed against all who in plays or songs shall mock said book. Private persons were allowed to use the forms for Matins and Evensong in Latin, Greek, or Hebrew in their own private devotions, and liberty was reserved to the universities to have the service in their college chapels conducted in any of these tongues. There is nothing in this Act to enforce attendance at public worship, but the provisions of the Act apply to every kind of public worship or "open prayer", as it was called, which might take place. The Act itself defines "open prayer" as "that prayer which is for others to come unto or near, either in common churches or private chapels or oratories, commonly called the service of the Church". This Act was confirmed by 5 and 6 Edw. VI, c. 1, repealed by I Mary, sess. 2, c. 2, revived by 1 Eliz., c. 2, and 1 James I, c. 25, and made perpetual so far as it relates to the Established Church of England by 5 Anne, c. 5 (c. 8 according to some computations).

The next of these Acts (3 and 4 Edward VI, c. 10) was passed in 1549 under the title "An Act for the abolishing and putting away of diverse books and images". The preamble of the Act recites that the king had of late set forth and established by authority of Parliament an order for common prayer in a book entitled, "The Book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments, and other rites and ceremonies of the Church, after the Church of England". The first section then suppresses and forbids all books or writings in Latin or English used for church services other than such as are appointed by the king's majesty. And all such books are to be collected by the mayor and other civil authorities and delivered to the bishop to be destroyed.

But as the "First Prayer-book" of Edward VI did not satisfy the reformers, it was soon supplanted by the "Second Prayer-book", issued in 1552 and also sanctioned by Act of Parliament. This Act of Uniformity is the first to be expressly called by that name, being entitled "An Act for the Uniformity of Service and Administration of Sacraments throughout the realm" (5 and 6 Edw. VI, c. 1). It goes much further than the previous Act, for it enforces church attendance on Sundays and holy days. After the preamble declaring the desirability of uniformity, the second section enacts that after 1 November, 1552, all persons shall attend their parish church on Sundays and holy days and shall be present at the common prayer, preaching, or other service, under pain of punishment by the censures of the Church. The archbishops and bishops are charged with the task of enforcing the Act (sect. 3); and they are to inflict the censures of the Church on offenders (sect. 4). The fifth section refers to the new "Book of Common Prayer", to which had been added a "Form and Manner of making and consecrating archbishops, bishops, priests, and deacons", and declares that all the provisions of the previous Act shall apply to it. By the sixth and last section any person convicted of being present at any other form of common prayer or administration of the sacraments shall be imprisoned for six months for the first offence, one year for the second, and shall suffer imprisonment for life for the third. The Act was to be read in church four times during the following year and once a year afterwards. It was repealed by I Mary, sess. 2, c. 2, but revived with certain alterations by 1 Eliz., c. 2, and confirmed by 1 James I, c. 25. It was made perpetual so far as it relates to the Established Church of England by 5 Anne, c. 5 (or c. 8 according to the chronological table of statutes).

Queen Mary contented herself with repealing these statutes of Edward and thus restoring the ancient liberty. No fresh Uniformity Act appeared on the statute book till Protestantism returned under Elizabeth. Then the well known "Act for the Uniformity of Common Prayer and Service in the Church and Administration of the Sacraments" (1 Eliz., c. 2) was passed. The first effect of this statute was to repeal the Act of Mary as and from 24 June, 1559, and to restore the "Book of Common Prayer" from that date. The "Second Prayer-book" of Edward VI with certain additions and alterations was thenceforth to be used, and any clergyman neglecting to use it or substituting any other form of open prayer or preaching against it, was on conviction to suffer penalties which increased with offence till on the third conviction they mounted to deprivation from all spiritual preferment and imprisonment for life. Similarly severe penalties culminating in the forfeiture of all goods and chattels and imprisonment for life were decreed against all persons who spoke in derision of the "Book of Common Prayer". Attendance at church service on Sunday at the parish church was rendered compulsory, and any person absent without reasonable cause was to pay a fine of twelve pence, which would be equivalent to ten shillings in modern English money, or two dollars and a half. Long and extensive provisions for enforcing the Act are included, and one section provides for uniformity in the ornaments of the Church and ministers. This enacts that the same ornaments shall be retained "as was in this Church of England, by authority of Parliament, in the second year of King Edward VI".

This Act proved a powerful weapon against the Catholics, who could not conscientiously obey it, and it was used consistently as a means to harass and impoverish them. So effective was it that it needed no amending, and a century elapsed before the next Uniformity Act was passed. This was the celebrated Act of Charles II (13 and 14 Chas. II, c. 4: according to some computations it is quoted as 15 Chas. II, c. 4). It was followed by a short Act of Relief (15 Chas. II, c. 6). This Act is of little or no special interest to Catholics, for it was primarily designed to regulate the worship of the Church of England, and so far as Catholics were concerned it added nothing to the provisions of the Edwardine and Elizabethan Acts.

Relief from the Acts of Uniformity was granted to Catholics by the Second Catholic Relief Act (31 Geo. III, c. 32), though the benefits of the Act were limited to those who made the declaration and took the oath under the Act. So much of this statute as related to the declaration and oath was repealed in 1871 by the Promissory Oaths Act (34 and 35 Vict., c. 48). There were certain restrictions and conditions as to Catholic places of worship, but these were changed in 1832 by the Act 2 and 3 Wm. IV, c. 115, by which Catholics were placed on the same footing as Protestant dissenters in this and some other respects. Incidentally this statute made it compulsory to certify Catholic chapels to the Anglican bishop and archdeacon and the quarter sessions. But this restriction was abolished in 1855 by 18 and 19 Vict., c. 81, which provided that such buildings could be notified to the registrar-general instead. Even this provision has long fallen into disuse and it is not customary to register Catholic churches except for the solemnization of marriage. Thus for Catholics, as for Nonconformists, the provisions of the Uniformity Acts have been gradually repealed and now they apply only to the Established Church of England; but to that extent they are still on the statute-books and as late as 1872 a statute entitled "An Act for the Amendment of the Act of Uniformity" was passed (35 and 36 Vic., c. 35). As long as the Church of England is the established religion its worship will be regulated by statute, so that Acts of Uniformity in one shape or another will remain part of the English code of law unless, and until, disestablishment takes place.

EDWIN BURTON

Unigenitus

A celebrated Apostolic Constitution of Clement XI, condemning 101 propositions of Pasquier Quesnel. In 1671 Quesnel had published a book entitled "Abrégé de la morale de l'Evangile". It contained the Four Gospels in French, with short notes explanatory of the text, at the same time serving as aids for meditation. The work was approved by Bishop Vialart of Châlons. An enlarged edition, containing an annotated French text of the New Testament, appeared in three small volumes in 1678, and a later edition in four volumes appeared under the title "Le nouveau testament en francais avec dees reflexions morales sur chaque verse, pour en rendre la lecture plus utile et la méditation plus aisée" (Paris, 1693-94). This last edition was highly recommended by Noailes, who had succeeded Vialart as Bishop of Châlons. While the first edition of the work contained only a few Jansenistic errors, its Jansenistic tendency became more apparent in the second edition, and in its complete form, as it appeared in 1693, it was pervaded with practically all the errors of Jansenism. Several bishops forbade its reading in their dioceses, and Clement XI condemned it in his Brief, "Universi Dominici Gregis", dated 13 July, 1708. The papal Brief was, however, not accepted in France because its wording and its manner of publication were not in harmoy with the "Gallican Liberties". Noailles, who had become Archbishop of Paris and cardinal, was too proud to withdraw the approbation which he had inadvertently given to the book while Bishop of Châlons, and Jansenism again raised its head. To put an end to this situation several bishops, and especially Louis XIV, asked the pope to issue a Bull in place of the Brief which the French Government did not accept. The Bull was to avoid every expression contrary to the "Gallican Liberties" and to be submitted to the French Government before publication. To avoid further scandal, the pope yielded to these humiliating conditions, and in Feb., 1712, appointed a special congregation of cardinals and theologians to cull from the work of Quesnel such propositions as were deserving of ecclesiastical censure. The most influential member of this congregation was Cardinal Fabroni.

It took the congregation eighteen months to perform its task, the result of which was the publication of the famous Bull "Unigenitus Dei Filius" at Rome, 8 Sept., 1713. The Bull begins with the warning of Christ against false prophets, especially such as "secretly spread evil doctrines under the guise of piety and introduce ruinous sects under the image of sanctity"; then it proceeds to the condemnation of 101 propositions which are taken verbatim from the last edition of Quesnel's work. The propositions are condemned respectively as "False, captious, ill-sounding, offensive to pious ears, scandalous, pernicious, rash, injurious to the Church and its practices, contumelious to Church and State, seditious, impious, blasphemous, suspected and savouring of heresy, favouring heretics, heresy, and schism, erroneous, bordering on heresy, often condemned, heretical, and reviving various heresies, especially those contained in the famous propositions of Jansenius". The first forty-three propositions repeat the errors of Baius and Jansenius on grace and predestination, such as: grace works with omnipotence and is irrestible; without grace man can only commit sin; Christ died for the elect only. The succeeding twenty-eight propositions (44-71) concern faith, hope, and charity: every love that is not supernatural is evil; without supernatural love there can be no hope in God, no obedience to His law, no good work, no prayer, no merit, no religion; the prayer of the sinner and his other good acts performed out of fear of punishment are only new sins. The last thirty propositions (72-101) deal with the Church, its discipline, and the sacraments: the Church comprises only the just and the elect; the reading of the Bible is binding on all; sacramental absolution should be postponed till after satisfaction; the chief pastors can exercise the Church's power of excommunication only with the consent, at least presumed, of the whole body of the Church; unjust excommunication does not exclude the excommunicated from union with the Church. Besides condemning these 101 propositions, the Bull states that it finds fault with many other statements in the book of Quesnel, without, however, specifying them, and, in particular, with the translation of the New Testament, which, as the Bull reads, has been censurably altered (damnabiliter vitiatum) and is in many ways similar to the previously condemned French version of Mons.

Louis XIV received the Bull at Fontainebleau on 24 Sept., 1713, and sent a copy to Cardinal Noalles, who, probably before receiving it, had revoked, on 28 Sept., his approbation of the "Moral Reflections" given in 1695. The king also ordered the assembly of the French clergy to convene at Paris on 16 Oct., and designated the acceptation of the Bull as the purpose of the meeting. At the first session, on 16 Oct., Noailles appointed a committee presided over by Cardinal Rohan of Strasburg to decide upon the most suitable manner of accepting the Bull. Noalles, who took part in a few sessions of the committee, attempted to prevent an unconditional acceptation of the Bull by the committee, and when his efforts proved fruitless he would have withdrawn from the assembly if the king had not ordered him to remain. The report of the committee was for an unqualified acceptance of the Bull, and at the session of the assembly on 22 Jan., 1714, the report was accepted by a vote of forty against nine. By order of the king, the bull was registered by the Parliament on 15 Feb. and by the Sorbonne on 5 March. A pastoral instruction of Noailles, forbidding his priests under pain of suspension to accept the Bull without his authorization, was condemned by Rome. Of the bishops not present at the assembly, seven joined the opposition, while the remaining seventy-two accepted the Bull unconditionally. The opposition, with the exception of Bishop de la Brou of Mirepoix, also condemned the book of Quesnel. As a pretext of their non-acceptance of the Bull, they gave out that it was obscure. Ostensibly they postponed their acceptance only until the pope would explain its obscurity by special declarations. It is manifest that the pope could not yield to these demands without imperilling the authority of the Apostolic See.

It was the intention of Clement XI to summon Noailles before the Curia and, if needs be, despoil him of the purple. But the king and his councillors, seeing in this mode of procedure a trespass upon the "Gallican Liberties", proposed the convocation of a national council which should judge and pass sentence upon Noailles and his faction. The pope did not relish the idea of convoking a national council which might unnecessarily protract the quarrel and endanger the papal authority. He, however, drew up two Briefs, the one demanding the unconditional acceptance of the Bull by Noailles within fifteen days, on pain of losing the purple and incurring canonical punishment, the other paternally pointing out the gravity of the cardinal's offence and exhorting him to go hand in hand with the Apostolic See in opposing the enemies of the Church. Both Briefs were put in the hand of the king, with the request to deliver the less severe in case there was well-founded hope of the cardinal's speedy submission, but the more severe if he continued in his obstinacy. On the one hand, Noailles gave no hope of submission, while, on the other, the more severe of the Briefs was rejected by the king as subversive of the "Gallican Liberties". Louis XIV, therefore, again pressed the convocation of a national council but died (1 Sept., 1715) before it could be convened. He was succeeded as regent by Duke Philip of Orleans, who favoured the opponents of the Bull. The Sorbonne passed a resolution, 4 Jan., 1716, annulling its previous registration of the Bull, and twenty-two Sorbonnists who protested were removed from the faculty on 5 Feb. The Universities of Nantes and Reims now also rejected the Bull, the former on 2 Jan., the latter on 26 June. In consequence Clement XI withdrew from the Sorbonne all the papal privileges which it possessed and deprived it of the power of conferring academic degrees on 18 Nov. He had sent two Briefs to France on 1 May. One, addressed to the regent, severely reproved him for favouring the opponents of the Bull; the other, addressed to the opposition, threatened to deprive Noailles of the purple, and to proceed canonically against all that would not accept the Bull within two months. These Briefs were not accepted by the regent because their text had not been previously submitted to his ministers. But he sent to Rome, Chevalier, the Jansenist Vicar-General of Meaux whom the pope did not, however, admit to his presence, when it became known that his sole purpose was to wrest the admission from Clement XI that the Bull was obscure and required an explanation. In a consistory held on 27 June, 1716, the pope delivered a passionate allocution, lasting three hours, in which he informed the cardinals of the treatment which the Bull had received in France, and expressed his purpose of divesting Noailles of the cardinalate. The following November he sent two new Briefs to France, one to the regent, whose co-operation he asked in suppressing the opposition to the Bull; the other to the acceptants, whom he warned against the intrigues of the recalcitrants, and requested to exhort their erring brethren to give up their resistance.

On 1 March, 1717, four bishops (Soanen of Senez, Colbert of Montpellier, Delangle of Boulogne, and de La Broue of Mirepoix) drew up an appeal from the Bull to a general council, thus founding the party hereafter known as the "appellants". They were joined by the faculties of the Sorbonne on 5 March, of Reims on 8 March, and of Nantes on 10 March; likewise by the Bishops of Verdun on 22 March, of Pamiers on 12 April, of Châlons, Condom, Agen, and St. Malo on 21 April, of Auxerre on 14 May, and more than a year later by the Bishop of Laon, also by the Bishops of Bayonne and Angouleme. Though a personal letter of the pope, dated 25 March, and a joint letter of the cardinals at Rome urgently begged Noailles to submit, he also drew up an appeal on 3 April, "from the pope manifestly mistaken, and from the Constitution Unigenitus, in virtue of the decrees of the Councils of Constance and Basle, to the pope better informed and to a general council to be held without constraint and in a safe place". He did not, however, publish his appeal for the present, but deposited it in the archives of the officialité of Paris. On 6 May he wrote a long letter to the pope, in which he endeavours to justify his position and that of his adherents. A few months later his appeal from the Bull was published. The appellants were soon joined by many priests and religious, especially from the Dioceses of Paris and Reims. To swell the list of appellants the names of laymen and even women were accepted. The number of appellants is said to have reached 1800 to 2000, pitifully small, if we consider that about 1,500,000 livres ($300,000) were spent by them as bribes.

On 8 March, 1718, appeared a Decree of the Inquisition, approved by Clement XI, which condemned the appeal of the four bishops as schismatic and heretical, and that of Noailles as schismatic and approaching to heresy. Since they did not withdraw their appeal within a reasonable time, the pope issued the Bull "Pastoralis officii" on 28 Aug., 1718, excommunicating all that refused to accept the Bull "Unigenitus". But they appealed also from this second Bull. Noailles finally made an ambiguous submission on 13 March, 1720, by signing an explanation of the Bull "Unigenitus", drawn up by order of the French secretary of State, Abbe Dubois, and, later, approved by ninety-five bishops. After much pressure from the king and the bishops he made public this ambiguous acceptance of the Bull in his pastoral instruction of 18 Nov., 1 720. But this did not satisfy Clement XI, who required an unconditional acceptance. After the death of Clement XI, 19 March, 1721, the appellants continued in their obstinancy during the pontificates of Innocent XIII (1721-24) and Benedict XIII (1724-30). Noailles, the soul of the opposition, finally made a sincere and unconditional submission on 11 Oct., 1728, and died soon after (2 May, 1729). The Apostolic See, in concerted action with the new Archbishop Vintimille of Paris and the French Government, gradually brought about the submission of most of the appellants. (See JANSENIUS AND JANSENISM: The Convulsionaries, Decline and End of Jansenism.)

SCHILL, Die Constitution Unigenitus (Freiburg im Br., 1876); LAFITEAU, Histoire de la constitution Unigenitus (Avignons, 1737); CROUSAZ-CRETET, L'eglise et l'etat au XVIII siecle (Paris, 1893); LE ROY, Le gallicanisme au XVIII siecle, la France et Rome de 1700 a 1715 (Paris, 1892); THUILLER, La seconde phase du jansenisme (Paris, 1901); SECHE, Les derniers jansenistes (Paris, 1891); DURAND, Le jansenisme au XVIII siecle et Joachim Colbert, eveque de Montpellier (Toulouse, 1907); GILARDONE, La Bulle Unigenitus et la fin du jansensime en Champagne (Vitry, 1892); BAUER, Quesnel und die Bulle Unigenitus in Stimmen aus Maria-Laach, VI (Freiburg im Br., 1874), 147-64; IDEM, Der Kardinal Noailles und die Appellanten, ibid., VII, 167-87, 492-518; BARTHELEMY, Le cardinal Noailles (Paris, 1888); DUBOIS, Collecta nova actorum publ. constit. Clem. Unigenitus (Leyden, 1725); PFAFF, Acta publius constitutionis Unigenitus (Tubingen, 1728); Proces-verbaux des assemblees du clerge de France, VI (Paris, 1774); Clementis XI pontificis maximi opera omnia, ed. CARDINAL ALBANI (Frankfort, 1729). The titles of the immense number of Jansenistic pamphlets that were directed against the Bull "Unigenitus" are found in Dictionnaire des livres jansenistes (Antwerp, 1752).

MICHAEL OTT

Union of Brest

Brest -- in Russian, Brest-Litovski; in Polish, Brzesc; in the old chronicles, called Brestii, or Brestov.

Brest is a city in Lithuania, with some 50,000 inhabitants, famous in the history of the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church of Russia for the union of the Ruthenians with Catholicism.

After the annexation of Red Ruthenia, or the Ukraine, to Poland, in 1569, the Ruthenians, who had become politically subject to Poland, began to compare the lamentable condition of their Church with the development and vitality of Catholicism and to turn their eyes towards Rome. The Ruthenian clergy were steeped in immorality and ignorance; the bishops made no scruple of setting their flocks an evil example, living in open concubinage, and practising the most brazen simony. Russian documents of the sixteenth century bear witness to this melancholy decay of the Orthodox Church in the Polish provinces and to the impossibility of applying any remedy. Face to face with this spiritual ruin, the Catholic Church, reinvigorated by the accession of Jesuit missionaries, was showing her immense religious and moral superiority. Some loyal and honourable members of the Orthodox clergy and laity gradually became convinced that only a return to the Roman obedience could secure for their Church anything like sound conditions.

The Jesuits, who had been established at Vilna in 1569, at Yaroslaff in 1574, and successively at Polotsk, Grodno, and other cities of Southern Russia, soon set about to conciliate the friends of union among the Orthodox and to second their efforts. They began publishing works of religious controversy, emphasizing the spiritual, moral, and political advantages which must accrue to the so-called Orthodox Church from union with Rome. Eminent in this labour of preparing opinion for return to the Roman Church were Father Peter Skarga (1536-1612), one of the greatest apostles, and a literary and political genius, of Poland, and Father Benedict Herbest (1531-93). The former published, at Vilna, in 1577, his famous work on "The Unity of God's Church under One Only Pastor" (O jednosci kosciola bozego pod jednym pasterzem), and it filled the Orthodox with confusion; they burned numerous copies of it, so that a new edition had to be published in 1590. Father Herbest then published, also in Polish, his "Exposition of the Faith of the Roman Church, and History of the Greek Servitude" (Cracow, 1586). These two works helped greatly to dispel the doubts of the Orthodox friends of union and bring them still nearer to Rome; a result that was greatly furthered by the writings and labours of Antonius Possevinus. However, the Orthodox remained still undecided. Jeremias II, Patriarch of Constantinople, visited Moscow in 1588 and in 1599 arrived at Vilna, where he convoked a synod to find remedies for the most serious evils of the Ruthenian Church. Received by Sigismund III, King of Poland (1587-1632), with honour and costly gifts, he consecrated Michael Rahosa, Metropolitan of Kieff and Halicz (1588-99). Finding that some of the Orthodox Ruthenians did not conceal their desire for reconciliation with Rome, Jeremias II, to bind them more closely to his own authority and the Orthodox Church, by a decree of 6 August, 1589, appointed Cyril Terlecki, Bishop of Lutzk, his exarch for the metropolitan jurisdiction of Kieff. The patriarch also imposed a precept that a synod of bishops must be held every year to remedy the disorders of the Ruthenian Church.

In 1590 the metropolitan, Rahosa, convoked a synod at Brest for 24 June. A few days before the Ruthenian bishops assembled, Terlecki had a conference at Bels with the Bishops of Lemberg (Balaban), Pinsk (Pelczycki), and Chelm (Zbiruiski), and they jointly drew up a document undertaking to "submit their will and their intelligence to the Pope of Rome", and begging that their rites and their ecclesiastical privileges should be preserved. This document was presented to the Synod of Brest, at which the metropolitan and the Bishop of Vladimir assisted; it was accepted and approved, but kept secret, for reasons of prudence. Terlecki was charged to present it to Sigismund III and obtain the royal sanction for it, but a year and more passed before he fulfilled his charge. Sigismund III, having at last received the document, replied to it on 18 March, 1592, expressing his joy at the decision of the Ruthenian episcopate, promising them his assistance against possible persecutions by the Orthodox, and assuring them that the national rite should be respected and safeguarded. Nevertheless, the proposal of union, though warmly approved by Terlecki, did not attain realization. Terlecki was soon supported by Adam Pociej, who was consecrated Bishop of Vladimir in 1593, in succession to Meletius Chrebtowicz, deceased. Pociej was a sincerely convinced advocate of the union, though he well understood the obstacles to its accomplishment. Another synod of Ruthenian bishops met at Brest on 24 June, 1593, but avoided the question of union, and confined itself to depriving Gideon Balaban of the administration of his diocese. Balaban refused to recognize the privilege granted to the Orthodox patriarchal community of Lemberg by Jeremias II.

On 24 June, 1594, the Ruthenian bishops again assembled at Brest, but their meeting had no synodal character, as Sigismund III was in Sweden, and no synod could be held in the absence of the sovereign. A few days later, Bishops Terlecki, Balaban, Zbirujski, and Kopystenski met at Sokal and reaffirmed their adhesion to the act of union drawn up at Bels and approved at Brest, in 1590. Terlecki had full powers to treat of the union with the Court of Poland and the Holy See. They composed a "Decree on receiving back and entering into the communion of the Holy Roman Church" (Decretum de recipienda et suscipienda communione sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae), in which, after deploring the evils resulting from the schism, they begged to submit themselves to the jurisdiction of the visible pastor of God's Church, on condition that the sacred rites and liturgical customs of the Eastern Church were preserved, saving such points as might be judged contrary to the union and prejudicial to the unity of faith. Terlecki began to solicit the adhesion of the Ruthenian bishops to this document, which was dated 2 December, 1594. It was subscribed by the metropolitan, Rahosa, Pociej, Terlecki, Zbirujski, Pelczyski, Gregory of Polotsk, and Jonas Hohol of Pinsk.

On 12 June, 1595, Rahosa, the metropolitan, and the Bishops of Vladimir, Lutzk, and Pinsk met at Brest and drew up two petitions, one to Clement VIII and the other to Sigismund III. The former protested that they desired to renew the union concluded at the Council of Florence, saving always the Eastern customs and rites; in the latter the same desires were expressed, and it was added that the Ruthenian Church adopted the Gregorian Calendar. Pociej and Terlecki betook themselves to Cracow to confer with the king's delegates and the Apostolic nuncio as to the basis and conditions of the union. These conditions were accepted. On 2 Aug., 1595, Sigismund III declared that the Ruthenian clergy enjoyed the same privileges and rights as the Latin, that they were free of the excommunications and censures inflicted by the Patriarch of Constantinople, that Ruthenian sees should be entrusted only to Ruthenian prelates, that the Ruthenian Church should retain the free possession of its property, that Ruthenian churches and monasteries could not be latinized, and that the Eastern prelates were thenceforward to have no jurisdiction over the Ruthenian clergy. The Apostolic nuncio agreed to the concession of these privileges, and Sigismund III required that delegates of the Ruthenian episcopate should go to Rome for the definitive sanction of the act of union. But its conclusion was already known, and the Bishops of Lutzk, Chelm, Przemysl, and Lemberg announced it to their flocks in pastoral letters dated 27 August. Unfortunately, the metropolitan, Rahosa, did not act loyally: after signing the decree of union, he endeavoured secretly to hinder its execution, and instigated Constantine, Prince of Ostrog, to assemble the Ruthenian bishops and dissuade them from submitting to the Holy See. But Rahosa's intrigues were to no purpose, and, on 25 November, 1595, Pociej and Terlecki arrived at Rome with the decree of union of 2 December, 1594.

The arrival of the Ruthenian bishops overwhelmed Clement VIII and the Roman Court with joy. The delegates were received with great honour; the pope and the cardinals discussed the conditions of reunion proposed by the Ruthenian episcopate, and ungrudgingly conceded that the integrity of the Ruthenian Rite should be maintained; it was also agreed that the "Filioque" should not be inserted in the Nicene Creed, although the Ruthenian clergy professed and taught the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Son. The bishops asked to be dispensed from the obligation of introducing the Gregorian Calendar, so as to avoid popular discontent and dissensions, and insisted that the king should grant them, as of right, the dignity of senators. To all these requests Clement VIII acceded.

All obstacles having been removed, the union of the Rutheians with the Roman Church was solemnly and publicly proclaimed in the Hall of Constantine in the Vatican. Canon Wollowicz, of Vilna, read in Ruthenian and Latin the letter of the Ruthenian episcopate to the pope, dated 12 June, 1595. Cardinal Silvio Antoniani thanked the Ruthenian episcopate in the name of the pope, and expressed his joy at the happy event. Then Pociej, in his own name and that of the Ruthenian episcopate, read in Latin the formula of abjuration of the Greek Schism, Terlecki read it in Ruthenian, and they affixed their signatures. Clement VIII then addressed to them an allocution, expressing his joy and promising the Ruthenians his support. A medal was struck to commemorate the event, with the inscription: "Ruthenis receptis". On the same day the Bull "Magnus Dominus et laudabilis" was published, announcing to the Catholic world the return of the Ruthenians to the unity of the Roman Church. The Bull recites the events which led to the union, the arrival of Pociej and Terlecki at Rome, their abjuration, and the concession to the Ruthenians that they should retain their own rite, saving such customs as were opposed to the purity of Catholic doctrine and incompatible with the communion of the Roman Church. On 7 Feb., 1596, Clement VIII addressed to the Ruthenian episcopate the Brief "Benedictus sit Pastor ille bonus", enjoining the convocation of a synod in which the Ruthenian bishops were to recite the profession of the Catholic Faith. Various letters were also sent to the Polish king, princes, and magnates exhorting them to receive the Ruthenians under their protection. Another Bull, "Decet romanum pontificem", dated 23 Feb., 1596, defined the rights of the Ruthenian episcopate and their relations in subjection to the Holy See.

About the beginning of February, 1596, Terlecki and Pociej returned to their own country, arriving at Lutzk in March and celebrating a solemn "Te Deum" for the success of their mission. But the enemies of the union, their religious fanaticism aroused, redoubled their activity. At the Diet of Warsaw, which opened in May, 1596, the Ruthenian deputies, led by the Prince of Ostrog, protested against the bishops who had signed the decree of union and declared that they would not accept it. The Orthodox communities of Vilna and Lemberg stirred up the people against the unionist bishops. To cut this religious agitation short, Sigismund III ordered the Ruthenian episcopate to be convoked in a synod at Brest, 8 October, 1596, and the union to be solemnly proclaimed. About 6 October the metropolitan, Rahosa, the Ruthenian Bishops of Vladimir, Lutzk, Polotsk, Pinsk, Chelm, the Latin Bishops of Lemberg, Lutzk, Chelm, Father Skarga, and other prelates met at Brest. The Orthodox had sent many of their lay representatives, various archimandrites, Nicephorus, the protosyncellus of the Patriarch of Constantinople, and Cyril Lucaris, representing the Patriarch of Alexandria. The Orthodox, under the Prince of Ostrog, petitioned for the deposition of the bishops who had withdrawn from the obedience of the Patriarch of Constantinople, for the maintenance of the Old Calendar, and for the abrogation of the act of union. They moreover held a conciliabulum to concert measures of opposition. In vain did the king's commissioners labour to allay their hostility and induce them to accept the union; they would not yield, and they refused to recognize Rahosa as their metropolitan.

All attempts failing to win over this opposition to the union, the Ruthenian bishops, on 9 October, wearing their pontifical vestments, went in procession to the Church of St. Nicholas and celebrated the Liturgy, at the conclusion of which Hermogenes, Archbishop of Polotsk, mounted the pulpit and read the declaration of the Ruthenian episcopate accepting the union with Rome. When this had been read, the Latin and Ruthenian bishops embraced each other and then repaired to the Latin Church of the Most Blessed Virgin to sing the "Te Deum" again. Next day another solemn ceremony was celebrated in the Church of St. Nicholas, and Father Skarga preached on the unity of God's Church. Bishops Gideon Balaban, of Lemberg, and Michael Kopystenski, of Przemysl, having declared themselves opposed to the union, were deposed and excommunicated. Their dioceses remained in schism until 1720. The enemies of the union published, on 9 October, a protest against the Ruthenian episcopate. The Prince of Ostrog became the soul of the opposition, and the struggle was maintained, particularly in the field of theology. But Sigismund III efficaciously undertook the defence of the union; in an edict of 5 December, 1596, he ordered the Ruthenians to recognize as bishops only those who had accepted the act of union.

Thus came to pass one of the most auspicious events in the history of Catholicism among the Slavic peoples. The Union of Brest would have produced most abundant fruit, and would have contributed greatly to the triumph of Catholicism in Russia if the statesmen and the Latin clergy of Poland had realized its political and religious utility, and had used all their efforts to favour it, and if, after the partition of Poland, Russia had not destroyed it in the conquered provinces by methods of the most brutal violence.

SKARGA, Synod brzeski; obrona synodu brzeskiego (The Synod of Brest; A Defence of the Synod of Brest) (1596), reprinted in Pamjatniki polemitcheskoi literatury v zapadnoi Rusi (Monuments of the Polemical Literature of Western Russia) (St. Petersburg, 1882), 939-1002; Echthesis, abo krotkie zebranie spraw, ktore sie dzialy na partycularnym synodzie w Brzesciu litewskim (Small Collection of Documents relating to the Special Synod of Brest) (Cracow, 1597; Moscow, 1879) in Pamjatniki, III (St. Petersburg, 1903), 329-76; PHILALETHES, Apokrisis, abo odpowiedz na xiazki o synodzie brzeskim (Reply to Father Skarga's Work on the Synod of Brest) (Vilna, 1597; 1599; Russian tr., Kieff, 1870) in Pamjatniki, III, 1003-1820; ARCUDIUS; Antirresns, apo apologia przeciwko Krzystofowi Philaletowi (Apology against Christopher Philalethes) (Vilna, 1600) in Pamjatniki, III, 477-982; ZOCHKOWSKI, Colloquium lubelskie (Lemberg, 1680); KULCZYNSKI, Specimen ecclesiae ruthenicae (Rome, 1733; Paris, 1859); HARASIEWICZ, Annales eccl. ruthenae (Lemberg, 1862), 111-61; LIKOWSKI, Historya unii kosciola ruskiego z rzymskim (History of the Union of the Ruthenian Church with Rome) (Posen, 1875), French tr. L'union de l'eglise grecque ruthene en Pologne avec l'eg. rom., conclue a Brest, en Lithuanie, en 1596 (Paris); MALINOWSKI, Die Kirchen-und Staats-Satzungen bezuglich des griechisch-kathol. Ritus der Ruthenen in Galizien (Lemberg, 1861); BARTOSZEWICZ, Szkic dziejow kosciola ruskiego w Polsce (Hist. Sketch of the Ruthenian Church in Poland) (Cracow, 1880); PELESZ, Gesch. des Union der ruthen. Kirche mit Rom, I (Wurzburg, 1881), 498-556.
The chief works by Russian Orthodox writers on the Union of Brest are: KAMENSKIJ, Izvestie vozniksei v Pol' sie unii (Notes on the Union concluded in Poland) (Moscow, 1805); FLEROV, Oxpravoslavnyh cerkovnyh bratswah protivoborstvovavshih unii (Orthodox Eccl. Confraternities which Opposed the Union of Brest) (St. Petersburg, 1857); KOJALOVIC, Litovskaya cervoknaja unija (Lithuanian Eccl. Union) (St. Petersburg, 1861). The principal Russian works, Catholic and non-Catholic, are given in PALMIERI, Theologia dogm. ortho., I (Florence, 1911), 748-51, 783-98.

A. PALMIERI

Union of Christendom

The Catholic Church is by far the largest, the most widespread, and the most ancient of Christian communions in the world, and is moreover the mighty trunk from which the other communions claiming to be Christian have broken off at one time or another. If, then, we limit the application of the term Christendom to this, its most authentic expression, the unity of Christendom is not a lost ideal to be recovered, but a stupendous reality which has always been in stable possession. For not only has this Catholic Church ever taught that unity is an essential note of the true Church of Christ, but throughout her long history she has been, to the amazement of the world, distinguished by the most conspicuous unity of faith and government, and this notwithstanding that she has at all times embraced within her fold nationalities of the most different temperaments, and has had to contend with incessant oscillations of mental speculation and political power. Still, in another and broader sense of the term, which is also the more usual and is followed in the present article, Christendom includes not merely the Catholic Church, but, together with it, the many other religious communions which have either directly or indirectly, separated from it, and yet, although in conflict both with it and among themselves as to various points of doctrine and practice agree with it in this: that they look up to our Lord Jesus Christ as the Founder of their Faith, and claim to make His teaching the rule of their lives. As these separated communities when massed together, indeed in some cases even of themselves, count a vast number of souls, among whom many are conspicuous for their religious earnestness, this extension of the term Christendom to include them all has its solid justification. On the other hand, if it is accepted, it becomes no longer possible to speak of the unity of Christendom but rather of a Christendom torn by divisions and offering the saddest spectacle to the eyes. And then the question arises: Is this scandal always to continue? The Holy See has never tired of appealing in season and out of season for its removal but without meeting with much response from a world which had learnt to live contentedly within its sectarian enclosures. Happily a new spirit has lately come over these dissentient Christians, numbers of whom are becoming keenly sensitive to the paralyzing effects of division and an active reunion movement has arisen which, If far from being as widespread and solid as one could wish, is at least cherished on all sides by devout minds.

In summarizing in this article the various matters that bear upon this question of the unity of Christendom, its present default, and the hopes for its restoration, the following points will be considered:

• I. The Principles of the Church's Unity
• II. Unity in the Early Church and its Causes
• III. The Divisions of Christendom and their Causes
• IV. Reunion Movements in the Past
• V. Reunion Movements in the Present
• VI. Conditions of Reunion
• VII. Prospects of Reunion

I. PRINCIPLES OF THE CHURCH'S UNITY

A. As Determined by Christ

It is to the Gospels we must go in the first place if we desire to know what in the intentions of its Founder were to be the fundamental elements in the constitution of the Church, nor do the instructions He gave to His Apostles leave us in doubt on the subject. His last words, as reported by St. Matthew, are: "All power is given to Me in heaven and on earth. Going therefore make disciples (matheteusate) of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you, and, lo, I am with you all days until the consummation of the world" (xxviii, 19, 20). St. Mark's account is to the same effect, but adds important details: "Going into all the world, proclaim the Gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, he that disbelieveth (ho de apistedaz) shall be condemned. And these signs shall follow those that believe: in my name they shall cast out devils, speak with new tongues, and take up serpents, and if they shall drink any deadly drink it shall not hurt them; and they shall lay their hands on the sick and they shall be healed. . . . And they going forth preached everywhere, the Lord co-operating with them, and confirming their words by the signs that accompanied them" (xvi, 15-20). St. Luke, in Acts, i, 8, preserves words of Christ which fit in with these two accounts: "You shall receive the power of the Holy Ghost that will come down upon you, and you shall be My witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judæa and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth"; whilst in his Gospel this Evangelist has recorded how Jesus Christ in His post-Resurrection discourses to His disciples enumerated as among the primary doctrinal facts to be thus attested by the Apostles and preached throughout the world, the fulfilment in Jesus of the Old-Testament prophecies, and the remission of sins through His name: "These are the words which I have spoken to you whilst I am still with you, for it is necessary that all things which are written of Me in Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms be fulfilled; and He said to them: For thus it is written that the Christ must suffer and rise again from the dead on the third day, and repentance be preached in His name for the remission of sins to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. And you shall be witnesses to these things. And I will send down upon you that [gift] which has been promised to you by My Father. Remain therefore in this city until you be endued with power from on high" (xxiv, 44-49).

Further, to go back to St. Matthew, this Evangelist tells us, in a most impressive passage intimately connected with the plan of his Gospel, that Christ made provision for unity of action among His Apostles by appointing one of them to be the leader of his brethren, and assigning to him a unique relation to the spiritual building He was raising. "And I say to thee that thou art Peter [i.e. the Rock], and upon this Rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it; and I will give thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (xvi, 18, 19). St. Luke (xxii, 31, 32) has words spoken in the supper-room which imply this previous appointment of St. Peter, by describing in other terms the same firm support which it would be his to communicate to the faith of the Church. "Simon, Simon, Satan hath desired to have you that he may sift you as wheat, but I have prayed for thee that thy faith may not fail, and do thou when thou art converted" (or it may mean, "do thou in thy turn") "confirm thy brethren." St. John, whose Gospel follows a different course from the Synoptics, and seems to select for narration previously unrecorded deeds and words of Christ which cast a fuller light on what the others had given, tells of Jesus Christ's final reiteration of the commission to St. Peter rendered necessary perhaps to reassure him after his fall and deep repentance, and entrusting him anew with the supreme pastoral charge of the entire flock. "Simon, Son of John, lovest thou me more than these . . . feed My lambs . . . be the shepherd of my sheep" (xxi, 15-17). To St. John, too, we are indebted for our knowledge of a fact which accords well with the words, "Lo, I am with you always", reported by St. Matthew; for he testifies that on the occasion of the Last Supper Jesus Christ promised to send the Spirit of Truth, who proceeds from the Father, and "will bear testimony of me" (xv, 26) and "will lead you into all truth" (xvi, 13); also that on the same occasion He prayed an effectual prayer for His disciples and "those who through their word should come to believe in him, that they all may be one, even as Thou, Father, art one in me, and I am one in Thee, so that they may be one in us, and thus the world may believe that thou hast sent me" (xvii, 20-23).

Were we arguing with the Rationalistic critics we should have to meet their refusal to grant the authenticity of much that is in these passages, but the question of reunion is practical only for those who accept fully and in all respects the authority of the canonical Scriptures. If, then, we take these passages together as utterances of the same Divine voice, reaching us through these different channels, the conclusion is irresistible that the Church was founded by Christ on the principle of a revelation to which, as attested by the word of God, unquestioning assent is due from all to whom it is addressed; on the principle of an authority communicated by Christ to chosen representatives whom He set as teachers of the world, and to whom He requires that the world should render the obedience of faith; and on the principle of a single religious communion, under the rule of these teachers and their duly appointed successors, admission to which is through the gate of baptism and adherence to which is imposed on all under the most solemn sanctions. For:

• the duty assigned to the hearers is simply to believe what the Apostles impart to them as teaching derived from Jesus Christ, no liberty being allowed for disbelief on the ground that the Apostolic teaching does not commend itself to the judgment of the disciple; and this duty is declared to be so imperative that the fulfilment of it places a man in the way of salvation, but disregard of it in the way of Divine condemnation -- the implication being that, as this teaching comes ultimately from Christ, that fact in itself should be held to give the disciple a better guarantee of truth than any reasoning of his own could give.
• The Apostles are sent by Christ in like manner as He was sent by His Father, and to the chief of them are given the keys of the kingdom of heaven with a far-reaching power to make binding laws, which must mean that He sends them forth to continue the work He had begun, to make disciples as He had done, and to rule them in the spirit of the Good Shepherd as He had done; consequently, that He delegates to these Apostles such share of the authority given to Himself as He deemed necessary for the discharge of their world-wide commission.
• The community thus formed out of the Apostolic teachers and their disciples was necessarily one by a twofold bond of union, inasmuch as the teaching, being from God, was necessarily one, and the faith with which it had to be received was correspondingly one, inasmuch too, as the visible society into which all were baptized was essentially one, being under the rule of a body of pastors united under the presidency of a single visible head.
• The words, "I am with you always until the consummation of the world", prove, what indeed was presumable from the nature of the case, that Christ was then instituting a system not intended for the Apostolic generation only, but for all the generations to come, and hence that He was addressing His Apostles, not as eleven individual men only, but as men who, with their legitimate successors, formed a moral personality destined to last through the ages.
• We may further gather from the texts above cited that the revelation thus brought down from heaven and imparted to the world to be the means of its salvation was not confined to a few ethical maxims, lit up by the splendour of a surpassing example and of such simplicity that all men in all ages could without difficulty reconcile them on intrinsic grounds with the dictates of their personal reason. On the contrary, it is expressed in terms of unlimited range -- "teaching them all that I have commanded" -- and is explicitly declared to contain first and foremost in its doctrinal whole the mystery which surpasses all others in baffling human speculation, namely, the mystery of the Holy Trinity -- "baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" -- in other words, for this is the meaning, dedicating them by baptism to the worship of (eis to honoma), and therefore to belief in the Trinity in Unity.
• At the same time, that the human mind, in thus giving its assent to doctrines so difficult for it to conceive may do no violence to its own rational nature, the above passages tell us of the promise of the Spirit to abide for ever in the Church, to guide at all times the mind of the teaching body, organized under its visible head, so that it may always be kept from corrupting the sacred doctrine, and presenting it for acceptance in a form foreign to its original purity.
• Lastly, that we may understand the vital importance of this unity of communion, of this unity of truth, for the due carrying out of the Church's work, we have the prayer of Christ to His Father to teach us that the spectacle of it was intended by Him to furnish the world with the most signal and convincing proof of the divinity of the Christian religion: "That even as the Father is in Me, and I in Him, so they may be one in Us, that the world may believe that Thou hast sent Me." We can appreciate the character of this motive, we who live in an age when the divisions of Christendom are cast in our faces as evidence of the uncertainty on which the Christian pretensions rest. We can see how it would facilitate Christian work at home and in the mission field, if we could still say, as in the time of the Apostles, "The universality of those that believe are of one heart and one soul." We can understand how discerning observers, weighing the natural tendency of human minds to differ, would, in the presence of such a world-wide unity, be fain to exclaim, "This is something that surpasses the power of nature; the hand of God is here."

B. As understood by the Apostles and their Disciples

In the Acts and the Epistles we have a record of the way in which the Apostles understood their commission, and it is obvious that the two things correspond. After receiving the promised gift of the Spirit, the Apostles go forth confidently and commence their preaching. Peter is their leader and, in those early days, so far their spokesman as for the moment to throw his fellow-Apostles almost entirely into the shade. Even St. John, great as he was, and, as we may gather from a comparison of the writings of the two, greatly St. Peter's intellectual superior, accompanies him as a silent companion, thus illustrating the completeness of the union that bound together the Apostolic band. In his preaching St. Peter follows an easily recognizable plan. First he seeks to accredit himself and his colleagues by appealing to the character of their Master, Whose life had been led before the eyes of the people of Jerusalem. He was Jesus of Nazareth, "a man approved by God among you by miracles and wonders and signs which God wrought through him in the midst of you" (Acts, ii, 22), One, therefore, to Whose teaching the people were bound to attend and Whose representatives they were bound to receive. It was true that He who had thus been approved by God among them had afterwards fallen into the hands of wicked men who had taken and slain Him, thereby appearing to show signs of weakness hard to reconcile with such stupendous claims. But the Twelve, who were now addressing the people, were also known to them as having each and all been the companions of the Lord Jesus all the time He went in and out from the Baptism of John (Acts, i, 21, 22); and these could testify from their own immediate experience that what had befallen their Master, so far from being a real sign of weakness, had been ordained for His glorification "by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God", Who, after thus permitting His Son's death for our sakes, had "raised him up" from the dead, whereof they, the Apostles, were the witnesses (Acts, ii, 33), as they were also of His subsequent Ascension.

Having thus declared and authenticated their commission, and having received a further confirmation of it by the miracles wrought through their intercession (Acts, iv, 10, 29, 30; v, 12, 16), which made a, deep impression on the people, they take up a position of the utmost authority (Acts, v, 32), proclaim their Master's teaching, and, on the faith of their sole word, demand credence for it and obedience to its requirements. "Therefore let the House of Israel know that God hath made this same Jesus whom you crucified both Lord and Christ. Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" (Acts, ii, 36, 38). Thus did they teach and claim to be believed, and thus did they call upon their hearers to enter the nascent Church by Baptism and to place themselves as disciples under the Apostolic instruction and rule. And this is what the hearers did in large numbers. On the day of Pentecost itself there were added to the Church, we are told, three thousand souls (ibid., 11, 41), a number which a few days later, after another discourse from St. Peter, swelled into five thousand, and from thence the multitude steadily grew, not only in Jerusalem but in Judæa, and Samaria, and unto the ends of the earth (iv, 4). In strict conformity with the words of Christ (make disciples of all nations. . . . He that believeth and is baptized shall he saved), those who thus join themselves to the Apostles are described invariably as "believers" (pistoi, Acts, x, 45), or again as "disciples" (mathetai, Acts, ix, 1; xi, 26; xvi, 1), or in other places as "those who are being saved" (sozomenoi, Acts, ii, 47; I Cor., i, 18). On these principles the Church was founded, and from these principles unity of faith and communion resulted. "They continued", we read, "steadfastly in the Apostles' teaching and communion, and in the breaking of bread and in prayer" (Acts, 11, 42); and again "the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and one soul" (iv, 32). Later indeed disputes arose and led to critical situations. That was to be expected, for human minds necessarily approach subjects that challenge their attention from the standpoint of their own antecedents, which means that their judgments are apt to be one-sided and to differ. But the point to note is that in those times the authority of the Apostles was universally recognized as competent to decide such controversies and to require obedience to its decrees. Accordingly, they were controversies which led to no breach of communion, but rather to a strengthening of the bonds of communion by eliciting clearer statements of the truths to which all believers were committed by their faith. One instance of a controversy thus happily terminated we have in the fifteenth chapter of the Acts. It is a valuable illustration of what has been said, for it was settled by the authority of the Apostles, who met together to consider it, and ended by affirming the equality of Jews and Gentiles in the Christian Church, together with the non-necessity of circumcision as a condition of participating in ifs full benefits; and by recommending to the Gentile converts a certain (apparently temporary) concession to Jewish feelings which might soften the difficulties of their mutual intercourse. "It has seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us" (xv, 28) was the ground on which those Apostles claimed obedience to their decree, thereby setting a type of procedure and language which subsequent rulers of the Church have consistently followed.

From the second part of the Acts and from the remaining books of the New Testament we have the means of ascertaining how St. Paul and the other Apostles conceived of their mission and authority. It is clear that they, too, regarded themselves as clothed by Jesus Christ with authority both to teach and to rule, that they, too, expected and received in every place a like assent to their teaching and a like obedience to their commands from their disciples, who just by this means were held together in the unity of the one undivided and indivisible Church which the Apostles had founded. The following texts may be consulted on this point, but it is not necessary for our present purpose to do more than refer to them: Acts, xv, 28; Rom., i, 5; xv, 18, 19; xvi, 19, 26; I Cor., iv, 17-21; v, 1-5; xv, 11; II Cor., iii, 5, 9; x, 5, 8; xiii, 2, 10; Eph., ii, 20; iv, 4-6, 11, 12; I Thess., ii, 13; iv, 1, 2, 3, 8; II Tim., ii, 2; Tit., ii, 15; Heb., xiii, 7-9; I John, iv, 6; III John, 10; Jude, 17, 20. We must not, however, pass over St. Paul's jubilant description of this unity in his Epistle to the Ephesians, standing out so conspicuously as it does in the New-Testament writings, to convince us of its deep significance, its all-penetrating character, and the firm foundations on which it was set: "One body, one Spirit, one Hope, one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of us all, Who is over all and through us all, and in us all." Such was the spectacle of Christian unity born of the Apostolic preaching which presented itself to the eyes of the enraptured Apostle some thirty years from the time when St. Peter preached his first sermon on the day of Pentecost.

C. As Resisted by the Earliest Heretics

To claim this wonderful unity as distinctive of the followers of Jesus Christ in the Apostolic days is not to forget that there were sad exceptions to the general rule. There were indeed no rival communions then which, whilst claiming to be Christian, were maintained in formal opposition to the Church of the Apostles. It is expressly stated by Tertullian (Adv. Marcion., IV, v) that the Marcionites, in the middle of the second century, were the first who, when expelled from the Church Catholic, created an opposition Church for the expression of their peculiar views. Before that time the dissentients contented themselves with forming parties and schools of thought, and of this mode of separation, which sufficed to put men outside the Church, we find clear traces in the New-Testament writings together with predictions that the evil thus originating would become more pronounced in after times. Men of what would nowadays be called independent temperament were dissatisfied with the Apostles' teaching in some particulars, and refused to accept it without further warrant than the mere "word of an Apostle." Thus we may gather from the Epistle to the Galatians that, in spite of the decision of the Council of Jerusalem, there continued to be a party which insisted that the observance of the Jewish Law was obligatory on Gentile Christians, and from the Epistle to the Colossians that there was likewise a Jewish party, probably of Hellenistic origin, which mingled insistence on Jewish legalities with a superstitious worship of the angels (Col., ii, 18). At Ephesus we may detect the adepts of an incipient Gnosticism in St. Paul's warnings against giving heed to "fables and endless genealogies" (I Tim., i, 4) and against "profane and vain babblings and oppositions of 'gnosis' falsely so-called" (I Tim., vi, 20). Hymenæus and Alexander are mentioned by name as denying the resurrection of the flesh at the last day (II Tim., ii, l8. Cf. I Cor., xv, 12). St. John, in the Apocalypse (ii, 6, 15), tells us of the Nicolaites who seem to have fallen into some kind of Oriental admixture of immorality with worship, and in his second Epistle (verse 7. Cf. I John, iv, 2) he warns his readers that many "deceivers are entered into the world" who confess not that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, which the church historians refer to the Docetism of Cerinthus.

Our modern admirers of comprehensive Churches would regard the coexistence side by side of these beliefs with those of the Apostles as a healthy sign of mental activity in those early Christian communities, and it is instructive to compare such modern judgments with those of the Apostles, because the comparison enables us to realize better how strong was the feeling of the latter as to the essential importance of basing unity of communion on adherence to the Apostles' doctrine, and as to the exceeding sinfulness of dissenting from it. Thus St. Paul calls these alien doctrines "old wives' fables" (I Tim., iv, 7), "doctrines of devils" (ibid., 2), and "profanities the preaching of which will spread and devour like gangrene" (II Tim., ii, 17). St. Peter calls them "fables skillfully made up" (II Peter, i, 16), and, in a passage where the word heresy under Christian influences has already acquired its traditional meaning, "damnable heresies", or "heresies leading to damnation" (ibid., ii, 1). The preachers of these heresies St. Paul calls "men of corrupt minds" (I Tim., vi, 5), who "speak falsehood in their hypocrisy, and have consciences seared with a red-hot iron" (I Tim., iv, 2). St. Peter calls them "false teachers who deny the Lord that bought them and bring upon themselves speedy damnation" (II Peter, ii, 1), and St. John calls them "antichrists" (II John, 7; I John, ii, 18; iv, 3). Moreover, so far from wishing to tolerate such persons in the Church, St. Paul warns the faithful to avoid them (Rom., xvi, 17), calls upon those who are set over Churches to cast out the recalcitrant heretic, as one who is "subverted and self-condemned" (Tit., iii, 10, 11), and, in a particular instance, tells St. Timothy that he has "delivered" two such heretics "to Satan" -- that is, cast them out of the Church -- "that they may learn not to blaspheme" (I Tim., i, 20). Finally, St. John is most severe towards the Christians of Pergamos for neglecting to expel from their midst the two classes of heretics whom he describes (Apoc., 11, 14, 15).

Summary

In short, according to the teaching and record of the Scriptures, the Church is one everywhere with a oneness which is desired by Christ on its own account as befitting the obedient children of one God, one Lord, and one Spirit, and likewise as the necessary outcome of faithful adherence on the part of its members to the concordant teaching of those whom He appointed to be its rulers, and whom the Holy Spirit preserves in all truth. Still, inasmuch as each is left free to accept or reject this one teaching, this wholesome doctrine, there were, side by side with the general body of the true believers, some apparently small groups who held alien doctrines, for which they had been rejected from the communion of the one Church and these were regarded as having placed themselves outside the pale of salvation. There is not a trace, however, of any third class, separated from the communion of their brethren, but still regarded as members of the true Church.

II. UNITY IN THE EARLY CHURCH

In the writings of the early Fathers, which contain their testimony to the nature of the Church as it existed in their days, we find the same formative principles which moulded its origins continuing to determine the character of its structure and the distinctive spirit of its members. The Church is now widely spread through the known regions of the world, but it is still, as in the days of St. Paul, everywhere one and the same, all its members in whatever place being united in the profession of the same faith, in the participation of the same sacraments, and in obedience to pastors who themselves form one corporate body and are united by the bond of an intimate solidarity. We learn, too, from these contemporary witnesses that the principle of this remarkable unity is still that of a strict adherence to the Apostles' doctrine, but here a new element from the nature of the case comes in. The Apostles no longer live to proclaim their doctrine; It can be obtained, however, with perfect security from the Apostolic tradition. In other words, it has been banded down incorrupt by oral transmission through the lines of bishops who are the duly appointed successors of the Apostles, and who, like them, are guarded in their teaching by the assistance of the Holy Ghost. Thus the word tradition now comes into prominence, and, just as St. Paul said to Timothy, "keep the deposit" (I Tim., vi, 20), that is the sacred doctrine committed to him by the Apostle as a sacred trust, so the Fathers of the Church say "keep the tradition." This is ever their first and most decisive test of sound doctrine, not what recommends itself to the reason of the individual or his party, but what is sanctioned by the Apostolical tradition; and for the ascertaining of this tradition the Fathers of the second and third centuries refer the searcher to the Churches founded immediately by the Apostles, and before all others to the Church of Rome. We learn, moreover, from these early witnesses, that this Church of Rome, in proportion as the ecclesiastical system passed out of the state of embryo to that of full formation, became more and more explicitly recognized as the see which had inherited the prerogatives of Blessed Peter, and was, therefore, the authority which in all cases of controversy must ultimately decide what was in accordance with the tradition, and in all questions of jurisdiction and discipline was the visible head, communion with which was communion with the one and indivisible Church. As these points of ecclesiastical history are discussed elsewhere, we need not demonstrate them by bringing forward the copious Patristic testimonies which may be found in any good treatise on the Church. We may, however, usefully quote, not so much in proof as in illustration of what is said, a passage or two from St. Irenæus's treatise "Adversus hæreses", he being the earliest of the Fathers from whom we have extant a treatise of any fullness, and this particular treatise dealing with just the points with which we are concerned.

"The Church which is now planted throughout the whole inhabited globe, indeed even to the ends of the earth, has received from the Apostles and their disciples that faith which is in one God, the Father omnipotent who made Heaven and earth and the sea and all that is in it; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, Who was incarnate for our salvation, and in the Holy Ghost. . . . Having received this preaching, and this faith, as we have said, the Church, though spread throughout the whole world, preserves it with the utmost care and diligence, just as if she dwelt in one house, and believes these truths just as if she had but one and the same soul and heart, and preaches them and teaches them and hands them down [tradit] just as if she had but one mouth. For, although the languages of the world are diverse, the force and meaning of the tradition is everywhere the same. Nor do the Churches which are in Germany believe differently or pass down a different tradition, as neither again do the Churches in Spain or Gaul or in the East, or in Egypt or Africa, or those situated in the middle of the earth [that is the Churches of Palestine]. But as the sun, which is God's creature, is one and the same throughout the whole world, so too does the preaching of the truth shine everywhere and illuminate all men who desire to come to the knowledge of the truth. And neither do those of the Church's rulers who are powerful in speech add to this tradition -- for no one is above the [great] teacher -- nor do those who are infirm in speech subtract from it. For since the Faith is one and the same, neither does he who can say more add to it, nor he who can say less diminish it" (Adv. hær., I, x, n. 2).

This striking passage shows not merely how complete was the unity of faith throughout the world in those days, but how this unity of faith was the response to the unity of the doctrine everywhere preached, to the unity of the tradition everywhere handed down. Elsewhere St. Irenæus testifies to the source of this uniform tradition, and what was understood to be the safeguard of its purity. In the first three chapters of his third book he is criticizing the heretics of his time and the inconsistency of their methods; and in so doing sets forth by way of contrast the method of the Church. "When you refute them out of Scripture", he says "they accuse the Scriptures themselves of errors, of lack of authority, of contradictory statements, and deny that the truth can be gathered from them save by those who know the tradition." By "tradition", however, they mean a fictitious esoteric tradition which they claim to have received, "sometimes from Valentinus, sometimes from Marcion, sometimes from Basilides, or anyone else who is in opposition." "When in your turn you appeal to the tradition that has come down from the Apostles through the succession of the presbyters in the Churches, they reply that they are wiser than the presbyters and even than the Apostles themselves, and know the uncorrupted truth." To this Irenæus observes that "it is difficult to bring to repentance a soul captured by error, but that if is not altogether impossible to escape error by setting truth by the side of it." He then proceeds to state where the true tradition can be found: "The tradition of the Apostles has been made manifest throughout the world, and can be found in every Church by those who wish to know the truth. We can number, too, the bishops who were appointed by the Apostles in the Churches and their successors down to our own day, none of whom knew of or taught the doctrines which these men madly teach. Yet, if the Apostles had known of these secret mysteries and used to teach them secretly, without the knowledge of others, to the perfect, they would have taught them to those chiefly to whom they confided the Churches themselves. For they desired that those whom they left behind them as successors, by delivering over to them their own office of teaching, should be most perfect and blameless, inasmuch as, if they acted rightly, much good, but if they fell away the gravest calamity, would ensue."

To exemplify this method of referring to the tradition of the Churches, he applies it to three of the Churches: Rome, Smyrna, and Ephesus, setting that of Rome In the first place, as having a tradition with which those of the other Churches are necessarily in accord. The passage is well known, but for its Intimate hearing on our present subject we may transcribe it. "But as it would take too long in a volume like the present to enumerate the successions of all the Churches, we confound all those who, in any way, whether through self-will, or vain glory, or blindness, or evil-mindedness, invent false doctrines, by directing them to the greatest and most ancient Church well known to all, which was founded and established at Rome by the two glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul, and to the tradition it has received from the Apostles and the faith it has announced to men, both of which have come down to us through the succession of the Bishops. For to this Church, on account of its greater authority", -- the Greek text being defective here, it is impossible to say exactly what Greek word lies behind the Latin principalitas, but the context indicates "authority" as giving the intended sense -- "it is necessary that every Church -- that is, the faithful from all parts -- should have recourse as to that in which the Apostolic tradition is ever preserved by those" -- if we follow Dom Morin's highly probable correction of an apparently defective reading -- "who are set over it."

One more quotation from St. Irenæus we must permit ourselves, as it evidences so clearly the feeling of this Father and his contemporaries as to the relative conditions of those who were in the one Church or without it: "For in the Church God has set Apostles, prophets, and doctors, together with all the other operations of the Spirit, in which those have no share who do not fly to the Church, but deprive themselves of life by their evil opinions and evil deeds. For where the Church is there is the Spirit of God, and where the Spirit of God is there is the Church and all grace, but the Spirit is truth. Wherefore those who have no part in it neither receive the life-giving nutriment from the breasts of their mother, nor drink of the most pure spring that flows from the Body of Christ; but such people dig for themselves broken cisterns out of earthly trenches, and drink out of the filth putrid water, flying from the faith of the Church lest they should be converted, rejecting the Spirit that they may not be instructed. Being alienated from the truth by just consequence, they are rolled and tossed about by every error, holding at one time one opinion, at another another in regard to the same subject, never having any fixed and stable judgments, caring more to cavil about words than to be disciples of the truth. For they are not built upon one rock, but upon the stone-strewn sand; and hence invent many gods, and plead ever in excuse that they are seeking, but, being blind, never succeed in finding" (ibid., III, xxiv).

A modern reader of St. Irenæus's "Adversus hæreses" might be inclined to object that the heretics of those days held doctrines so preposterous that his severe language about them is intelligible without our having to suppose that he would have judged with similar severity doctrines opposed to the tradition which could claim to rest upon a more rational basis. But his principle of the authority of the tradition is manifestly intended to have universal application, and may be safely taken as supplying the test by which this typical Father of the second century would, were he living now, judge of the modern systems in conflict with the Church's tradition.

III. DIVISIONS OF CHRISTENDOM AND THEIR CAUSES

A. Extinct Schisms

The notable heresies that originated in the first four Christian centuries have long since expired. Gnosticism in its various forms occasioned serious trouble to the Apologists of the second century, but scarcely survived into the third. Montanism and Novatianism are not much heard of after the third century, and Donatism, which arose in Africa in 311, perished in the general ruin of African Christianity caused by the Vandal invasion in 429. Manichæism came forward in the third century, but is not much heard of after the sixth, and Pelagianism, which arose at the very end of the fourth century, though for the time it provoked an acute crisis, received a crushing blow at the Council of Ephesus (431) and disappeared altogether after the Council of Orange in 529. Arianism arose at the beginning of the fourth century and, in spite of its condemnation at Nicæa, in 325, was kept alive both in its pure form and in its diluted form of Semi-Arianism by the active support of two emperors. From the time of the First Council of Constantinople (381) it disappeared from the territories of the Empire, but received a new lease of life among the northern tribes, the Goths, Lombards, Burgundians, Vandals, etc. This was due to the preaching of Ulfilas, a bishop of Arian views, who was sent from Constantinople in 341 to evangelize the Visigoths. From the Visigoths it spread to the kindred tribes and became their national religion, until 586, when, with the conversion of Reccared, their king, and of the Spanish Visigoths, the last remnants of this particular heresy perished.

As these ancient heresies no longer exist, they do not concern the practical problem of reunion which is before us in the present age. But it is instructive to note that the principles they embodied are the very same which, taking other forms, have invariably motived the long series of revolts against the authority of the Catholic Church. Thus regarded, we may divide them into five classes. First there are certain intellectual difficulties which have always puzzled the human mind. The difficulty of explaining the derivation of the finite from the infinite, and the difficulty of explaining the coexistence of evil with good in the physical and moral universe, motived the strange speculations of the Gnostics and the simpler but not less inconsistent theory of the Manichæans. The difficulty of harmonizing the mystery of the Trinity, and that of the Incarnation, with the conceptions of natural reason motived the heresies of the Patripassians, the Sabellians, the Macedonians, and the Arians, and again the difficulty of conceiving the supernatural or justifying the idea of inherited sin motived the Pelagian denial of these doctrines. A second source of heresies has been the outburst of strong religious emotions, usually based on fancied visions to which, as being direct communications from on high, it was claimed that the traditional teaching of the Church must give way. Montanism, that earliest example of what are now glorified as "religions of the Spirit", was the most striking example of this class. Thirdly, the chafing under the rule of authority, with the desire to pursue personal ambitions, is discernible in the origins of Novatianism and Donatism, whose founders, although they alleged on the flimsiest grounds that the rulers they wished to displace had been irregularly appointed, must be held to have acted primarily from the desire to exalt themselves, even at the risk of dividing the Christian community. In the fourth place comes the principle of nationalism, that is of nationalistic exclusivism, in those who ally themselves with a separatist movement not from any conviction personally formed of the justice of the arguments on its behalf, but because its leaders have contrived to present it to them as a means of emphasizing their national feeling. This has always proved a potent instrument in the hands of heretical leaders, and we have early examples of it in the way in which Donatism presented itself as the religion of the Africans, and Arianism as the religion of the Goths. A last class of motives which has often worked for separation is to be sought in the disposition of temporal rulers to intrude into the administration of the ecclesiastical province and mould ecclesiastical arrangements into forms that may assist their own political schemes. We have an example of this evil in the conduct of the Emperors Constantius and Valens, who so disastrously fostered the Arian heresy. To all these false principles the orthodox Fathers opposed, in the first place, the authority of the tradition that had come down from the Apostles, though not refusing to meet the heresiarchs on their own ground also, and refute them by argument, as many beautiful treatises testify.

B. Nestorianism

Besides these notable heresies of the early centuries, which fixed the type, as it were, for all future divisions, Monothelitism in the seventh century, Iconoclasm in the eighth, together with the heresies of the Waldensians, Albigensians, Wycliffites, and Hussites of the medieval period, introduced strife and division into Christendom for periods shorter or longer. As, however, they too are extinct, it is enough just to refer to their existence, and we may pass on to the still-enduring separatist Churches of the East of which the most ancient is the Nestorian. The distinctive doctrine of the Nestorians is that which, as held by Nestorius, was condemned in the Council of Ephesus, in 431. It is the doctrine that in Christ there are not only two natures but also two persons, the Divine person, Who is the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, and the human person, Who was born of the Virgin Mary; and that the union between these two persons is not physical but moral, the Divine person having chosen the human person to be in a unique manner His dwelling-place and instrument. As Nestorius, after his condemnation, was first imprisoned in his former monastery at Antioch and then banished to the Greater Oasis in Upper Egypt, his personal influence over his disciples ceased. But his doctrine was undoubtedly derived from his former master, Theodore of Mopsuestia, and, as Theodore's memory was cherished as that of the greatest theological light of Syria, the condemned doctrine found many friends in the Eastern Patriarchate, and was taken up with special zeal at Edessa. From thence it spread to the neighbouring kingdom of Persia, where it was welcomed and protected by the Persian king as tending to emancipate his Christian subjects from Byzantine influence. Shortly afterwards the prevailing sentiment at Antioch became Monophysite, and the Nestorians of the patriarchate had to take refuge in Persia, with the result that the subsequent development of the heresy had its centre of propagation in the Persian town of Seleucia-Ctesiphon, on the Tigris, where was its metropolitan see. These Nestorians had a fine missionary spirit, and evangelized many countries in the Far East, some even reaching China, and others founding those Christian communities on the Malabar Coast of India called the Thomas Christians, or Christians of St. Thomas. This Nestorian Church reached its highest pitch of prosperity in the eleventh century, but the Mongol invasion in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries involved its adherents in ruin and the great mass of their posterity became absorbed in the general Mohammedan population. They are now represented by a small body, who dwell on the borders of Lake Urumiyah in Kurdistan and in the neighbouring highlands. They are not a very civilized race and probably know little of the doctrine which was the original cause of their secession, or know it only as the patriotic watchword of their race. A still smaller body of Catholics of the same spiritual ancestry and the same liturgical rite are called Chaldees and live in the Euphrates and Tigris valley. In 1870 their catholicos seceded on a purely personal matter, and induced his people to refuse acceptance of the Vatican decrees. They returned to unity seven years later, but the episode seems to show that their faith is not very firm.

C. Monophysitism

The Monophysite schism had still more serious consequences. Its distinctive doctrine is associated with the name of Eutyches, former archimandrite of a monastery near Constantinople, and Dioscorus, the nephew of St. Cyril and his successor in the patriarchal See of Alexandria. This doctrine, which was condemned at the Council of Chalcedon in 451, contrasted with Nestorianism by running to the opposite extreme. It maintained that in Christ there is not only a single personality, but also only a single nature. "Of two natures but not in two natures" was its phrase; for the Monophysites were zealous upholders of the decrees of Ephesus, and affirmed that Mary was the Theotokos, from whom her Son received a perfect human nature; but they maintained that the effect of the union was that the Divine nature absorbed the human so that there were no longer two natures, but one only; anything short of that seemed to them to dissolve the essential unity of Christ's person. At Ephesus the two theologians mentioned had stood by the side of St. Cyril and had fought hard for the condemnation of Nestorianism just on this ground, that it amounted to a denial of the unity of Christ; and now it seemed to them that his doctrine, which had triumphed so splendidly at Ephesus, had been condemned at Chalcedon. Nor can it be denied that some unguarded expressions used by St. Cyril, though not so intended by him, were susceptible of a Monophysite interpretation. Besides Eutyches and Dioscorus, some of those who had signed the decrees of the new council felt that St. Cyril's expressions were affected by its decisions, and they returned home dissatisfied.

But here, too, it was chiefly racial feeling which, by intensifying the crisis, precipitated a far-reaching schism. Although hellenized on the surface by their incorporation first in the Macedonian Empire and then in the Roman the populations of Egypt and Syria were racially distinct from the Byzantines who governed them and the Greek colonists who had settled among them. Hence their attitude towards the dominant race was one of dislike and resentment, and they welcomed the opportunity which enabled them to assert in some measure their national distinctness. Accordingly, when the Egyptians were assured that their great hero St. Cyril had been outraged by a condemnation of his doctrine, they rallied round Timothy Ælurus, the usurping successor of Dioscorus, and embraced his doctrine. The Greek colonists of course took the orthodox side, or rather took the side of the Court, just as it happened to be at the time, whether orthodox or Monothelite, according to the personal policy of the successive emperors; but from the time of Chalcedon the great mass of the Christian population of Egypt became Monophysite and was lost to the unity of the Church. Two centuries later the Mohammedan invasion came both to emphasize and to enfeeble this extensive schism. During the interval, though the people were set against orthodoxy, the imperial power could do much to enforce it, but when the Mohammedans came the whole influence of the caliphs was used to confirm the schism -- that is, in those whom they could not succeed in gaining over to the religion of Islam. In the Patriarchate of Antioch and the smaller Patriarchate of Jerusalem events pursued a corresponding course. The Christians of Syrian race were predisposed to take up with Monophysitism just because their Byzantine rulers were on the side of orthodoxy, and so fell away into a schism which, although from time to time checked or modified by the action of the Court as long as Byzantium retained its sovereignty over those parts, settled down into a permanent separation, when the Mohammedans had obtained possession of the country, besides losing vast numbers of its adherents by perversions to Mohammedanism.

The Christians of the present day who represent the former populations of the three splendid Patriarchates of Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem are few in number, and fall into five classes.

• First there are the schismatic Copts in Egypt, descendants of the native Egyptians, whose numbers are estimated at about 150,000.
• Secondly the Abyssinians. These were in early days converted from Alexandria, and so in due course passed into schism along with it. They form the great mass of the inhabitants of Abyssinia, about three million and a half, and have kept their faith well, but are very ignorant of its teaching and duties.
• Thirdly, the Jacobites of Syria, who bear the same relation to the ancient Syrians as the Copts to the ancient Egyptians, and are called Jacobites after Jacob Barradai (Baradæus), who preserved the episcopal succession when it was threatened by Justinian. The Jacobites are to be found mostly in Mesopotamia, Syria, and Kurdistan, and are estimated as numbering some 80,000.
• Fourthly, the Thomas Christians on the Malabar Coast, who may number about 70,000. These were originally Nestorians, having been first evangelized, as we have seen, by the early Nestorians; the Portuguese sought to catholicize them by very harsh means, and succeeded only in attracting their dislike. When the Dutch succeeded the Portuguese in India, and began to persecute the Catholics, these Malabar communities returned to schism, but, not being able to find a Nestorian bishop, procured a Jacobite bishop from Jerusalem, to renew their episcopal succession, and thus ended in becoming Monophysites.
• Fifthly, the Armenians, if we include with those who dwell in Armenia Proper those of the same race and religion who are settled in Asia Minor, European Turkey, Galicia, Armenia, and elsewhere, may perhaps amount to some three millions and a half, though trustworthy statistics are difficult to obtain.

As in the case of the Nestorians, by the side of each of these sections of Monophysites is a corresponding body of Eastern-Rite Catholics who, once Monophysites, have at one date or another in the past renounced their heresy and been reconciled to the Catholic Church, which has cordially sanctioned the retention of their native rites. Of these the Melchites, Coptic and Syrian included, amount to about 35,000, the Catholics of St. Thomas to about 90,000, and the Catholic Armenians to about 60,000 or 70,000. Of Abyssinian Catholics there are practically none.

D. Photianism

The next great schism which divided Christendom was that which is known as the Photian schism, and led to the separatist existence of that vast body of Christians which has come to be called "the orthodox Church". We shall employ both these names as names which have become current designations, though without accepting the implications that attach to them. Certainly Photianism is a name which well expresses the character of a separation motived, at all events in the first instance, not by any doctrinal reasons, but by one man's endeavour to realize his personal ambitions, that one man being Photius, the usurping Patriarch of Constantinople in 857. It is true that the schism initiated by Photius did not long survive his death, but he was a man as remarkable for his learning and ability as for his unscrupulousness, and so was able to create -- doubtless out of pre-existing materials -- and to equip with an effective controversial armoury an ecclesiastical party animated by his own separatist ambitions and anti-Latin animosities.

The history and vicissitudes of this most lamentable of all schisms have been sufficiently told in other articles (IGNATIUS OF CONSTANTINOPLE, SAINT; PHOTIUS OF CONSTANTINOPLE; MICHAEL CÆRULARIUS; GREEK CHURCH), but we must note here how entirely unprovoked it was, both in the time of Photius and in that of Michael Cærularius, by any harsh or inconsiderate action on the part of the popes. When Bardas, the uncle or the Emperor Michael III, presented himself to the Patriarch Ignatius to receive Communion while living in incest with his daughter-in-law -- when the empress mother and her daughter were brought to the patriarch against their will to receive the veil of religion -- what else could a conscientious prelate do save refuse what was so improperly sought? Yet it was just for this that the Patriarch Ignatius, on refusing to resign his see, was banished to the island of Terebinthus, and under just these circumstances that Photius mounted the still occupied patriarchal throne and sought confirmation of his appointment from Pope St. Nicholas I. The letter which he addressed to St. Nicholas ("Opera", in P.G., CII, 586-618) misrepresented the facts, and besides bore on its face such signs of unreality as could not but arouse the suspicions of the pope, who, when at last he found out what the true facts were, did the only thing that a conscientious pope could do, pronounced the election of Photius null and void, and laid Photius under excommunication. Later, when Photius saw that Rome could not be induced to sanction his usurpation, he threw off his disguise and, professing to have discovered that certain usages of the West were scandalous and even heretical, addressed an encyclical to the other Oriental prelates inviting them to meet in a general council at Constantinople and pass judgment on St. Nicholas.

Though the pope's real offence, in the eyes of Photius, was that, as successor of St. Peter, he exercised an authority which stood in the way of Byzantine ambitions, the schismatic felt that, if he would recommend his cause to the religious world, he must provide it with a dogmatic basis, and accordingly he formulated the following charges, only one of which raised an issue which had even the appearance of being dogmatic. The Westerns, he said, fast on Saturdays, use lacticinia during the first week in Lent, impose the yoke of celibacy on their clergy, reconfirm those who have been confirmed by simple priests, and have added the "Filoque" to the creed. To these five points he added four others, in a subsequent letter to the Bulgarians, namely, that they sacrifice a lamb along with the Holy Eucharist on Easter Sunday, oblige their priests to shave their beards, make their chrism of running water, and consecrate deacons per saltum to the episcopate. Nothing could be more trivial than these charges on the ground of which this man was prepared to break up the unity of Christendom; but for the time the schism thus caused was only transitory. Photius himself was quickly displaced by a fresh court intrigue, and though, on the death of Ignatius, he attained to a more legitimate possession of the patriarchate, he died in 867, after which there was a reconciliation with the Holy See which lasted for the next two centuries.

Then came the Patriarch Michael Cærularius, who in 1053 -- that is at a time when not only was there no tension between the emperor and the pope, but the Norman invasion of Sicily just then occurring made it peculiarly desirable that they should unite to oppose the common enemy -- caused letters to be written and brought to the notice of the pope, in which he renewed the old condemnation of the Latins for fasting on Saturdays, consecrating the Holy Eucharist in unleavened bread, and requiring clerical celibacy. Also at Constantinople, he invaded the churches built for the use of the Westerns, where the Latin Rite was used, and ignominiously handled the Blessed Sacrament there reserved, on the plea that, being consecrated in unleavened bread, it was not truly consecrated. Again there was a saint on the throne of St. Peter, and St. Leo IX in a temperate letter contrasted the violence offered by Michael to the Latin Church at Constantinople with the pope's cordial approval of the many monasteries of the Greek Rite in Rome and its neighbourhood. Further, at the request of the Emperor Constantine Monomachus, who by no means shared the patriarch's bitter spirit, St. Leo sent two legates to Constantinople to arrange matters. There was nothing, however, to be done, as the emperor was weak, and the patriarch was allowed to carry all before him. So the legates returned home, having first left on the altar of St. Sophia a letter in the pope's name by which Michael Cærularius and one or two of his agents were deposed and excommunicated. Of course the excommunication touched only the persons named in the document, and not the whole Byzantine Church; indeed the excommunication of a whole Church is an unknown and unintelligible process. If the whole Church or patriarchate from that time fell away from unity, and has remained out of it ever since, it was because, and in so far as, its members of their own initiative adhered to Michael and his successors in breaking off relations with Rome.

This fact, however, must remind us of the mistake we should make were we to regard the vagaries of a patriarch like Michael Cærularius as the adequate cause of so persistent and far-reaching an effect. Undoubtedly, he had with him in his secession, if not the whole population of his patriarchate, at all events a party strong and influential enough to compel the submission of the rest. This party was the one to which we have referred as formed and consolidated by Photius. In a less pronounced form it is traceable back to the secular struggle between the Greek and Latin races for universal dominion; and since the time of Photius its antipathies had been further stimulated by the growth of Western kingdoms hostile to the empire and by the amicable relations in which their rulers stood to the Roman bishops. This then was the main cause of the separation which has endured so long, and still endures, but to estimate it at its full strength we must take into account the accompanying negative cause. For, though Photius in one of his letters claimed for his see that it was "the centre and support of the truth", and though his followers would have us seek our standard of doctrinal purity exclusively in the prescriptions of the first seven oecumenical councils, St. Leo IX, in his letter to Cærularius enumerated nineteen of the latter's predecessors as having fallen under the condemnation of these seven councils, while Duchesne (Eglises séparés, p. 164) calculates that in the interval of 464 years which separates the accession of Constantine the Great from the celebration of the Seventh Council (787), Constantinople and its ecclesiastical dependencies had been in schism for 203 years. This means that the sense of unity, so strong in the West, had in the East, owing to the perversity of emperors and patriarchs, no fair chance of striking deep roots among the people, and so could seldom offer effectual resistance to the forces making for schism.

Unlike the Nestorians and the Monophysites (whom the Orthodox regard as heretics just as much as do the Catholics), the Photian schism commenced nearly nine centuries ago by Michael Cærularius is now represented not by a few scattered groups which taken altogether number not more than six or seven millions, but by vast populations which, in the aggregate, number not far short of a hundred millions. This is chiefly, though not solely, because, the Russians having been converted by missionaries from Constantinople about a century before the time of Cærularius, their direct religious intercourse was with Constantinople and not with distant Rome; and accordingly they drifted gradually first into unconscious, and later into conscious, acceptance of its separatist attitude. The upshot is that out of the 95,000,000, at which the Orthodox Christians are estimated by statisticians, some 70,000,000 are Russian subjects, the remaining 25,000,000 being divided among the pure Greeks of the Turkish Empire and the Kingdom of Greece, the Rumanians, Servians, and Bulgarians of the Balkan Peninsula, the Cypriotes, and the comparatively small number, mostly Syrians, who reside in the former territories of the Alexandrian and two Eastern Patriarchates. (For particulars see GREEK CHURCH.) As against these must be set a group of Catholics who, since the disruption, have been converted from their schism and are now in communion with the Holy See, though keeping religiously to their ancient Byzantine Rite, whether in its Greek, Slav, or other vernacular form. These are estimated by the author of the article just cited as numbering in all about 5,000,000, of whom the greater part are Ruthenians and Rumanians in the Austrian dominions.

Probably, when the Photian schism was first effected it seemed to the Byzantine leaders that, though by an unfortunate chance the see from which they were separating was the one which could claim the inheritance of the promise made to Blessed Peter, it was with themselves rather than with the Westerns that the main portion, the very substance, of Christendom was and would always be found. Certainly the centre of the world's culture and civilization, religious as well as civil, was then on the Hellespont, and it may be that even in actual numbers the subjects of this one patriarchate surpassed the hordes of half-converted barbarians (as they would have called them) who formed the populations of the new Western kingdoms. Regarded under this aspect, however, it cannot be said that the comparison still tells in their favour or that the schism has profited them. Impressive as is the Orthodox Church numerically, it is far surpassed in that respect by the 260,000,000 or more who represent the old Patriarchate of the West, nor could anyone now compare, to the advantage of the former, the religious culture and activity of the East with that of the west. Indeed, until a quite recent date, stagnation and ignorance is the judgment passed on the Orthodox clergy and laity by observers of all sorts; and if during the last century there has been a distinct improvement in the leaders among priests and people, it has derived much of its inspiration from Protestant sources, chiefly from German universities, and has not been obtained without some sacrifice of the integrity of their ancient tradition and without some admixture of the modern Protestant spirit.

In another very serious respect the Orthodox Christians have lost by their separation from Catholic unity, for they have succumbed to progressive disintegration -- the fate of all communities that are without an effectual centre of unity. The Patriarch of Constantinople's original claim to be exalted to the second, if not to the first, place in Christendom was (though never formulated distinctly) that Old Rome had been chosen for the seat of primacy because it was the imperial city, and hence, with the transference of the empire, this primacy had passed to New Rome. Such a claim quite lost its significance when the Byzantine Empire was overthrown in the fifteenth century, and the sultans sat in the seat of the former sovereigns of the East. For the time, indeed, the new order of things brought with it even an accession of power to the patriarchs. The sultan saw the advantage of keeping alive a separation which alienated his Christian subjects from their brethren in the West. Accordingly he made the patriarchs, whom he could appoint, keep, or change at his pleasure, to be, under himself the civil as well as the ecclesiastical governors of the Christians of whatever race, within his dominions. Still, the condition of patriarchs thus bound hand and foot, to the chief enemy of Christendom was but a gilded servitude for which it was difficult to feel respect; and, as racial consciousness developed among the many nationalities of the patriarchate, it became more and more realized that the New Rome theory could now be given a fresh application.

Russia was the first to revolt, and in 1589 the Tsar Ivan IV insisted that the Patriarch Jeremias should recognize the Metropolitan of Moscow as the head of an autonomous patriarchate. Why should he not, when Moscow was fast becoming what Constantinople had formerly been, the metropolis of the great Christian Empire of the East? Later, to bring the ecclesiastical government more effectually under the thumb of the Crown and convert it into an instrument of political government, the whole constitution of the Russian Church was changed by Peter the Great, who in contempt of every canonical principle, suspended the patriarchal jurisdiction of Moscow, and put the whole Church under a synod consisting of the three metropolitans, who sat ex officio, and some prelates and others personally appointed by the tsar, with a layman as chief procurator to dominate their entire action. Till the last century this was the only diminution of the Patriarch of Constantinople's jurisdiction; but, with the weakening of the sultan's power, the various nationalities over which he formerly reigned supreme have succeeded one after another in gaining their independence or autonomy, and have concurrently established the autonomy of their national Churches. Though adhering to the same liturgy and to the same doctrine as the other Orthodox Churches, they have followed the example set by Russia and, casting off all subjection to the patriarch, have instituted holy synods of their own to govern them ecclesiastically under the supreme control of the civil power. Greece began in 1833, and since then the Rumanians, the Servians, and the Bulgarians, with their respective subdivisions, have followed suit; so that at present we must no longer talk of the Orthodox Church, but of the Orthodox Churches, seventeen in number, in no sense governmentally connected, torn with internecine quarrels, and offering no guarantee, especially in view of the infiltration of Protestant tendencies now going on, that their doctrinal agreement will continue.

Summary

In these three Eastern schisms, which broke up so disastrously the ancient union of Christendom, two things are specially observable from the point of view of this article. One is that, apart from the separation from the centre of unity which constituted the schism, they have retained almost in its entirety the ancient system of Church organization and method. They have retained the threefold hierarchy endowed with valid orders the sacrificial worship of the Mass, a spirituality based on the use of the seven sacraments, the Catholic doctrine of grace, the exaltation of the Virgin Mother, and the invocation of the saints. Above all they have retained the appeal to tradition as the sure test of sound doctrine and the principle of submission to a teaching authority. The other thing observable in these three schisms accords with what has already been noticed in the early schisms. Doctrinal considerations based on the exercise of private judgment may have influenced their founders to an extent greater or less, but reasons of quite a different order determined the allegiance of their followers. Nationalism exploited by their leaders, or more often exploited by civil rulers for political purposes, is the true formula which explains their origin and long endurance. The nationalism of Syria and Egypt in its antipathy to Byzantine rule, further exploited by Persian and Mohammedan sovereigns, is what explains the facts of Nestorian and Monophysite history; the nationalism of Byzantine hellenism in its antipathy to the Latins, as exploited by the Eastern emperors and their prelates, is what explains the separation of the Orthodox Churches from the Holy See; the nationalism of Greeks, Slavs of different races, and Byzantines, which is the source of their mutual antipathies, is what explains their separation from Constantinople and their erection into so many autonomous Churches.

E. Protestantism

The fourth great breach in the union of Christendom was that caused by the Protestant Reformation of the sixteenth century. Of this movement it can by no means be said that it left the organization and methods of the Catholic Church largely untouched among the populations which it carried with it. On the contrary, it effected the most revolutionary changes of system where it prevailed, substituting church organizations constituted on a radically different principle and having codes of religious opinions unknown to previous ages. Luther, in the first instance, had no thought of breaking with the church authority; at all events he did not inscribe that object on his origina1 programme. Out of his own disordered spiritual experiences he elaborated a theory of sin and salvation founded on his peculiar doctrine of justification by faith. Only when the Holy See rejected this travesty of St. Paul's teaching, together with the conclusions which Luther had deduced from it -- only when it thus became necessary, if he would persist in his errors, that he should elsewhere for a principle on which to base them -- did he fall back on the principle of the Bible privately interpreted as the sole and sufficient rule of Christian belief. He had, it must be acknowledged, fore-runners in this course; for the Church herself has always preached the infallibility of Holy Scripture, and previous heresiarchs had been wont to justify their revolts against her doctrinal decisions by claiming that, as regards the particular doctrines in which they were interested, Holy Scripture stood for them and not for her.

What was special and novel in Luther and his colleagues was that they erected the principle of an appeal to the Bible not only into an exclusive standard of sound doctrines, but even into one which the individual could always apply for himself without dependence on the authoritative interpretations of any Church whatever. Luther himself and his fellow-reformers did not even understand their new rule of faith in the Rationalistic sense that the individual inquirer can, by applying the recognized principles of exegesis, be sure of extracting from the Scripture text the intended meaning of its Divine author. Their idea was that the earnest Protestant who goes direct to the Bible for his beliefs is brought into immediate contact with the Holy Spirit, and can take the ideas that his reading conveys to him personally as the direct teaching of the Spirit to himself. But, however much the Reformers might thus formulate their principle, they could not in practice avoid resorting to the principles of exegesis, applied well or ill, according to each man's capacity, for the discovery of the sense ascribed to the Holy Spirit. Thus their new doctrinal standard lapsed even in their own days, though they perceived it not, and still more in later days, into the more intelligible but less pietistic method of Rationalism.

Now, if the Bible were drawn up, as it is not, in the form of a clear, simple, systematic, and comprehensive statement of doctrine and rule of conduct, it might not, perhaps, seem antecedently impossible that God should have wished this to be the way by which his people should attain to the knowledge of the true religion. Still, even then the validity of the method would need to be tested by the character of the results, and only if these exhibited a profound and far-reaching agreement among those who followed it would it be safe to conclude that it was the method God had really sanctioned. This, however, was far from the experience of the Reformers. Luther had strangely assumed that those who followed him into revolt would use their right of private judgment only to affirm their entire agreement with his own opinions, for which he claimed the sanction of an inspiration received from God that equaled him with the Prophets of old. But he was soon to learn that his followers attached as high a value to their own interpretations of the Bible as he did to his, and were quite prepared to act upon their own conclusions instead of upon his. The result was that as early as the beginning of 1525 -- only eight years after he first propounded his heresies -- we find him acknowledging, in his "Letter to the Christians of Antwerp" (de Wette, III, 61), that "there are as many sects and creeds in Germany as heads. One will have no baptism; another denies the sacrament, another asserts that there is another world between this and the last day, some teach that Christ is not God, some say this, some say that. No lout is so boorish but, if a fancy enters his head, he must think that the Holy Ghost has entered into him, and that he is to be a prophet". Moreover, besides these multiplying manifestations of pure individualism, two main lines of party distinction, each with a fatal tendency to further subdivision, had begun almost from the first to divide the reform leaders among themselves. The Swiss Reformer, Zwingli, had commenced his revolt almost simultaneously with Luther, and, though in their fundamental doctrines of the Bible privately interpreted and of justification by faith, they were on the same lines, in regard to the important doctrines of predestination and the nature of the Holy Eucharist they took opposite views, and attached to them such importance that they became irreconcilable foes and leaders of antagonistic parties.

On such a foundation, if consistently held to, it was impossible to build up a Church which should stand out in the world like the old Church they were striving to destroy, for if in the last resort the judgment of the individual be for him the supreme authority in matters of religion, it is impossible that any external authority can be entitled to demand his submission to its judgments when contrary to his own. The early Reformers probably realized this but they felt the necessity of building up some sort of a Church which could bind together its members into a corporate body professing unity of belief and worship, and which, in contrast with the pope's Church, which they called apostate, could be called the true Church of God. And so, regardless of the contradictions in which they were involving themselves, they set to work to excogitate a theory of church-constitution to suit their purposes. This theory is exhibited in the seventh article of the Augsburg Confession of 1530, to which type the other Protestant Confessions, both Lutheran and Reformed (that is, Calvinistic), of the next few decades conformed. "The Church of Christ", says the Augsburg Confession, "is, in its proper meaning, the congregation of the members of Christ, that is of the Saints, who truly believe and obey Christ; although in this life many evil men and hypocrites are intermixed with this congregation until the day of judgment. This Church, properly so termed, has, moreover, its signs, namely, the pure and sound teaching of the Gospel and the right use of the sacraments. And for the true unity of the Church it is enough to agree as to the teaching of the Gospel and the administration of the sacraments."

This idea of the Church has some surface resemblance to the Catholic idea, but is in reality its exact converse. The Catholic, too, would say that his Church is the home of true teaching and true sacraments, but there the resemblance ends. The Catholic first asks himself which is the true Church that Christ has set to be the guardian of His Revelation, the teacher and ruler of his people. Then, having identified it by the marks set upon its face -- by its continuity with the past, which, in virtue of its indefectibility, it must necessarily possess, its unity, catholicity, and sanctity -- he submits himself to its authority, accepts its teaching, and receives its sacraments, in the full assurance that just because they are sanctioned by its authority its teaching is the true teaching and its sacraments are the true sacraments. The Protestant, on the other hand, if he follows the course marked out for him by these Protestant confessions, begins by asking himself, and decides by the application of a wholly distinct and independent test, what are the true doctrines and true sacraments. Then be looks out for a Church which professes such doctrines and uses such sacraments; and having found one, regards it as the true Church and joins it. The fatal tendency to disunion inherent in this latter method appears when we ask what is that distinct and independent test by which the Protestant decides as to the truth of his doctrines and sacraments, for it is, as the whole history of the Reformation movement declares, that very rule of the Bible given over to the private interpretation of the individual which is inconsistent with any real submission to an external authority. Important however, and fundamental as this point is, the Augsburg Confession passes it over without the slightest mention. So, too, do most of the other Protestant Confessions, and none of them dare to go to the root of the difficulty.

The Scottish Confession of 1560 (of which the Westminster Confession drawn up in England during the Commonwealth is an amplification) is the most explicit in this respect. After claiming that the Presbyterian Church recently established by John Knox and his friends holds the true doctrine and right sacraments, it gives as its reason for so affirming that "the doctrine which we use in our Churches is contained in the written Word of God . . . in which we affirm that all things that must be believed by men for their salvation are sufficiently expressed". It then goes on to declare that "the interpretation of Scripture belongs neither to any private or public person, or to any Church . . . but this right and authority of interpretation belongs solely to the Spirit of God by whom the Scriptures were committed to writing". This, no doubt, is what the other Reformers in Germany, Switzerland and elsewhere would also have said, but they prudently passed the point over in their confessions, half conscious that to claim the right of interpretation for the Spirit of God was but a misleading way of claiming it for each individual who might conceive himself to have caught the mind of the Spirit; foreseeing, too, that, if no Church could claim the right to interpret with authority, no Church, Protestant any more than Catholic, could claim the right to impose its doctrines or worship on others.

However, the Reformation leaders knew what they were about. They meant to have a Protestant Church, or at all events Protestant Churches, to oppose to the pope's Church, and they intended that these new Churches should profess a very definite creed, and enforce its acceptance, together with submission to its disciplinary arrangements, on all whom they could reach by the exercise of a very effective and coercive jurisdiction. Accordingly, these Protestant confessions of faith, which were the formal expression of their doctrinal creeds, contained and prescribed, quite after the manner of Catholic professions of faith or decrees of councils, lists of very definite articles, often with added anathemas directed against those who should venture to deny them. The ministers were to be "called" before they could exercise their functions, those entitled to call them being governing bodies consisting of clergy and laity in fixed proportions, and formed hierarchically into local, regional, and national consistories. To these governing bodies appertained also the right of administration, of deciding controversies, and of excommunicating. The difficulty was to equip them with coercive power, but for this the German Reformers had recourse to the secular power. The secular power was, they assured their princes, bound to use its sword for the defence of right and the suppression of evil; and it appertained to this department of its functions that in times of religious crisis it should take upon itself to further the cause of the Gospel -- that is, of the new doctrines -- and root out the old errors.

The German princes had hitherto stood off from the new evangelists, whose democratic tendencies they suspected, hut this appeal for their intervention was baited with the suggestion that they should take away from the Catholics their rich endowments, and apply them to more becoming uses. The bait took, and within a few years, one after another, the princes of Northern Germany -- no very edifying class -- declared themselves to be on the side of the Gospel and ready to take over the responsibility for its administration. Then, from 1525 onwards, following the lead of Philip, Landgrave of Hesse, one of the most immoral men of the age, they seized the abbeys and bishoprics within their dominions, the revenues of which they mostly applied to the increase of their own, and proceeded to found national Churches based on the principles shortly afterwards accepted by the Augsburg Confession, which should be autonomous for each dominion under the supreme spiritual as well as temporal rule of its secular sovereign. For these national Churches they drew up codes of doctrine, schemes of worship, and orders of ministers, observance of which they enjoined on all their subjects under penalty of exile, a penalty which was at once inflicted on those of the Catholic clergy who remained faithful to the religion of their ancestors, as well as on multitudes of Catholic laymen.

This system of national Churches did not necessarily involve the imposition of Protestant creeds differing among themselves, for it was within the power ascribed to the princes that they should agree together as to what they would enforce, and no doubt to a certain extent this was what happened, and by happening caused Lutheranism to be the prevailing form of religion in Protestant Germany. Still the system did involve that the prince had the power, if he judged fit, to introduce a creed differing from that of the neighbouring dominions, and eventually this was what occurred when the Lutheran and Reformed parties settled down within the limits of the Empire into formal opposition among themselves. Some principalities -- and it was the same with the free cities which went over to Protestantism -- enforced one of the forms of Lutheran confession, others one of the forms of Reformed confession, and there were even oscillations in the same principality as one sovereign succeeded another on the throne . The signal instance of this was in the Palatinate, the inhabitants of which were required to change backwards and forwards between Lutheranism and Calvinism four times within the years 1563 and 1623. This pretension of the German princes to dictate a religion to their subjects came to be known as the jus reformandi, and gave rise to the maxim, Cujus regio ejus religio. By the Peace of Augsburg, 1555, this pretension was reluctantly conceded as a temporary expedient to the Protestant princes, and by the Treaty of Westphalia (1648) it received a more formal kind of imperial sanction, against which an ineffectual protest was made on behalf of Pope Innocent X by his nuncio, Chigi.

In Switzerland there were no princes to put themselves at the head of the new national Churches, but their place was taken by the cantonal governments, wherever these had been captured by the Protestant faction. Thus Zwingli, who began his fiery preachings against the Catholic Church in 1518, and in a few years' time had gathered round himself a band of fanatical followers with their aid and by holding out the confiscation of the church property as an inducement, was able by 1525 to draw over to his side the majority of the members of the State Council of Zurich. By this majority the Catholic members of the council were overpowered and extruded, which done, at the instigation of Zwingli; the Catholic religion, though it had been the religion of their ancestors for many centuries and was still the religion of the quiet people in the land, was summarily proscribed, even the celebration of the Mass being forbidden under the severest penalties; while, to make its restoration forever impossible, fierce crowds led by Zwingli in person were sent to visit the various churches and strip them of their statues and ornaments on the plea that the Bible commanded them to put down idolatry. The ground being thus cleared, the state Council by its own authority set up a national Church conformed to the German type. Berne, Basle, Schaffhausen, St. Gall, and Appenzell followed quickly in the footsteps of Zurich, the same methods of violence being employed in each case. The desires of the people themselves counted for nothing. The opinions of yesterday adopted by the fanatical leaders were at once exalted into dogmas for which was claimed an authority over the consciences of all far exceeding that which had been exercised by the venerable Church of the ages.

Nor were these Protestant cantons satisfied with imposing their new doctrines on their own subjects. Having combined with certain cities of the Empire to form a "Christian League" in its name they summoned the Catholic cantons, Schwytz, Uri, Unterwalden, Zug, and Lucerne, to follow their example in supplanting the old Faith by the new. The latter, however, were resolute in their refusal and, although their military strength was inferior to that of their antagonists, they eventually inflicted on them a severe defeat at Kappell (31 Oct., 1531), a defeat in which Zwingli himself and several other preachers were slain on the field. It was a crushing blow to Zwinglianism, which, as such, never recovered, and it saved the Catholic cantons from the danger of perversion, while opening the way for the Catholic restoration that was to ensue. But, if Zwinglianism in Switzerland was now practically dead, this meant not that Protestantism had become extinct there, but that it was about to pass throughout Switzerland into Calvinism. John Calvin, a native of Picardy, after imbibing in Paris the Lutheran views which later on he recast, in his "Institutes", into the form ever since associated with his name, settled down at Geneva in 1536. The desire of the citizens to cast off the yoke of Savoy by allying themselves with the Swiss Confederation gave him the opportunity of acquiring a power over them through the exercise of which he was enabled to force upon the city that all penetrating theocratic despotism which stands out in history as the supreme example of spiritual tyranny.

From Germany and Switzerland, the sources respectively of Lutheranism and Calvinism, Protestantism was propagated into other lands, but in this respect Calvinism showed itself more successful than Lutheranism. Lutheranism spread into Denmark and the Scandinavian Peninsula, in each case owing its beginnings and consolidation to the compulsion and persecution practised on an unwilling people by unworthy sovereigns; but, except that in Poland also it made some headway, this was the extent of its conquests. Calvinism, on the other hand, in Germany itself supplanted Lutheranism and became the dominant religion in some parts, especially in the Palatinate, besides gaining over a sufficient number of adherents in the predominantly Lutheran districts to make it an enduring rival to Lutheranism on German soil. Moreover, in Transylvania and Hungary, and still more in the Netherlands, where its domination was destined to be lasting, it superseded the Lutheran apostolate which had been first in the field. In France, though from the time of the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes (1687) its adherents became a steadily decreasing number, for a whole century and a half it was so powerful that at times it seemed destined to absorb the country; yet there also it owed its progress chiefly to the military violence of its leaders. In Scotland it was tyrannically forced on the people by a corrupt and lawless nobility which, covetous of the church property, lent its support to the fiery energy of John Knox, a pupil of Calvin and a fervent admirer of his theocratic system.

England was a case apart. Henry VIII coquetted with Lutheranism, which was of service to him in his campaign against the pope, but he disliked Protestantism, whether in its Lutheran or its Calvinist form, and devised his Six Articles to aid him in suppressing it. Under Edward VI Calvinism was favoured by the two regents and the more influential bishops, and their legislation was directed towards the establishment of this system in the country, with the sole difference that episcopacy, in name at least, was to be retained. The short-lived reaction under Mary left Elizabeth a free soil on which to build, and she preferred an episcopal system with a considerable toning down of the asperities of Continental Protestantism, as more in harmony with a monarchical and aristocratic regime and better adapted to gain over a population which was at heart Catholic. Still she had to employ the personnel at her disposal, a section of which was of the same mind as herself, while another section had strong Calvinistic leanings. The result was that a double tendency developed in her newly-formed Church, one which, though hating Catholicism as a system, clung to some of the characteristic features of Catholic worship and organization, the other which strove perseveringly for a root-and-branch subversion of the Elizabethan settlement and the substitution of one conformed to the Genevan model. During the Commonwealth the latter party obtained for the time the upper hand, but with the Restoration it was extruded altogether and became the parent of those Nonconformist sects whose progressive divisions and subdivisions have always been the gravest scandal of English religious life. The other party meanwhile, with some oscillations to the right or to the left (under the names of the High and Low Church parties), maintained itself with approximate consistency as exhibiting the distinctive spirit of the Established Church of the country.

Towards the middle of the nineteenth century, however, two quite novel tendencies asserted themselves in that communion (and these have since become so influential that before long they are likely to divide between themselves the race of Anglican Churchmen), one based on a far-reaching appreciation (but with some reservations) of the Catholic system, delighting to call itself Catholic, and striving to assimilate the national worship to the Catholic pattern, the other, which calls itself Liberal and, pushing to its bitter end the application of the Protestant principle of private judgment, has by its rationalistic criticism diffused a widespread scepticism as to the authenticity of the Christian records and the truth of the most fundamental articles of the Christian creed. This theological Liberalism has likewise exercised a disastrous influence on the English Nonconformist bodies, and one more deadly still on Continental Protestantism, Germany being the primary source from which it has sprung. Of Germany, in fact, it must now be said that, as in the sixteenth century it gave birth to what is called orthodox Protestantism, so in the present age it is engaged in throttling its offspring in the tight grasp of its criticism. Of the forms which Protestantism has assumed in the United States, Canada and other countries colonized from Europe, it is sufficient to say that the immigrants have taken their beliefs and forms of worship with them to their new homes, and, the world of ideas being now one, this many-headed hydra has displayed in the new countries the same diversities as in the old.

Except for its Puritan variety, which depended for its propagation chiefly on the powers of physical coercion its leaders could dispose of, Protestantism was an easy-going religion which had abolished many of the ascetic observances and restrictions on liberty and license that held in the old Church. It was to be expected, therefore, that it should spread rapidly in an age when manners were alarmingly corrupt, nor must we be surprised that, with such a start, it was enabled soon to present the appearance of a group of Churches peopled by very many thousands of adherents. Since those early days, however, it cannot be said to have extended its conquests much, and the millions to which it has now grown are due not much to conversions, but rather to the natural increase of populations. In the present day the total number of Protestants is estimated at about 166,000,000, an enormous number, no doubt, but one which, unlike the 260,000,000 Catholics who all stand together, is only an aggregate made up of a multitude of separate communions, under separate governing bodies, which not only differ among themselves as to important points of doctrine, but -- such is the increasing individualism among their members -- are fast approaching a goal in which each member will have become a Church and a creed to himself.

Summary

It will be useful, as in the cases of the primitive and the great Eastern divisions, to fix attention on the forces making for disintegration which have brought these Protestant divisions into being. If the effect of such a summary is to show the essential similarity of the forces at work in all these cases, that will be advantageous, for it will reveal to us how few are these disintegrating forces, and how elemental is their character; how, in fact, they spring from the very heart of human nature, which can only hope to counteract the divisions towards which they tend if sustained and elevated by some other forces of a different order altogether. In two respects, then, these separatist bodies to which Protestantism has given birth need to be considered in their separations from the parent communions and in their cohesion among themselves, as corporate bodies enduring for a certain time and in a certain degree. The principle of private judgment has been the undoubted cause of their separations and incessant subdivisions for the principle of private judgment is essentially disintegrating. The cause of such cohesion as they have exhibited has been as their history shows, of the following nature. First, under the influence of private judgment, one or more strong-willed men have conceived a doctrinal system antagonistic to that of the religious communions to which they originally belonged, have gathered a party of others like-minded around them, and have undertaken on behalf of their system a propaganda which has attained a certain success. Next, wishing to establish a Church which shall be an embodiment of their system, but finding themselves unable by pure persuasion to hold the multitude to their views, they have had recourse to the civil power, or some dominant faction of nobles or democrats; and have induced it, in view of the temporal advantages to be gained, to impose their system on the people and sustain it by physical force. Or, ex converso, resistance to the ruling power or its established Church, when it has been able to maintain itself with comparative success, has caused the separatists to realize that they must unite together under definite rule and government if they are to make their resistance effectual -- as has been the case with the English Nonconformist bodies. Thirdly, realizing that no system imposed by violence can hope to be lasting unless the mass of its people can be brought round to voluntary acceptance of it, they have exploited the passions and prejudices of the people, particularly its race and class exclusivisms, and sought to foment these by campaigns of bitter controversy and calumny. Fourthly, where this policy has succeeded in the earlier stages of a schism, a more internal and durable principle of cohesion has eventually been generated under the influence of custom and heredity, of antagonisms and misconceptions hardened by long-continued isolations and estrangements, of affections deepened by long continued intimacies, cherished memories, experiences, and associations, and of the good faith and even high spirituality nourished by the detached truths retained in such false creeds, which can prevail under these later conditions.

Such, speaking generally, has been the chain of causes which has welded into churches and congregations with definite creeds and organizations the bodies of men that have preferred the principle of private judgment as a rule of faith to that of submission to the authority of the Catholic Church. But the species of unity thus attained is always in its outer relations separative, in its inner relations precarious; for the very motives that cause the members of such a body to cohere among themselves are those that separate them from other similar bodies, whilst within it, eating away its structure, there is always the latent consciousness among its members that their ruling body and its doctrinal formulæ have no valid title to enforce submission, and it only needs a crisis, or that spirit of radical inquiry which is now so common, to arouse this consciousness to activity. (See PROTESTANTISM; LUTHERANISM; CALVINISM; ANGLICANISM; NONCONFORMISTS; RITUALISTS; RATIONALISM.)

F. Divisions within The Catholic Church

We ought not, perhaps, to conclude this survey of the history of religious divisions without touching on what some might consider to be such within the bosom of the Roman communion itself. There are and always have been opposite parties in this communion, whose adherents disagree on points of doctrine the importance of which may be estimated by the bitterness of their controversies. Thus there have been Jansenists and Molinists, Gallicans and Ultramontanes, Liberals and Infallibilists, Modernists and Anti-Modernists. It is true that, a time has come for some of these parties when their peculiar tenets have been condemned, and a portion of their adherents have passed from the Church into schism. But this has not happened in all cases of party divisions; and even where it has happened, those ejected had for a long time previously been tolerated in the Church, holding their distinctive views, and yet not being denied the sacraments and other privileges of communion. Again, there have been, many times over, rival popes each gathering round himself a following and denouncing that of his rival; and during one notorious period of forty years' duration the Church was rent by these rivalries into two, and even into three, parts, to the grave scandal of Christendom. Do not these divisions show that the Catholic Church is as unable as the separated communions to claim unity of faith and government as her perpetual note? In two respects, however, there is an essential difference between the sort of dissensions that may arise in the Catholic Church and those which constitute heresy and schism in the separated communions.

• First, in the Catholic Church the points in dispute round which these dissensions gather are not the Church's accepted doctrines, but further points which the course of study within or without the Church has forced into prominence, and which one party thinks to be compatible with the accepted Catholic doctrine and to make for its vindication, but another thinks to be incompatible with it and dangerous.
• Secondly, on both sides the combatants embrace the formal principle of Church unity, the magisterium of the Holy See, and, should the Holy See think fit to intervene, they are prepared to submit to its determination of their controversy.

So far there is nothing to justify the imputation of schism but only an illustration of the error of those who imagine that inside the Church thought and speculation must be stagnant. For these domestic controversies, though sometimes rendered harmful by the defective spirit of those engaged in them, have their useful side, as conducing to the fuller, deeper, and more precise comprehension of the meaning and limits of the accepted doctrines. It may happen, however, that when the course of a controversy has made clear what is involved in the new opinions advanced, the supreme authority in the Church will feel the necessity of intervening by some decree. In that case a crucial moment often arises for the side whose tenets are now condemned. If they have the true Catholic spirit, falling back on their formal principle of unity, they will, submit to the voice of authority, abandon their former opinions, and in so doing act with the truest consistency. If, on the other hand, they attach themselves so stubbornly to the condemned opinions as to prefer rather than abandon them, to abandon their formal principle of unity, there is no longer a place for them in the Church, and they become schismatics in the ordinary sense.

A similar distinction applies to the case of schisms in the papacy. It is true that many antipopes have sprung up and caused division in their time. They were mostly the creatures of some despot who had set them up by his own will, in defiance of the lawful method of appointment, and it is, and invariably was, easy to tell which was the true pope, which the antipope. The one exception to this general statement is that referred to in the objection, the case of the schism which lasted from 1378 to 1417. (For the fuller history of this distressing episode see WESTERN SCHISM; URBAN VI; BONIFACE IX; GREGORY XII; ROBERT OF GENEVA; PEDRO DE LUNA.)

What concerns us here is that the conclave of 1378 was disturbed by the Roman mob, which, anxious lest the popes should go back to Avignon, demanded the election of a Roman or an Italian, that is to say, not a Frenchman. Urban VI, till then Archbishop of Bari, was elected and enthroned, and for some weeks was recognized by all. Then the main body of the cardinals dissatisfied with the administration of Urban, who certainly behaved in an extraordinarily tactless manner, retired to Anagni, declared that, owing to the pressure of the mob upon the conclave, Urban's election had been invalid, and elected Robert of Geneva, who called himself Clement VII. This latter was soon compelled by circumstances to withdraw to Avignon, and so the schism resolved itself into a papacy at Rome and another at Avignon. Of the Roman line there were four popes before the schism was finally healed, Urban VI, Boniface IX, Innocent VII, and Gregory XII; of the Avignon line there were two, Clement VII and Benedict XIII. The effects were terrible and world-wide, some countries, through their sovereigns, ranging themselves on the side of Rome, others on the side of Avignon, politics in some degree determining their choice. But earnest efforts were made from the first to repair the evil, the kings appointing commissions to ascertain the facts, and the canonists writing learned treatises to expound the questions of law involved. Proposals were also made from the first, recommending alternative plans for solving the difficulty, namely that both popes should simultaneously resign and another be then elected, that both should agree to go by the decision of arbitrators, or that a general council should be called which both popes should combine to authorize, and that the decision should be left to this. All these plans failed for the time, because neither pope would trust the other, and this prevented their meeting and arranging. Hence, in 1408, the cardinals of both obediences abandoned their chiefs and meeting together convoked a council to be held the following year at Pisa and end the schism. When it met it declared both Gregory XII and Benedict XIII to have forfeited their claims by their conduct, which, it was suggested, was unintelligible save on the supposition that they had an heretical disbelief in the unity of the Church. It then elected Peter Philargi, who took the name of Alexander V. But this only made matters worse, for the Council of Pisa, not having been convoked by a pope, had no standing. Thus the sole effect of its action was to increase the confusion by starting a third line of popes. The end of the schism did not come till 1417. By that time John XXIII, the successor of Alexander V, had been deposed by the Council of Constance, a council of the same irregular kind as that of Pisa; and had also resigned. Benedict XIII had lost his following almost entirely, which was taken as a sign that he could not be the true pope, and Gregory XII, whose title is now generally held to have been the best founded, resigned after first legalizing the Council of Constance by a formal act of convocation, and authorizing it to elect a new pope. Then the council elected Martin V, who was forthwith universally acknowledged.

These are the leading facts of the history. It is of course difficult to exaggerate the injury done to the Church by this unfortunate schism, for, apart from the harm it wrought in its own age, it provided a dangerous precedent for future disturbers of the Church to cite, and, by diminishing the reverence in which the papacy had hitherto been held, it went far towards creating the tone of mind which rendered the outbreak of Protestantism in the next century possible. Still, when we compare this schism with schisms like those of the Orthodox and the Protestants an essential difference between them appears. In the other cases the division was over some question of principle; here it was over a question of fact only. On both sides of the dividing line there was exactly the same creed and exactly the same recognition of the essential place of the papacy in the constitution of the Church, of the method by which popes should be elected, of the right to the obedience of the whole Church which attaches to their office. The only matter in doubt was: Had this person or that fulfilled the conditions of a valid election? Was the election of Urban VI due to the terrorism applied by the mob to the electors, and therefore invalid; or had it been unaffected by this terrorism and was therefore valid? If Urban's election was valid, so too were those of his successors of the Roman line; if his election was invalid, Clement VII's and Benedict XIII's were valid. But the verification of facts is through the testimony of those who have taken part in them, and in this case the witnesses were at variance. To decide between them belongs to the special articles on that schism. In this article what concerns us is to appreciate the difference between a schism of this sort over a question of fact and a schism over a question of principle like the others that have been instanced. We may help ourselves by an analogy; for we may compare this difference with that between a sword-stroke which has dissevered a limb from the body and one which has caused a deep wound in the body itself. In the former case the life of the organism ceases at once to flow into the dissevered part, and it begins to disintegrate; in the latter, all the powers and processes of the organism are at once set in motion for the repair of the injured part. It may be that the injury wrought is too serious for recovery and death must be expected, but the life is still there in the organism, and oftentimes it is able to achieve a complete restoration. To apply this to the history, whereas in schisms properly so called a depreciation of the value of unity is wont to mark their commencement, in this schism it was most remarkable how strong was the sense of unity which expressed itself on every side, so soon as the news of the rival lines set up became known, and how steadily, earnestly, discerningly, and unanimously the different parts of the Church laboured, with ultimate success, to ascertain which was the true pope, or to obtain the election of one.

IV. REUNION MOVEMENTS IN THE PAST

A. In the East

As Constantinople had so often been in schism for a season, the popes took some time to realize that the schism accomplished by the Patriarch Cærularius was destined to continue. Even when they were at last disillusioned, they never ceased to regard the Eastern Christians as a choice portion of Christ's flock, or to work for the restoration of that portion to unity according to their opportunities. Thus it was not merely for the recovery of the Holy Places and the protection of the pilgrims that Urban II and his successors originated and sustained the Crusades, but for the far more comprehensive object of bringing the concentrated strength of the Western Powers to the aid of their Eastern brethren, now threatened by a Turkish invasion which bade fair to overwhelm them. It is true that the intermingling of human passions and the clash of animosities, for which Easterns and Westerns were both to blame, not only brought to naught the realization of this splendid ideal, but actually enlarged the chasm which separated the two sides by intensifying the antipathy of the Easterns for their aggressive allies. Nor can it be denied that the Western populations often showed a very unsatisfactory spirit in their dealings with the East and their feelings towards them; for the Westerns, too, were dominated by the unbrotherly passions that spring from excessive nationalism, and it was just this that increased so seriously for the popes the difficulty of bringing the two sides together for the defence of Eastern Christendom.

But the important thing to observe is that the popes themselves, with wonderful unanimity, stood outside all these racial animosities, and, whatever were their personal affinities, never lost hold of the pure Christian ideal or thought to subordinate it to worldly politics. Thus a succession of popes from Gregory VII down to our own days (conspicuous among whom were Urban II, Blessed Eugenius III, Innocent III, Blessed Gregory X, Nicholas IV, Eugenius IV, Pius II, Calixtus III, St. Pius V, Clement VIII, Urban VIII, and Clement XIV) have manifested their strong desires and have striven most pathetically for the healing of this saddest of schisms, never losing heart even when the outlook was darkest, welcoming each gleam of sunshine as an occasion for repeating their assurances of a truly brotherly feeling, and a readiness to concede in the terms of union all that was not essential to the Church's faith and constitution. On the Oriental side there has not been much response to this pathetic call of the popes; but two of the Eastern emperors made overtures which led on to the solemn acts of reunion in the Council of Lyons (1274) and the Council of Florence (1439). Unfortunately, these negotiations were prompted, on the Oriental side, by the instinct of self-preservation in face of the Turkish danger more than by any adequate appreciation of the necessity of religious unity, and were, besides, undertaken by sovereigns the mass of whose subjects were not prepared to follow them in a course that ran counter to their traditional resentments. Still, the second of these councils had its solid results; for it won over the last two emperors of the East, the last three patriarchs under the old empire, the two distinguished prelates Bessarion of Nicæa, and Isidore of Kiev, besides originating the Catholic Eastern Rites. Though adverse circumstances have sometimes disturbed their allegiance, and have prevented their numbers from attaining to any high figures, these Eastern-Rite Catholics have done good service to the cause of reunion by their standing testimony to the mode of reunion which is all that the popes ask for, namely, acceptance of the entire deposit of faith including the Divine institution of the Roman primacy, but beyond that a full-hearted adherence to those venerable rites and usages which are dear to Eastern hearts as an inheritance bequeathed to them by the highest Christian antiquity.

Although, since the Council of Florence, no more proposals for healing the schism have come from the main body of the Orthodox and their rulers, one must include among the reunion movements of the past the one which, initiated by some Ruthenian bishops, led to the union accomplished at Brest in Lithuania in 1596 (see UNION OF BREST). By this Union a considerable portion of the Ruthenians, the race that had formed the original nucleus of the Russian Empire, was officially reunited with the Holy See, but it was not for some time, and after the fiercest opposition, that the main body of that people were gained over to the union. Having, however, at length accepted it, they remained firmly attacked to it until the partition of Poland. Then one-half of these Eastern-Rite Catholics came under Austrian rule, the other under Russian rule. The former, meeting with toleration from their rulers, still remain constant, the latter have been the victims of a succession of the cruelest persecutions undertaken to drive them back into schism.

B. In the West

In the first outburst of Protestantism neither its leaders nor their followers had any scruples about their separation from the communion of the ancient Church. They regarded it as an apostate Church from which it was a blessing to be separated, and they anticipated the speedy advent of the time when, its members converted by the Protestant preachers, it would dissolve away, and their own purified Churches take its place everywhere. But, as new generations grew up which were not responsible for the schism, devout minds were inevitably led to contrast the sectarianism they had inherited with the beautiful ideal of religious unity praised by St. Paul and realized in their own lands in days previous to the Reformation. That there were many such minds is evidenced by the stream of converts to the Catholic Church, which from the days of the Reformers onward has never ceased to flow -- of converts who invariably ascribe their first discontent with their previous Protestantism to the scandal of its divisions. The same deep sense of scandal motived the attempts to bring about reunion, whether among the Protestant sects themselves, or between these and the Catholic Church, which were made at various times during the succeeding centuries. All of these attempts failed because set on a false foundation, but some of them were certainly inspired by a genuine spirit of concord. We cannot indeed regard as so inspired the group of German Lutherans, represented by James Andreæ and Martin Crusius, who, in the last quarter of the sixteenth century, proposed to the Patriarch Jeremias II of Constantinople a plan for the union of the Lutherans with the Greeks on the basis of the Lutheran Creed, a plan promptly rejected by the patriarch; nor the Dutch Calvinists and Anglican divines who, a generation later, negotiated for a similar union with the semi-Calvinist Patriarch Cyril Lucaris, but were finally repulsed by the Synod of Jerusalem (1672), which condemned their doctrines together with the memory of the patriarch who had coquetted with them; nor again the Gallican priest, Ellies du Pin, and the Anglican archbishop, Wake, who in the first quarter of the eighteenth century negotiated a reunion between the Anglican and Gallican Churches. In each of these cases the predominant motive was not to heal division, but to aid the cause of separation by strengthening the opposition to the Holy See.

Very different, however, and in every way commendable, was the spirit in which the party led by George Callixtus in the second quarter of the seventeenth century, and that in which Molanus and Leibniz in their negotiations with Bishop Spinola of Neustadt and the great Bossuet, half a century later, worked for the elaboration of a reunion scheme which the Catholic Church and the Protestant bodies might both be able to accept. The last-mentioned episode, of which a full account may be read in M. Reaumes' "Histoire de Bossuet", is of peculiar interest, supported as it was by the Court of Hanover, with the approbation of many Protestant princes, and watched with sympathy by Clement IX and Innocent XI. But, though political reasons were the immediate cause of the discontinuance of these negotiations, they were doomed to failure for theological reasons also. Of attempts to unite the Lutherans and Calvinists who formed the two main varieties of Protestantism several were made in Germany from the time of Melancthon downwards; but all failed until the occurrence of the tercentenary of the Reformation in 1817, when the scheme recommended by Frederick William III of Prussia achieved a partial success which still endures. By this scheme the two sides were to retain each its own doctrine, but they were to coalesce into one "Evangelical Church" and worship together according to a common liturgy, or agenda, which was drawn up on lines sufficiently vague to leave untouched the points as to which they were at variance among themselves. Even this modus vivendi, external and superficial as it was, would not have been able to establish itself had it not been for the pressure applied by royal authority, which in some districts had to resort to physical force; nor has it been able to embrace all the Lutherans in its fold, tending as it did to favour their side less than that of their traditional adversaries.

V. REUNION MOVEMENTS IN THE PRESENT AGE

In the present age the divisions of Christendom not only furnish its assailants with their most effective taunt, but constitute the most serious hindrance in the way of Christian work. Hence, among those who have inherited the condition of separation, the value of Christian unity has come to be much more deeply appreciated than ever before, and many active movements have been set on foot, and schemes devised, for its restoration.

A. In the East

So far as the Orthodox Churches are concerned it does not appear that the solicitude for reunion is very marked, at least among the rulers and the great mass of the populations. During the last half-century some members of the High Church section of the Anglican party, and likewise some members of the Old Catholic party in Germany and Switzerland have approached the adherents of Russian and Greek Orthodoxy, in hopes of inducing them to promote intercommunion between their respective Churches; but these negotiations, though they have led to occasional interchanges of ecclesiastical courtesies and concessions, such as the more rigidly consistent Roman Church would deem to be compromising, have not yet attained, and are not likely to attain, their object; for the simple reason that the Orthodox Churches have no intention of uniting with Churches which permit the most fundamental heresies to he held and taught by prelates and men of standing in their communions, and yet they are perfectly aware that this is the case in the Anglican Church, and are likewise aware that the old Catholics, since they broke away from the Holy See in 1870, have come under Protestant influence and have lost their hold on much Catholic doctrine. As for negotiations with the Holy See or even an interchange of ideas with it, the rulers of these Eastern Churches are as ill-disposed as ever, and when invited to do so by recent popes -- as by Pius IX, on his accession and when convoking the Vatican Council, and by Leo XIII on his accession and in his "Præclara Gratulationis" of 1894 -- they have always opposed either scornful silence or words of studied offensiveness to the affectionate language of the popes.

A pleasant exception to this rule is the present (1912) Patriarch of Constantinople, Joachim III, who, contrary to the prevailing custom, has been left in office since 1902 -- an unusually long time. It is known that he is personally inclined towards reunion, but he is only one and when, in 1902, shortly after his accession, he addressed a letter to the heads of the autocephalous Churches of his patriarchate, proposing to them that they should all agree to enter into negotiations both with the Protestant bodies and also with the Churches in union with the Holy See, they were unanimous in refusing even to discuss the idea, so far as Rome was concerned ("Reunion Magazine", Sept., 1910, p. 375, and Feb., 1911, p. 281). The only basis, they declared on which the Orthodox Churches could entertain the thought of reunion with the Holy See was that of an acceptance of themselves as, by reason of their fidelity to the teaching of the seven oecumenical councils, "alone composing the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church"; and hence of a renunciation by the pope of all his innovations on this doctrinal standard, particularly of that worst innovation of all, the papal despotism. As there was no present likelihood of the pope's assenting to that basis, what room was there for negotiations?

Such was the answer to this important invitation returned so recently by the highest authorities of these Eastern Churches, and, if it represents their real mind we must agree with them that negotiations would be useless; for one thing is quite certain, the Holy See can never accept conditions which would involve the renunciation of an office it knows to be of Divine appointment and vital for the maintenance of the Church's unity. Nor is this all, for these Orthodox prelates, if they will reflect, must needs see that their conditions are such as cannot possibly form a durable basis for reunion. They claim that their position and theirs only is sanctioned by what they call "the Seven General Councils" -- that is, the Councils of Nicæa (325), Constantinople I (381), Ephesus (431), Chalcedon (451), Constantinople II (553), Third Constantinople (680), Second Nicæa (787). But this is just what Catholic historians deny; and, as it would appear, with a heavy balance of evidence on their side. Who, then, is to decide between the two contentions? In other words, is this Oriental claim more than a disguised appeal to the Protestant principle of private judgment, the very principle which, as the experience of four centuries of Protestantism has demonstrated, is essentially the principle of division, and not of unity? It will be replied that the authority to decide is with the next general council. But if it were at all conceivable that general councils could take the place of a living centre of unity in the government of the Church, at least they would require to be held at short intervals, and then the question arises: Why, if our Eastern brethren appreciate the importance of unity, have they not during all these centuries taken the initiative in working for the holding of such a general council and invited the Catholic representatives to take a friendly part in it? Why, when the popes have taken that initiative and have invited the Easterns in the most cordial terms to join in such a council, or at least to join with them in some friendly conference to discuss the possibilities of a reconciliation, have they always so sternly refused? There are those who think that, as in the times of Photius and Cærularius, the chief deterring causes that stand in the way of the reunion of the Orthodox with the Catholics are political, and to some extent that may be the case. But the tsars, who, if they were to put themselves at the head of a vast reunion movement, could probably carry the rest of the Easterns (Monophysites and Nestorians included) with them, cannot be unconscious of the splendid rôle which would become theirs as the leading Christian sovereigns and protectors of a united Christendom of such vastly increased dimensions.

Evidently, then, the primary cause why the East will not approach the West for the healing of the schism is still to be sought in that indefinable spirit of antipathy which the Easterns have inherited from past ages, when to some extent it was reciprocated in the West, and which makes them suspect every overture that comes from the West of being dictated by some malign ulterior purpose -- such as to suppress their ancient rites, or transform their religious habits, or crush out their reasonable liberties by extravagant exercises of ecclesiastical power. To us in the West it seems unintelligible that such groundless suspicions should be entertained. It may be that in some districts, where the East and West touch each other closely, and the blending of religious with political animosities causes tension, material for that sort of suspicion exists, but certainly there is no corresponding aversion to Easterns or their religious habits in the general area of Western Catholicism, and above all, as has already been observed, there is absolutely no ground for suspecting the integrity of the motives that have consistently animated the long line of popes. The Greeks who took refuge in Southern Italy under pressure of the Turkish invasion have never to this day found difficulty, but on the contrary much encouragement, from the popes, in their adherence to their Eastern customs, the marriage of their clergy included; and since the time of the Council of Florence it has been a fixed principle of papal government that Orientals passing into communion with the Holy See should be required to remain in their own rites and customs where no doctrinal error was involved, Leo XXII enforcing adherence to this principle by new sanctions in his "Orientalium ecclesiarum dignitas" (1893). Moreover, why should the popes or their adherents in the West cherish dislike for rites and customs so intimately associated with the memories of those venerable Fathers and doctors whom East and West agree in venerating and claiming as their own? Could the Easterns, then, only be induced to lay aside these suspicions, if but provisionally, and meet the pope or his representatives in friendly conference, the problem of reunion would already be half solved. For then explanations could be exchanged, and false impressions removed, particularly the false impression that it is lust of domination, and not fidelity to a Divine trust, that constrains the popes to insist on the recognition of their primacy. After that it might be necessary to discuss doctrinal points on which the two sides are at variance; but the discussion would turn on the application of ancient principles recognized on both sides. Seeing how shadowy are some of the points of disagreement, some of them would surely be cleared up completely by such discussions, and if others stood out, and thereby made any immediate act of reunion impossible, at least the better understanding arrived at might be hoped to impart to any further studies and discussions a convergent tendency and so lead on to intercommunion at no remote date.

Is such a consummation impossible? For the present it would seem to be so, if we are to judge by the attitude of the rulers, civil and ecclesiastical, of the Orthodox Churches. But it is at least symptomatic that Joachim III, the present Patriarch of Constantinople, the same who in 1902 proposed conferences on reunion to the other autocephalous churches, has recently (Bessarione, January-March, 1911) expressed his desire for reunion and for preparatory efforts to come to an understanding with the Westerns. The career, too, of such a man as the late Vladimir Soloviev -- who, starting from the ordinary Orthodox conceptions, set himself to study the whole question of reunion in the light of the patristic writings, and was led to enroll himself among the Eastern-Rite Catholics -- may fairly be taken, seeing what influence he exercised, and his memory still exercises, over many of his fellow-countrymen, as a sign that there are others of like mind in that sealed empire, as indeed is known to be the case. Moreover, the imperial edicts of toleration published in Russia in 1905, though they were quickly to all intents and purposes revoked, sufficed to lift the veil and make manifest the true sentiments of the many Ruthenian Catholics who had been given out as willing deserters to the camp of schism. So, too, did the memorandum of the thirty-two Orthodox priests on the necessity of changing the organization of the Russian Church (published at St. Petersburg in 1905), together with the subsequent discussions and proceedings for the determination of this question in a national council (Palmieri, "Chiesa russa", i), manifest the grave dissatisfaction of many of the Orthodox clergy with the suppression by the civil power of the spontaneous life and thought of their national Church.

Nor do we lack the direct testimony of witnesses familiar with Eastern lands to the existence there of many ardent aspirants after reunion. Thus Nicolà Franco, a Catholic priest of the Greek Rite, in his instructive study of the question under all its aspects, testifies that "the reunion movement has manifested itself in the provinces of European Turkey among Greeks, Albanians, and Bulgarians, and in Asia among the Greeks and Melchites, not to speak of the Armenians, Syrians, and Chaldeans, and, which is more significant still, among the Russians, in whose midst Catholic groups of the Greek-Slav Rite keep on establishing themselves, and give promise of a wider extension of the apostolate for reunion" (Difesa del Cristianesimo, p. 199). It is perhaps the spectacle which can now be seen in many places in the East, of Catholics of the Greek and Latin Rite working side by side in cordial co-operation, while on terms of friendly intercourse with the Orthodox of the same neighbourhood, which is chiefly helpful in removing prejudice by the object lesson it offers of what reunion would bring to pass in all parts of the world in these days, when Easterns as well as Westerns are spreading and mingling in many lands. Especially impressive in this way seems to have been the object-lesson of the Eucharistic Congress held at Jerusalem in 1893 in which the Catholic clergy and laity of both rites took part under the eyes of numerous adherents of the separated communions. The solemn Eucharistic Liturgies, according to the rite of St. John Chrysostom celebrated at St. Peter's in the presence of the pope on 14 Feb., 1908, and that celebrated later in the same year at Westminster Cathedral in the presence of his legate, were examples of similar import. Moreover, if Leo XIII's letter of 20 June, 1894, addressed to "the Princes and Peoples", received a rude answer from the patriarch Anthimus VII and his Synod (Duchesne, "Egluses separées"), there were not lacking devout minds in the East who contrasted the patriarch's brutal language with the exquisitely tender and conciliatory language of the pope. Padre Franco reports the accession of over a hundred thousand persons to the Eastern Catholic Churches as the harvest gathered from this episode during the years that followed.

B. In the West

In the West the English-speaking countries must be distinguished from the others, which, like them, have inherited the state of religious isolation. In the latter no general sense of the evils of division appears to have been as yet awakened, and even in the former as much must be said of the great mass of the population, even of that section of it which is in earnest about its spiritual condition. Still, in England and the United States there are numerous groups of religious-minded persons who do take very much to heart the scandal of religious division which is brought home to them in diverse ways through their experience of the hindrances that block the path of Christian progress. Their sense of this scandal and the consequent desire for reunion goes back to the second quarter of the last century. It began with the Tractarians and sprang naturally out of the fuller realization, to which their Patristic studies had led them, of the nature and authority of the visible Church. This school is still the home of the most solid and fervent aspiration after reunion, but the aspiration has spread during the last few decades from this to other parties in the national Church, and even to the Nonconformists, who have gown ashamed of the multiplicity of their sects and are now anxious to find some basis on which they may coalesce among themselves. These latter, however, have no conception of unity in the Catholic sense of the term, and contemplate only a federation on the basis of sinking differences. The Free Church Council founded in England in 1894, and chiefly notorious for its political campaigns against the Anglican Church, is their principal achievement so far. The Presbyterians of Scotland have also felt the influence of the reunion ideal, but they too, except for some individuals, have not looked beyond the healing of their own intestine divisions.

The Anglicans (under which designation are included, as members of the same commumon, the Episcopalians in America and elsewhere) have a wider vision, and have even fancied that to their Church, as holding a central position between the ancient Churches and the modem Protestant sects, is assigned the providential mission of bringing these two extremes together, and serving the cause of reunion by enabling them to understand each other. During the last half-century, under the spreading influence of the High Church movement, this sense of vocation has been specially cherished, and has found frequent expression in the pulpit and religious literature. It has also given birth to some well-meant undertakings. Thus the A.P.U.C., or Association for Promoting the Unity of Christendom -- by which is meant the union of the Roman, Eastern, and Anglican "branches", others not excluded -- is a league of prayer, founded in 1857, which is said to have by now many thousand members, drawn from various religious communions, though, as being under non-Catholic management, Catholics are not allowed to join it; the Eastern Church Association (E.C.A.) and the recently founded Anglican and Eastern Orthodox Church Union (A.E.O.C.U.) both work for the union of the Anglicans with the Easterns, the latter, "while in no way antagonistic to efforts for reunion in other directions", confining itself to those of the Eastern Churches which are in communion with the Patriarch of Constantinople. This A.E.O.C.U. is particularly active in the United States, where the existence side by side of Westerns and Easterns offers special facilities for mutual intercourse. It is due mainly to its instances that the Orthodox Bishop Raphael of Brooklyn recently sanctioned an interchange of ministrations with the Episcopalians in places where members of one or the other communion are without clergy of their own -- a practice which, as coming from the Orthodox side, seemed strange, but was presumably justified by the "principle of economy" which some Orthodox theologians unaccountably advocate (see Reunion Magazine, September, 1910). This concordat did not, however, last very long: Bishop Raphael seems not to have understood, at first, the motley character of the Episcopalian communion, but having come to realize it, quickly revoked his concession (Russian Orthodox American Messenger, 28 Feb., 1912).

Other societies of kindred aim are the Christian Unity Foundation, established in the United States in 1910; the Home Reunion Society, established in England in 1875, of which the object is to reunite the various English religious bodies with the National Church; the Evangelical Alliance for banding together the Evangelical Protestants of all nations, which was founded in 1846, and is thoroughly Protestant in its principles and aims, the Christian Unity Association of Edinburgh which is under Presbyterian management. Apart from these, as being the only Anglican, or Protestant, Association which directly contemplates the union of the Anglican with the Catholic Church, is the Society of St. Thomas of Canterbury, founded in 1904, and undertaking as its special work to clear the way for this species of reunion by studying and making known the real doctrines of the Catholic Church held by its own members, as opposed to the erroneous or coloured accounts of the same doctrines which prevail so widely. This society being thus based on sound principles, though at present in its infancy, is capable of doing valuable work for the cause.

The annual Church Congresses in England are wont to give a place in their discussions to the reunion question, and even the decennial Pan-Anglican Conferences, in which the bishops of that communion come together from all lands, are increasingly affected by the movement; though, as consisting of prelates with very diverse views, they are always chary about committing themselves to definite statements. Their committees are allowed to be slightly more courageous, and in the Conference of 1888 the committee on Church Unity formulated four conditions as constituting the necessary and sufficient basis for all who might desire to enter into communion with themselves:

1. The Holy Scriptures as the rule of faith
2. The Apostles' and the Nicene Creeds, as the statement of the Faith
3. The two Sacraments ordained by Christ Himself
4. The historic episcopate locally adapted in the methods of its administration to varying needs

This offer, which has come to be known as "the Lambeth Quadrilateral", has been renewed by the subsequent Pan-Anglican conferences and has been frequently discussed, but so far has not attracted any of those for whom it was intended. The same Committee of 1888 looked wistfully towards the separated communions of the East, but did not venture to do more than repudiate the idea of wishing to proselytize among them, and recommend that a statement of the Anglican position should be drawn up for their benefit. Subsequent Conferences have gone a little farther in this direction, and the Conference of 1908 went so far as to recommend in one of its resolutions that there should be an interchange of ministrations offered and accepted between members of the Orthodox and of the Anglican communion, in places where none of their own clergy were within reach -- a recommendation which, as already mentioned, was for the moment reciprocated not indeed by the official representatives of the Orthodox Churches, but by two of their prelates in America. In the earlier Pan-Anglican Conferences the attitude taken up towards the Churches in union with the Holy See was hostile rather than friendly, warm sympathy being extended to those who had recently abandoned its communion. In the Conference of 1897 there was a slight improvement in this respect, and in the most recent of these Conferences, held in 1908, whilst recognizing, as they could not but do, that it would be useless to propose any terms of intercommunion to the Holy See, as they could offer none which it would accept, the Committee of Reunion and Intercommunion recorded their "conviction that no projects of union can ever be regarded as satisfactory which deliberately leave out the Churches of the great Latin Communion" and then went on to urge the importance of cultivating friendly relations with the ecclesiastical authorities of that communion abroad, an excellent recommendation which will be cordially reciprocated by the authorities in question, whether abroad or at home.

Of individual workers in the cause of reunion four names should certainly be mentioned. Father Ignatius (George) Spencer (1799-1864) was reconciled to the Catholic Church in 1829; in due course he was ordained priest, and in 1849 joined the Passionists. During the last twenty-six years of his life, both in England and on the Continent, he laboured with the utmost zeal to arouse men's minds to a sense of the importance of reunion and to engage them in systematic prayer for that object. Mr. Ambrose Phillips de Lisle (1809-77) was another convert from Anglicanism and an intimate friend of Father Ignatius Spencer. He took up the same crusade and formed the most sanguine expectations of a consoling result. In 1877, in co-operation with the Anglican, Dr. Frederick George Lee, he founded the Association for Promoting the Union of Christendom, to which reference has already been made. Mr. de Lisle failed to see the theological impropriety of Catholics joining an association of this kind under Protestant management, but the sincerity of his faith and the single-mindedness of his zeal were beyond all question. Newman's appreciation of these qualities in him caused him to say to de Lisle in 1857: "If England is converted, it will be as much due, under God, to you as to any one." It might seem strange to count Dr. Pusey among prominent reunionists in view of his "Eirenicon", of which the first part was published in 1864. But this book, as its name intimates, was written to promote reunion by raising a friendly discussion on certain points of Catholic practice which to Anglicans of the writer's party caused difficulty. Inadvertently he used language in describing these Catholic practices which gave offence, and brought down upon him from the Catholic side a torrent of reproaches that was rather excessive. This, however, should not blind us to the underlying fact that Dr. Pusey came forward with the best intentions, as a pacificator, not an assailant, and was prepared to use his powerful influence on behalf of a reconciliation. Viscount Halifax has identified himself with a method of reunion which can never be practical, because it overlooks the essential character of the Catholic system. It was this that frustrated his well-meant overtures to Leo XIII in 1894-6, and stamps with hopelessness the movement connected with his name. None the less he stands out as the man who has done more than any other to set the attractive ideal of Catholic unity before the eyes of the present generation. "Public opinion", he said, in his famous Bristol speech of 1895, "will never be influenced if we hold our tongues. It is influenced by those who, without any concealment, have the courage of then opinions. It is the interest of the whole Church of Christ, it is the interest of political order, it is the interest of the human race that these estrangements in the Christian family should cease. The cause is good, we have no need to be ashamed of it. Let us frankly avow it to be our own." These words may be regarded as the text of his untiring public action. And so far as they go, nothing could be more encouraging.

VI. CONDITIONS OF REUNION

The longing for the restoration of unity to Christendom, which is active in these and other ways, must be regarded by Catholics as one of the most precious features of the present age, and should enlist all their sympathy. Even if these reunionists be working on lines that are in themselves hopeless, at least their desire is for a high object, and desires fondly cherished and energetically pursued tend to the acquirement of solid experience, and so eventually to the discovery of the true course for the attainment of their object. Nevertheless their schemes cannot have been worked out with much insight, for the principles on which they are based are such as could not possibly sustain a fabric of Christian unity -- are in fact, the self-same principles which we have seen to be the cause of disunion in the past. What they contemplate is corporate reunion, that is to say, the reunion of whole Churches as such, each of which is to come into the union with its organization intact, its clergy remaining in their respective ranks, and the general body of its laity in theirs. It is from this standpoint that we need to consider the possibility of their projects. We ask, then, what kind of corporate reunion do they hope for and consider likely to prove satisfactory? The idea of reunion on a purely undenominational basis has been generally rejected by Anglican reunionists and rightly. For, if it means anything, it must mean that the reuniting communions are to coalesce into a huge undogmatic Church in which the utmost license of religious opinion will be allowed, as long as it does not claim to be more than opinion; and in which, on that understanding, the sacraments will be accessible to all who seek them. Still, it is not out of place to reflect on this system, inasmuch as it is the system which, though not in any way sanctioned by its formularies, practically prevails in the modern Anglican Church, those of its members who hold the most subversive doctrines being not only allowed to approach its sacraments unchecked when they desire to do so, but often promoted to its posts of trust and authority. An individualism equally subversive has invaded the ranks of some of the Nonconformist bodies. Obviously, this scandal will need to be suppressed by a drastic discipline before the Churches affected by it can be in a position to propose a scheme of unity to other Churches. It is of little use for a group of Churches to pledge themselves to definite doctrines as long as their individual members are free to hold or reject these doctrines, or even condemn them, without forfeiting their right to its membership.

"Comprehension not compromise" is a phrase often employed to express what is considered fitting and possible. The reuniting Churches are not to be asked to renounce any of the beliefs and practices to which from long usage they have become attached. They are to come in just as they are -- all, that is; who are agreed as to a substratum of fundamental doctrines and institutions -- and on this basis they are to be in recognized sacramental communion with one another everywhere. This system seems to its advocates not only to remove the chief difficulties in the way of reunion, but, to have positive advantages. Instead of a dull and deadening uniformity extending throughout, it will give unity in variety, a "synthesis of distinctions", in which each reuniting Church will contribute to the general harmony some special gift which, under the Providence of God, it has cultivated with peculiar care and success. Under a slightly changed form we have here the self-same scheme, based on the distinction between essentials and nonessentials, which in the past has been put forward so often, and always so unsuccessfully. Is it likely to succeed any better now? First; what are to be deemed essentials? Is this a point on which agreement is likely to be reached? We have seen what four conditions the Pananglican Conferences have laid down as in their estimation essential, and we may be inclined to wonder at the liberality of the concessions involved in it. This "Quadrilateral" had in view, so it was understood, the Nonconformist Churches in England and perhaps the Presbyterians in Scotland and elsewhere. But general and indefinite as it is, it does not seem to have found favour with any of these; it does not go far enough for them.

But it will be found to go much too far for the Easterns, leaving it open, as it does, to anyone to believe that the sacraments are efficacious channels of grace or only nude symbols of the same, to believe that in the Holy Eucharist the Body and Blood of Christ are truly present or really absent, to believe that besides the two sacraments explicitly included there are or are not five others equally instituted by Christ and equally partaking of the true nature of sacraments, to believe that the historic episcopate does or does not involve the transmission of a mystic power over the sacraments such as is wont to be called the grace of Holy orders. Secondly, what guarantee is there that the assignment of essentials agreed to at the moment of union will continue to satisfy the contracting parties? What makes this question so pertinent is that in the "Quadrilateral", for instance, the stipulation is only that the reuniting Churches shall in fact be agreed on these four points; there is no stipulation for any formal principle of unity. It will be said, perhaps, that the first-named condition, that Holy Scripture is to be accepted as containing all things necessary to salvation and hence is the sufficient rule of faith, is this formal principle. But does this mean, as it appears to mean, that the individual is to be the judge of what Holy Scripture contains? If so, surely it is a bold thing, after these four centuries of disastrous experience to put forward this rule as calculated to ensure an all-pervading and durable doctrinal agreement. Or does it mean that the governing authorities of the reuniting Churches are to decide what is contained in Scripture, and are to be qualified to enforce their decisions? If so, another crop of difficulties springs up. Why is this further condition, supremely important as it is, not included in the first article of the "Quadrilateral"? And what is to be the nature of these governing authorities, and of their relation to one another? Are they to be each and all autonomous, and, if so, what guarantee is there that they will all agree -- for instance, that the Easterns will not insist that the Bible shall be interpreted according to the decrees of the seven oecumenical councils, and the Anglicans that at least the decrees of the Seventh, which sanctions the veneration of images, shall be deemed inadmissible? Or are these governing authorities of the reuniting Churches to be subjected to one supreme authority, and, if so, what is to be its nature (the papacy being, of course, out of the question)? Also, is the submission of the individual to the decisions of the heads of his own Church, or the submission of the reuniting Churches to the supreme authority they have recognized as over them, to be treated as imposed under pain of sin by some Divine sanction, and, if so, what is that sanction, and why is it not explicitly stated in the "Quadrilateral"? Thirdly, if we grant the impossible, and assume that the system will be found to work on the lines indicated, could the result be claimed as a becoming realization of Christian unity? Although the essentials are to be firmly fixed and accepted by all, each reuniting Church is to be free to retain the further beliefs and methods it has built on this foundation; in fact, it is just through this superstructure of its own that it is to make its own contribution to that "synthesis of distinctions", from which unity in variety is expected to result. But is it this that will result? If the Easterns, for instance, are to insist as they now do on the Eucharistic Sacrifice and the necessity of confession, on the invocation of saints and veneration of their icons; and the Anglicans, or at all events the Nonconformists whom we must suppose to have joined in likewise, are to teach that confession is soul-destroying; the Mass and invocation of saints idolatrous -- will that be a synthesis of distinctions, and not rather a synthesis of contradictions? In short, if this system of "comprehension not compromise" were to obtain the general acceptance desired for it, in what respect would it differ from the present system of divisions, which is felt to be so scandalous, except that it would add the further element of scandal that those who preached these conflicting doctrines would come up together to the altar-rails, as if to show what light value they attached to the points about which they none the less contend so stubbornly?

Evidently, "comprehension not compromise" cannot be a guiding principle for those who wish to restore to Christendom such unity as our Lord prayed for, and the world will be constrained to recognize as an evidence of Divine handiwork. Neither can compromise help us, for truth does not admit of compromise, and what it is desired to restore throughout the world is unity in truth. What we do require is neither comprehension nor compromise, but conviction; for unity in truth must mean that all whom the system embraces profess one and the same creed in all its parts, that they are honestly convinced that in professing it they are adhering to the simple truth, and that in reality they are professing only the truth. How can a unity of that kind, a unity of conviction which is also a unity in truth, be brought about in such wise as to include the many separated Churches of Christendom and their members? That is the problem on which serious reunionists should concentrate their attention. They may begin by observing that in societies of all kinds -- in kingdoms, armies, trade-unions, clubs, and even Churches -- the principle of unity which holds them together is the authority of their chief rulers. If they submit to these -- be they kings or presidents, bishops or moderators, parliaments, or committees, or conferences -- they become one with them in their action, and (if the rulers have a recognized right to impose opinions) in their opinions also; and by way of consequence become one among themselves. On the other hand, in proportion as the members refuse submission to this ruling authority they become disunited and, if the insubordination continues, break up into parties, or drift away, or set up opposition societies. Almost any Protestant Church among the many around us will supply an illustration of this. At one time its ruling authority is recognized by all the members to be the authentic interpreter of its formularies, and all are prepared to submit to if. It is then a united Church in itself. Later comes a time when a number of its members grow dissatisfied with these formularies, and refuse to accept them at the hands of their church authority. Then disunion sets in; either dissent from the letter of the formularies is tolerated, and intestine divisions arise, or some split off and set up for themselves opposition Churches elsewhere.

If this is the law of all human societies, is it not to be anticipated that the Christian community is also subject to that law, in other words that its unity is to be secured by the submission of its members and component Churches to the one ruling authority which is duly set over them all? It will be objected that this principle of authority, if allowed to prevail, may suffice to secure unity in Christendom, but not unity in truth. As soon as the time comes when it is the conviction of individual members or groups of members that their ruling authority is departing from the truth, they cannot but give the preference to truth over unity, which in fact is what has happened in the history of Christendom, and has caused the present disunion. The answer to this dilfficulty is that the human mind is indeed bound to truth, and acts irrationally if it does not pursue it at all costs; but none the less it is rational for the individual mind to subordinate its personal judgments to those of a mind which can give it a securer guarantee of truth than it can derive from its own reasonings; it is, therefore, supremely rational for it to submit to the mind of Christ, whensoever this can be securely ascertained. If Christ communicated His own mind to His Apostles as to the doctrines and laws He desired His Church to receive and obey; if His Apostles transmitted these Divine communications by tradition to future generations; if a living authority duly set over His people has watched over the safe transmission of this tradition; and, if the Holy Spirit was sent by Him to abide in His Church and secure this living authority in the faithful discharge of its trust -- then, so far as we can see, the duty to truth and the duty to unity are fully harmonized, and a way opened for the reunion of Christendom without any outrage being done to the nature of the human mind. This, it may be said, is only an inference based on the law of human societies and the nature of the human mind. Can it be safe to take it as sufficing to determine a question of fact, such as is the question whether our Lord really did make this particular provision for the safeguarding of His revelation? But if it were only that, at least it proves that this principle of a Divinely guarded magisterium is not irrational, but on the contrary is, so far as we can see, the only principle capable of harmonizing the two certain facts, that our minds are by nature bound to truth at all costs and that our Lord prayed and therefore provided that we might all be one in faith. A principle, however, of this value must be regarded as resting on a much firmer basis than mere inference, especially when it is associated with the massive historical fact that the oldest and greatest of all the Churches -- which is also the only one that has known how to secure unity among its children without injury done to their sense of truth -- has all along been ruled by this very principle in the sure belief that it rests on the express words of Christ. Should not this send us back to a study of the words as they came from Christ's lips, and as they were understood by His Apostles, to see if those words do not correspond with this belief of the later Church?

And here we join on to the historical survey with which this article commenced, for in that survey has been epitomized the evidence from the New Testament and the early Christian writings, which shows that if we are to credit these records, our Lord did establish and impose this very system; that the Apostles whom He sent forth to lay the foundations of the Church, did so understand Him; that the Church of the second century, as represented by St. Irenæus, likewise so understood Him.

VII. PROSPECTS OF REUNION

If corporate reunion were a practical ideal, capable of being realized at no distant date, it would have enormous advantages, for it would greatly facilitate the task of those who feel the sadness of their present isolation. But, the conditions of this mode of reunion being such as we have seen, it is unfortunately impossible to regard the prospect of its realization as other than discouraging. Why is if that those who tell us with transparent sincerity that they long for the time when Christendom will be united once more, so persistently resist the rule of tradition and submission to the Holy See, though as capable as ourselves of appreciating the reasoning of the last section, and admiring the results which that rule can produce in the communion of the Apostolic See? Why is it that they continue, in the face of all their past disappointments, to stand out for their principle of comprehension, and to ask for reunion on the basis of mutual concession and contract? Obviously if is because they are still dominated by those self-same principles of religious division which we discerned in the earlier part of this article, when we were tracing to their ultimate causes the schisms that troubled the first four Christian centuries. We counted five such causes: "I cannot belong to a Church in whose doctrines I find insoluble intellectual difficulties", or "which cannot find a place in its system for religious experiences I take to be the direct voice of God to me", or "which claims to put fetters on my mental liberty", or "which runs counter to my national attachments and antipathies", or "which involves me in opposition to my temporal rulers" These principles, we said then, all or some of them, would be found likewise at the root of all subsequent schisms, and have not the summaries above given proved the truth of this? In the Oriental schisms, though private judgment on doctrinal subtleties had its part, the chief agencies at work were national antipathies and subservience to temporal rulers. In the sixteenth-century revolt all the five influences were fiercely active. Many Catholic doctrines -- as, for instance, those of transubstantiation, the sacramental principle, the merit of good works -- were condemned as offensive to the private judgment of the Reformers. The doctrine (Lutheran) of justification by faith was an egregious example of putting absolute trust in the assumptions of emotionalism, indeed was the first step towards transferring the basis of faith from the preaching of the word to the so-called testimony of experience. How repugnant to these Reformers was the idea of submission to any teaching authority save their own, is evidenced by their denunciations of popes and priests: how much they were possessed by the principles of Nationalism and Erastianism, is evidenced by the way in which they allowed their rulers to split them up into national Churches and gain their favour for these by stirring up their national animosities. At the present time, among the Churches of England and America which are asking for reunion -- or rather, some of whose members are asking for reunion -- these same sentiments still prevail, with some modification as regards their particular application. Is not this sufficiently attested by the tone of the criticisms which come so readily to their lips? "I cannot bring my mind to believe in a Trinity in Unity, in a Godman, in a sinless man, in an atonement, in transubstantiation, in original sin, in the power of a little water to wash away sin, in a power of absolution entrusted to sinful men, in a gift of immunity from religious error vested in a succession of under-educated Pontiffs." And again, "I know from my spiritual experience that I am saved, that the sacraments I have received are valid whatever reasons may be urged against them, that my particular form of religion is the true one though it contradicts the religion of others who can cite similar experiences on their behalf." Or again, "I am not going to hand over the keeping of my conscience to any priest or Church, I am not going to surrender the open-mindedness which is the essential quality of a truth-seeker." Or again, "I want a religion to suit my national temperament as an Englishman or an American; I am not going to submit to a foreign priest or listen to an Italian mission." How is it possible that men saturated with principles so antagonistic to the obedience of faith should be induced to seek reunion in the only form in which, as we have seen, it can be solid and lasting, that is, by submission to the teaching of the Apostolic See? Indeed, how can one imagine that they would accept even a system of comprehension unless, like their own present systems, it should be one prepared to tolerate every variety of individualism? But the fact is, these Anglican reunionists strangely overlook the mentality of their fellow-churchmen, and persuade themselves that the comparatively small section which forms the moderately High Church party can be taken as duly representing their Church; and then, realizing that neither this small section, nor even they themselves, have the true Catholic disposition of submission to a teaching authority, they have taken refuge in a project of comprehension that would just include themselves.

But it will not do to take this over-hopeful view of the situation. The possibilities of an approaching corporate reunion must be judged by the mentality of the whole body, and what chance is there, humanly speaking, that -- to say nothing of the Presbyterians and Nonconformists -- the general body of Anglicans, which is every year becoming more and more radical in its tone will be brought within a generation or two to such a degree of doctrinal unity and Catholic spirit among themselves as to make it likely that, as an organized body of bishops, clergy, and laity, they will approach the Holy See in the full spirit of submission, and ask to be received into its communion? Moreover, if we can imagine these internal difficulties overcome, and whole Churches approaching the Holy See in this manner, we must not overlook the probability that the difficulty from state interference, dormant for the present, would quickly revive. The statesmen would be sure to take alarm, and work against the project with all their might as a danger to their own selfish schemes; and this all the more because aggressive Anticlericalism has captured so many of the governments of powerful countries, and would strive, by appealing to racial prejudices and fostering campaigns of misrepresentation and oppression, to stamp out a movement calculated, if successful, to add so greatly to the forces of Christianity, If must be repeated that individuals might hold out against this persecution, but the masses of men whom we are supposing to form the membership of Churches anxious to reunite would in all probability be shattered by it, and break up. We must not, indeed forget that we are all in the hands of God, and God may at any time intervene by some signal providence to clear away the obstacles from the path of corporate reunion. But we have no right to count on interventions of this kind. Reunionists whose inquiries have convinced them that the way to unity is through submission to the Holy See will be imprudent indeed if they delay their personal submission in expectation of a corporate act on the part of their respective Churches which, in the absence of any such Divine intervention, is, in view of the difficulties indicated, most unlikely to come till long after the present generation of men has passed away. Nor is it to the purpose to ask here if by this method of individual conversions there is any prospect of an eventual restoration of Christendom to the unity which once held it together. Possibly there is not; but why should there be? We may indeed look to a continuance, and perhaps to an expansion, of the process now going on whereby appreciable numbers are added to the Church through individual submissions, but it does not seem likely that, in this age of individualism, whole nations will be brought in by this method, nor is there any Divine promise that they will be. Another age may bring forth better things, but whether it will we know not. Still, though the prospects of corporate reunion appear discouraging, Catholics may well show themselves appreciative and sympathetic towards the efforts of those of other communions who are captivated by the splendid ideal and think that under one form or another it is capable of realization. We may safely leave to the Providence of God to determine what course the present reunion movement shall ultimately take, and meanwhile we may emphasize the substantial point that Catholics and other reunionists have in common: their mutual desire to see the barriers that separate them removed. They can co-operate, too, in working for the good cause in useful ways without any surrender of their own principles. For they can cultivate friendly personal relations, to the formation of which it will greatly contribute if they can work together for objects, social or otherwise, as to the value of which they are agreed. There is a special value in the personal friendships thus formed, for they tend to dissolve the obstacles which come from sheer misunderstandings and the animosities that these engender. And they can further co-operate for the removal of these same obstacles by positive efforts to understand one another correctly, particularly by the others seeking and the Catholics, if they are competent, showing a readiness to give simple explanations of the true character of their beliefs and practices.

The latter cannot indeed be too careful to avoid bitter controversies, for these, as experience has proved, serve more to harden estrangements than to cement reconciliations. But their explanations will be often welcomed, if it be known that they will be marked by candour, cordiality, and patience, for nowadays there is a growing number who have come to suspect that Catholicism is not as black as it has been painted for them, and are anxious to hear about it from those whom they can trust, and who have intimate knowledge of it from the inside. If would be rash, however, for Catholics to expect that their non-Catholic friends will be readily convinced by the explanations they give. Convictions are of slow growth; besides it is not for the human agent to intrude on the office which the Holy Spirit reserves to Himself. Lastly, there can be co-operation in efforts to promote reunion by earnest and assiduous prayer. Catholics cannot join an association for prayer like the A.P.U.C., which is under non-Catholic management, but they have the highest sanction for joining similar associations under Catholic management, such as the Confraternity of Compassion, which Leo XIII himself established in 1897, and entrusted to the administration of the Sulpician Fathers.

(See also CHURCH; POPE; TRADITION; GNOSTICISM; MARCIONITES; MONTANISTS; NOVATIAN; NOVATIANISM; MANICHÆISM; DONATISTS; ARIANISM; ALBIGENSES; WYCLIF, JOHN; HUS AND HUSSITES; NESTORIUS AND NESTORIANISM; CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA; COUNCIL OF EPHESUS; MONOPHYSITES AND MONOPHYSITISM; EUTYCHES; EUTYCHIANISM; COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON; GREECE; GREEK CHURCH; PHOTIUS; MICHAEL CÆRULARIUS; RUSSIA; PROTESTANTISM; REFORMATION; MARTIN LUTHER; JOHN CALVIN; JOHN KNOX; ANGLICANISM; PRESBYTERIANISM; NON-CONFORMISTS; COUNCILS OF LYONS.)

Papal Letters

PIUS IX, In suprema (Jan., 1848), Arcano Divinoe Providentioe and Jam vos omnes novistis (Sept. 1868); LEO XIII, Orientalium dignitas Ecclesiarum (Nov., 1893); Proeclara gratulationis (June, 1894), Amantissima voluntatis (April, 1895), Satis cognitum (June, 1896); PIUS X, Ex quo nono (Dec., 1910).

FRANZELIN, De traditione (Rome, 1875), De ecclesia Christi (1877); BATIFFOL, Primitive Catholicism, tr. (London, 1911); PESCH, Proelecctiones dogmaticoe, I (Freiburg, 1909); BOTALLA, The Supreme Authority of the pope (London, 1868); RIVINGTON, The Primitive Church and the See of Peter (London, 1894); HERGENRÖTHER, Handbuch der allgemeinen Kirchengeschichte (3 vols., Ratisbon, 1876-80); MORÈRE, Histoire et filiation des hérésies (Paris, 1881); Photii Opera in P. G., CI-III; WILL, Acta et Scripta quoe de controversiis Ecclesioe Groecoe et Latinoe soeculo XI composita extant (Leipzig, 1861); HERGENRÖTHER, Photius (3 vols., Ratisbon, 1867); BRÉHIER, Le schisme oriental du XIme siècle (Paris, 1899); DUCHESNE, Eglises séparées (Paris, 1896); FORTESCUE, The Orthodox Eastern Church (London, 1906); DEMETRAKOPOULOS, Historia tou schismatos tes latinikes ekklesias apo tes orthodoxoui ekkenikes (Leipzig, 1867); KYRIAKOS, Geschichte der orientalischen Kirchen (German tr. from the Greek, Berlin, 1902); FFOULKES, Christendom's Divisions (2 vols., London, 1867); HORE Eighteen Centuries of the Orthodox Eastern Church (London, 1899); MOURAVIEF (tr. BLACKMORE), History of the Church of Russia (London, 1842); SILBERNAGL, Verfassung und gegenwärtiger Bestand sämtlicher Kirchen das Orients (2nd ed., Ratisbon, 1904); DÖLLINGER, Die Reformation in seine Entwickelung und Wirkungen (3 vols., Ratisbon, 1843); JANSEN, Geschichte des deutschen Volkes, II-V (Freiburg, 1882-86); PASTOR, Geschichte der Päpste, III-V (1889-1909); CREIGHTON, History of the Papacy during the Reformation (5 vols., London, 1882-86); HERING, History of the Efforts at Reconciliation made since the Reformation (Leipzig, 1836); GAIRDNER, History of Lollardy and the Reformation (3 vols., London, 1908); LINGARD, History of England, V, VI (London, 1883); DIXON, History of the Church of England (4 vols., London, 1878-91).

THEINER, Vetera monumenta Polonioe et Lituanioe historiam illustrantia (2 vols., Rome, 1861-3); LIKOWSKI, Union zu Brest, German tr. from the Polish by JEDZINK (Freiburg, 1904); LESCOEUR, La persécution de l'Eglise en Lithuanie, 1865, 1872, French tr. from tbe Polish (Paris, 1873); MICHEL, L'Orient et Rome, Etude sur l'union (Paris, 1895); PALMIERI, Chiesa Russa (Florence, 1908); WILBOIS, L'avenir de l'Eglise russe (Paris, 1907); FRANCO, Difesa di Cristianesimo per l'unione delle chiese (Rome, 1910); CHAPMAN, The First Eight General Councils (London, 1906); URBAN, De iis quoe theologi Catholici proestare possint et debeant erga Ecclesiam russicam, oratio habita in Conventu Velehradensi (Prague, 1907); HARPER, Peace through the Truth, First Series (London, 1866); MANNING, England and Christendom (London, 1867); NEWMAN, Letter of March 3, 1866, to Ambrose Phillips de Lisle in WARD, Life of Newman, II (London, 1912), 115; PALMER, Notes of a visit to the Russian Church with Preface by NEWMAN (London, 1882); BIRKBECK, Russia and England during the last fifty years, a correspondence between Mr. William Palmer and M. Khomiakoff, in the years 1844-54 (London, 1895); SOLOVIEV, La Russie et l'Eglise universelle (Paris, 1889); D'HERBIGNY, Wladimir Soloviev, un Newman Russe (Paris, 1911); PUSEY, Eirenicon; Letter to Dr. Newman; Second Letter to Dr. Newman: Is Healthful Reunion Impossible? (London, 1865, 1867, 1870); WARD, Life of Cardinal Newman (London, 1912); DÖLLINGER, Reunion of the Churches (tr. London, 1872); ANGLICAN BISHOPS, Lambeth Encyclicals, with the Resolutions and Reports (London, 1888, 1897, 1908); The Anglican Communion in relation to other Christian Bodies in Pananglican Papers (London, 1908); GORE, Orders and Unity (London, 1909); SPENCER-JONES, England and the Holy See, with Introduction by HALIFAX (London, 1902); Rome and Reunion (London, 1904); MCBEE, An Eirenic Itinerary (London, 1911); HALIFAX, Leo XIII and Anglican Orders (London, 1912); MATURIN, The Price of Unity (London, 1912); MCBEE, An Eirenic Itinerary (London and New York, 1911); LANG, Reunion in The Tablet (London, May, 1912), 763-64.

Reviews devoted to work for Reunion

Bessarione (Rome, 1896); Revue de l'Orient Chrétien (Paris, 1896); Echos d'Orient (Paris, 1897--); Slavorum Litteroe theologicoe (Prague, 1905--); Ekklesiastike, the organ of the Phanar (Constantinople, 1880--); Eirene, the organ of the A.E.O.C.U. (London, 1908--); Reunion Magazine (London, Oct., 1909-March, 1911).

SYDNEY F. SMITH

Unions of Prayer

A tendency to form unions of prayer among the faithful has recently manifested itself in the establishment of organizations like the following:

(1) The Association of Prayer and Penitence in honour of the Heart of Jesus, founded at Dijon in 1879, transferred to Montmartre, and made an archconfraternity by Leo XIII, 10 April, 1894. Its purposes are: to offer reparation, by prayer and penitence, for sin, and for outrages against the Church and the pope; to obtain the welfare of the Church, the freedom of the pope, and the salvation of the world.

(2) The Archconfraternity of Our Lady of Compassion for the Return of England to the Catholic Faith, founded at Saint-Sulpice, Paris, by Brief of Leo XIII "Compertum est" (22 Aug., 1897). Jean-Jacques Olier had always been zealous for the conversion of England; and the ministry of his congregation was favourable to the spreading of this confraternity. The Brief exhorts the faithful everywhere to join this confraternity, and authorizes its directors to unite with all other similar confraternities, and communicate to them its indulgences. The "Statutes" were published, 30 Aug., 1897, by Decree of the Congregation of Bishops and Regulars. The solemn inauguration took place, 17 Oct., 1897, by the Cardinal Archbishop of Paris, in the presence of the Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster. About 1000 confraternities, in France, England, Italy, Belgium, Australia, and elsewhere, have become united with the archconfraternity. By Apostolic Letter of 2 Feb., 1911, Pius X extended the scope of the prayers of the archconfraternity from Great Britain to the whole of the English-speaking world.

(3) Pious Union of Prayer to Our Lady of Compassion for the Conversion of Heretics, founded at Rome, 7 Nov., 1896, in St. Marcellus. Similar unions may be formed in any church where there is an altar and a statue of Our Lady of Compassion. The director general is the Father-General of the Servites, who names a general secretary from his order.

(4) Archconfraternity of Prayers and Good Works for the Reunion of the Eastern Schismatics with the Church under the patronage of Our Lady of the Assumption, founded at the Church of the Anastasis at Constantinople. Organized by Emmanuel d'Alzon, the founder of the Assumptionists, it was developed under his successor François Picard to such a degree that even some Eastern schismatics were induced to pray for the same intentions. Leo XIII in the Brief "Cum divini Pastoris" (25 May, 1898) made it an archconfraternity prima-primaria. It is established at the church of the Assumptionists under the title of Anastasis of Constantinople. Affiliated confraternities may be formed wherever there is an Assumptionist church and house, with the same privileges as the archconfraternity. The "Statutes" were approved 24 May, 1898, by Decree of the Congregation of Bishops and Regulars. (See also APOSTLESHIP OF PRAYER; PARIS, Famous Pilgrimages; (2) Notre-Dame-des-Victoires.)

BERINGER, Die Ablässe (13th ed., Paderborn, 1910), Fr. tr. (Paris, 1905).

C.F. WEMYSS BROWN

Unitarians

A Liberal Protestant sect which holds as it distinctive tenet the belief in a uni-personal instead of a tri-personal God.

I. NAME AND DOCTRINE

In its general sense the name designates all disbelievers in the Trinity, whether Christian or non-Christian; in its present specific use it is applied to that organized form of Christianity which lays emphasis on the unity of the personality of God. The term seems to have originated about 1570, was used in a decree of the Diet held in 1600 at Lecsfalva in Transylvania, and received official ecclesiastic sanction in 1638. It supplanted the various designations of anti-Trinitarians, Arians, Racovians, and Socinians. In England the name first appears in 1682. It became frequent in the United States from 1815, although it was received unfavourably by some anti-Trinitarians, and omitted in their official titles by some congregations whose religious position it defined. The explanation of this opposition is to be found in the reluctance of the parties concerned to lay stress on any doctrinal affirmation. Historical associations account for the name Presbyerians, frequently applied to Unitarians in the British Isles, and Unitarian Congregationalists, used in the United States. No definite standard of belief is recognized in the denomination and no doctrinal tests are laid down as a condition of fellowship. The co-operation of all persons desirous of advancing the interests of "pure" (i.e. undogmatic, practical) Christianity is welcomed in the Unitarian body.

In granting this co-operation each member enjoys complete freedom in his individual religious opinions, and no set of doctrinal propositions could be framed on which all Unitarians would agree. The bond of union between them consists more in their anti-dogmatic tendency than in uniformity of belief. The authority of the Bible is in some degree retained; but its contents are either admitted or repudiated according as they find favor before the supreme, and in this case, exacting tribunal of individual reason. Jesus Christ is considered subordinate to the Father and, although the epithet Divine is in a loose sense not infrequently applied to Him, He is in the estimation of many an extraordinarily endowed and powerful but still a human religious leader. He is a teacher to be followed, not a God to be worshipped. His Passion and Death are an inspiration and an example to His disciples, not an effective and vicarious atonement for the sins of men. He is the great exemplar which we ought to copy in order to perfect our union with God gradually. This teaching concerning the mission of Jesus Christ is but the logical complement of the Unitarian denial of the Fall of Man and with similar consistency leads to the suppression of the sacraments. Two of these (baptism and Eucharist) are indeed retained, but their grace-conferring power is denied and their reception declared unnecessary. Baptism is administered to children (rarely to adults) more for sentimental reasons and purposes for edification than from the persuasion of the spiritual results produced in the soul of the recipient. The Eucharist, far from being considered as sacrificial, is looked upon as a merely memorial service. The fond hope of universal salvation is entertained by the majority of the denomination.

In short, present-day Unitarianism is hardly more than natural religion, and exhibits in some of its members a pronounced tendency towards Pantheistic speculation. The Church polity in England and America is strictly congregational; each individual congregation manages, without superior control, all its affairs, calls and discharges its minister, and is the final judge of the religious views expressed in its pulpit. In Transylvania the Church government is exercised by a bishop who resides at Kolozsvár (Klausenburg) and is assisted by a consistory. The episcopal title which he bears does not imply special consecration but mearly designates the office of an ecclesiatical supervisor.

II. HISTORY

A. In Europe

The first church holding Unitarian tenets was founded in Poland during the reign of Sigismund II (1548-72). The year 1568 saw the establishment and official recognition of such congregations in Transylvania. While in the former country Unitarianism was completely supressed in 1660, in the latter it has, despite temporary persecution, maintained itself. The Transylvanian Church is of Socinian origin but has suppressed the worship of Jesus Christ, thus casting off what chiefly differentiated it from strict Unitarianism. Its present name is the Hungarian Unitarian Church, although comparatively few of its members reside in Hungary proper.

In England the organization of Unitarianism was effected at a much later date. The first attempt at establishing a congregation was made by John Biddle (1615-62), but the organization did not last its author. More permanency attended the efforts of Theophilus Lindsey (1723-1808). In 1773 he seceded from the Anglican Communion, organized the following year a Unitarian congregation in London, and in 1778 built the Essex Street chapel. About the same time anti-Trinitarian views were spread by the scientist Joseph Priestly, pastor of a congregation at Leeds (1768-80) and later at Birmingham. His work in the latter place was cut short by a popular uprising in 1791, and three years later he emigrated to America. Others, among them Thomas Belsham (1750-1829) and Lant Carpenter (1780-1840), continued to propagate Unitarianism in England. Legal restrictions were still in vigour, however, against persons denying the doctrine of the Trinity and hampered their work. But in 1813 most of these disabilities were removed, and in 1844 complete liberty was obtained, despite opposition, by the Dissenters' Chapels Act, sometimes called the Unitarian Charter. As early as 1825 English Unitarians had concluded a union with their co-religionists abroad under the name of British and Foreign Unitarian Association. This society disseminated religious literature and promoted the interests of the sect. The prospects of this activity were brightened by the appearance of a capable exponent of Unitarian views, Dr. James Martineau (1805-1900). After a successful resistance to early opposition, his personality dominated English Unitariansm for an extended period. His writings exercised a potent influence far beyond England, and still continue to advance the cause of Liberal Christianity. His disciples have taken up his work and outstripped their master in his radical views.

Scotland never proved a fruitful soil for Unitarian propaganda. A congregation was organized in 1776 in Edinburgh and the Scottish Unitarian Association was formed in 1813; but progress in that country has been insignificant and there are very few congregations there. In Ireland Unitarianism is held chiefly in the North where it has found adherants among the Presbyterians. It may not inappropriately be considered a self-governing branch of the Presbyterian body. Some Unitarian congregations are to be found also in the British colonies, notably Australia and Canada, and among the French Protestants a comparatively large number are Unitarian in view, though not in name.

B. America

About the middle of the eighteenth century Unitarian opinions gained favor among New England Congregationalists. They were propagated by Jonathan Mayhew (1720-1766), for nineteen years pastor of the West Church at Boston, and Charles Chauncey (1705-87), in the same city. The first organized church was King's Chapel, Boston, when the congregation, until then Episcopal, removed in 1785 all references to the Trinity from the Book of Common Prayer and in 1787 assumed an independent existence. Congregations were also organized at Portland and Saco (Maine) in 1792, and in 1794 Joseph Priestly began his propaganda in Pennsylvania. It was particularly in New England, however, that the movement gained ground. The appointment in 1805 of the Rev. Henry Ware to the Hollis chair of divinity at Harvard College and the nomination within the next two years of four other Liberal candidates to important professorships in the same institution, brought that seat of learning under considerable Unitarian influence. Its school of divinity was endowed and organized by the denomination in 1817 and remained under its control until 1878, when it became nondenominational. While the diffusion of Unitarian ideas was comparitively rapid the organization of churches was retarded by the reluctance of many to separate from the Congregationalist communities of which they were members. Before the separation was effected a heated controversy was waged between the liberal and conservative wings of Congregationalism. Matters came to a head in 1819 when the Rev. William Ellery Channing, in a sermon preached at Baltimore at the installation of the Rev. Jared Sparks, advocated the public acknowledgement by the liberal members and congregations of their Unitarian beliefs. This discourse proved decisive, and the parties concerned immediately proceeded to organize themselves independently. Frm this date until his death in 1842, Channing was the acknowledged leader of the denomination. Under his auspices the American Unitarian Association was founded at Boston in 1825 for the promotion of Unitarian interests.

After his death the radical element became predominant under the direction of Theodore Parker (1810-60), who succeeded him in influence. The authority of the Bible acknowledged by the old school was, under Parker, largely sacrificed to the principles of destructive criticism, and Unitarianism drifted rapidly into Rationalistic speculation. The activity of Channing and Parker was supplemented by the more general and far-reaching influence of the Unitarian poet-philosopher, Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-82). Although he resigned his charge of the Second Congregational Church at Boston after a short period (1829-32), he continued to preach for many years and his popularity as a writer and lecturer could not but lend additional prestige to the advanced religious views which he defended. The interests of the Unitarian propaganda were also served by the foundation of the Western Conference of Unitarians in 1852 and that of the National Unitarian Conference in 1865. Of a more universal character was the International Council of Unitarians and other Liberal Religious Thinkers and Workers, which was organized at Boston in 1900. It held sessions in London (1901), Amsterdam (1903), Geneva (1905), Boston (1907), and Berlin (1910). At the last-mentioned convention the official title was changed to International Congress of Free Christians and Other Religious Liberals. The purpose remains the same, namely: "to open communication with those in all lands who are striving to unite pure religion and perfect liberty and to increase fellowship and co-operation among them."

III. PROPAGANDA; EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS; STATISTICS

The Unitarian body sent a missionary to India in 1855, and since 1887 has carried on an active propaganda in Japan; however, its missionary efforts in foreign langs, viewed in the aggregate, have not been considerable. In accordance with its general indifferent attitude toward dogma, its endeavours to advance the cause of Christianity without emphasizing its own specific tenets, and its members have in the past contributed to the missionary funds of other denominations. Their efforts, moreover, are more concerned with the dissemination of literature among civilized nations than with the sending of missionaries to non-Christian lands. This method of gaining adherants has proved successful, partly owing to the Liberal, Rationalistic, and excessively individualistic tendency of the present age, but largely also to the number of eminent men and capable writers who have adhered to or defended Unitarian doctrines. Financial resources for propagandist purposes were provided for by the rich Jamaica planter, Robert Hibbert (1770-1849), through the creation of the fund which bears his name. Out of it grew the well-known Hibbert Lectures, and the more recent "Hibbert Journal". An organization unique in its character is the Post Office Mission which, by means of correspondence and the distribution of books and periodicals, seeks to bring courage to the despondent and joy to the suffering.

The Church has made no determined effort to organize benevolent institutions of its own. A considerable number of the Unitarian ministry (to which women are admitted) receive their training in the educational institutions of other sects. The Church, however, founded the following special schools for this purpose: in Hungary, the Unitarian College at Kolozsvár; in England and Wales, the Unitarian Home Missionary College at Manchester; the Manchester College at Oxford; the Presbyterian College at Carmarthen; in America, the Harvard Divinity School at Cambridge, Massachusetts; the Meadville Theological School at Meadville, Pennsylvania; and the Pacific Unitarian School (later renamed the Starr King School for the Ministry) at Berkelely, California. In the United States the denomination maintains, besides these training-schools for the ministry, seven academies situated, but one exception, in the New England States. The number of persons holding Unitarian views cannot be determined, even approximately; for many undoubtedly reject the doctrine of the Three Divine Persons and retain the belief in a uni-personal Godhead without ever affiliating with the Church. Among these must be reckoned not only a large number of Liberal theologians and advanced critics, but also some religious denominations which, either in their entirety, as the Hicksite Friends, or at least in many of their members, as the Unitarian-Universalists, are distinctly anti-Trinitarian.

On doctrine consult MARTINEAU, CHANNING and the other Unitarian writers mentioned above; HEDGE, Reason in Religion (Boston, 1865); CLARKE Essentials and Non-Essentials in Religion; IDEM; Manuel of Unitarian Belief (Boston, 1884); ALLEN, Our Liberal Movement in Theology (Boston, 1882); BONET-MAURY, tr. HALL, Early Sources of English Unitarian Christianity (London, 1884); For a Catholic point of view, see KOHLMANN, Unitarianism, theologically and philosopically considered (Washington, 1821).

N.A. WEBER

The United States of America

BOUNDARIES AND AREA

On the east the boundary is formed by the St. Croix River and an arbitrary line to the St. John, and on the north by the Aroostook Highlands, the 45th parallel of N. lat., the St. Lawrence, and the Great Lakes. West of Lake Superior, the Rainy River, Rainy Lake, and the Lake of the Woods form the boundary; thence to Puget Sound the 49th parallel. Thereafter it drops down to the Strait of Juan de Fuca, leaving Vancouver Island to the Dominion of Canada. The Atlantic Ocean washes the entire eastern shore. On the south the Gulf of Mexico serves as the boundary to the mouth of the Rio Grande del Norte. That river separates the United States from the Republic of Mexico until at the city of El Paso it turns northward; from that point to the Colorado River an arbitrary line marks the boundary of the two republics. The Pacific Ocean forms the western boundary.

The total area is 3,026,789 sq. miles. The United States is divided into two unequal parts by the Mississippi River, which flows almost directly south from its source in a lake below the 49th parallel. The portion east of that great river is subdivided into two parts by the Ohio and the Potomac Rivers. The section west of the Mississippi is divided into two very unequal parts by the Missouri River.

In a physiographic view, however, the area of the United States may be divided into the Appalachian belt, the Cordilleras, and the central plains. The first of these divisions includes the middle Appalachian region, or that between the Hudson and the James Rivers; the north-eastern Appalachian region, which overlaps New England at many points; the south-western Appalachian, which includes the country from Maryland to the Carolinas. In North Carolina the mountain belt reaches its greatest altitude, falling away in Georgia and Alabama. Much of the early history of the United States is concerned with the Atlantic coastal plain. In New England the mountains almost front the sea, and harbour and hill are within sight of each other. From New York, however, the interval which separates them gradually widens toward the southward, until in the State of Georgia it extends into the interior about 120 miles, after which it unites with the Gulf coastal plain. In New York is the rugged Adirondack region, which was very late in being settled. The characteristics of the region of the Great Lakes, which is a projection of the Laurentian Highlands in eastern Canada, are well known. Of almost inexhaustible fertility and of immense area is the region included by the Prairie States. Roughly speaking, it may be bounded by the Ohio and the Missouri Rivers on the south, and by the Great Lakes on the north. The Prairies are the gift of the glacial period. The Gulf coastal plain has been alluded to. Authorities on physical geography also distinguish a Texas coastal plain. Passing by the great valley of the Mississippi, the next division is the region known as the Great Plains, which extends from the 97th meridian of W. longitude to the base of the Rocky Mountains. To the elevated section between the Great Plains and the Pacific is given the name Cordilleras. This includes the Rocky Mountains, the Basin range, the plateau province, and the Pacific ranges (Cascade and Sierra Nevada). Around desirable harbours and in situations favourable for defence the first European settlements were made in what is now the United States. In this connexion are suggested the names: Boston, Salem, Plymouth, Providence, New York, Philadelphia, Charleston. For a long time the waterways not only influenced the social and political life of the people, but determined the direction of their movements when they went to new regions. Thus were the early westward movements of population conditioned by the river systems. This, too, explains the irregular character of the frontier line until railways became numerous, when it moved regularly toward the west.

GEOLOGY

The Laurentian uplift, seen in the Adirondacks and the region of the Great Lakes, was clearly in the earliest geological periods. The rock structure and the character of the deposits tend to support this opinion. The Cordilleras, on the contrary, are of comparatively recent formation, and exhibit evidences of late volcanic action. The volcanoes of Mexico and of Alaska, indeed, are not yet extinct. Many of the valleys in the Cordilleras are vast lava beds. The entire region, including New England, New York to the Ohio River, and westward to the prairies and the great plains, exhibits evidences that a great glacial sheet had in practically recent times spread over it. In its retreat were left fertile prairie in the United States and unnumbered lakes and water-courses as well in that country as in Canada. In 1902 the United States produced about one third of the entire coal supply of the world. In the east it is generally distributed, except the anthracite variety, which is found in only a limited field. It is also found in many sections of the west. Still more valuable than the production of coal is that of iron, which in the year mentioned amounted to $367,000,000. Approximately the value of the gold produced yearly in the United States is $80,000,000; copper comes next with an estimated value of $77,000,000. Silver amounts to $29,000,000, lead to $22,000,000, and zinc to $14,000,000. Aluminium and quicksilver are less important. Montana and the Lake Superior region lead in the output of copper; gold is found in many of the western states, and silver is widely distributed. The zinc deposits in northern New Jersey are among the richest in the world. The non-metallic mineral products are also of great value, e.g. petroleum, clay, gypsum, salt, and natural gas. Of the tin, antimony, sulphur, and platinum consumed in the United States, much is imported.

COLONIZATION

In April, 1606, King James I created a company with two branches, viz, the London and the Plymouth. The former was given permission to make settlements between 34 and 41 N. lat., and was to receive grants of land extending fifty miles north and south from its first settlement,—a coast front of 100 miles and the same distance inland. The Plymouth merchants were permitted to make their first settlement between 38 and 45 N. lat., and were also given a block 100 miles square. To prevent disputes, the branch making the second settlement should locate at least 100 miles from the colony first established. Each branch was very careful to fix its first settlement on territory to which the other had no right whatever. The two branches are always mentioned as two companies. King James's patent of 10 April, 1606, is a document of interest. It provides that English colonists and their posterity "shall have and enjoy all liberties, franchises, and immunities within any of Our other dominions, to all intents and purposes as if they had been abiding and born within this Our realm of England or any other of Our said dominions". A similar provision was found in the earlier patent granted to Raleigh, and even in that obtained by Gilbert. On the other hand, the colonists of France, Spain, and other nations were regarded as persons outside the laws, privileges, and immunities enjoyed by those who continued to dwell in the mother land. It will thus appear that English settlers carried with them as much of the common law of their country as was applicable to their new situation. In colonization this principle marked an epoch.

The London Company was composed of merchants and gentlemen in the vicinity of London, and the Plymouth company of persons dwelling in the west of England. In some respects the British government had no more enlightened a conception of colonization than did contemporary governments. England was "to monopolize the consumption of the colonies and the carriage of their produce". This led to the enactment of the celebrated Navigation Laws. Commercial legislation affecting colonial trade falls under two heads: acts controlling exportation and importation, and those controlling production. By a law of 1660 certain enumerated commodities, being all the chief products of the colonies, could be landed only in British ports. Two later acts further extended this restriction. Under the Navigation Act of 1660, European goods could not be imported into the colonies except in ships of Britain or of British colonies, sailing from British ports. We are not now concerned with the Act of 1733. If strictly enforced this would have oppressed the New England colonies, but, fortunately for them, the revenue officers winked at their frequent infractions of the law.

The London Company was the first to establish a settlement, viz, that at Jamestown in 1607. The vicissitudes of that colony and the general outline of English colonial development will be found in the articles on the thirteen original states, viz. Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Georgia Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maryland, South Carolina, New Hampshire, Virginia, New York, North Carolina, and Rhode Island. This summary can touch upon them but briefly. On 6 May, 1607, the first Virginia settlers, 120 in number, entered Chesapeake Bay, and sailed about thirty miles up the James River, so named after the king. Toward evening they landed, and were attacked by the Indians. In a few months Captain Newport, who had brought out the first settlers, returned to England, collected supplies and recruits, and in January, 1608, was again at James Fort, as the settlement was then called. Fever, hunger, and Indian arrows had swept off more than half of those he had first brought over, among them some members of the council. Wingfield, the first president, was under arrest, and John Smith, an influential man in the colony was awaiting execution.

At the end of three months, when Newport again sailed for England, one-half of those who were alive in January had died. Edward Maria Wingfield, the first president of the local council, was the only person among the patentees who came with the colonists. With suffering came dissension. Ratcliffe, Martin, and Smith removed Wingfield not only from the presidency but from the council. In the circumstances his overthrow was easy. It was charged that he was a Catholic, some authorities say an atheist, that he brought no Bible with him, and also that he had conspired with the Spaniards to destroy Virginia. In April, 1608, Wingfield left Jamestown, and later in England made to the authorities an interesting statement in his own defence. For considerably more than two hundred years Captain John Smith was universally regarded as the ablest and the most useful of the first Jamestown settlers. Indeed, he was believed to have been the founder and the preserver of the colony. As a matter of fact, he was a mere adventurer, responsible for much of the dissension among the first settlers. His "General History" is an absurd eulogy of himself and an unfair criticism of his fellows. Perhaps it was no misfortune to Virginia when the accidental explosion of a bag of gunpowder compelled him to return to England for medical treatment. Smith was never afterward employed by the Virginia Company. The five hundred new settlers sent to Jamestown in 1609 were "a worthless set picked up in the streets of London or taken from the jails, and utterly unfit to become the founders of a state in the New World". This, however, while true of a particular band of immigrants, will not serve for a description of those who came later. During the seventeenth century there arrived numerous knights, and numbers of the nobility of every rank, representatives of the best families and the best intellect in England.

In the beginning the population of Virginia was almost exclusively English; indeed, Virginia was very much like an English shire. As early as 1619 the company had sent out a few Frenchmen to test the soil for its capacity to produce a superior variety of grapes. Other French immigrants continued to arrive in the colony throughout the seventeenth century. After the English took New Amsterdam, in 1664, many Dutchmen went from New Netherland to Virginia. Germans and Italians were never numerous in that province. During the era of Cromwellian ascendency many Irish were sent to Virginia. Again in 1690 and afterwards there arrived many Irishmen who were captured at the Boyne and on other battlefields. These non-English elements in the population do not appear, however, to have exerted much social or other influence. They soon melted into the population around them. The name of Edward Maria Wingfleld has been mentioned as that of the only patentee who came over with the colonists. If there is any doubt as to the Catholicism of the first president of the council there is none concerning the religious belief of the Earl of Southampton. That nobleman had a keen interest in English colonization.

While England was engaged in developing the Province of Virginia, four other European powers, Spain, France, Holland, and Sweden, were establishing themselves on parts of the Atlantic coast of North America. In 1655 the Dutch conquered New Sweden, and nine years later New Netherland was acquired by the English. The latter conquest was facilitated by the former, because New Netherland had reduced itself to a condition of bankruptcy in order to send its warlike armament into Delaware Bay. After the failures of Ribaut and Laudonnière the French made no attempt to settle the south Atlantic coast. That nation, however, did not abandon American colonization. From the founding of Quebec, in 1608, great activity was manifested in Canada and later in Louisiana. On the Atlantic coast, therefore, Spain and England were the chief rivals. The former manifested little interest to the northward of the Mexican Gulf, and after 1664 England was free to develop her maritime colonies in her own way. In the meantime France was exploring the interior, establishing garrisons, and in other ways strengthening her hold on the most desirable part of the continent. Between the outposts of the two nations collisions were inevitable.

INTER-COLONIAL WARS

It is not possible to discuss here either the causes or the conduct of those wars which in 1763 ended in the complete triumph of British arms. Between 1689 and 1763 four separate struggles took place between these ancient enemies.

King Williams' War. The first, which began in 1689, is known as King William's War, ending in 1697 by the treaty of Ryswick.

Queen Anne's War. The second conflict was Queen Anne's War, known in European history as the War of the Spanish Succession. Though not so widespread as the preceding one, in America it was marked by the same characteristics. In 1710, with the assistance of ships sent from England, Port Royal was again captured. With it the whole of Acadia passed into the hands of the English. The name of the town was changed to Annapolis Royal, in honour of Queen Anne. Acadia became Nova Scotia, or New Scotland. In 1713 this war was ended by the treaty of Utrecht. The extent of the country designated as Acadia was somewhat vague, and as to the regions included under that name new disputes were destined to arise.

King George's War. The War of the Austrian Succession (1744-1748), occurring in the reign of George II, is known in American history as King George's War. The French promptly swept down on and captured the little town of Canso, in Nova Scotia. They carried off its garrison and then attacked Annapolis, but were repulsed. The most important event of this war was the expedition against Louisburg, on Cape Breton Island. Though Louisburg had been fortified at an expense estimated at $10,000,000, it was compelled to surrender. Later there came the alarming report that a French armada was on the way to retake Acadia and Louisburg, and to destroy Boston. Though the armada reached American waters, it was dispersed by a tempest off the coast of Nova Scotia, and its crest-fallen crews soon returned to France. At this stage of the war both sides were freely assisted by savages. One of the French expeditions attacked the outpost of Saratoga, killed thirty persons, and took a hundred prisoners. By the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle in July, 1748, all conquests were mutually restored. The news of the surrender of Louisburg, which had been chiefly won and defended at the expense of New England, caused the greatest dissatisfaction throughout the colonies, and strained somewhat the relations with the mother country.

The French and Indian War. Having emerged from the last war without loss of territory, France went to work more vigorously than ever with her preparations for excluding the British altogether from the Mississippi valley. In 1749 the Governor of Canada despatched Céloron de Bienville with a band of men in birch-bark canoes to take formal possession of the Ohio valley, the only highway still unguarded. Once on the Allegheny River, the ceremony of taking possession began. The men were drawn up by their commanders, and Louis XV was proclaimed king of all the country drained by the Ohio. Then the arms of France were nailed to a tree, at the foot of which was buried a leaden plate with an inscription claiming the Ohio and all its tributaries for the King of France. At various points along the Ohio similar plates were hidden. Forts were built along the Allegheny. This activity on the part of the French alarmed Governor Dinwiddie of Virginia. He determined to demand the withdrawal of the French, and for his messenger chose George Washington, then an officer of the Virginia militia. Washington proceeded to Fort Le Boeuf, where he delivered Dinwiddie's letter to the commandant, Saint-Pierre, who promised to forward the letter to the authorities in Canada. In the meantime he would continue to hold the fort.

When Dinwiddie received the reply of Saint-Pierre, he knew that the time for action had come. He sent forward to the forks of the Ohio a party of forty men, who began the erection of a stockade, intended to surround a fort, on the site of the present city of Pittsburgh. On 17 April, 1754, while the English were still engaged at their work, a body of French and Indians from Fort Le Boeuf ordered them to leave the valley. The English commander was allowed to march off with his men. The French then completed the work thus begun, and in honour of the Governor of Canada called it Fort Duquesne. The surrender at the forks of the Ohio was soon known to the governors of Maryland, Virginia, and Pennsylvania. Virginia acted promptly and raised a force, of which Frye was commander, with Washington as lieutenant-colonel. Near a place called Great Meadows, Washington with a few men killed or captured a small party of French. On 4 July, 1754, he was himself besieged by a party of French and Indians, and after a brave resistance compelled to surrender. Thus was begun what the English colonists called the French and Indian War. The British in 1755 sent over Major-General Braddock as commander-in-chief in America. The colonial governors met him at Alexandria, Virginia. Four expeditions were agreed upon:

• an expedition from New York to Lake Champlain, to take Forts Ticonderoga and Crown Point, and to move against Quebec;
• an expedition to sail from New England and make such a demonstration against the French towns to the north-east as would prevent the French in that quarter from going off to defend Quebec and Crown Point;
• an expedition, starting from Albany, up the Mohawk toward its source, to cross the divide to Oneida Lake, then by the Oswego River to Lake Ontario and the Niagara River;
• an expedition from Fort Cumberland, in Maryland, across Pennsylvania to Fort Duquesne. Braddock himself took command of the fourth expedition.

There was no opposition until his troops had crossed the Monongahela River and had arrived within eight miles of Fort Duquesne. Suddenly they came face to face with an army of the Indians and French. It was not in any sense an ambuscade, but the French and their Indian allies instantly disappeared behind bushes and trees, and poured a merciless and incessant fire into the ranks of the British. Braddock would not allow his men to fight in Indian fashion; therefore they stood huddled in groups, targets for the Indians and the French, till the extent of his loss compelled him to order a retreat. Had it not been for Washington and his Virginians the British force would probably have perished to a man. Braddock, wounded in the battle, died soon afterwards. The expedition against Niagara was a failure. That against Crown Point was partially successful.

The French Government now appeared to see vaguely the great importance of the contest in America. The demands of the European war had kept the French armies employed at home; therefore, no considerable force could be sent to America. The king, however, sent over the Marquess de Montcalm, the ablest French officer that ever commanded on this continent, and there followed for the British two years of disastrous war. Montcalm won over the Indians to the side of France, captured and burned the post at Oswego, and threatened to send a strong fleet against New England. Until the elder William Pitt became influential in the councils of Great Britain, no progress was made against the French. In the year 1758 the strong fortress of Louisburg surrendered to a joint military and naval force under Amherst and Boscawen. In the same year Washington took Fort Duquesne, which was renamed Fort Pitt. Fort Frontenac, on Lake Ontario was destroyed by a provincial officer named Bradstreet. With the loss of Fort Duquesne this second disaster cut off the Ohio country from Quebec.

On 8 July, 1758, General Abercrombie, with an army of at least 15,000 men, made a furious and persistent assault on the strong post of Ticonderoga. The fort was defended by Montcalm with about 3100 men. The battle raged all day in front of Ticonderoga, its outlying breastworks, and its formidable abattis of fallen trees. When the British, under cover of darkness, withdrew, they left behind them 1944 killed, wounded, and missing. The French reported a loss of 377.

In a fiercely contested battle on the plains of Abraham, 13 Sept., 1759, the French were defeated, and Wolfe and Montcalm were among the dead. In the following year Montreal was taken, and the American phase of the war came to an end. In Europe the conflict continued until peace was made at Paris in February, 1763. By that treaty France gave to Spain for her assistance in the war, all that part of the country lying west of the middle of the Mississippi River from its source to a point almost as far south as New Orleans. To Great Britain she surrendered all her territory east of this line.

After the French and Indian War (1759-1774). From the beginning of the inter-colonial wars, in 1689, the Middle Colonies gave assistance to New England in its expeditions against the French strongholds in Canada. When the last conflict broke out the lower states of the south sent troops into Pennsylvania. Some of these served under Washington at Fort Necessity. Whenever troops from the different colonies acted together, as they frequently did, they used the name "provincials" to distinguish themselves from the British troops. There is a popular notion that all the proposals after 1643, when the United Confederation of New England was formed, were suggested by military necessity. In a measure, but not wholly, such necessity was the sole influence tending toward their union. As early as 1660 an agreement was entered into by Maryland, Virginia, and Carolina to restrict the production of tobacco. Even though nothing came of this commercial agreement, it indicates the existence among the colonies of interests other than military. As early as the eighteenth century (1720) Deputy-governor Keith, of Pennsylvania, submitted to the Lords of Trade and Plantations a plan, or a recommendation, for a union of England's North American colonies. In the treatises on the development of the idea of union this document is overlooked. It will be found, however, among the printed papers of Sir William Keith.

The French and Indian war was the prelude to the American Revolution. It trained officers and men for that struggle. During its campaigns the commander-in-chief in the War for Independence acquired his first knowledge of strategy. This War released the colonies from the pressure of the French in Canada and developed in them a consciousness of strength and unity. Besides it gave to the colonies an unlimited western expansion. In this great acquisition of territory is to be found one of the earliest causes of the quarrel with the mother country. Though the provinces had fought for territorial extension, a royal proclamation was issued (1763) forbidding present land sales west of the Alleghenies, thus reserving the conquered territory as a crown domain. Though they did not clearly perceive it, the war had welded the thirteen colonies into one people. It was in this era that there grew up the feeling that this conquered territory did not belong to the Crown but to the colonies collectively. So afterwards, when independence was achieved, it was contended that these western lands did not belong to the respective states but to the union collectively, because the domain had been won by their joint exertions. By the proclamation of 1763 a line was drawn around the head-waters of all those rivers in the United States which flow into the Atlantic Ocean, and west of that line the colonists were forbidden to settle. All the valley from the Great Lakes to the Florida country and from the proclamation line westward to the Mississippi was set apart for the Indians. Out of the conquered territory England created three new provinces: in Canada the Province of Quebec; out of the country conquered from Spain, two provinces, namely, East Florida and West Florida. The Appalachicola separated the Floridas. The land between the Altamaha and the St. Mary's was annexed to the Province of Georgia.

In order to provide for the military defence of the colonies, it was decided to enforce the Navigation Acts. These required:

• that colonial trade should be carried on in vessels built and owned in England or in the colonies, these ships to be manned, to the extent of two-thirds of the crew, by English subjects;
• that important colonial products should not be sent to ports other than those of England. Products or goods not named in a certain list might be sent to any other part of the world;
• if a product exported from one colony to another was of a kind that might have been supplied by England, it must either go to the mother country and then to the purchasing colony, or pay an export duty at the port where it was shipped, equal to the import duty it would have to pay in England;
• goods were not allowed to be carried from any place in Europe to America unless they were first landed at a port in England.

Not unconnected with this measure, perhaps, was an intention of establishing permanently in America a body of 10,000 British troops, for whose maintenance it was decided to provide at least in part by a Parliamentary tax in the colonies. These were among the measures which led ultimately to a division of the empire.

While these measures of Grenville's administration were in contemplation, information of the design of the ministry was received in Boston from the colonial agent in England, who asked counsel in the emergency. In the spring of 1764 a Boston town-meeting gave the subject special consideration. For the guidance of newly-elected members a committee was appointed to prepare instructions. This important work was assigned to Samuel Adams. While motives of policy suggested the language of loyalty and dependence, it is not difficult to see behind these instructions of Adams the spirit of a determined patriot who had long and thoughtfully considered the whole question of the relation of the colonies to the mother country, for he furnished Americans with arguments that never ceased to be urged till the separation from Great Britain was complete.

By drawing into question the right of the Crown to put an absolute negative upon the act of a colonial legislature, the Virginian orator merely revived in another form that struggle against prerogative which with varying success had long been maintained on both sides of the Atlantic. The resolutions of the Boston town-meeting, however, had a different purpose, marking, as they do, the first organized action against taxation.

Trade with the French and the Spanish West Indies not only stimulated the prosperity of the commercial centres in every colony, but was a chief source of wealth to all New England. For the abundant supply of timber standing in her forests, for her fish, and for her cattle, these islands furnished a convenient and profitable market. By the vessels engaged in this extensive trade, cargoes of sugar and molasses were unloaded at Boston and other New England ports. A Parliamentary statute of 1733 had imposed on both commodities a prohibitive duty, which but for the connivance of revenue officers would even then have accomplished the ruin of a flourishing commerce. When this law, after several renewals, was about to expire in 1763, the colonists actively opposed its re-enactment, but Grenville was resolved to improve the finances in his own way, and against the successive remonstrances of colonial agents, of merchants, and of even a royal governor, renewed the act, says Bancroft, in a form "greatly to the disadvantage of America". Commissioners of customs, regarding their places as sinecures, had hitherto resided in England. Now they were ordered at once to their posts; the number of revenue officers was increased, and, to assist in executing the new regulations, warships patrolled the harbours and the coast. These were instructed to seize all vessels suspected of smuggling. Army officers were commanded to co-operate. The jurisdiction of admiralty courts, in which cases were tried without juries, was greatly extended. Both the promise of emolument from confiscated property and the fear of dismissal for neglect of duty sharpened the vigilance of those engaged in enforcing the acts of navigation, and it was soon perceived that their unusual activity and violence threatened to destroy not only contraband, but menaced the very existence of even legitimate, trade. At this time 164,000 sterling was the estimated annual value of the Massachusetts fisheries; and to supply the provisions, casks, and sundry articles yearly required in the business, there was needed an additional capital of 23,700. The importance of this industry may be easily estimated from the extent to which it had been carried by a single community. A rigorous execution of the Act of April, 1764, meant to Americans the annihilation of this natural and legal branch of commerce, for if the planters in the French West Indies could not sell their sugar and molasses, they would not buy fish, and any deficiency or any great irregularity in the supply of molasses would have been fatal to the distilleries of Boston and other New England towns. Ships would have been almost worthless on the hands of their owners, and the 5000 seamen employed yearly in carrying fish to Portugal and Spain would have been without an occupation. The severity of the new regulations, by which property amounting to 3000 was soon swept into prize courts, coupled with the declared intention of raising by imperial authority a revenue for the defence of the colonies, created a constitutional question of the gravest character.

Since 1763, when the war ended, the British Government had time to consider a system of revenue. The importunities of British merchants, who were creditors of American importers, as much at least as a feeling of tenderness for the colonists, influenced Grenville to suspend for almost a year his purpose of laying a stamp duty on America. An expectation of mastering the subject was undoubtedly an additional cause of delay. His purpose, however, remained unchanged, and neither petitions nor remonstrances, nor even the solemn pledges of the colonies to honour as hitherto all royal requisitions, availed to overcome his obstinacy, and on 6 Feb., 1765, in a carefully prepared speech, he introduced his fifty-five resolutions for a stamp act. In the colonies this aroused a bitter spirit; the stamp distributors were induced to abandon their offices by persuasion or intimidation, and delegates from nine colonies met in New York to express disapproval.

Patrick Henry, of Virginia, led the opposition with the resolutions: that the first Virginia colonists brought with them "all the privileges and immunities that have at any time been held" by "the people of Great Britain"; that their descendants held these rights; that by royal charters the people of Virginia had been declared entitled to all the rights of Englishmen "born within the realm of England"; that one of these rights was that of being taxed "by their own assembly"; that they were not bound to obey any law taxing them without consent of their assembly. The Virginia Resolutions were passed 29 May, 1765. This action by the southern colony was followed on the part of Massachusetts by a call for a congress to meet at New York City. This assembly, known as the Stamp Act Congress, began its sessions in New York on 5 Oct., 1765, and was attended by delegates from nine of the colonies. New Hampshire, Virginia, Georgia, and North Carolina were unrepresented. The representatives from six of the nine colonies present (Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, New York, and Massachusetts) signed a "Declaration of Rights and Grievances", setting forth that the Americans were subjects of the British Crown; that it was the natural right of a British subject to pay no taxes unless he had a voice in laying them; that Americans were not represented in Parliament; that Parliament, therefore, could not tax them, and that any attempt to do so was an attack on the rights of Englishmen and the liberty of self-government. The grievances were five in number: taxation without representation; trial without jury (in the admiralty courts); the Sugar Act; the Stamp Act; restrictions on trade.

The "Sons of Liberty" promptly associated for resistance to that measure. At first they demanded no more than that the stamp distributors should resign their offices. Their refusal was the occasion of violence and serious riots. 1 Nov., 1765, was the day fixed for the Stamp Act to go into force. During the next six months every known piece of stamped paper was seized and burned; handbills were posted denouncing the law, and public meetings were called; mobs frequently paraded the streets, shouting: "Liberty, property, and no stamps!" Merchants pledged themselves not to import English goods till the Stamp Act was repealed. These agreements among the mercantile classes were widespread. The effect was to leave on the hands of British exporters goods intended for America. By its restraint on production it threw out of employment multitudes of English labourers. This led English merchants to flood Parliament with petitions calling for the repeal of the Stamp Act. The distress occasioned in England forced Parliament to yield, and in March, 1766, the law was repealed. Both in America and England rejoicings and votes of thanks greeted the repeal.

The term of rejoicing was brief. In England the king as well as his friends conceived for the authors of that conciliatory measure the most bitter dislike, which expressed itself in the driving from power of the supporters of Rockingham, and soon after, under a more compliant ministry, adopting a new form of taxation. At this unexpected course the indignation among the colonists far surpassed the outbreak which marked the first attempt upon their liberties. The new measures of taxation were known as the Townshend Acts:

• the legislature of New York was forbidden to pass any more laws until it had provided the British troops in the city with shelter, fire, and such articles as salt, vinegar, and candles;
• at Boston a Board of Commissioners of the Customs was established to enforce laws relating to trade;
• taxes were laid on glass, painters' colours, lead, paper, and tea.

Though these taxes were not burdensome, they involved the important principle of the right of Parliament to tax people not represented in it, and once more the colonists rose in resistance; again there were non-importation agreements, correspondence between assemblies, and a revival of the Sons of Liberty. For the Massachusetts Assembly, Samuel Adams drafted a circular letter, which was sent to the other colonies. It contained expressions of loyalty, re-asserted the rights of the colonists, and appealed for united action in opposing the new taxes. Many of the legislatures were dismissed or dissolved for their connexion with the circular letter, or for complaining of the unfair treatment of some sister colony.

The proroguing of colonial assemblies became frequent. The Massachusetts legislature was dissolved for refusing to recall the letter. In other words, the king had been defied. He ordered two regiments to Boston to assist the authorities in enforcing the new system of taxation. The people of Boston accused the soldiers of corrupting the morals of the town, "of desecrating the Sabbath with fife and drum; of striking citizens who insulted them; and of using language violent, threatening, and profane". This excited state of feeling led to frequent quarrels between the townspeople and the soldiers, and culminated on 5 March, 1770, in a riot known as the "Boston Massacre". More, perhaps, than anything which had yet happened this event hastened the revolution. A few years later (1773) a considerable quantity of tea which had arrived on ships from England was thrown into Boston Harbour. In Charleston, Annapolis, and Philadelphia also there was determined opposition to receiving the consignments of tea, which, though cheap, yet concealed a tax. When tidings of these events reached England, Parliament determined to punish Massachusetts, and proceeded to pass five laws so severe that the colonists called them the "Intolerable Acts". These were: the Boston Port Bill, which closed the port of Boston; the Transportation Bill, which gave the authorities power to send persons, accused of murder in resisting the laws, to another colony or to England for trial; the Massachusetts Bill, which changed the charter of the province, provided for it a military governor, and prohibited the people from holding public meetings for any purpose other than the election of town officers, without permission from the governor; the Quartering Act, which made it lawful to quarter troops on the people; and the Quebec Act, which enlarged the Province of Quebec to include all the territory between the Great Lakes, the Ohio River, the Mississippi River, and Pennsylvania. When the Puritan element in the colonies found that this law practically established the Catholic religion in the new territory, its traditional feeling of intolerance revived.

The news of these Acts of Parliament crystallized almost every element of union in the colonies. When, in May, 1774, the Virginia legislature heard of the passage of the Boston Port Bill, it passed a resolution that the day when the law went into effect in Boston should be one of "fasting, humiliation, and prayer" in Virginia. For this conduct the legislature was at once dissolved by the governor. Before separating, however, the members appointed a committee to correspond with the other colonies on the advisability of holding another general congress. There was a unanimous approval, and New York requested Massachusetts to name the time and place of meeting. To this request she agreed, selecting Philadelphia as the place, and 1 Sept., 1774, as the date. The Congress assembled in that city on 5 Sept. It included delegates from all the colonies except Georgia, and hence is commonly known as the First Continental Congress. It adopted addresses to the king, to the people of the colonies, of Quebec, and of Great Britain; passed a declaration of rights, summing up the various Acts of Parliament which were believed to be violative of those rights. This body had met, of course, in virtue of no existing law. In other words, it was a revolutionary assembly, though it assumed revolutionary functions slowly. In the matter of the petition it ignored Parliament; it prepared Articles of Association, to be signed by people everywhere, and to be enforced by committees of safety. The members of these committees were to be chosen by the inhabitants of the cities and towns. The articles bound the people to import nothing from Great Britain and Ireland, also to export nothing to those countries. Henceforth the Committees of Safety were to perform an important service in promoting the Revolution. On 8 Oct. the Congress adopted the following resolution: "That this Congress approve the opposition of the inhabitants of the Massachusetts Bay to the execution of the late Acts of Parliament; and, if the same shall be attempted to be carried into execution by force, in such case all America ought to support them in their opposition." Before the Congress adjourned it was ordered that another Congress should meet on 10 May, 1775, in order to consider the result of the petition to the king. It then adjourned.

When the king and his friends heard of the proceedings of the Congress, they were more determined than ever to make them submit. On the other hand, the friends of the colonists exerted themselves to promote conciliation, but neither the influence of Pitt nor the eloquence of Burke could alter the resolution of the king's party. The ultimatum of the First Continental Congress led to considerable military activity. When it was seen that force would be met by force, the people began to arm. As was generally foreseen, the conflict between the people and the royal forces occurred before the meeting of the Second Continental Congress. An encounter was likely to occur anywhere, but most likely to take place in Massachusetts. Up to the meeting of the First Continental Congress there were in America thirteen local governments. From that time there came into existence a new body politic, with aims and with authority superior to the local governments. These several governments had actually formed a new state. The Declaration of Independence was merely an announcement of an established fact.

NATIONAL HISTORY

War of the Revolution. When the Stamp Act was passed, the Congress which assembled acted as an advisory rather than as a legislative body. Perhaps the chief result of its meeting was that it accustomed the colonists to the idea of union. This feeling was confirmed when the First Continental Congress convened (1774). On 10 May, 1775, the Second Continental Congress assembled. By that time the notion of union was much more familiar; besides, the military phase of the war had begun three weeks earlier. Tidings soon came of the taking of Ticonderoga by a force under Ethan Allen. This was the key of the route to Canada. Thus far the chief object of the Americans had been to secure a redress of grievances. Independence was advocated by nobody, and a little earlier John Adams said that it would not have been safe even to discuss it. However, events moved rapidly. Separation was discussed, and on 4 July 1776 a Declaration of Independence was adopted by the Congress, which had already become a revolutionary body. It had ceased to be an advisory assembly, and for some time had been exercising the powers of a national government. A constitution, entitled "Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union", was proposed, but it was not until March, 1781, that it was adopted by all the states. For the conduct of the war in which they found themselves engaged they were wretchedly prepared: they had no money, no system of taxation, no navy.

Early in the war Congress sent to Canada a commission to win over its people to the side of the insurgent colonists. This body included Benjamin Franklin, Samuel Chase, and Charles Carroll. A cousin of the last-named, Rev. John Carroll, accompanied the commission to assist in promoting its patriotic purpose. By virtue of the Quebec Act the Canadians were enjoying religious liberty, and they must have wondered what they could gain from an alliance with a people who considered that measure of toleration as a ground of reproach to England. As to the enlargement of the Province of Quebec, already noticed, the people of Canada must have been somewhat indifferent. These and other considerations led them generally to adopt a policy of neutrality. The presence in the American army of one or two small battalions of Canadians did not to any considerable extent affect the sentiments of the French population. During the progress of the war their loyalty was often suspected by British officials, perhaps not without cause.

Under General Montgomery an army also was sent into Canada. A co-operating force under Benedict Arnold reached Canada by way of the Kennebec River and the Maine wilderness. Montgomery had won several small advantages, but the joint attack on Quebec, 31 Dec., 1775, resulted in his death, in the wounding of Arnold, and the defeat of their forces. Then was begun a disastrous retreat toward the State of New York. Either this step of Congress or the plans of the British War Office led to a counter invasion. A force under St. Leger, moving by way of Oswego and Fort Stanwix (Rome), was intended to create a diversion in favour of the main army under Burgoyne, which was advancing leisurely from Canada. With these two commands Clinton was expected to co-operate along the line of the Hudson. St. Leger"s army was defeated or dispersed, and, instead of co-operating with Burgoyne, General Clinton had gone off to attack Philadelphia. A detachment from Burgoyne"s army was defeated at Bennington, Vermont. This event left nearly all New England free to act on Burgoyne's line of communications. After two severe battles he surrendered, near Saratoga, on 17 Oct., 1777, his entire army of nearly six thousand men. Thus ended the struggle for the possession of the Hudson. The event influenced France to form an alliance, Feb., 1778, with the young Republic.

After the commission had returned from Canada, several agents were sent to represent the United States in Europe, and Franklin's ability had much to do with the establishment of friendly relations with France. When in March, 1776, Washington drove the British from Boston, he brought his army southward and occupied New York and Long Island. That portion of his force in Long Island met with disaster in the following August. To avoid capture, he turned northward, crossed the Hudson, entered New Jersey, and passed over into Pennsylvania. From his camp in that state he surprised a regiment of his pursuers at Trenton, 25 Dec., 1776, recrossed to Pennsylvania, and early in the following year again encountered the enemy at Princeton. This ended the first stage of the struggle for the Delaware. Cornwallis gradually retired towards New York.

In the West, Colonel George Rogers Clark took Kaskaskia, 4 July, 1778. The influence of Father Pierre Gibault, its parish priest, enabled Clark speedily to recruit two companies at that place and in the neighbouring settlement at Cahokia. A generous loan by François Vigo enabled him to complete his equipment for the march on Vincennes, which, after terrible hardships, was surprised and taken. These were the first steps in the winning of the West. That term included the region now covered by Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and a part of Minnesota. In this great achievement of Clark's, Catholics acted a very praiseworthy part. When that commander arrived at Kaskaskia, he was not unexpected; the terms of enlistment of many of his men had already expired, and in the battalions with which he marched to Vincennes there was a great preponderance of Catholics. In the conquest of that place he was also assisted by the inhabitants of the town. Indeed he felt encouraged during the entire campaign by the friendship of the Spanish governor beyond the Mississippi.

When General Clinton should have co-operated with Burgoyne he set out for the conquest of Philadelphia, the capital of the new union. Transporting his army by the Atlantic and Chesapeake Bay, he landed in Maryland, marched towards Philadelphia and, after defeating Washington's army on the Brandywine, occupied the capital. Though the fighting around Philadelphia was not decisive, the patriot army, as shown in the engagement at Germantown (Oct., 1777), was improving in efficiency. To defend the Continental military stores, as well as to menace Philadelphia, Washington went into winter quarters at Valley Forge. It is unnecessary to repeat the familiar story of the sufferings of the patriot army. One thing, however, was accomplished during that terrible winter. The little army of Washington was rigorously drilled by the German volunteer, Baron Von Steuben. Thereafter the Continentals were a match for the best-drilled troops of England. In the spring of 1778 there was a rumour that a French fleet had sailed for the Delaware. This consideration, together with the improvement in the condition of Washington's army, persuaded the British to return across New Jersey to New York City. During this march a severe engagement occurred at Monmouth Court House, N. J., 28 June, 1778. It was only the treachery of General Charles Lee that prevented Washington from winning a more complete victory.

The alliance with France has been noticed. The operations of its fleet at Newport are popularly regarded in America as having been somewhat useless. As a matter of fact, the activity of the allies put the British on the defensive at the very moment that they had decided to wage aggressive war. At an early stage Beaumarchais had forwarded military supplies to the United States. After Feb., 1778, his government loaned large sums of money ($6,352,500), used its armies wherever the opportunity offered, and into every quarter of the globe, even into the Indian Ocean, sent its warships to fight England.

When New England and the Middle States were believed to be lost, the British endeavoured to win back the South. This policy brought Cornwallis into the Carolinas. After a crushing defeat of one of his subordinates at King's Mountain he retired into Virginia, watched by the vigilant General Greene. That officer had been sent South to reorganize and to command the army that had been ruined by the incapacity of General Gates. While he won no great victories, Greene found himself a little stronger after each engagement; the discipline and the equipment of his army also were constantly improving. He succeeded in drawing Cornwallis farther and farther from his base of supplies on the coast. The posts forming Cornwallis's line of communication were successively surprised by partisan bands commanded by such officers as Marion, Sumter, and Pickens. With Greene's army growing stronger, the independent forces more bold, and his own force melting away, nothing appears to have been left for Cornwallis but to fortify himself in Virginia. His army with a smaller force under Arnold (who had deserted to the British) destroyed much private property in that state. A small force under General Lafayette had been sent by Washington to watch the movements of the enemy. It was about this time that there arrived from Europe a great French fleet under the Count de Grasse, perhaps the most powerful armament that had put to sea since the days of the Spanish Armada. It defeated a great British fleet off the capes of the Chesapeake and gave Washington the opportunity for which he had yearned. It then approached the position of Cornwallis at Yorktown. Meanwhile the commander-in-chief was hurrying southward from New York with his own army and a fine French army under General Rochambeau to join the force under Lafayette. Further to embarrass Cornwallis, a French force under the Marquess Saint-Simon was landed. The allied armies under Washington promptly began the siege of Yorktown, which ended, 19 Oct., 1781, in the surrender of the army of Cornwallis. Thus ended the military phase of the War for Independence, and thus culminated a party struggle that had long been in progress on both sides of the Atlantic. The Whigs, whether English or American, had been endeavouring to diminish the power of the king; the Tories, both English and American, would preserve that power unimpaired. The Whig opposition in England and lreland finally forced George III to apply to Russia for troops, and, when they were refused, to hire Waldeckers, Brunswickers, and Hessians. Besides these foreign soldiers there was in America a large number of Loyalists or Tories. These fought in the armies of the king, and when the war was over, because of the hostility of the patriots, settled in England or in Canada.

When the Revolutionary War began, there were few Catholics in the United States. Perhaps their number did not exceed 26,000. However, members of that faith were to be found on all her borders, and everywhere they were either neutral, as were many in Canada, or friendly, as in the Spanish colonies around the Mexican Gulf and in the French settlements of the Illinois country. The services of the latter have been noticed, while those of the Spaniards of New Orleans would require much space to describe. The reader who desires to examine this neglected phase of the Revolution will find ample materials in the unpublished papers of Oliver Pollock, on file in the Library of Congress. It is well known that Spain declared war against England (1779) and loaned money to the United States. It is known also that the Dutch Republic was friendly to America and that among all the Netherland elements who favoured its independence Catholics were conspicuous. During the progress of the war Frederick the Great had urged the United Provinces, as he had urged France, to join in the war against England. The withholding by George III of the subsidy that had formerly been granted to Prussia incensed its ruler against his former ally.

It has been stated that the colonies were wretchedly prepared for engaging in war with the mother country. In July, 1775, it was voted to issue due bills for 2,000,000 Spanish milled dollars to be sunk by taxes in four successive years, beginning 30 Nov., 1779, the taxes to be levied and collected by the states in proportion to population. These bills Congress petitioned the states to make legal tender. Indifferent ways and at different times this was done, and before 4 July, 1776, $9,000,000 in due bills were out. To distinguish it from the issues of the states this was called "Continental" currency. From this time forward fiat money got possession of the American people, and by 1779 the issues amounted to $242,000,000 in a single year. By 1781 the whole mass became worthless.

Up to this time the fatal error was the belief that the credit and currency of continental money could be maintained by acts of compulsion. From this delusion, which affected governments, state and national, few persons were exempt. By October, 1779, Boston was on the verge of starvation; money transactions had nearly ceased, and business was done by barter. In May, 1779, there was a mutiny of certain Connecticut regiments on account of bad pay. In January, 1781, there was a mutiny of the Pennsylvania Line for the same reason. In that disturbance the soldiers killed a captain who tried to bring them to submission. This is not so much to be wondered at when one learns that $7.00, the monthly pay of an enlisted man, dropped by depreciation to .33. Before Washington could move his army to Yorktown it was necessary to give the soldiers their back pay. To do this, Robert Morris had to borrow hard money from Rochambeau. In March, 1780, there was outstanding $200,000,000 of continental money. Congress declared this to be worth forty dollars for one dollar of a "new tenor". In other words, of that entire amount Congress repudiated all but $5,000,000. The "old tenor" fell to 500 to 1 in Philadelphia, when it ceased to circulate. To complete the misfortunes of this experiment, counterfeiters successfully imitated the issues of Congress and hastened the death of paper money. Then hard money sprang to life, and was abundant for all purposes. Much had been hoarded and great quantities had been brought in by the armies and navies of both France and England. As early as 1779 Congress attempted the expedient of specific supplies. Requisitions were made upon the states for meat, flour, forage etc. Because of the defective system of transportation, and for other reasons, it became necessary to abandon this resource. The impressment of horses, wagons etc. was perceived to be dangerous and was soon given up. The income of the Continental Treasury from 1775 to 1783 was $65,863,825. This was received from domestic loans, foreign loans, taxes, paper money, and from miscellaneous sources. Outstanding certificates of indebtedness amounted to $16,708,000. Besides these sums, the total cost of the war included the expenditures of the several states.

The Confederation and the Constitution. Though prepared soon after independence was declared, the "Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union" were not adopted until 1781, when the war was nearly won. This was due chiefly to the opposition of Maryland, which refused to confederate until states having western lands should cede them to the Union; as it was claimed that all such lands had been held only by the joint exertion of the states. Under the Articles all measures of government were directed to the states as corporations; there was no national executive; the Congress was a body of only one chamber; the states paid, and had the power to recall, their delegates; in theory it was difficult to amend this constitution, and in practice it had proved impossible; finally there was no efficient system for obtaining a federal revenue. In other words, the government under the confederation had no independent income, but depended entirely upon the contributions of the various states. These defects soon produced consequences so alarming that the leading patriots brought about a constitutional convention which attempted to amend the fundamental law. When this was found to be impossible, they framed a new constitution of government (1787). This provided for a national executive, a national legislature, and a national judiciary; also for a simpler method for its own amendment. It gave to Congress the power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises for federal purposes.

The Congress was further empowered to borrow money on the credit of the United States; to establish a uniform rule of naturalization and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States; to coin money and regulate the value thereof; to regulate commerce with foreign nations, with the Indian tribes, and among the several states. To the National Legislature was also given power to declare war; to maintain and equip an army and a navy; to exercise exclusive legislative power over such tract as may, by cession of particular states become the capital of the United States; to make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory and other property of the United States. The body vested with the powers just enumerated was a bicameral one. In its upper house (Senate) each state has two senators, while in the lower house each has representatives in proportion to population. The House of Representatives is merely a legislative body. The Senate, on the other hand, performs a threefold function. Primarily it assists the house in making laws; in ratifying treaties or confirming nominations to office it performs executive functions; in trying an impeachment it acts as a judicial body. The duration of a session of Congress is two years, the term for which representatives are elected. Senators are chosen for a term of six years. In construing an act of the National Legislature one is to assume that it has no power to pass such act unless the authority is conferred by the Constitution, or may be fairly derived from some grant of powers enumerated therein. In examining the constitutionality of a state law one is to assume that the state legislature has power to pass all acts whatever, unless they are prohibited by the Constitution of the United States or by the constitution of the state.

Under the Articles of Confederation there was no national executive. The Constitution, however, vests the supreme executive authority in a President of the United States, who, with a vice-president, is chosen for a term of four years. Both officers are chosen by an electoral college. In this college each state has a number of electors equal to its whole number of senators and representatives in Congress. Originally the electors of president and vice-president looked over the country and selected some distinguished public character for each office. In a little while, however, they ceased to exercise such discretion, and nominations for both the presidency and vice-presidency were made in congressional caucuses. The contest of 1824 brought this method into disfavour. Thereafter, for a brief period, many of the states nominated some favourite son. An evident disadvantage of this system was the great number of candidates, of whom none was likely to receive, as the Constitution requires, a majority of all the votes cast. About 1831 there began to take shape the present system of a national nominating convention. In this extra-constitutional institution the states are represented according to population, each sending twice as many delegates as it has senators and representatives in Congress. The District of Columbia, the Territory of Alaska, and some of the insular possessions are also entitled to send delegates. To obtain the nomination in a Republican National Convention a majority of the delegates is sufficient, whereas in that held by the Democratic party a two-thirds vote is necessary.

Presidential electors are chosen on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November of every fourth year. No person except a natural-born citizen is eligible to the office of president or of vice-president. The president shall be commander-in-chief of the army and navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states when called into the actual service of the United States. He has power to grant reprieves and pardons for all offences against the United States, except in cases of impeachment; by and with the advice and consent of the Senate he has the power to make treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur. In addition to these powers he can nominate, and, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the United States Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States whose appointments are not otherwise provided for in the Constitution. He is empowered to convoke Congress in special session and to dissolve that body when the two houses are unable to agree upon a time for adjournment. Like other civil officers, the president and vice-president may be removed from office on impeachment for and conviction of, treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanours.

By the Constitution the judicial power of the United States is vested in a supreme court, and such inferior courts as the Congress may, from time to time, ordain and establish. In order to secure the independence of the judiciary the judges of both the supreme and inferior courts hold their offices during good behaviour, and, for their services, receive a compensation which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office. The judicial power is commensurate with the legislative, and extends to all cases, in law and equity, arising under the Constitution, the laws of the United States, and the treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority. It also extends to cases affecting foreign representatives (ambassadors, ministers, and consuls), to cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, to controversies to which the United States shall be a party, to controversies between two or more states, etc. In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be a party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all other cases it possesses appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions and under such regulations as Congress shall make.

In addition to the division of political power among the three departments mentioned, the Constitution also provides for inter-state comity. For example, it is provided that full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. It also provides that the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states; for the return of fugitives from justice and for the admission of new states. By the Constitution the United States is required to guarantee to every state in this Union a republican form of government, and to protect each of them against invasion, and, in certain circumstances, against domestic violence. Amendments to the Constitution may be proposed by two-thirds of both houses of Congress or by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states. Amendments proposed in either manner become valid as parts of the Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three-fourths of them. Congress is empowered to propose the method of ratification. The schedule provided that the ratification by conventions of nine states should be sufficient for the establishment of this Constitution between the states ratifying the same.

Owing to the opposition to its adoption, especially in Virginia and New York, it was agreed by the friends of the Constitution that a bill of rights should be added to it. Accordingly, many amendments were proposed; these were grouped under ten heads, familiar as the first ten amendments, and known to students of the Constitution as the Bill of Rights. The eleventh amendment, declared a part of the Constitution in 1798, interprets a part of Article III, and prevents the citizens of a state from suing another state, or a foreign citizen or subject from bringing suit against one of the states. The twelfth amendment, which became a part of the Constitution in 1804, makes a change in the method of choosing a president. It made the ballot of the elector more definite, and in case the election went into the House of Representatives, it restricted the choice of that body to the three candidates highest on the list. The remaining amendments, the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth, grew out of the Civil War. Contrary to a popular notion, the framers of the Federal Constitution had had considerable experience in the making of constitutions before they set about the establishment of their crowning work. Shortly after independence was declared, the states were advised to prepare constitutions of government. All complied promptly, except Rhode Island and Connecticut, both of which retained their liberal colonial charters. The establishment of any state religion is prohibited by the Constitution. The regulation of charities, education, marriages, land tenures, religious corporations, etc., about which it says nothing, is reserved, by inference, to the various states.

The period from 1783, when the definitive treaty of peace was signed, until 1789, is known as the critical era of American history. The federal government was in distress; many of the states were on the verge of civil war. Relations, external and internal, were highly unsatisfactory. Indeed, the situation was worse than at any time during the progress of military operations. When George III, for himself and his successors, acknowledged the independence of the United States, the several commonwealths, claiming to be sovereign, adopted policies more or less selfish. This disposition begot a number of domestic quarrels. In addition to dissension at home, foreign relations were not too harmonious. The young republic had nearly forfeited the confidence of its own citizens, and was beginning to incur the contempt of the world outside. It was these alarming symptoms that forced upon a few leaders the idea of amending the fundamental law. When, however, the Constitution was submitted to the people, a majority of them appeared to oppose its adoption. This opposition was overcome by the influence and activity of the leading patriots. In this great work the services of Washington cannot be overestimated. His brilliant lieutenants, Hamilton and Madison, ably supported his efforts in conventions and in the Press. The names of the friends of the Constitution would make a considerable list, and no list would be complete. Of course, all those who signed the instrument worked for its adoption. The Constitution also had friends who were not members of the Convention. Among the ablest and the most useful of these was Pelatiah Webster, an able student of public finance and of constitutional systems. In 1788 the proposed Constitution was ratified by the requisite number of states (nine), and on 4 March, 1789, the first Congress assembled under it. Much of its time and energy was devoted to considering means for improving the public credit and to organizing the various departments of government. In this work Congress was greatly assisted by Alexander Hamilton, Secretary of the Treasury. On 30 April, 1789, General Washington had been inaugurated president. John Adams had been chosen vice-president. Internal relations and external relations were speedily improved by the wisdom of Washington. The measures of his administration soon established domestic tranquillity and general prosperity.

Starting the Government. In his exercise of the appointing power Washington observed the greatest care. His nominations to office were remarkable for their accuracy. He set an example, however, which none of his successors has seen fit to imitate. He appointed to the most important position in his cabinet Thomas Jefferson, the head of an opposition which a little later assumed more definite form. Ultimately Hamilton and Jefferson quarrelled, and both resigned from the administration. Hamilton, however, had done his work. His report on manufactures, a remarkable document, and one still consulted by statesmen, among other things justifies the tariff policy then adopted. Measures involving a still broader construction of the Constitution were enacted. One was the organization of the First United States Bank. To its establishment there was social, sectional, and constitutional opposition. There was also considerable hostility toward the measure for assuming the Revolutionary debts of the states. The enactment of these laws was chiefly responsible for the rise of a new political party, the Republican party of Jefferson, The revenue system established by Congress led to an insurrection in western Pennsylvania. That outbreak was suppressed in 1794 by sending the militia of New Jersey, Maryland, and Virginia, and some troops of Pennsylvania, into the troubled region. This indicated the energetic policy that was adopted by the new government. Armies under Generals Harmer and St. Clair were defeated by the Miamis. In 1795, after their defeat by General Wayne, the tribe made a cession of nearly the whole of Ohio. In 1794-95 John Jay, Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, negotiated a very unpopular treaty with Great Britain. After the people of France had put their king and queen to death, President Washington issued his Neutrality Proclamation, thus taking the first step in the foreign policy of the United States. Though Washington was honoured by a second election, his administration continued to be attacked with considerable energy and great bitterness. After enacting the laws referred to, tracing the foreign policy of his country, and organizing its departments, Washington determined to retire from public life. Before doing so he issued his "Farewell Address". Washington"s refusal of a third term was, perhaps, not unconnected with the attacks upon him by the coarse journalists of that time.

John Adams, who had served two terms as vice-president, was chosen to succeed Washington. His majority over Jefferson, who was elected to the vice-presidency, was very slight. An effort of this administration to negotiate a commercial treaty with France resulted in the celebrated "XYZ" correspondence. In portions of the country there was opposition to the new taxes. A graver problem with the administration was the question of dealing with those citizens and resident aliens who attacked the president and the members of his administration. The Alien and Sedition Laws were designed to meet the emergency. By a majority of the people the Sedition Law was regarded as a violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and of the Press. By the legislatures of Virginia and Kentucky these measures were criticised, and the latter came near to proclaiming nullification as the rightful remedy. Madison was the author of the Virginia resolutions, while Jefferson prepared those passed by Kentucky. These resolutions connect with the Hartford Convention, Nullification, and Secession. In the third presidential election the administration was embarrassed by the taxes necessary for building up a navy, by the Alien and Sedition Laws, and by dissension among the Federalist leaders. Hamilton attacked President Adams with great severity, and contributed to the defeat of the Federalist party, of which he had been the intellectual head.

Early Political Parties. In the Constitutional Convention at Philadelphia there were many discrepant elements. We are now concerned with only two, viz., those who favoured the foedus, or union, under the proposed system and those who opposed it. The former were known as Federalists, the latter as Anti-Federalists. When the Constitution was finally adopted, the Anti-Federalists became "strict constructionists" and the Federalists "loose constructionists". President Washington had generally acted with the Federalists. Adams also belonged to that party. It was during his presidency that Congress enacted the celebrated Alien and Sedition Laws. These measures were unpopular, and, combined with the attitude of the Federalists during the War of 1812, led to their complete overthrow. They had organized the government and given it its tendency, but after the administration of Adams they became little more than a party of protest. In 1800 the followers of Jefferson, then known as Republicans, won the presidency. They had previously obtained control of Congress. At that time the conflict in progress between England and France divided the American people on the question of foreign relations. The Federalists, who were strongest in New England, favoured England, while the Republicans generally sympathized with France, the late ally of the United States. After the War of 1812 party lines had been almost effaced. President Monroe was practically the unanimous choice of the American people. The rivalry of Andrew Jackson and Henry Clay led, after 1829, to the rise of a new political party. The followers of Clay were known as Whigs, those of Jackson as Democrats. Clay and his friends favoured internal improvements at federal expense, and the continuance of the United States Bank, an institution first chartered by the Federalists. They also favoured a tariff for protection. These principles formed what is known as the "American" system. Of course, the Whigs were "loose constructionists" of the Constitution. To these principles the Democrats were opposed. That organization is generally regarded as being identical with the Jeffersonian party. William Henry Harrison, the first Whig president, served for one month. His successor, Vice-President Tyler, though an admirer of Henry Clay, was a "strict constructionist". Again in 1848 the Whigs elected General Zachary Taylor and Millard Fillmore. This was their last victory. Their attitude toward the Fugitive Slave Law impaired their popularity, and in 1852 they met with a crushing defeat. In 1856 a new organization, composed chiefly of anti-slavery elements nominated Fremont and Dayton, the first candidates of the Republican party. They were defeated. After 1860, however, they won all the presidential elections except those of 1884 and 1892, when Grover Cleveland, the Democratic candidate, was chosen. The third parties, generally parties of moral ideas, will be noticed presently.

Territorial Accessions. After 1800 the successive acquisitions of territory are to be noticed. In point of time the Louisiana Purchase, in 1803, came first. This was acquired from France after she had lost the important colonial possession of Hayti, and when Napoleon had decided to renew the war with England. Florida was acquired from Spain in 1821, when the United States surrendered any claim they may have had to the Texan country. At that time and by the same purchase the United States succeeded to Spain's rights in the Oregon country. Having achieved her independence from Mexico, Texas was annexed in 1845 by a joint resolution of both Houses of Congress. The constitutionality of that act has been challenged. The settlement of the Oregon dispute was a contemporary event. To that country America had several distinct titles. Oregon was claimed by right of Captain Gray's discovery of the Columbia River, which he named after his ship; when President Jefferson had bought Louisiana he sent Lewis and Clark to explore that region; in 1811 the fur-trading station Astoria was established there. The right acquired with the purchase of Florida has already been mentioned. These claims, reinforced by American occupation, ultimately gave the vast Oregon country to the United States. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848), which concluded the war with Mexico, gave to the United States an immense region in the southwest. This included the whole of California, Nevada, Utah, a small part of Wyoming, more than a third of Colorado, and considerable portions of Arizona and New Mexico. In 1853 the Gadsden Purchase from Mexico completed the boundary of the United States in that region. Alaska was purchased in 1867 for $7,200,000 from Russia. In our own time (1899) Porto Rico and the Philippine archipelago were acquired, as a result of the war with Spain. Less important insular possessions in the Pacific (Hawaiian Islands, Guam, Samoan Islands) were also acquired about this time.

Foundations of Foreign Policy. The Neutrality Proclamation of President Washington has been mentioned. A second important step in the development of America's foreign policy was taken in 1823 when President Monroe sent to Congress his annual message. Between 1816 and 1822 a revolutionary government had been established in each of the Spanish colonies from the Rio Grande to Cape Horn. Upon due consideration, the United States had acknowledged their independence. After the overthrow of Napoleon the Holy Alliance had restored absolutism on the continent of Europe. The project was then considered of restoring to Spain her lost dependencies in South America. England, however, was opposed to such intervention. Her attitude was chiefly determined by the profitable commercial interests which had sprung up since the overthrow of Spanish dominion in that region. It was in these circumstances that Canning, the British Minister of Foreign Affairs, proposed to Dr. Rush, the United States Minister in England, that the two powers issue a joint declaration against the proposed intervention of the Holy Alliance. Another element in the situation was the attitude of Russia, which had been establishing trading posts in the North-West. It was feared that she would endeavour to extend her dominion farther down the coast. John Quincy Adams, Secretary of State, protested against this action, and informed the Russian Minister that the United States would assume the position that the American continents were no longer open to future colonization by European nations.

President Monroe sought the advice of ex-Presidents Jefferson and Madison, and was encouraged by both in the stand which he was about to take. In his message to Congress, Dec., 1823, the president, in speaking of America's foreign policy, said that hitherto the United States had not interfered in the internal affairs of the Allied Powers; that "We owe it, therefore, to candor and to the amicable relations existing between the United States and those powers, to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power we have not interfered, and shall not interfere. But with the governments who have declared their independence and maintained it, and whose independence we have, on great consideration and just principles, acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them or controlling in any other manner their destiny, by any European power in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition towards the United States". And, "It was impossible that the Allied Powers should extend their political system to any portion of either continent without endangering our peace and happiness; nor could any one believe that 'our Southern brethren', if left to themselves, would adopt it of their own accord. It was equally impossible, therefore, that we should behold such interposition in any form with indifference". The part of the message referring to Russia declared that "occasion has been judged proper for asserting, as a principle in which the rights and interests of the United States are involved, that the American Continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintained, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European power". These announcements of the president have since been collectively known as the "Monroe Doctrine". When these bold declarations were made, the United States felt confident of the support of Great Britain. Their joint navies would have made it impossible for the Allied Powers to conduct any military operations in the western hemisphere.

Sectional Conflict. In the Constitutional Convention (1787) it was clear that the North and the South had interests which were somewhat different. Notwithstanding this fact, they agreed upon a fundamental law by adopting a number of compromises. In the endeavour to administer the government other compromises were adopted between 1789 and 1860 when the Southern States were convinced that further compromises would be useless. It has already been stated that one form of opposition to the establishment of the First United States Bank was sectional. It was regarded as a Northern measure; was supported chiefly by Northern members of Congress, and received few votes from the South. In 1820 the difference between the sections assumed a very different form. At that time it was bound up with the institution of slavery. In 1818 the Territory of Missouri applied for admission into the Union as a state. That application had not been acted upon in 1819 when Representative Tallmadge, of New York, proposed an amendment to the effect "that the further introduction of slavery or involuntary servitude be prohibited, and that all children of slaves born within the said state after the admission thereof into the Union shall be free at the age of twenty-five". This raised an important constitutional question, namely, whether under the Constitution, Congress had the power to impose conditions upon the admission of new states which were not imposed by the Constitution on the original states. The amendment of Tallmadge passed the House, but failed in the Senate. The discussions on the anti-slavery amendment created the greatest excitement throughout the country. The matter was finally settled by the first of the great compromises between the sections. Missouri was admitted without any restrictions upon slavery, but in all other territory north of its southern boundary (36 30' N. lat.) slavery was prohibited forever. Bound up with this controversy was the application of the District of Maine, which since 1691 had been a part of Massachusetts. Maine was admitted as a free state, thus preserving in the United States Senate the balance between the two sections. The Missouri constitution contained a provision excluding free negroes. This was a palpable violation of the Federal Constitution, which guarantees to the citizens of each state the privileges and immunities of citizens of the several states. This part of the controversy was set at rest by the influence of Henry Clay. It was provided that this discrimination of the Missouri constitution would not be enforced. This ended the first controversy over the question of slavery. In the division of the Louisiana Territory thus effected, the North gained much more territory than the South.

Grave as was the constitutional question that arose on the application of Missouri for admission to the Union, that which grew up about 1830 was much more alarming. After the war of 1812 the successive Congresses enacted tariff laws. So great was the opposition to that which was passed in 1828 that it was called the "Tariff of Abominations". The feeling between the sections showed itself when Senator Foote, of Connecticut, introduced a resolution proposing an inquiry as to whether or not it was desirable temporarily to suspend the sale of public lands, excepting such as were already surveyed. It also proposed to abolish the office of surveyor-general. Senator Hayne, of South Carolina, chose to regard this as a manifestation of the Eastern jealousy of the West. He made Foote's resolution the occasion of a general and energetic attack upon New England and a pretence for expounding the doctrine of nullification. By "nullification", in American history, is meant the claim by a state of the right to suspend within her own territory the operation of any act of Congress which the state deems injurious to her own interests. Hayne's brilliant oration was replied to by Webster (1830) in, perhaps, the greatest speech ever delivered in the Senate. It has been said that Webster took ground on a position toward which the greater part of the nation was steadily advancing, that is in the direction of nationalism. Hayne's sentiments found favour in the South alone. The theory which he had championed South Carolina soon sought to put into practice. In 1832 Congress passed a new tariff law, which omitted many of the objectionable features of the Act of 1828, though it still contained the principle of protection.

In South Carolina, where the objection to the law was strongest, the governor convoked the legislature in special session. That body issued a call for a state convention to meet at Columbia 19 Nov., 1832, and on 24 Nov. there was passed by that convention the famous Ordinance of Nullification. This declared the tariff law null and void so far as concerned South Carolina, forbade the payment of duties after 1 Feb., 1833, and prohibited appeals arising under the law from being taken to the United States courts. If Congress attempted to reduce the state to obedience, South Carolina would regard her connexion with the Union as dissolved. The legislature passed several laws to carry the ordinance into effect. Among them was an act that provided for placing the state on a war footing for the purpose of resisting the authority of the United States. Another act provided a test oath for all officers of the state, by means of which Union men were to be excluded from holding positions of honour or trust under South Carolina. President Jackson, who had been re-elected in 1832, does not appear to have been alarmed at the condition of affairs in South Carolina. He instructed the collector of customs at Charleston to perform the duties of his office, and, if necessary, to use force. He also issued an address to the Nullifiers. In it he urged them to yield; he likewise told them that "the laws of the United States must be executed. . . . Those who told you that you might peacefully prevent their execution deceived you. . . . Their object is disunion, and disunion by armed force is treason". When Congress met in December, 1832, the president wanted the passage of an act giving him power to collect tariff duties by force of arms. A great debate followed on this measure, which was known as the Force Act. Speaking for the South, Calhoun asserted the right of a state to nullify acts of Congress deemed injurious to her interests, and also the right to secede from the Union. Webster denied the right of nullification and secession, and upheld the Union and the Constitution. Henry Clay, fearing a civil war now came forward with a compromise. He proposed that the tariff of 1832 should be reduced gradually till 1842, when on all imported articles there should be an ad valorem duty of twenty per cent. This Compromise Tariff became a law in March, 1833. A second convention met in South Carolina, and repealed the Ordinance of Nullification.

The acquisition of territory from Mexico led to another great controversy between North and South, or rather between the free and the slave states. In August, 1846, President Polk asked Congress for $2,000,000 "for the settlement of the boundary question with Mexico". Mexico had abolished slavery long before (1827), and David Wilmot of Pennsylvania moved that the money should be granted, provided that neither slavery nor involuntary servitude should exist in any territory that might be acquired from Mexico. The bill passed the House of Representatives, the Southern members voting almost solidly against it; in the Senate it never came to a vote. When finally the measure did pass, the Wilmot proviso was stricken out. Later it was sought to attach this anti-slavery provision to other bills. While it did not pass, it aroused the most bitter feeling in the South. At a meeting of Southern members of Congress an address written by Calhoun was adopted and signed, and then circulated throughout the country. Among other things it complained of the constant agitation of the slavery question by the Abolitionists. In 1849 the legislature of Virginia adopted resolutions of which one declared that "the attempt to enforce the Wilmot Proviso" would rouse the people of Virginia to "determined resistance at all hazards and to the last extremity". The Missouri legislature also protested against the principle of the Wilmot proviso. One of the toasts at a dinner to Senator Butler, in South Carolina, was "A Southern Confederacy". Besides this general Southern opposition to the Wilmot proviso, that section complained of the difficulty of recovering slaves who had escaped to the free states. In almost every part of the South there was a demand that the territories be opened to slavery. Some of the legislatures contended that the abolition of the slave trade in the District of Columbia would be a direct attack on the institutions of the Southern States.

In the North, public sentiment was not less excited. The legislatures of the free states, except Iowa, resolved that Congress had the power and was in duty bound to prohibit slavery in the territories. Many states instructed their congressmen to do everything possible toward abolishing the slave trade in the District of Columbia. When Congress met in December, 1849, it had serious business on hand. It then seemed as if the Union were about to be broken up, and that in its place there were to be two republics—one composed of free states and one made up of slave states. As in the excitement of 1832, so now again Henry Clay came forward as a peacemaker. In his patriotic task he was assisted by both Webster and Calhoun. Several bills were at last passed by Congress. Collectively they are known as the Compromise Measures of 1850. By this treaty between the sections it was provided that California be admitted as a free state, and that the slave trade, but not the institution of slavery, be prohibited in the District of Columbia. These bills were agreeable to the North. The measures in which the South was interested were: territorial governments for Utah and New Mexico without any restriction on slavery; and the payment to Texas of $10,000,000. for abandoning her claim to considerable neighbouring territory, and for having surrendered her revenue system to the United States at the time of her annexation. The measure in which the South was most interested, however, was a more stringent law for the return of fugitive slaves. During the debates on the measure, President Taylor died (9 July, 1850). He was succeeded by the vice-president, Millard Fillmore. A law relative to the return of fugitive slaves had been passed in the administration of President Washington (1793). The new law empowered United States commissioners to turn over a coloured person to anybody who claimed him as an escaped slave. It also provided that the negro could not give testimony. It further provided that all citizens, when summoned to do so, were required to assist in the capture of the slave, or, if it seemed necessary, in delivering him to his owners. Any citizen who harboured a fugitive slave or prevented his recapture was liable to fine and imprisonment. The Compromise of 1850 was expected to last forever. As we shall see, it became the very seed-plot of graver troubles. Slave catchers in great numbers invaded the North and hunted up negroes who had escaped twenty years, or even a generation before, and with the assistance of the United States marshals took them back to slavery. Both the free negroes and the whites in the North interfered with the officers in the performance of their duties. In this way many negroes regained their liberty. Disturbances occurred in many Northern cities, and some negroes were restored to their owners only after enormous expense. Northern States began promptly to pass Personal Liberty bills, for the protection of negroes who were claimed as slaves. In the South these laws were regarded as a violation of the Compromise.

Slavery Controversy. In colonial America slavery was general in the English possessions. In the South nearly all the unskilled labour was performed by negro slaves; in the North much of that work was done by a class of men known as "Redemptioners". For the latter class there was a prospect of entire freedom and even of social importance. For the most part the negro was doomed to toil forever; he had no hope of freedom and, perhaps, scarcely dreamt of wealth. When the War of Independence began, negro slavery existed in all the rebellious colonies. For economic and other reasons negroes were not numerous in the North. In the diversified industries of that section slave labour was not regarded as efficient. In the South, on the other hand, life was largely agricultural. On the large plantations the negro could be employed to advantage. His mind was adapted to the simple operations required in the tobacco and rice fields, while his body was well suited to its semi-tropical climate. There he thrived in spite of malaria. While the South was the section peculiarly interested in the institution of negro slavery, the North was not less interested in importing them from Africa. In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson in his indictment of George III charged him, among other counts, with "suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or restrain this execrable commerce". In so doing he had "waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights in the person of a distant people who had never offended him". Out of deference to the wishes of some Southern delegates in Congress, especially those from South Carolina and Georgia, Jefferson's denunciation was stricken from the final draft of the Declaration.

In the North the principles of 1776 were applied early. In 1777 Vermont, whose territory was still claimed by both New Hampshire and New York, adopted a constitution which declared that no person ought to be held as a slave after attaining to the age of maturity. In 1780 Pennsylvania enacted that the children of slaves born after that date should be free. A principle of the Massachusetts constitution of 1780 was interpreted by the supreme court of that state as abolishing slavery. In 1783 New Hampshire, and in 1784 Connecticut and Rhode Island all adopted measures looking to the gradual emancipation of their slaves. New York and New Jersey came later. At the time of the adoption of the Constitution (1785), slavery had almost disappeared in the North. Even in parts of the South it was unpopular. The great patriots and statesmen of Virginia, Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Mason, and others, hoped to see the institution quietly disappear. The Constitution recognized the existence of slavery and permitted the importation of negroes until 1 January, 1808. It also provides that in a census of the people three-fifths of the negroes be counted. This provision gave rise to two systems of enumeration. For state purposes every human being was counted, that is, if he were an inhabitant. For Federal purposes all whites were counted, three-fifths of the negroes, and any Indians who paid taxes. Thus the population of the state was not the same as its "Federal numbers". At the same time that the Constitution was being framed, the Continental Congress enacted the famous Ordinance of 1787. Section 6 forever prohibits slavery in the territory north-west of the Ohio River. This measure was re-enacted by the Congress under the Constitution.

When benevolent people and wise statesmen of the South expected the gradual extinction of slavery, the invention of the cotton gin created an industrial revolution in that section. Slavery became a source of extraordinary profit and was soon regarded as an economic necessity. Thereafter cotton-raising became the chief industry of the South. There was an immense demand for negroes, and all thought of emancipation was forgotten. The Constitution conferred upon Congress no authority over the subject of slavery except in the territories and in the District of Columbia. After the admission of Maine as a free state, almost to the time of the Civil War, slave states and free states were admitted to the Union alternately. This preserved a sort of balance between the two sections. The American Colonization Society was organized at Washington in 1817. The object of this association was to organize settlements on the western coast of Africa for free negroes who would volunteer to go thither. During the forty years ensuing, 8000 emancipated blacks emigrated to Africa. The promoters of this society, whose officers were largely Southern men, were disappointed in the slender success of the movement. At that time there were a number of abolition societies in the South, though very few in the North. After 1829 abolition societies began to be organized in the North. These demanded the extinction of slavery not only in the territories but in the states. Periodicals appealing to this constituency and endeavouring to win converts were now undertaken from time to time.

Among the pioneers in this movement was one Benjamin Lundy, a New Jersey Quaker. He had resided in East Tennessee, whence he removed to Baltimore. In that city he published the "Genius of Universal Emancipation". There also he made the acquaintance of William Lloyd Garrison. The hostility of the pro-slavery element compelled them to leave the city. In 1831 Garrison began publishing the "Liberator" in Boston. The "Liberator" denounced the slaveholders as criminals, and demanded the immediate emancipation of slaves throughout the United States. As a defensive measure it was excluded from circulation in the South. While the effect of Garrison's teachings was feared in the slave states, they were not very acceptable in Boston. In 1835, while addressing an anti-slavery meeting at the City Hall, he was taken from the building and dragged through the streets with a rope about his body. For personal safety it was necessary to lodge him in jail. As a result of Garrison"s teachings anti-slavery societies were formed in the North. The first of these was the "New England Anti-Slavery Society", organized in 1831. A few years later a national organization was formed in Philadelphia. The membership of these early anti-slavery organizations included Wendell Phillips, Gerrit Smith, Emerson, Dr. Channing, Theodore Parker, Henry Ward Beecher, and other persons equally well-known. Anti-slavery meetings were often dispersed by Northern mobs. A Connecticut teacher, Miss Crandall, who opened her school to negro girls, was thrown into jail, while her school was broken up by the mob. An Illinois Abolitionist editor, Rev. Elijah P. Lovejoy, was killed by a pro-slavery mob.

In 1831 occurred in Southampton County, Virginia, the Nat Turner insurrection, when the slaves rose against their masters and massacred sixty persons. In the South this was ascribed, without much reason, to the influence of Abolitionist literature. Large rewards were offered, below Mason and Dixon's Line, for the delivery of the prominent anti-slavery leaders. Northern legislatures were called upon to suppress the Abolitionist societies by law. They continued, however, to flood the South with their literature, and appear to have seriously expected to convince the slave-holders of the evils of human servitude. The South demanded the exclusion from the mails of this obnoxious literature, but the postmaster-general claimed that he had no authority to exclude objectionable matter from the mails. In the summer of 1835 the people of Charleston took the matter into their own hands, intercepted the mails, seized the Abolitionist literature and made a public bonfire of it. The House of Representatives refused to receive petitions in any way relating to slavery, or rather voted to lay them on the table. In Congress ex-President John Quincy Adams acted as the spokesman of the Abolitionists. In the brief space of four years he presented two thousand anti-slavery petitions. The more the House endeavoured to discourage such petitions, the more active became the Abolitionists. That body therefore on 28 Jan., 1840, declared that "no petition, memorial, resolution or other paper praying for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia or any State or Territory, or the slave trade between the States and the Territories of the United States in which it now exists, shall be received by this House or entertained in any way whatever". About twenty members from the free states supported this resolution. For a long time petitions poured into the House praying for the repeal of the "gag rule", but it was not until 1844 that this was done.

In 1840 the Abolitionists nominated James Gillespie Birney a Southerner, as their first candidate for the presidency. He received 7000 votes. Four years later (1844) 62,000 voters supported another Abolitionist candidate. When it is remembered that many of the anti-slavery party were so radical that they refused to participate in such contests, their increase in numbers must have convinced the South that they were destined soon to be a menace to slavery. In Congress the discussion of slavery aroused much bitterness, and henceforth that issue coloured almost every question in the tide of events. Slavery had been recognized by the Constitution, but that instrument gave to Congress authority over the subject only in the District of Columbia and in the territories, and it was not until vast areas had been acquired by the United States that Southern statesmen perceived any danger to their own section in such agreements as the Compromise on the admission of Missouri. After the acquisition of the South-West from Mexico, they insisted that the restriction of slavery in the territories was a discrimination against those Southern citizens who were interested in the institution. The territories were open to the citizens of the North with their property; why not allow the citizens of the South the same privilege? To this the North replied that negro slavery was a moral wrong and ought to be restricted rather than extended. The civilized world, said that section, has condemned slavery as an evil. If, then, the institution could not be abolished, it should not be further extended. Moreover, if the citizens of a commonwealth could take into one of the territories all the kinds of property recognized by the laws of that commonwealth, the citizens of other states could insist upon the same privilege. In this case everything would be property in one of the territories which was so regarded in any one of the states. This is entirely inconsistent with any Congressional regulation of the subject. Perhaps not more than one-third of the Southern people were interested in the institution of slavery, but the large slave-holders formed a powerful aristocracy. Though in number they may not have exceeded 10,000, they were influential enough to name governors, congressmen, and state legislators, and for a time to determine important questions of foreign and domestic policy. In the South their opinions were not often questioned. In many of the Southern States it was forbidden to teach slaves to read and write, but oftentimes the more humane masters taught them the meaning of the Scripture and even the elements of knowledge. Naturally the influence of the more intelligent among the negroes was feared. Southern statesmen of the generation before the Civil Wax expressed opinions that are not now held in that section.

The Kansas-Nebraska Bill. From the results of the presidential election of 1852 the Whig party never recovered. The great Democratic victory of that year is generally ascribed to the attitude of that party toward the Compromise measures, especially its position on the Fugitive Slave Law. Though in the beginning it met with much opposition, that act was now enforced quietly. When Franklin Pierce was inaugurated, 4 March, 1853, the nation was enjoying something like a state of tranquillity. The new president apparently believed that the slavery agitation had permanently sunk to rest. In the midst of this repose a measure was introduced into Congress which plunged the nation into a sectional strife more bitter than any which preceded it. Stephen A. Douglas, of Illinois, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Territories, introduced a bill to organize a government for that part of the Louisiana Territory between Missouri and the Rocky Mountains. Senator Douglas has been accused of having been influenced by his personal ambition. He could have added to his popularity by assisting in the acquisition of Cuba, a project agreeable to the South, but he was not in the president's cabinet. In the way of increasing his popularity he could have made himself acceptable to that section by a better tariff law, but he had little talent for mathematics or economics. The position which he occupied, as Chairman of the Committee on Territories, he proceeded to turn to account. He maintained that the part of the Compromise of 1850 referring to Utah and New Mexico established "certain great principles", which were intended to be of "general application". In his second bill it was provided that the country mentioned would be divided into two territories, one to be called Kansas and the other Nebraska. It expressly repealed that section of the Missouri Compromise restricting slavery, and opened up to slavery territory which was already free soil.

The true intent and meaning of this act, said the law, is, "not to legislate slavery into any territory or state nor to exclude it therefrom, but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States". There began at once a seven years' struggle for Kansas. From the North the free state men and from the South the slave state men rushed into Kansas and began a struggle for its possession. The slave State of Missouri promptly attempted to colonize the new territory, and settled at a place which was called Atchison in honour of a pro-slavery Senator of Missouri. On the other hand, the North was not idle. The New England Emigrant Aid Society sent a band of free state men, who settled west of Atchison at a place named Lawrence. Strife began in November, 1854, at the election of a territorial delegate to Congress. Armed bands of Missourians crossed the border into Kansas, took possession of the polls, and, though they had no right to vote, elected a pro-slavery delegate. According to the principle of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill the people dwelling in the territory were to decide whether it should be a free or a slave territory. Therefore each side endeavoured to elect a majority of members to the territorial legislature. The election took place in March, 1855. As election day approached, armed Missourians entered Kansas "in companies, squads, and parties, like an invading army, voted, and then went home to Missouri". In this manner was elected a legislature of which every member save one was a pro-slavery man. It promptly adopted the slave laws of Missouri and applied them to Kansas. The free state men repudiated this legislature, held a convention at Topeka, and made a free state constitution, which they submitted to popular vote. Pro-slavery men refrained from voting but the free state people ratified the proposed constitution. Later they elected a governor and a legislature. When that body assembled, senators were elected, and Congress was asked to admit Kansas into the Union.

The old leaders of the Whig party, Clay and Webster, were dead, but that organization lost not only leaders but thousands of voters in the free states. As early as 1841 a state convention in Louisiana founded the Native American or Knownothing party. The Kansas-Nebraska Act and its execution led to a breaking up of the old political parties. As early as 1854 there was formed a new organization established on anti-slavery principles. The new party, named Republican, was joined by Free-soilers, Whigs, and anti-Nebraska Democrats. The first National Nominating Convention of this party (1856), its candidates, and some of its principles have been noticed in the sketch of political parties. In that election the Democratic nominees, Buchanan and Breckinridge, were chosen. Whigs and Knownothings then disappeared from national politics. In his inaugural address President Buchanan referred to a forthcoming decision of the United States Supreme Court, which would set at rest the slavery agitation. This was in the case of Dred Scott v. Sanford. The question in this celebrated case was whether a slave became free if taken by his master to, and permitted to reside in, a free state. The opinion of the majority decided;

• that Dred Scott was not a citizen, and therefore could not sue in the United States courts. His residence in Minnesota had not made him free;
• that Congress could not exclude from the territories slave property any more than other sort of property;
• the Missouri Compromise of 1820 was null and void. The dissenting opinion of Justice Curtis in this case was destined to become the legal basis of the Thirteenth Amendment.

The effect of this decision was to split the Democratic party in the North and to attract great numbers of anti-slavery men to the new Republican organization. In Kansas the struggle between free-state and slave-state men continued, the administration giving its support to the latter. To this era belong the celebrated joint debates between Senator Douglas and Abraham Lincoln for the United States senatorship for the State of Illinois. The legislature which was to elect a successor to Senator Douglas was itself to be chosen in 1858. One candidate was an advocate of squatter sovereignty, the other was opposed to the extension of slavery into the territories. Before the people of seven towns in their state the rival leaders discussed their respective platforms. Though Lincoln was defeated for the United States Senate, his remarkable speeches made him a national character and won for him the Republican nomination in the great contest for the presidency in 1860. In that era John Brown, who hated slavery and who had opposed it in Kansas, settled on the Maryland side of the Potomac River not far from Harper's Ferry with about twenty followers. In October, 1859, they seized the United States armoury at that town and freed a number of slaves in its vicinity. The negroes did not rise as Brown had expected; his force was soon overpowered by United States troops; Brown himself was captured, tried for treason against the State of Virginia, and convicted of promoting a servile insurrection. In December, 1859, he was hanged. In some localities of the North there was sympathy for his fate, but other communities looked on with indifference.

To many people in America the administration of President Buchanan appeared to be perfectly tranquil. Nevertheless, there were at work unseen but powerful forces. As we have seen, as early as 1832 there was talk of disunion; after 1850 the notion of secession became familiar. In 1860 the excuse for this step was the election of Abraham Lincoln, the candidate of the Republican party who was regarded by the South as a sectional candidate, now a sectional president-elect. The party to which Lincoln belonged was a minority one. Indeed, there were cast against him almost a million more votes than were cast for him. In the Presidential contest of 1860 Breckinridge and Lane expected the support of the Southern States; Douglas was the choice of the Northern Democrats. The Constitutional Unionists nominated Bell and Everett. It was this split in the Democratic party that made possible, in November, 1860, the election of Abraham Lincoln and Hannibal Hamlin.

The Legislature of South Carolina, which had assembled for the purpose of appointing electors of president and vice-president, called a convention, which met at Charleston on 20 Dec., 1860, and passed an ordinance of secession. According to the Southern theory, this act severed the relations of that state with the Union. Other states followed her example, and in Feb., 1861, at Montgomery, Alabama, organized the Confederate States of America. A provisional constitution was adopted, and agents were sent into other Southern States to persuade them to join the slave-holding confederacy. At different dates until May, 1861, other commonwealths cast their fortunes with the new government. In all, the seceding states numbered eleven. The President of the Southern Confederacy was Jefferson Davis, of Mississippi; Alexander H. Stephens, of Georgia; was chosen vice-president. The constitution differed but slightly from the Constitution of the United States. Its preamble stated that the Confederate States acted in their sovereign and independent capacity.

Civil War. While the people of the South were organizing a government, President Buchanan did nothing to preserve the Union. In his view the states had no right to secede, but, if they did so, there was no authority conferred by the Constitution of the United States to prevent such action. On 4 March, 1861, Lincoln took the oath of office as president and delivered a very temperate address, in the course of which he stated that he had no purpose to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it existed, and he believed that he had no lawful right to do so. Nevertheless, he had formed a resolution to enforce the laws and to protect the property of the United States. It was in his endeavour to carry out this policy that the great Civil War began. In their eagerness to extend their authority over the entire South the Confederate officials decided to seize Fort Sumter, which was the property of the United States. On 12 April 1861, a considerable army under General Beauregard began its siege. The little garrison under Major Anderson was compelled to surrender. The first important battle between the sections took place at Bull Run, Virginia, 21 July, 1861, when the same Confederate general defeated the Union army under General McDowell. For the conflict thus inaugurated the South, which had long been preparing, was much better equipped than was the North. After looking into the law and consulting the precedents, President Lincoln in a proclamation called forth the militia of the several states.

The policy adopted in Washington was to divide the Confederate States along the line of the Mississippi, to blockade their ports and to take their capital, which had been removed to Richmond after the secession of Virginia. The Confederates won another battle, at Ball"s Bluff, in Oct., 1861. Meanwhile a large army was being brought together at Washington. This was placed under the command of General George B. McClellan, who later advanced toward Richmond from Yorktown. In May, 1862, his army was close to the Confederate capital. Thereafter occurred heavy fighting until the beginning of July. Later in the season the Union forces were again defeated near the old Bull Run battle-ground. This succession of victories persuaded General Robert E. Lee, then in command of the Army of Northern Virginia, to make his first invasion of the North. On 16-17 Sept., 1862, he was defeated at Antietam by a superior Union force under General McClellan, and compelled to retreat into Virginia. The approach of winter found him occupying a strong position in the vicinity of Fredericksburg. There he was attacked by General Burnside, who had superseded McClellan in the command of the Federal army Lee inflicted immense loss on his opponents, and in May, 1863, at Chancellorsville won perhaps a still greater victory. These advantages effaced every recollection of his defeat at Antietam, and induce him to make another invasion of the North. During May and June, 1863, his victorious troops marched leisurely through Virginia and Maryland, and during the first three days of July following fought at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, the greatest battle of the New World. The defeat of General Lee by General George G. Meade, the Commander of the Army of the Potomac, was a disaster to the South, and marked the turning-point of the war. General Lee never again commanded so splendid an army; in fact the Confederacy could not furnish one. Perhaps a greater military leader than Meade would have annihilated the remnant of the Army of Northern Virginia before it arrived at the Rappahannock a second time. As it was, Lee escaped and was able to protract the struggle for more than another year. When the war was renewed in Virginia, Lee and his famous captains were opposed to Generals Sheridan and Grant.

The mention of these officers reminds one of the progress of the Federal armies in the West. The problem of opening up the Mississippi was begun in the south by General Benjamin F. Butler in command of an army, and Commodore D. G. Farragut, who co-operated with a powerful fleet. In April, 1862, New Orleans was permanently occupied by the Federals. Farther north the river had been freed from Confederate control by the victories of General Pope, General Grant, and Commodore Foote. The capture of Forts Henry and Donelson brought Grant"s army into the heart of Tennessee and led to the flight of its legislature to Memphis, where the Confederates still had a foothold. Later that general directed his attention to the remaining obstacles to the free navigation of the Mississippi, namely Vicksburg and Port Hudson. However, his first movements were not altogether successful. Sherman and some of his other officers met with reverses. In fact, there was little in the first attempts that would lead one to foretell a glorious conclusion of the campaign. Grant decided to run past the batteries at Vicksburg; landed a large army below that place, and in the interior of Mississippi defeated both Pemberton and Johnston, the Confederate commanders. The army of the former general, over 37,000 strong, which was forced into the city of Vicksburg, surrendered on 4 July, 1863. This loss occurring on the day after the great defeat at Gettysburg was too much for the resources of the South. Within about five days Port Hudson also fell into the hands of the Federals, and the Mississippi was open from its source to the Gulf.

A large Union force under General Rosecrans was stationed near Murfreesboro, Tennessee, where also was the Confederate General Bragg with a fine army. In that vicinity was fought one of the great battles of the war. Bragg was defeated 31 Dec., 1862, and 2 Jan., 1863, and was finally forced to enter Georgia, where he was greatly strengthened. On 19 and 20 September, 1863, these armies fought at Chickamauga the most desperate battle that had yet taken place in Tennessee. The military genius of General George H. Thomas saved the Union army from destruction after Rosecrans had left the field. Though his fame was to come later, even here Sheridan displayed great ability. Though still in command, Rosecrans remained inactive, and pressed the administration for reinforcements. When it was feared that he would surrender the army, President Lincoln sent General Grant to the headquarters of Rosecrans; Sherman came later with a small force. As we have seen, Sheridan and Thomas already belonged to that army. General Hooker was sent west from the Army of the Potomac, which was following Lee. This was the only occasion during the war when nearly all the great Union commanders took part in any battle. The Federal cause had the benefits of their services at Missionary Ridge and Lookout Mountain, 23-25 Nov., 1863. In these great battles Bragg, after much loss, was forced into Georgia, where his command was turned over to General Joseph E. Johnston. He retreated slowly toward Atlanta, followed by Sherman and Thomas. Grant and Sheridan came east; the former, commander-in-chief of all the Federal armies, took up his headquarters with Meade's army, while the latter was given an independent command in West Virginia. This brought him later into the Shenandoah Valley, where he destroyed a fine Confederate army under General Early during the summer and autumn of 1864.

After winning a number of small battles from Johnston, who had continued to retire before him, Sherman finally reached Atlanta. There his command was energetically attacked by General J. B. Hood, who had superseded Johnston. The aggressive system of the new leader destroyed an excellent army and left the State of Georgia at the mercy of Sherman's veterans. To draw the Federal commander away from the interior of the commonwealth, Hood entered Tennessee, intending, no doubt, to alarm the people of the Middle West by a demonstration of force in the direction of the Ohio River. This policy, however, failed to divert Sherman from his purpose of marching to the sea and destroying en route whatever would be of value to the Confederate armies. This was very thoroughly, Southern people think ruthlessly, done. By December, 1863, Sherman captured Fort McAllister, and later made President Lincoln a Christmas present of Savannah. As he marched northward through the Carolinas, General Hardee hurried away from the city of Charleston lest his little army might be captured. When Hood invaded Tennessee, Sherman left Thomas to deal with him. In an evil hour for the Confederacy, Hood threatened Thomas at Nashville. The Union commander came from behind his defences, captured the Confederate guns and soldiers behind their intrenchments and annihilated Hood's army. After this, all the available troops in the lower South were entrusted once more to General Johnston. Great though that officer's genius undoubtedly was, it was not sufficient to sustain the declining fortunes of the South. Grant had begun at the Wilderness 4 May, 1864, his advance toward Richmond and Petersburg. Sheridan, as already stated, had destroyed the army of Early in the Shenandoah Valley, and of his own account joined the great army under Grant. In the beginning of 1865 there was an attempt to end the war by a conference of Southern statesmen and President Lincoln, with his Secretary of State, at Hampton Roads, Virginia. Nothing came of this attempt. The South made an expiring effort, but its resources were exhausted. Grant forced Lee out of Richmond; he was hurrying toward the western part of Virginia, and was compelled at Appomattox Court House to surrender the remnant of his small army. Grant was in his rear and Sheridan squarely in his path. The end, which had long been foreseen, came on 9 April. Less than three weeks later Johnston surrendered to Sherman near Raleigh, North Carolina. The small Confederate forces still in arms soon dispersed or surrendered.

The Confederate navy was built chiefly in England. Cruisers equipped in that country inflicted much damage on American commerce, and for her failure to refrain from these indirect acts of hostility Great Britain was later compelled to pay the United States the sum of $15,500,000. This was distributed among those American citizens whose property and ships had been destroyed by vessels of the class of the "Alabama", the "Florida", and the "Shenandoah". For a time England refused to pay any attention to the demands of the United States, but finally entered into a treaty, and consented to leave the settlement of the matter to an arbitration court, which convened at Geneva in 1872, with the result mentioned. These vessels inflicted great damage on American commerce, and British officials in the Bahamas, the Bermudas, and the West Indies permitted ships known as blockade runners to land immense quantities of English goods in Southern ports. This had much to do with the desperate resistance of the South. The Federal navy, however, was efficient, and during the war captured or destroyed 1504 ships engaged in this perilous trade. In the beginning of the conflict the South built ironclads like the "Merrimac," and destroyed many of the wooden ships of the United States navy. After 1862 the Federal Government began to construct a new type of warship known as "Monitors", which were found effective in coping with the Southern ironclads, and resulted in the maintenance of the blockade of the Southern ports. The first of those so named was invented by an engineer named Ericsson, also the inventor of the screw propeller. When the war began, the vessels of the United States navy were scattered over the globe.

Reconstruction. When the Virginia secession convention decided to support the Confederate States, the citizens in the western part of the "Old Dominion" took steps to establish a loyal state of Virginia. A governor was chosen, senators and representatives were elected, and finally admitted to seats in Congress. The new commonwealth, which was called West Virginia, was proclaimed a member of the Union, 20 June, 1863. As soon as Tennessee was beginning to slip from the hands of the Confederacy, President Lincoln appointed Andrew Johnson as military governor of that state. Immediately after his arrival in Nashville he began to organize the Union elements, and took steps toward the building up of a loyal state government. He also exerted himself to persuade men to enlist, and after providing them with arms sent them to the front. His attempts to establish a government friendly to the United States were constantly interrupted by Confederate armies. It was during the severe fighting in that state that the president issued his proclamation of amnesty and reconstruction. He sought to apply the same system to the States of Arkansas and Louisiana. His plan of restoring loyal governments in those states was as follows: a duly qualified person was to take a census of those who were willing to take an oath of allegiance to the United States. lf their number was equal to ten percent of the voters of the state in the presidential election of 1860, they were empowered to take steps toward the formation of a loyal government. This nucleus would be recognized by the president as the state, and would receive the protection of the army and navy of the United States while they were organizing it. Of the states reconstructed according to this plan only Tennessee was recognized by Congress. On this important subject the National Legislature was not in harmony with the executive, and after the assassination of President Lincoln, that body soon disagreed with his successor, Andrew Johnson. When the 39th Congress met in December, 1865, it refused to admit to the seats which they claimed those senators and representatives who came from states reconstructed under the direction of President Johnson during the preceding summer. Instead the Congress appointed a joint committee, which was empowered to inquire into the condition of the states recently in rebellion, and determine whether any of them were entitled to representation in Congress.

On 18 Dec., 1865, the thirteenth amendment was proclaimed a part of the Constitution. This abolished slavery in every part of the United States. The president's proclamation, which became operative on 1 Jan., 1863, had freed the slaves only in the seceding states, and of them certain parishes of Louisiana, a few counties in Virginia and the entire State of Tennessee were excepted. There was also a doubt in the minds of some lawyers as to whether the proclamation of President Lincoln, which was issued as a military measure, was perfectly valid. To free the slaves everywhere in the Union, and to set at rest the scruples of constitutional lawyers, it was deemed necessary to make this change in the fundamental law. The Joint Committee suggested the submission to the states of the fourteenth amendment. This, which was adopted in July, 1868, nationalized citizenship, disfranchised certain classes who had participated in rebellion, and prohibited the payment of the Confederate debt. To entitle a state to restoration in its former place, these amendments had to be adopted. Those states that did not do so promptly were required to adopt still another amendment, the fifteenth, which in effect gave the freedmen the franchise. Mr. Lincoln would have conferred the suffrage upon the more intelligent of the negroes and those who had fought gallantly in the Union ranks. Beyond that he was not prepared to go. The enfranchisement of the entire body of males twenty-one years and over among the freedmen was the result of the adoption by Congress of a plan of reconstruction very different from that of Mr. Lincoln. It was shaped to a great extent by Charles Sumner and Thaddeus Stevens. In pushing their measures through Congress they were constantly opposed by President Johnson, who was a Democrat and a "strict constructionist" of the Constitution . When he violated the Tenure of Office Act, he was promptly impeached of high crimes and misdemeanours. The managers of the impeachment lacked one vote of the two-thirds necessary to convict. One by one the erring states returned. The Congressional plan of reconstruction provided for a division of the South into eleven military districts, and the establishment in each of troops commanded by a major-general. Far earlier there had been established a Bureau of Freedmen Refugees, and Abandoned Lands. The army and the Freedmen's Bureau assisted in preserving order during the interval up to the spring of 1877, when the last of the Federal troops were withdrawn from the South. This was the end of the era of Reconstruction. It is impossible even to estimate the destruction of wealth that had resulted from four years of war, or the confusion that succeeded.

Burdens of War. In the administration of President Jackson the public debt of the United States was about $37,000. By 1861 it had risen to $90,000,000. The total revenue was then only $41,000,000 a year. When the war began it was necessary to adopt a method more productive. Early in the conflict Congress increased the duties on imports; imposed a tax of 3 percent on all incomes over $800; created an internal revenue; taxed trades, professions, occupations, and even sales and purchases. From such sources there was collected between 1862 and 1865 the sum of $780,000,000. By reason of its constitutional authority Congress borrowed money "on the credit of the United States" by selling bonds. The extent to which advantage was taken of this grant of power will be apparent from the fact that between 1 July, 1861, and 31 Aug., 1865, there was sold to the people of the United States $1,109,000,000 worth of bonds, to raise money to carry on the war. United States notes, bearing interest, were issued to the amount of $577,000,000. There were also notes bearing no interest. These included the "old demand notes", the "fractional currency", and the "national bank notes". Though the amount of money paid out in the course of the war was immense, there was a public debt of $2,845,000,000 on 31 Aug., 1865 Besides the Federal debt there were state debts of almost $500,000,000. A generation after the war had passed away the National Government was still paying out annually in pensions from $150,000,000 to $160,000,000, at that time about one-third of its entire expenses. At the distance of half a century from the beginning of the great conflict vast sums are still paid in pensions to the disabled survivors and the dependents of deceased Union soldiers. It has been estimated that 300,000 men lost their lives in the war for the Union. In the cause of secession the loss of life must have been quite as great, and the amount of suffering very much greater, because the South, in the era preceding the war, obtained almost everything in the way of manufactures from the North or from Europe. The outbreak of the rebellion found the people within the Confederacy almost destitute of the skill or the machinery to make the goods which they consumed, and the stringent enforcement of the blockade by the United States ships soon caused embarrassment ever where in the South. Instead of healing the wounds of war the Congressional plan of reconstruction, which contained vindictive elements, served only to aggravate them. It was, however, believed to be necessary, and was, therefore, supported by patriotic and enlightened men in the North.

New States. The south-western part of the United States was acquired from Mexico at the close of the Mexican War. California, which was included in that cession and admitted to the Union as a free state by a provision of the Compromise of 1850, rapidly developed. The rumour that gold had been discovered there was soon known throughout the world, and from the countries and the islands of the Pacific there arrived many settlers. From Mexico and from every part of the United States came multitudes. The rush was greatest in 1849, but it continued long after. Indeed, it has been only in comparatively recent times that it has nearly ceased. Even yet some of its rapidly growing cities receive large accessions from the older states. In 1858, ten years after the discovery in California, tidings reached Missouri that gold had been found on the eastern slope of the Rocky Mountains. A mining camp was soon established on Cherry Creek, in what was then the Territory of Kansas. Later it was named Denver, in honour of the governor. Within a year the place had a population of 1000. In the interior of the mountains some silver-mining camps were in 1864 erected into the State of Nevada. In the space between that state and the Territory of Colorado the Mormons after having been driven out of Illinois, settled in 1848, when they established the community of Deseret, later known as Utah. Montana and Idaho, as well as Colorado were made territories, while Arizona was separated from New Mexico. In 1876 Colorado became a state; The camp on Cherry Creek, Denver, is now a populous city.

On 2 Nov., 1889, the Dakotas came into the Union as states; Montana was admitted on 6 Nov., and three days later the Territory of Washington became a state. In 1907 Oklahoma was admitted as the forty-sixth state. In 1912 Arizona and New Mexico were admitted as states. The accession of new states suggests the territorial expansion of the original Union. It does not, however, give one a definite idea of the national increase in population, in wealth, and in power since 1789.

End of Reconstruction. The two administrations of President Grant formed a period of recuperation and industrial progress. His second term was marked by much corruption in the bureaus of the general government. This condition may have been due to his training, which was chiefly military. Perhaps it was this limitation that enabled dishonest men to win his confidence. During the war the Democratic party formed a very small minority in Congress, but it was strong enough to watch the opposition and to take note of the political scandals. Just at that moment this minority party came under the leadership of Samuel J. Tilden, of New York. With great ability as a lawyer and an unquestioned record as a reformer, he was influential enough to persuade his party to accept the Civil War amendments of the Constitution. In the summer of 1876 he was nominated for the presidency. At the same time Thomas A. Hendricks, of Indiana, was nominated for the vice-presidency. Two weeks earlier the Republican national nominating convention had named Governor R. B. Hayes, of Ohio, and William A. Wheeler, of New York, as its candidates for the presidency and vice-presidency, respectively. On 6 Nov. the election took place, and on the following morning most of the Republican leaders conceded the election of the Democratic candidates. Zachariah Chandler, the campaign manager of the Republican party, did not, however, admit it, but promptly claimed for the nominees of his party 185 electoral votes, and their election by a majority of one vote. On the face of the returns it appeared that the Democratic candidates had carried all the Southern States; also New York, New Jersey, and Indiana. There was no question that Tilden received 184 votes, or one less than the majority required by the Constitution. The 185 claimed by the Republican manager could be made up only by including the electoral votes of Florida, South Carolina, and Louisiana. The Republican "returning boards" of those states had it in their power to determine the result of the election by throwing out the votes of any places where, in their judgment, fraud or intimidation had occurred. One of the Republican electors of Oregon was said to have been disqualified under the Constitution, because he was an officer of the United States. The governor gave the certificate in this case to the Democrat having the highest vote. If Tilden could get this disputed vote his election was assured. This disqualification was merely a technical one, for the Republicans had undoubtedly carried that state.

It seems to have been otherwise in the case of the three Southern States. The constitution says that the presiding officer of the Senate "shall open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted", but it does not say who is to do the counting. In 1876 the Senate was Republican and the House was Democratic. Two sets of certificates had been sent to Washington. In November and the months following there was much excitement throughout the country, and some persons thought of attempting to seat Mr. Tilden by force. To suppress any disorder, President Grant strengthened the military forces around the capital. In this action the Democrats perceived an attempt at intimidation. So grave was the situation that Congress decided to submit the disputed points to an Electoral Commission. This was to consist of five United States senators, five representatives, and five justices of the United States Supreme Court. There were three Republican and two Democratic senators; the House had appointed three Democratic and two Republican representatives. Congress had elected two Republican and two Democratic justices, and they were to choose a fifth. It is perfectly clear that this member could determine the entire question. Mr. Justice Bradley, a Republican, was the person chosen. This made up a commission of eight Republicans and seven Democrats. Every important question before the Commission was decided by a strict party vote. By many independent persons it is regarded as an established fact that the Democrats had been counted out in the election of 1876 by "carpet baggers" and the negroes, who were under their guidance. On 2 March the election of Hayes and Wheeler was announced by the president of the Senate. Amongst Democrats there was extreme disappointment, but Mr. Tilden himself advised obedience to the law.

An early act of the new president, often referred to by orators and newspapers as a fraudulent Executive, was the withdrawal of the Federal troops from the South. The "carpet bag" governments soon came to an end, and also the wild political orgies that disgraced them. This also was the era of strikes, Chinese agitation, and epidemics. Before the administration of President Hayes began, an important question of foreign relations was settled. In 1861 Great Britain, Spain, and France each sent an army to Mexico to collect debts due their respective subjects. When it became apparent that Napoleon III had ulterior designs, Great Britain and Spain withdrew. The French troops remained. Seeing that the United States was engaged in war, Napoleon overturned the Mexican Republic and made Maximilian, a brother of the Emperor of Austria, Emperor of Mexico. The United States protested against this violation of the principles of the Monroe Doctrine, but nothing was done till the war was over. Then General Sheridan was sent to the Rio Grande with 50,000 veterans. The French army was promptly withdrawn in 1867, and Maximilian fell into the hands of the Mexicans, by whom he was shot. The republic was then restored.

Recent History. In the election of 1880 the Republican candidates, General James A. Garfield and Chester A. Arthur: were successful. The new executive had scarcely entered upon the duties of his office when he was shot by Charles J. Guiteau, a disappointed office-seeker. This event took place on 2 July, 1881, but the president lingered on till 19 Sept., 1881, when he died at Elberon, New Jersey, where he had been taken in the hope that he might recover. The forty-sixth Congress had ceased to exist on 4 March, and the forty-seventh would not meet till December. Had President Arthur died or been killed during the interval, there would have been no national executive. It was this condition which suggested the passage in 1886 of the Presidential Succession Act. Thereafter, in case of the occurrence of vacancies in both offices, the heads of departments would succeed to the presidency in the order in which those departments had been established, viz., State, Treasury, War, Justice, Post Office, Navy, Interior. No other departments existed at that time. Of course, the secretary succeeding to the presidency must have the qualifications enumerated in the Constitution. In the administration of President Arthur there was passed a law for the suppression of polygamy in Utah; also an act to regulate appointments to the Civil Service of the United States. Hitherto most of those appointments had been bestowed as a reward for partisan services. The new law was designed to make appointments to public office on the ground of fitness. Since its passage in 1883 much progress has been made in the matter of making appointments, but the system is still crude.

In the presidential contest of 1884 the Republicans nominated James G. Blaine and John A. Logan as their candidates, while the Democrats selected Grover Cleveland and Thomas A. Hendricks. The nomination of Blaine was the signal for a secession from the Republican ranks. Independents within the party, then known as "Mugwumps", refused to support the ticket, and contributed much toward its defeat. In the first administration of Grover Cleveland there were passed several important laws: an anti-contract labour law (1885), which prohibited the importation of aliens into the United States under contract to perform labour or service; the Interstate Commerce Act (1887), which placed railways under the supervision of a commission. That body has to see that charges for the transportation of merchandise and passengers are reasonable and just; also that no rebates, special rates, or unjust discriminations are made for one shipper in preference to another. A second Chinese Exclusion Act was passed in 1888. This prevented the return to the United States of any Chinese labourer who had once left this country. A Bureau of Labour was created in the same year. Questions of public finance also received the attention of the administration. In twenty years the public debt had been reduced by $l,100,000,000. Every bond that could be cancelled was called in and paid at its face value. There were other bonds, but they had many years to run. The Government could indeed buy them at a high rate or allow them to run. It did not appear sound policy to buy them at a high rate, while if they were permitted to run, the Government did not need its present income, for a surplus was rapidly accumulating in the Treasury. This was the condition which led to the proposal to enact a new tariff law. This conclusion was reached toward the close of President Cleveland's administration. When, therefore, the presidential election of 1888 came round, it found the Democrats supporting the policy of a tariff for revenue. On the other hand, the Republicans desired to retain the protective tariff. They proposed to reduce the revenue by lowering the taxes on tobacco and on spirits used in manufactures. They would also admit free of duty articles of foreign manufacture, if the United States did not manufacture a similar class of articles. Benjamin Harrison and Levi P. Morton were chosen as Republican candidates. When this party was again in control of the government, it began at once to take measures for the redemption of its promises. The McKinley Tariff Act was passed in 1890, and on 27 June in the same year a dependent pension bill. Hitherto the laws granted pensions only to those who had sustained an injury or contracted a disability in the service and in line of duty. The new law allowed a pension to all those who had served ninety days in the army or the navy, and were disabled, whether they contracted that disability in the service or not. The maximum allowance under this law was $12, and the minimum $6 a month. This law increased the names on the pension rolls to 970,000. It was in the administration of President Harrison that the Sherman Act became a law. It provided that the Secretary of the Treasury should buy each month 4,500,000 ounces of silver; that he should pay for the bullion thus purchased with treasury notes; that on demand of the holder the secretary must redeem these notes in gold or silver; after a fixed date, 1 July, 1891, the silver need not be coined, but might be stored in the treasury, and silver certificates issued. The Farmers Alliance and the People's Party belong to this era.

In 1892 Cleveland was once more elected. This time the Democratic party had control of the two political departments of the government, its first complete triumph since 1856. At the time of his inauguration, 4 March, 1893, the business of the country appeared to be in a very prosperous state, but during the succeeding summer and autumn there swept over the country a financial and industrial panic which wrecked banks and commercial establishments. Manufactories shut down everywhere, and over 300 banks suspended or failed. This was the beginning of a period of great distress. Believing that the compulsory purchase of silver by the Secretary of the Treasury was responsible, to some extent, for the alarming conditions, the president convoked Congress in special session, and asked for the repeal of that clause of the Sherman Act which required a monthly purchase of silver. On 1 November, after a considerable struggle, the compulsory clause was repealed. Industry, however, did not revive. In December, 1893, the Democratic Congress met and passed the Wilson Bills a tariff measure in harmony with Democratic principles. As it was foreseen that the revenue from such a tariff would not produce a revenue sufficient to pay the expenses of the Government, one section of the act provided for a tax of two per cent on all incomes above $4000. This part of the law was afterward declared by the United States Supreme Court to be unconstitutional.

In the matter of foreign relations there occurred during the second administration of President Cleveland a grave controversy between the United States and Great Britain over the boundary between Venezuela and British Guiana. England claimed territory which had hitherto been regarded as belonging to Venezuela, and in this claim the president believed that he perceived a purpose on the part of England to ignore the principles of the Monroe Doctrine. The excitement both in England and the United States was extreme, and some people looked for a war as the outcome. On 2 Feb., 1897, however, a treaty of arbitration was signed at Washington between Venezuela and Great Britain. While the controversy was pending a commission appointed by the president had examined the boundary question and made a report on the subject.

President Cleveland inherited from his predecessor the results of a revolution in the Hawaiian Islands, a revolution in which the United States was involved. In January, 1893, Queen Liliuokalani was deposed by her subjects, who then set up a provisional government, and sent commissioners to Washington to prepare a treaty of annexation to the United States. On 15 February this was sent to the Senate for approval. During the progress of these negotiations the president had heard that a force of men from a United States vessel had landed and given assistance to the revolutionists. This consideration led him to recall the treaty from the Senate and also to send to the islands an agent to investigate the entire affair. The report of this commissioner set forth that the queen had been practically deposed by United States officials. The president then sent another representative to the islands. He was instructed to seek for the restoration of the deposed queen on certain conditions, namely that she would grant full amnesty to all persons concerned in the events by which she had been deposed. To this she demurred, and expressed a purpose to behead the leaders and to confiscate their property. Upon receipt of this reply the president instructed his representative to cease all communication with her until she would agree to grant an amnesty. To this she consented in December, 1893. President Dole was then requested to surrender the government to the queen, but he refused to do so, denying the right of the President of the United States to interfere in the domestic affairs of the islands. Mr. Cleveland, doubting his authority to employ force, referred the entire matter to Congress, where it was investigated by the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. Construing this action as a purpose to leave the islands to take care of themselves, the revolutionists framed a constitution and organized a republic, 4 July, 1894. The new government was promptly recognized by President Cleveland, and the deposed queen, to whom he had promised a restoration, abandoned the contest for her throne. Though the United States was chiefly responsible for her deposition, succeeding Congresses have ignored her repeated applications for indemnity.

In the presidential election of 1896 the Republican party nominated William McKinley and Garret A. Hobart, and in its platform declared its opposition to "the free coinage of silver except by international agreement". Upon this announcement there took place a secession of twenty-one delegates from the convention. These represented the states which were then the chief producers of silver namely Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, South Dakota, and Utah. The Democratic convention was held in July, and after a very exciting session chose William J. Bryan and Arthur Sewall and declared for "the free and unlimited coinage of both silver and gold at the present legal ratio of 16 to 1, without waiting for the aid or consent of any other nation". Following this declaration of the convention, many leaders of the party refused to give it their support, scores of newspapers withheld their assistance, and finally in the month of September a convention of "gold Democrats" nominated John M. Palmer and Simon B. Buckner on a platform which declared for a gold standard. In the meantime the silver party had endorsed the Democratic candidates (Bryan and Sewall), and the Populists had nominated Bryan and Thomas E. Watson. There were also other tickets in the field, namely: the Prohibitionists, the National Party, the Socialist Labour Party. After a very serious discussion of the issues McKinley was elected. Immediately following his inauguration, 4 March, 1897, he convoked Congress in special session to revise the tariff. During the course of the same summer the Dingley Tariff became a law.

Cuban Question—War with Spain. More serious than the tariff question was the situation in the neighbouring Island of Cuba. In February, 1895, for the sixth time in half a century, the natives of Cuba, weary of the misrule of Spain, rose in revolt and founded a republic. In 1868 there was an insurrection in the island which lasted for ten years. By 1878 it had collapsed, but broke out in 1895 on a larger scale. General Campos attempted to suppress the rebellion, but was soon superseded by General Weyler, whose methods were drastic. The chief feature of his policy was to bring the non-combatants into the towns, so that they could not give any further aid to the insurgents. Penned in camps which soon became filthy, and poorly fed, they died in great numbers. Of course, this policy interrupted production and, if continued, would soon depopulate the island. In his annual message, 7 Dec., 1896, President Cleveland noticed the progress of the insurrection, and declared that the United States could not be expected to maintain that attitude indefinitely. In Cuba upwards of $50,000,000 of American capital were invested in plantations, mines, railways and other lines of business. A trade amounting to about $100,000,000 was being destroyed. The wretched condition of the reconcentrados excited the sympathy of the American people, and they began to send food and medical aid to the stricken island. President Cleveland declared that when it became evident that Spain was unable to subdue the rebellion, American obligations to Spain would be superseded by obligations still higher.

When McKinley became president, he demanded the release of American prisoners in Cuba, and requested the Spanish Government to put an end to the conditions existing in the island. At that time it was costing the United States much money to enforce the neutrality laws. A new administration in Spain led to the recall of General Weyler, and to the promise of local autonomy for Cuba; also to the release of the American prisoners and to an amelioration of the state of the reconcentrados. These concessions, however, did not pacify the insurgents, and they rejected the offers almost unanimously. In his message to Congress, 6 Dec., 1897, President McKinley expressed the opinion that the time for intervention on the part of the United States had not yet come. He believed that Spain should be given a reasonable time in which to prove the efficiency of the new system. The Spanish Government had agreed to admit free of duty articles contributed by Americans for the relief of the reconcentrados. In February, 1898, there was published by the Cuban junta in New York a private letter of the Spanish Ambassador to Washington, Señor Dupuy de Lome, in which the diplomat referred to President McKinley as "a pot-house politician and caterer to the rabble", who was endeavouring to stand well with the Spanish Minister and the Jingoes of his party.

An incident more grave than this, which was settled by the resignation of Señor de Lome, was the destruction of the battleship "Maine" and about 260 of her officers and crew, by a mine in Havana harbour. It was generally believed to have been the work of Spain, and, of course, the Cubans did not attempt to remove that idea. A war between the United States and Spain was what the natives of Cuba were eager to bring about. A court of inquiry was unable, however, to fix the responsibility for the explosion, which has since been shown to have been an external one. Congress voted $50,000,000 for strengthening the national defences and buying ships and material of war. On 19 April, 1898, Congress adopted a resolution declaring for the freedom of Cuba, demanding the withdrawal of Spain from the island, and authorizing the president to compel such withdrawal by force. Diplomatic relations were broken off by Spain on 21 April. A few days later Congress declared war, and 200,000 volunteers were enlisted. On 1 May, 1898 Commodore Dewey destroyed the Spanish fleet and captured the forts in Manila Bay, and took possession of Cavité. A joint land and naval force then invested the city of Manila. Another Spanish fleet, under Admiral Cervera, took refuge in the harbour of Santiago de Cuba, where it encountered the American fleet, under Rear-Admirals Sampson and Schicy. Cervera lost all his crews and vessels. Besides the loss in killed and wounded, the Spanish admiral and about 1800 of his men were taken prisoners. On 14 July, 1898, General Toral surrendered Santiago and his army of 25,000 men. General Miles landed a force on the Island of Porto Rico just as hostilities came to an end. Before the tidings had reached the Philippines, Dewey's fleet and an army, under General Merritt, had taken Manila and 7000 Spanish prisoners.

By the treaty of peace, signed 10 Dec., 1898, at Paris, it was provided that Spain should relinquish her title to Cuba, cede Porto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines to the United States, and that the United States should pay $20,000,000 to Spain. On 6 Feb., 1899, the treaty was ratified by the United States Senate. It was also accepted by Spain, and the $20,000,000 was promptly paid. Diplomatic relations were soon resumed. During the progress of the war with Spain the people of the United States began to take a different view of territorial expansion. Though the inhabitants of Hawaii had made repeated applications for annexation to the United States, it was only on 7 July 1898, that the president signed the joint resolution of Congress which provided for annexation. The formal transfer took place on 12 August.

The natives of the Philippines, who had been restless under Spanish rule, expected their political independence after the success of the Americans. Their failure to receive it led them on 4 Feb., 1899, to attack the United States troops at Manila. A war, disastrous for the natives and their leader Aguinaldo, ensued and continued for more than a year. Peace was finally imposed on all the discontented elements in the islands, and in 1900 a commission was sent thither by the president to organize civil government in such localities as appeared to be ready to receive it. On I May, 1900, a system of civil government went into operation in Porto Rico also. Cuba continued under the military control of the United States for many months. In June, 1900, however, the city governments in the island were turned over to the people, and on 5 Dec. a constitutional convention assembled.

In the presidential election of 1900, McKinley and Roosevelt, the Republican nominees, defeated Bryan and Stevenson, the Democratic candidates. While holding a reception during the summer of 1901, at the Pan-American Exposition at Buffalo, President McKinley was shot by an anarchist, and died on 14 September. In succeeding to the presidency, Mr. Roosevelt announced his intention of continuing the policy and retaining the cabinet of his predecessor. The new executive recommended several new laws, but Congress did not pass many at that session. He used his influence during a great strike to bring about a compromise between the coal operators and the mine-workers in the anthracite region of Pennsylvania. Upon the president's recommendation a Department of Commerce and Labour was established in December, 1902. Soon afterwards (18 Oct., 1903), a dangerous controversy with Great Britain over the Alaska boundary was settled at London. Another dispute was arbitrated with Mexico. Relations with the United States of Colombia were not so cordial.

During President Roosevelt's administration was passed an act authorizing the construction of a ship canal across the narrow isthmus connecting North and South America. After expending $250,000,000 in digging a canal between Panama and Colon, a French company was declared bankrupt. In 1889 a new company was organized and was said to have completed two-fifths of the work. At that stage this corporation offered to sell to the United States for $40,000,000 all its rights and property. In June, 1902, Congress empowered the president to accept this offer and to complete the canal at a cost not to exceed $120,000,000. For the necessary concessions generous terms were offered to Colombia but, under a belief that a much larger sum could be obtained, that Government failed to ratify the proposed treaty. This action was the signal for a revolt in Panama, and for the establishment there of a separate state. In November, 1903 the people of that province proclaimed their independence, and set up a republican government. The United States prevented Colombia from suppressing this rebellion, and promptly acknowledged the independence of the new state. With it a treaty was soon concluded containing the concessions demanded by the United States for the completion of the canal. At this stage Colombia was willing to concede, free of cost, all that the Americans had asked, provided she were allowed to reassert her sovereignty over her lost province. The Colombian envoy was informed, however, that it was now too late. The $10,000,000 which had been offered to Colombia was promptly accepted by the new republic; also a perpetual annuity of $250,000, beginning nine years after ratifying the treaty. In return, the United States secured jurisdiction over a zone of territory five miles wide on each side of the canal, and any other land necessary for its construction and maintenance. The Panama policy of President Roosevelt was denounced by many Democratic senators in Congress, but was nevertheless approved by a vote of 66 to 14. Colombia's efforts to stir up complications in Europe came to naught.

In 1904 Mr. Roosevelt was elected president, with Charles W. Fairbanks as vice-president. The Democratic candidates were Judge Alton B. Parker and Henry G. Davis. During his second term President Roosevelt was thwarted by the Senate in his endeavours to regulate railway rates and to advance the cause of arbitration. A prosperity almost unparalleled marked the beginning of the year 1907; at its close business was greatly depressed. In October a panic swept banks and trust companies into the hands of receivers. Relief did not come till the beginning of 1908. The subject of the Federal control of corporations was very fully discussed in the president's message of 3 Dec., 1907. He recommended the enactment of more stringent laws on this subject. On 16 June, 1908; at Chicago, the Republican National Nominating Convention selected as its candidates for the presidency and vice-presidency William H. Taft and James S. Sherman. Bryan and Kern were the Democratic nominees. In the November elections the Republicans were successful. (See articles on the various states of the Union and the Catholic dioceses. See also AMERICA; AMERICA, PRE-COLUMBIAN DISCOVERY OF; BEDINI; INDIAN MISSIONS, BUREAU OF CATHOLIC; INDIANS, AMERICAN; KNOWNOTHINGISM; LEGATE; MISSIONS, CATHOLIC INDIAN, OF THE UNITED STATES; STATISTICS OF RELIGIONS.)

FISCHER, The Discoveries of the Norsemen in America (St. Louis, 1903); O'GORMAN, A History of the Roman Catholic Church in the United States (New York, 1895); REEVES, The Finding of Wineland the Good (London, 1890); HARRISSE, John Cabot the Discoverer of North America and Sebastian his Son (London, 1896); THATCHER, Christopher Columbus: His Life, His Work, His Remains (New York. 1903); VIGNAUD, Histoire Critique de La Grande Entreprise de Christophe Colomb (Paris, 1911); CHEYNEY, A Short History of England (New York, 1904); PARKMAN, Pioneers of France in the New World (Boston, 1907); CHANNING, History of the United States (New York, 1909); BANCROFT, History of the United States from the Discovery of the American Continent (Boston, 1867); BROWN, The Genesis of the United States (Boston, 1890); FISKE, The American Revolution (Boston, 1899); FISHER, The Struggle for American Independence (Philadelphia, 1908); HAMILTON, The Intimate Life of Alexander Hamilton (New York, 1910); The Cambridge Modern History, ed. WARD, PROTHERO, AND LEATHES, VII (New York, 1903); BRUCE, Social Life of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century (Richmond, 1907); ROOSEVELT, The Winning of the West (New York, 1905); ENGLISH, Conquest of the Country North-West of the River Ohio (Indianapolis, 1896); EDLER, The Relation of the Dutch Republic to the American Revolution (Baltimore, 1911); THORPE, The Constitutional History of the American People (Chicago 1900); MCCARTHY, Civil Government in the United States (Washington 1911); MADISON, Journal of the ConstitutionaL Convention (Chicago, 1898); MCMASTER, History of the American People (New York, 1896); MCCARTHY, Lincoln's Plan of Reconstruction (New York. 1901); THWAITES, The Jesuit Relations (Cleveland, 1896); BURNS, The Catholic School System in the United States (New York, 1908); RHODES, History of the United States from the Compromise of 1850 (New York, 1901); ed. HART, The American Nation: A History (27 vols., New York, 1905-08); DAVIS, Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government (New York, 1881); TARBELL, The Life of Abraham Lincoln (New York, 1908); ANDREWS, The United States in Our Own Time (New York, 1903); MCCARTHY, Columbus and His Predecessors (Philadelphia, 1912).

CHARLES H. MCCARTHY

The United States of America

CHARLES H. MCCARTHY

Unity (as a Mark of the Church)

The marks of the Church are certain unmistakeable signs, or distinctive characteristics which render the Church easily recognizable to all, and clearly distinguish it from every other religious society, especially from those which claim to be Christian in doctrine and origin. That such external signs are necessary to the true Church is plain from the aim and the purpose which Christ had in view when He made His revelation and founded a Church. The purpose of the redemption was the salvation of men. Hence, Christ made known the truths which men must heed and obey. He established a Church to which He committed the care and the exposition of these truths, and, consequently He made it obligatory on all men that they should know and hear it (Matthew 18:17). It is obvious that this Church, which takes the place of Christ, and is to carry on His work by gathering men into its fold and saving their souls, must be evidently discernible to all. There must be no doubt as to which is the true Church of Christ, the one which has received, and has preserved intact the Revelation which He gave it for man's salvation. Were it otherwise the purpose of the Redemption would be frustrated, the blood of the Saviour shed in vain, and man's eternal destination at the mercy of chance. Without doubt, therefore, Christ, the all-wise legislator, impressed upon His Church some distinctive external marks by which, with the use of ordinary diligence, all can distinguish the real Church from the false, the society of truth from the ranks of error. These marks flow from the very essence of the Church; they are properties inseparable from its nature and manifestive of its character, and, in their Christian and proper sense, can be found in no other institution. In the Formula of the Council of Constantinople (A.D. 381), four marks of the Church are mentioned -- unity, sanctity, Catholicity, Apostolicity -- which are believed by most theologians to be exclusively the marks of the True Church. The present article considers unity.

I. Some False Notions of Unity

All admit that unity of some kind is indispensable to the existence of any well-ordered society, civil, political, or religious. Many Christians, however, hold that the unity necessary for the true Church of Christ need be nothing more than a certain spiritual internal bond, or, if external, it need be only in a general way, inasmuch as all acknowledge the same God and reverence the same Christ. Thus most Protestants think that the only union necessary for the Church is that which comes from faith, hope, and love toward Christ; in worshipping the same God, obeying the same Lord, and in believing the same fundamental truths which are necessary for salvation. This they regard as a unity of doctrine, organization, and cult. A like spiritual unity is all the Greek schismatics require. So long as they profess a common faith, are governed by the same general law of God under a hierarchy, and participate in the same sacraments, they look upon the various churches -- Constantinople, Russian, Antiochene, etc. -- as enjoying the union of the one true Church; there is the common head, Christ, and the one Spirit, and that suffices. The Anglicans likewise teach that the one Church of Christ is made up of three branches: the Greek, the Roman, and the Anglican, each having a different legitimate hierarchy but all united by a common spiritual bond.

II. True Notion of Unity

The Catholic conception of the mark of unity, which must characterize the one Church founded by Christ, is far more exacting. Not only must the true Church be one by an internal and spiritual union, but this union must also be external and visible, consisting in and growing out of a unity of faith, worship, and government. Hence the Church which has Christ for its founder is not to be characterized by any merely accidental or internal spiritual union, but, over and above this, it must unite its members in unity of doctrine, expressed by external, public profession; in unity of worship, manifested chiefly in the reception of the same sacraments; and in unity of government, by which all its members are subject to and obey the same authority, which was instituted by Christ Himself. In regard to faith or doctrine it may be here objected that in none of the Christian sects is there strict unity, since all of the members are not at all times aware of the same truths to be believed. Some give assent to certain truths which others know nothing of. Here it is important to note the distinction between the habit and the object of faith. The habit or the subjective disposition of the believer, though specifically the same in all, differs numerically according to individuals, but the objective truth to which assent is given is one and the same for all. There may be as many habits of faith numerically distinct as there are different individuals possessing the habit, but it is not possible that there be a diversity in the objective truths of faith. The unity of faith is manifested by all the faithful professing their adhesion to one and the same object of faith. All admit that God, the Supreme Truth, is the primary author of their faith, and from their explicit willingness to submit to the same external authority to whom God has given the power to make known whatever has been revealed, their faith, even in truths explicitly unknown, is implicitly external. All are prepared to believe whatever God has revealed and the Church teaches. Similarly, accidental differences in ceremonial forms do not in the least interfere with essential unity of worship, which is to be regarded primarily and principally in the celebration of the same sacrifice and in the reception of the same sacraments. All are expressive of the one doctrine and subject to the same authority.

III. The True Church of Christ Is One

That the Church which Christ instituted for man's salvation must be one in the strict sense of the term just explained, is already evident from its very nature and purpose; truth is one, Christ revealed the truth and gave it to His Church, and men are to be saved by knowing and following the truth. But the essential unity of the true Christian Church is also explicitly and repeatedly declared throughout the New Testament:

• Speaking of His Church, the Saviour called it a kingdom, the kingdom of heaven, the kingdom of God (Matthew 13:24, 31, 33; Luke 13:18; John 18:36);
• He compared it to a city the keys of which were entrusted to the Apostles (Matthew 5:14; 16:19),
• to a sheepfold to which all His sheep must come and be united under one shepherd (John 10:7-17);
• to a vine and its branches,
• to a house built upon a rock against which not even the powers of hell should ever prevail (Matthew 16:18).
• Moreover, the Saviour, just before He suffered, prayed for His disciples, for those who were afterwards to believe in Him -- for His Church -- that they might be and remain one as He and the Father are one (John 17:20-23); and
• He had already warned them that "every kingdom divided against itself shall be made desolate: and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand" (Matthew 12:25).

These words of Christ are expressive of the closest unity.

St. Paul likewise insists on the unity of the Church.

• Schism and disunion he brands as crimes to be classed with murder and debauchery, and declares that those guilty of "dissensions" and "sects" shall not obtain the kingdom of God (Galatians 5:20-21).
• Hearing of the schisms among the Corinthians, he asked impatiently: "Is Christ divided? Was Paul then crucified for you? or were you baptized in the name of Paul?" (I Cor. 1:13).
• And in the same Epistle he describes the Church as one body with many members distinct among themselves, but one with Christ their head: "For in one Spirit we are all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free" (I Cor. 12:13).
• To show the intimate union of the members of the Church with the one God, he asks: "The chalice of benediction, which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? And the bread, which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord? For we, being many, are one bread, one body, all that partake of one bread" (I Cor. 10:16-17).
• Again in his Epistle to the Ephesians he teaches the same doctrine, and exhorts them to be "careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace", and he reminds them that there is but "one body and one spirit-one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all" (Ephesians 4:3-6).
• Already, in one of his very first Epistles, he had warned the faithful of Galatia that if anybody, even an angel from heaven, should preach unto them any other Gospel than that which he had preached, "let him be anathema" (Galatians 1:8).

Such declarations as these coming from the great Apostle are clear evidence of the essential unity which must be characteristic of the true Christian Church.

The other Apostles also persistently proclaimed this essential and necessary unity of Christ's Church (cf. I John 4:1-7; Apoc. 2:6, 14-15, 20-29; II Peter 2:1-19; Jude 5:19). And although divisions did arise now and then in the early Church, they were speedily put down and the disturbers rejected, so that even from the beginning the Christians could boast that they were of "one heart and one soul" (Acts 4:32; cf. Acts 11:22; 13:1).

Tradition is unanimous to the same effect. Whenever heresy threatened to invade the Church, the Fathers rose up against it as an essential evil.

• The unity of the Church was the object of nearly all the exhortations of St. Ignatius of Antioch ("Ad Ephes.", n. 5, 16-17; "Ad Philadelph.", n. 3).
• St. Irenaeus went even further, and taught that the test of the one true Church, in which alone was salvation, was its union with Rome (Adv. haeres., III, iii).
• Tertullian likewise compared the Church to an ark outside of which there is no salvation, and he maintained that only he who embraced every doctrine handed down by the Apostolic Churches, especially by that of Rome, belonged to the true Church (De praescript., xxi).
• The same contention was upheld by Clement of Alexandria and by Origen, who said that outside the one visible Church none could be saved.
• St. Cyprian in his treatise on the unity of the Church says: "God is one, and Christ one, and one the Church of Christ" (De eccl. unitate, xxiii); and again in his epistles he insists that there is but "One Church founded upon Peter by Christ the Lord" (Epist. 70, ad Jan.) and that there is but "one altar and one priesthood" (Epist. 40, v).

Many more testimonies of unity might be adduced from Saints Jerome, Augustine, Chrysostom, and the other Fathers, but their teachings are only too well known. The long list of councils, the history and treatment of heretics and heresies in every century show beyond doubt that unity of doctrine of cult, and of authority, has always been regarded as an essential and visible mark of the true Christian Church. As shown above, it was the intention of Christ that His Church should be one, and that, not in any accidental internal way, but essentially and visibly. Unity is the fundamental mark of the Church, for without it the other marks would have no meaning, since indeed the Church itself could not exist. Unity is the source of strength and organization, as discord and schism are of weakness and confusion. Given one supernatural authority which all respect, a common doctrine which all profess, one form of worship subject to the same authority and expressive of the same teaching, centred in one sacrifice and in the reception of the same sacraments, and the other marks of the Church necessarily follow and are easily understood.

That the mark of unity which is distinctive of and essential to the true Church of Christ is to be found in none other than the Roman Catholic Church, follows naturally from what has been said. All the theories of unity entertained by the sects are woefully out of harmony with the true and proper concept of unity as defined above and as taught by Christ, the Apostles, and all orthodox Tradition. In no other Christian body is there a oneness of faith, of worship, and of discipline. Between no two of the hundreds of nonCatholic sects is there a common bond of union; each one having a different head, a different belief, a different cult. Nay more, even between the members of any one sect there is no such thing as real unity, for their first and foremost principle is that each one is free to believe and do as he wishes. They are constantly breaking up into new sects and subdivisions of sects, showing that they have within themselves the seeds of disunion and disintegration. Divisions and subdivisions have ever been the characteristics of Protestantism. This is certainly a literal fulfilment of the words of Christ: "Every plant which my heavenly Father hath not planted shall be rooted up" (Matt 15:13); and "every kingdom divided against itself shall be made desolate: and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand" (Matthew 12:25).

CHARLES J. CALLAN

Universalists

A Liberal Protestant sect -- found chiefly in North America -- whose distinctive tenet is the belief in the final salvation of all souls. The doctrine of universal salvation found favor among members of various Christian Churches (see APOCATASTASIS for its treatment anterior to the foundation of the Universalist Church). The present article will exclusively consider Universalism as a separate denomination.

I. DOCTRINAL PRINCIPLES

The historic creed of this religious body is the profession of belief adopted by the General Convention at Winchester, New Hampshire, in 1803. It contains the following articles:

1. We believe that the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments contain a revelation of the character of God and of the duty, interest, and final destination of mankind.
2. We believe that there is one God whose nature is Love, revealed in one Lord, Jesus Christ by one Holy Spirit of grace, who will finally restore tie whole family of mankind to holiness and happiness.
3. We believe that holiness and true happiness are inseparably connected, and that believers ought to be careful to maintain order and practise good works; for these things are good and profitable unto men.

To meet the objections raised by some Universalists to parts of the foregoing articles, a briefer statement of essential principles was adopted in 1899 by the General Convention held at Boston. It required for admission to fellowship the belief in the following articles:

• the universal fatherhood of God,
• the spiritual authority and leadership of His Son Jesus Christ;
• the trustworthiness of the Bible as containing a revelation from God;
• the certainty of just retribution for sin;
• the final harmony of all souls with God.

To the admission of these principles must be added "the acknowledgment of the authority of the General Convention and assent to its laws". The Trinity is usually rejected by present-day Universalists. The reception of the sacraments is not enjoined; but baptism (according to the mode preferred by the candidate) and the Lord's Supper are administered. The infliction of temporal punishment for sin insufficiently atoned for on earth is now generally admitted. A usage of distinctly Universalist origin is the observance of "Children's Sunday." A special day (the second Sunday in June) is set apart for the baptism of children and their dedication to God's service. This observance has been taken over by other Protestant churches. For many years, the several Universalist congregations administered their own affairs independently, and the General Convention enjoyed merely advisory powers. The functions of this body were enlarged in 1866 and further extended in 1870, until it became the highest legislative authority for the United States and Canada.

II. HISTORY & INSTITUTIONS

The first Universalist congregation was organized in 1750 in London by Rev. James Relly, who ministered to its spiritual needs until his death (1778). In spite of this early establishment few Universalist churches exist at present in Europe; but Universalism is undoubtedly believed in outside of the denomination. The stronghold of the sect is in America, where the first church was established by Rev. John Murray. He landed in New Jersey in September, 1770, preached the doctrine of Universalism along the Atlantic seaboard, and in 1779 formed with fifteen other persons the first American congregation of that faith at Gloucester, Massachusetts. Other preachers of the same doctrine arose about this time: Elhanan Winchester, a former Baptist minister, taught Universalism at Philadelphia, and Adams Streeter and Caleb Rich spread it m New England. More marked in its success and wider in the range of its influence was the propaganda of the Rev. Hosea Ballou (1771-1852), whose Unitarian views triumphed in the denomination over the Sabellian conception of the Trinity taught by Murray. His teaching of universal salvation immediately after death, however did not meet with unanimous approval, and caused the secession of eight ministers and some members who, under the name of Restorationists, founded a separate sect. But the existence of this new creation was short-lived (1831-41), while the parent body spread during Ballou's lifetime not only in the United States but also to Canada. Its progress was slowed by the Civil War, but the propaganda subsequently carried on, chiefly under the direction of the board of trustees and the state conventions, was crowned with some success, and the denomination spread throughout the United States.

The denomination founded the following educational institutions:

• Tufts College (founded in 1852) Medford, Mass.;
• Lombard College (1852), Galesburg, Illinois;
• St. Lawrence University (1856), Canton, New York;
• Buchtel College (1872), Akron, Ohio.

A school of divinity is connected with the first three institutions named. Academies are maintained at Franklin Massachusetts (Dean Academy); Barre, Vermont (Goddard Seminary); and Portland, Maine (Westbrook Seminary).

N.A. WEBER

Universals

The name refers on the one hand to the inclination towards uniformity (uni-versus) existing in different things, in virtue of which different things may be represented by a single idea applicable to all in the same way; and on the other hand to this one idea which is applicable to the different things (unum versus alia).

DEFINITION

Universals are those ideas which, while excluding whatever constitutes the difference of things of the same genus or species, represent that which is necessary to their constitution, is essential, and is therefore common to all, remaining fixed in all vicissitudes (universalia post rem, in re). Universals are thus mere]y an expression of those Divine ideas which are concerned with the universal (universalia ante rem) . Universal ideas are opposed to sense impressions, which represent that which is merely individual and contingent in a concrete phenomenon, and thus that which changes with circumstances in corporeal things of the same kind. These sense impressions correspond to those Divine ideas which are concerned with the corporeal individual.

SUBDIVISION

In so far as the nature of a thing is the object of a direct act of perception, it contains no relation to individuals, but is recognized in itself only according to its essential parts. When, however, the intellect has represented to itself the essential form of a thing (whether this be a substance or an accident), it can by reflection make this representation of the essence the object of its perception. It can apply the idea to various individuals of the same kind, can compare it with other ideas, and thus determine relationship and differences. The universale directum thus appears as an embryo, which is developed, ever more clearly arranged, and constantly more nearly perfected by reflection and various logical operations. It is but another way from the imperfect idea which an entomologist formed when as a boy he first saw an ant, to that perfected idea of the animal which he now possesses as the result of all his investigations and studies.

The means to arrive at a perfect idea and an exact definition is the clear distinction between the parts of a thing, which are grasped directly, if obscurely, by the perception. It should here be remarked that our intellect proceeds from the more general and thus less precise ideas to the less general and more precise. In the direct recognition of a corporeal being, it grasps first its reality, the idea of existence. This is the most universal of all ideas, but it is no true universal, since existence pertains to different things in different ways, and consequently cannot be predicated equivocally of all of them. While the senses are grasping what is individual in the phenomena, the intellect presses onward to the essence or nature of the thing, and grasps especially that which is most universal, its independence, and forms the idea of substance. It simultaneously seizes the notes of existence pertaining to and borne by the substance (accidents), which in the individual phenomenon are the object of the senses. Meanwhile it does not escape the intellect that quality and quantity are possessed by the substance which they determine in an entirely different way from the actio (action) and passio (passion), and these again in an entirely different way from the ubi (where) and quando (when), and that relation stands on the extreme border of accidental existence. In short, it grasps the various modes of existence of the above-mentioned accidents in the first substance. It thus comes that the idea of an accident is only analogous, like that of substance, and that it has no greater claim than this to be considered a true universal. The case is otherwise with the idea of substance and the ideas of the individual accidents mentioned above. They are the most universal of universals in the true sense of the word.

If these ideas be applied with the help of reflection to individuals, they become the highest predicates (categories) of concrete substance, and prove also the highest ideas of genera. The intellect is not yet satisfied. If possible, it proceeds step by step from the highest and least determinate idea of genus to the lowest and most determinate, which represents that which is common to two immediately related kinds. Only then is it possible to form a clear and distinct idea of species. This having been accomplished, one can distinguish the difference constituting the species, and by noting this lowest species and this difference, supply an exact definition. But in many cases, the intellect must remain content with the greatest possible approximation to the definition. For this purpose are employed description, the characteristics, explanation, and discussion. The final object in this is to give the lowest clearly recognizable species and that which, in the notes added to the substance, is proper (proprium, idion) to all the individuals of the same kind. Consequently, the connection of the accidents with the substance must be established to discover which of those accidents necessarily and of themselves arise from the substance (and from this alone), as speech in the case of man. Other properties are to be referred to fortuitous external influences, as lameness in the case of individual men. We thus obtain the logical accident, which indeed must be distinguished from the metaphysical, which, in accordance with what was said above, may be a proprium, or logical accident. One may even inquire into the genus, species, and specific difference of a metaphysical accident (e.g. of continued quantity).

In summary

According to their origin in a direct act of perception or in reflection, universals are divided into direct and reflex universals.

The direct universal, waiving, as it does, the question of the reality of the perceived being in nature, is metaphysical. In it lies only the possibility of being applied to many things, but the relation of universality is not recognized in it. Consequently, it is also known as the "material universal".

The reflex universal includes the relation to individuals, and is thus known as the universale logicum, or also as the "formal universal", since it is recognized as universal.

The universale directum is divided into the categories, since these represent the various modes of existence in the actual being. Recognized by reflection as the highest species, the categories are included under the universale logicum, which is divided into the five predicables: genus, species, specific difference, proprium, and logical accident.

IMPORTANCE OF THE PROBLEM OF THE UNIVERSALS

Science in general, inasmuch as it is the knowledge of the necessary and permanent drawn from the nature of things, is impossible without the recognition of the universals. Without such recognition, it is degraded into the description of successive individual impressions. The war between the pure Darwinists and the physicists, who recognize natural species which, in consequence of their mode of development and the influence of conditions, can be arranged into various systematic species, has been already designated a new phase of the Scholastic controversy concerning universals. In physics and chemistry the constancy of the laws of nature depends on the constancy of the nature of things. In psychology the existence of universals has led to the recognition of the intellect as a faculty fundamentally distinct from the senses. It is self-evident that metaphysics and logic would be an impossibility without universals. Without universals, ethics and aesthetics would also be surrendered to a relativism ungoverned by principles, and thus to annihilation. Without universals, impressionism in art and individual autonomy in life must attain undisputed sway. To these tendencies correspond in religion the exclusive validity of religious experiences, the belief in the changing content of dogmas, and the complete displacement of dogmatic by historical mode of thought. A history of the controversy concerning the universals and their relation to existence must necessarily be a presentation of the most fundamental differences of all philosophical systems. It would reveal that a deviation from Aristotelean Thomistic moderate Realism leads, on the one side, over Conceptualism and Nominalism to Scepticism and Agnosticism, or to barren Empiricism and Materialism, and on the other side over extreme Realism to false Idealism and Pantheism.

ALOIS PICHLER

Systems of the Universe

Universe (or "world") is here taken in the astronomical sense, in its narrower or wider meanings, from our terrestrial planet to the stellar universe. The term "systems" restricts the view to the general structure and motions of the heavenly bodies, but comprises all the ages of the world the present, past, and future.

I. HISTORIC TIMES OF THE UNIVERSE

The present system, in the widest sense of the term, forms the subject of universal cosmography. Descriptions of this kind were made by Lambert, the two Herschels, Laplace, Newcomb, and others. The present section treats only of the solar system, and in particular of the disputed theories of Ptolemy and Copernicus, and the proofs in favour of the latter.

A. Ptolemaic and Copernican Systems

(1) Greek astronomy

The earliest astronomical systems are found in the Greek school. No planetary system can be discerned in Chinese or Babylonian records.

The astronomical knowledge of the Greeks shows three periods. Its infancy is represented by Philolaus and Eudoxus, of the fifth and fourth century B.C. The earth is the common centre of the universe, within the celestial sphere of the fixed stars. The great luminaries, sun and moon, and the five planets have each their concentric spheres, upon which they slide in two directions, longitude and latitude, keeping constantly the same distance from the earth.

The flourishing period of Greek astronomy extends from Heraclides Ponticus in the fourth century B.C. to Hipparchus in the second. Observation was made its basis. The different degrees of brilliancy observed in the nearest planets, Mercury, Venus, and Mars, at the times of the opposition and conjunction with the sun, pointed to heliocentric orbits, and analogy demanded the same arrangement for Jupiter and Saturn. The hypothesis was then established, probably by Heraclides himself, that the sun revolved annually, with the five planets, around the earth, while the moon remained on her sphere as before. Heraclides also made an important step in advance by asserting the diurnal rotation of the earth. His system was afterwards known as that of Tycho Brahé. Even the annual motion of the earth around the sun is mentioned by Heraclides as held by some of his contemporaries. The heliocentric system was certainly pronounced and defended by Aristarchus of Samos, although his writings are lost, and known only through Archimedes, whose works were published a year after Copernicus's death (Basle, 1544).

The period of decline had commenced when Hipparchus flashed up as the last genius among the Greek astronomers. The precession of the equinoxes, which he discovered, was made to fit the geocentric system, then prevailing, only a century after Aristarchus. The philosophical schools, in particular the Stoics, began to prefer astrology to observational astronomy. The geometrical knowledge that apparent or relative motion remains unaffected by an interchange of its component motions, as was correctly demonstrated by Apollonius, paved the way to the confusion of the solar system. It must be remembered that the apparent planetary motions are epicyclical, each planet revolving in its own orbit, the epicycle, around the sun, and with the sun, as centre of the epicycle, apparently around the earth in a common orbit, which is called the deferent orbit. These are the correct ideas, and will ever form the basis of spherical astronomy.

The decadence of astronomical concepts among the Greek philosophers appeared in two ways: First, they applied the geometrical fiction of Apollonius to the physical planetary system, supposing that the epicycle must always be the smaller of the two components in apparent motion; and, secondly, they believed that a physical planet could revolve, all alone, around a fictitious point in space. For the outer planets, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn, the apparent orbit of the sun is the smaller component-the common deferent orbit. It cannot be made the epicycle, without introducing into the system three new circles each with a fictitious centre. This was done, but worse was to come for the inner planets, Venus and Mercury. There was no need for them to dislodge the common deferent circle, or solar orbit, as it was larger than the two planetary epicycles. And yet the centre of the deferent was moved from the sun towards the earth, at the cost of introducing into the system two new circles and two ideal centres of motion. The precession of the equinoxes discovered by Hipparchus even lent support to the concept of fictitious pivots. It seemed to swing the pole of the ecliptic around the pole of the celestial sphere. In this shape the Greek system of the heavenly bodies came down to posterity during the second century of our era through Ptolemy's Syntax . The two fundamental propositions of the geocentric system viz. that the earth has no axial rotation and no translation in space form the sixth chapter of the first book. The Syntax did not pass directly from the Alexandrian school to Europe. Greek astronomy made its round through Syria, Persia, and Tatary, under Albategnius Ibn-Yunis, Ulugh-Beg. The Ptolemaic system was accepted by the Arabic astronomers without criticism and was made known in Europe through their translations. An unintelligible Latin Almagest had taken the place of the Greek Syntax and rested like a tombstone on European astronomy.

(2) European astronomy

New astronomical life awoke in the fifteenth century in Germany. Nicholas of Cusa rejected the axioms of Ptolemy Peurbach and Muller restored the text of Ptolemy's Syntax and Copernicus made it his life-work to disentangle the cycles and epicycles of the Greek system. The task of Copernicus was harder than that of his predecessor Aristarchus on account of the unanimous acceptance of the geocentric system for more than a thousand years. The first book of Copernicus's great work On the Revolutions of the Celestial Bodies is directed against the Ptolemaic axioms on the centre of the universe and the stability of the earth. He rightly observes that the universe has no geometrical centre. He then gives clear definitions of relative and apparent motion and applies the Apollonian principle of interchanging the component motions in the opposite sense of Ptolemy. The complex heavenly machinery was explained by a triple motion of the earth one around its axis another around the sun and a third a conical motion around the axis of the ecliptic in periods of respectively one day, one year, and 2.5xxxxx816 years. Ptolemy's negative arguments against a moving earth were answered in a masterly manner:

• It had been objected that a disastrous centrifugal force would be created on the surface of the earth. Copernicus retorts that a far greater centrifugal force must be admitted in the outer planets and the fixed stars if they revolved around the earth.
• The resistance of the atmosphere which it was urged would sweep away every object from a moving earth was disposed of by Copernicus exactly as it is today: each planet condenses and carries its own atmosphere.
• A third difficulty was raised about necessary changes in the appearance of the constellations or in modern language about large parallaxes of the stars when viewed from opposite points of the earth's orbit. Copernicus correctly thought the stars so far away as to make the terrestrial orbit comparatively too small to show any effect in the instruments then available.

The negative arguments of Ptolemy being dispelled there remained only one positive argument in favour of Copernicus.

(3) Reaction to Copernicus

The simplicity of the heliocentric system had sufficient weight to convince a genius like Copernicus. He never called his system an hypothesis. The first who exercised censorship on the work De revolutionibus was the Reformer, Osiander. Dreading the opposition of the Wittenberg school he put the word Hypothesis on the title-page and substituted for the preface of Copernicus one of his own-all without authorization. It was more than half a century later that the Congregation of the Index pointed out nine sentences that had either to be omitted or expressed hypothetically before the book might be read freely by all.

The argument of simplicity was greatly strengthened by Kepler when he discovered the ellipticity of planetary orbits. Copernicus had found by long years observation that the inequalities of planetary motion could not be accounted for, after Ptolemaic fashion by simply placing the circular orbits excentrically. Not being prepared to abandon the circle he resorted to small epicycles. Their final removal greatly enhanced the simplicity of the Copernican system. Then came the discoveries of the aberration of light and of stellar parallaxes. While they appeared as natural consequences of the orbital motion of the earth they threw on the Ptolemaic system the condemnation of an almost infinite complexity. The fixed stars were recognized to vibrate in double ellipses their major axes parallel to the ecliptic in periods of exactly one year. The double ellipses are the images of the terrestrial orbit projected on the celestial sphere by the parallactic displacement of the stars and by the finite velocity of light. The former kind is much the smaller of the two and in most cases dwindles to immeasurable dimensions. Some twelve hundred of them have actually been observed. The aberration-ellipses have their apparent major axes all of equal length. The geocentric system not only has no explanation for these phenomena, but cannot even represent them without two epicycles for each star in the firmament. The Copernican argument of simplicity thereby received an overwhelming corroboration.

B. Direct Proofs of the Copernican System

While the argument of greater simplicity is only an indirect criterion between the two opposing systems mechanics has furnished more direct proofs. Copernicus actually had them in mind when he maintained that centrifugal force in a daily rotating celestial sphere would have to be enormous that the atmosphere is condensed around the terrestrial globe and that single planets cannot revolve around fictitious points that have no physical meaning. Kepler was too much preoccupied with geometrical studies and with the favourite idea of cosmical harmonics (Harmonices mundi) to recognize in the common focus of his elliptical orbits a governing power. It was reserved for Newton and Laplace to formulate the mechanical laws of celestial motion.

(1) The annual revolution of the earth around the sun is a necessary consequence of celestial mechanics.

(a) Newton computed from the velocity and distance of our satellite the amount of attraction that the earth must exercise upon it to maintain its orbital revolution. Learning then from French geometers the exact dimensions of the earth he found the force that keeps the moon in her orbit to be identical with terrestrial gravity divided by the square of the distance from the centre. The discovery led to the computation of the masses of sun and planets inclusive of the earth the latter turning out more than three hundred thousand times lighter than the sun. The mechanical conclusion is that the lighter body revolves around the heavier and not the reverse; or, in more scientific language that both revolve around their common centre of gravity which in this case lies inside the solar sphere.

(b) Our satellite furnishes another more direct proof of the annual revolution of the earth. Carl Braun shows in the Wochenschrift für Astronomie X (1867) 193 that the moon is attracted nearly three times more forcibly by the sun than by the earth. Our satellite would therefore leave us unless we revolved with it around the sun. The earth is only able to give the annual lunar orbit a serpentine shape so as to have the satellite alternately outside and inside her own orbit.

(c) Newton also alludes to comets and shows that in the Ptolemaic system each of them needs an epicycle parallel to the ecliptic to turn its orbit towards the sun. With our present cometary knowledge of comets the argument can be made stringent. Numerous comets have their orbits well determined. Over two hundred of them have passed the ecliptic within the earth's orbit, and some, like Halley's comet at its last appearance, almost in line between sun and earth. Most of the comets, including Halley's, come to us from distances beyond the orbit of Neptune. Now, computation shows that they all have their common focus in the sun and that the earth is, as a rule, outside their orbits. In the case of Halley's comet the earth was, at one time, even on the convex side of the orbit. The mechanical conclusion is as follows: If, without any regard to the earth, the comets obey the sun, the earth must do the

(2) The daily rotation of the earth

The daily rotation of the earth around its axis is demonstrated in many ways. Once the annual revolution is proved, the daily rotation becomes a matter of course. If the earth has not the power to swing the sun around its own centre once a year, it will be far less able to do so in one day; and if it cannot swing around one sun, what could it do with the countless suns of the universe? Yet, we have direct and special proofs of the diurnal rotation. They all rest on mechanics, partly celestial, partly terrestrial. Celestial mechanics has turned into proofs what formerly seemed to be difficulties. This occurred in the case of stellar parallaxes, the absence of which had been objected by Ptolemy, and the existence of which was shown by Bessel. The precession of the equinoxes also has changed its role. Laplace showed it to be due to the action of the sun on the protuberant equatorial regions of the rotating earth. The similar result of the action of the moon upon the earth is called nutation. Laplace's demonstration was based upon the flatness of the earth, which had been measured in the seventeenth century, and was also theoretically deduced by him from the existence of centrifugal force. We have here a complex reverse of roles. The consequences of centrifugal force, so strongly urged against diurnal rotation by Ptolemy, turned out to be the cause of precession, known to Hipparchus, and of several phenomena, discovered only after the time of Copernicus. Precession was still a matter of special difficulty to Copernicus, and the one of the three terrestrial motions that he could not explain. To him it was the resultant of two annual, slightly different, conical rotations of opposite direction, to which no cause could be assigned.

So much about the proofs from celestial mechanics. There are others, by means of instruments, so-called laboratory experiments. They commenced immediately after the time of Galilei and seem to have received the impulse from his trial. The experiments may be classified chronologically in five periods or groups. From 1640 to 1770 they were crude trials without result. The years from 1790 to 1831 were a period of experiments with falling bodies. The twenty years from 1832 to 1852 were a time of pendulum experiments. Then followed a period, 1852-80, of experiments with more elaborate apparatus; and the last, since 1902, may be called that of modern methods.

• The first period is represented by the names of Calignon, Mersenne, Viviani, and Newton. Calignon (1643) experimented with plumb lines, without knowing what their variations should tell. Mersenne (1643) had pieces of artillery directed to the zenith, rightly expecting a westerly deviation of the balls. Foucault's pendulum experiment was materially forestalled by Viviani at Florence (1661) and Poleni at Padua (1742), but was not formally understood. The easterly deviation of falling bodies was explicitly announced by Newton, but unsuccessfully tried by Hooke (1680). Galilei had alluded to it before, in his "Dialogo" (Opere, VII 1897), in a contradictory manner. In one place {p. 170) he denied the possibility of the experiment, in another (p. 259) he affirmed it. Lalande missed the opportunity of first making Newton's experiment at the Paris observatory. The honour was reserved to Abbate Guglielmini.
• The second period comprises the experiments with falling bodies, made by Guglielmini at Bologna (1790-2), by Benzenberg at Hamburg (1802) and Schlebusch (1804), and by Reich at Freiburg (1831) The general drift of the balls towards the east side of the meridian was unmistakable. It proved the rotation of the earth from west to east, but only in a qualitative manner. Quantitative proofs were obtained in the next period.
• Three kinds of pendulum experiments filled the third period. The horizontal pendulum was invented and tried by Hengler, in 1832, for the effects of the centrifugal force. The instrument is still waiting for a more delicate manipulator. Foucault's vertical pendulum dates from 1851, and was tried first in a cellar, then in the Paris Observatory, and last in the Pantheon. The deviation of the pendulum from the original vertical plane was clockwise, as expected by Foucault, but no quantitative measures were ever published by him. They were made in many places, chiefly in large cathedrals. The best results known are those of Secchi in Rome (1851) and of Garthe in Cologne (1852). Secchi experimented in San Ignazio, in presence of many Italian scientists, and Garthe in the cathedral, before Cardinal Geissel, royal princes, and numerous spectators. The counterproof in the southern hemisphere, where the deviation of the pendulum must be counter-clockwise, has not been made to this day. The attempt at Rio de Janeiro (1851) cannot be regarded as such. A conical pendulum was set in motion by Bravais in the same meridian room of the observatory and in the same year as the vertical pendulum of Foucault. The experiment had the advantage of being reversible. Swinging clockwise, the pendulum appeared to move faster than in the opposite sense, for the reason that the theodolite, in which it was observed, followed the rotation of the earth. Two pendulums used simultaneously, and moving in opposite directions, yielded the correct value of the diurnal rotation within a tenth of one per cent, a result never reached by Foucault's pendulum.
• The second half of the nineteenth century, the fourth period, is remarkable for complicated experiments and profound theories. The instruments were the gyroscope and the compound pendulum. The invention of the former is due to Foucault, and furnished a new proof of the diurnal rotation. It was constructed by him in three forms: the universal, the vertical, and the horizontal gyroscope, so called according to their degrees of freedom. The vertical gyroscope was perfected by Gilbert (1878) into his barogyroscope, while the horizontal gyroscope was lately introduced on warships as an astronomical compass. The proofs of Foucault and Gilbert could only be qualitative, for want of electric motors. The delicate experiment made in 1879 with the compound pendulum by Kamerlingh Onnes, comprises those of Foucault and Bravais as special cases, and in general all the movements between the plane and the circular pendulum vibrations (see "Specola Vaticana", I, 1911, Appendix 1).

• The fifth and last period of experiments falls within the early twentieth century and presents no less than four proofs, all widely different among themselves. The difficult experiment with falling bodies was brought within the walls of the physical laboratory by E. H. Hall in 1902. Under improved facilities, a fall of only twenty-three metres showed the easterly deviation better than all the preceding trials with heights from three to seven times as large. In 1904 the gyroscope was made to yield quantitative results by Föppl. An electric motor gave to a double wheel of 160 pounds a speed of over two thousand turns a minute. The rotation of the earth was strong enough to deviate the horizontal axis, which was suspended on a triple wire, six and a half degrees from the primevertical. A novel scheme had been tried by Perrot in 1859. He made a liquid flow through the central orifice of a circular vessel, and rendered the currents visible by means of floating dust. We have to take his word, that the currents were spiral-shaped, and ran counter-clockwise. The experiment was repeated by Tumlirz in Vienna (1908), and its result photographed and compared with theory. While the experiments of Hall, Föppl, and Tumlirz are repetitions of former ones, with improved methods, the next proof of the diurnal rotation is new as an experiment, although forecast in the idea by Poinsot as early as 1851. It was carried out at the Vatican Observatory in 1909. Its principle is that of equal areas described in equal times, applied to a horizontal beam suspended in form of a torsion balance, on which heavy masses can be moved. The shifting of the masses from extremity to centre will make the beam turn faster than the earth; the opposite will happen in the reverse case. The last proof had never been proposed before, and consists in observing the thread of the Atwood machine in a telescope. Viewed in the meridian, the thread of the falling weight is seen to come down east of the plumb-line, but viewed in the prime vertical it remains exactly plumb. This experiment was likewise carried out at the Vatican Observatory in 1912 (see "Specola Vaticana", I, 1911, appendix II, 1912).

  Some writers have expressed surprise that Catholic scientists were allowed to take part in the experiments, e.g. that Bonfioli, domestic prelate to Pius VI assisted Guglielmini in measuring the impressions of the balls on the plate of wax, or that Secchi demonstrated the rotation of the earth in Rome "before all the people" (Wolf, "Handbuch", I, Zurich, 1890, no. 262 c). We must remember, however, that what was condemned in a former age was not the experiment but a then gratuitous assertion.

II. PAST AND FUTURE OF THE WORLD

How the world has developed into its present shape, and how it will pass out of it, science may never tell. Cosmogony is the accepted name for all the hypotheses on the past (from kosmos world, and gignesthai to originate). A corresponding form from the Greek, to designate the speculations on the future of the world, cosmothany (world's death), has been used; more correct formations are perhaps: cosmophthory (phthora, corruption) or cosmodysy (dysis, occasus, decline). World must here be taken in all its narrower or wider meanings, as earth, solar system, stellar system, universe.

A. Cosmogony

No cosmogony can really claim to be a scientific theory or even hypothesis, in the proper sense of a systematic development of the details from a definite number of assumed principles. Proposition and rejection are alike vague and uncertain, and must be so, as processes of extrapolation from laboratory laws to the fabric of the Creator.

For more information on mythical cosmogony, the reader is referred to the article COSMOGONY. For Biblical cosmogony, see HEXAEMERON.

B. Cosmodysy

This is the proposed name for all the hypotheses on the future of the world. The literature on cosmodysy is far less extensive than that on cosmogony. The youth of the world seems to exert a stronger charm on human speculation than its old age and decline. There does not seem to exist any mythical cosmodysy, and very little can be found on scientific cosmodysies. So much the more explicit and detailed is Biblical cosmodysy (see JUDGMENT, DIVINE, IV). And yet, from a scientific point of view, the prospective conclusion from the known premises of the present world would seem to be better warranted than retrospective speculations upon cosmical conditions entirely unknown.

One such theory is the extinction theory. This theory rests on a certain irreversible process, common to all natural phenomena, called entropy. While the sum total of cosmical energy is supposed to remain constant, the amount of potential energy is steadily diminishing. It is the unstable condition of potential energy that animates all activity in the universe. Drifting as it is towards stability. it will end in exhaustion and repose. The process is not reversible and consequently not cyclical. Applying it to the earth but abstracting from organic life, it will mean the extinction of its interior plutonic power and of its rotary speed. The raising and shifting of continents, the continual tremors, occasional earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, the gradual shrinkage of the crust and the wandering of the polar ice caps, are so many irretrievable losses of potential energy.

Our scanty science of cosmodysy might be a temptation to look for further information in the Scripture. Will the darkening of sun and moon, and the falling of stars, lend support to the extinction theory, for instance? The like question may be raised in cosmogony. Can Genesis be consulted to decide between the various hypotheses?

The answer is given by an attempt, made three centuries ago, in cosmography. The Scriptural decision of the controversy, whether the solar system be geocentric or heliocentric, was bound to be a failure either way. Cosmogonic revelation was given to impress on the human race its physical and moral dependency upon the Creator. Likewise has cosmodysic revelation the purpose of holding out to mankind the final administration of justice. Purely scientific curiosity will find no satisfaction in Scripture.

J.H. HAGEN

Universities

The principal Catholic foundations have been treated in special articles; here the general aspects of the subject are presented:

I. Origin and organization;
II. Academic work and development;
III. Renaissance and Reformation;
IV. Modern period;
V. Catholic action.

I. ORIGIN AND ORGANIZATION

Although the name university is sometimes given to the celebrated schools of Athens and Alexandria, it is generally held that the universities first arose in the Middle Ages. For those that were chartered during the thirteenth century, dates and documents can be accurately given; but the beginnings of the earliest are obscure, hence the legends connected with their origin: Oxford was supposed to have been founded by King Alfred, Paris by Charlemagne, and Bologna by Theodosius II (A.D. 433). These myths, though they survived well on into modern times, are now generally rejected, and the historian's only concern with them is to discover their sources and trace their development. It is known, however, that during the eleventh and twelfth centuries a revival of studies took place, in medicine at Salerno, in law at Bologna, and in theology at Paris. The medical school at Salerno was the oldest and the most famous of its kind in the Middle Ages; but it exerted no influence on the development of the universities. At Paris, the study of dialectics received a fresh impetus from teachers like Roscellin and Abelard, and eventually it displaced the study of the Classics which, especially at Chartres, had constituted an energetic though short-lived humanistic movement. The dialectical method, moreover, was applied to theological questions and, mainly through the work of Peter Lombard, was developed into Scholasticism (q.v.). This meant not only that all sorts of questions were taken up for discussion and examined with the utmost subtlety, but also that a new basis was provided for the exposition of doctrine and that theology itself was cast into the systematic form which it presents in the works of St. Thomas, and above all, in the great "Summa". At Bologna, the new movement was practical rather than speculative, it afected the teaching, not of philosophy and theology, but of civil and canon law. Previous to the twelfth century, Bologna ahd been famous as a school of arts, while in regard to legal science it was far surpassed by other cities, e.g. Rome, Pavia, and Ravenna. That it became within a comparatively short time the chief centre of the teaching of law, not in Italy alone but in all Europe, was due mainly to Irnerius and to Gratian (q.v.). The former introduced the systematic study of the whole Corpus juris civilis, and differentiated the course in law from that in the Liberal Arts; the latter, in his "Decretum", applied the scholastic method to canon law, and secured for this science a distinct place apart from theology. In consequence, Bologna, long before it became a university, attracted large numbers of students from all parts of the Empire, and its teachers, as they became more numerous, also attained unrivalled prestige.

The school growing thus vigorously from within was further strengthened by the privileges which the emperor granted. In the "Authentic" Habita issued in 1158, Frederick I took under his protection the scholars who resorted to the schools of Italy for the purpose of study, and decreed that they should travel without hindrance or molestation, and that, in case complaint was lodged against them, they should have the option of defending themselves either before their professors or before the bishop. This grant naturally turned to the profit of Bologna; but it also served as the basis of many privileges subsequently accorded to this and to other schools. That Paris also enjoyed similar protection and immunities from an early date is highly probable, though the first grant of which there is record was made by Philip Augustus in 1200. To these two factors of internal growth and external advantage, a third had to be added before Paris or Bologna could become a university: it was necessary to secure a corporate organization. Both cities by the middle of the twelfth century possessed the requisite elements in the way of schools, sholars, and teachers. At Paris three schools were especially prominent: Saint Victor's, attached to the church of the canons regular; Sainte-Geneviève-du-Mont, conducted first by seculars and later by canons regular; and Notre-Dame, the school of the Cathedral on the "Island". According to one account these three schools unived to form the university; Denifle, however (Die Universitäten, 655 sqq.), maintains that it originated in Notre-Dame only, and that this school therefore was the cradle of the University of Paris. This does not imply that the cathedral school as an institution was elevated to the rank of a university by royal or pontifical charter. The initiative was taken by the professors who, with the licence of the chancellor of Notre-Dame and subject to his authority, taught either at the cathedral or in private dwellings on the "Island". When these professors, in the last quarter of the twelfth century, inited in one teaching body, the University of Paris was founded (For the older view, see PARIS, UNIVERSITY OF).

This consortium magistorum included the professors of theology, law, medicine, and arts (philosophy). As the teachers of the same subject had special interests, they naturally formed smaller groups within the centre body. The name "faculty" originally designated a discipline or branch of knowledge, and was employed in this sense by Honorius III in his letter (18 Feb., 1219) to the scholars of Paris; later, it came to mean the group of professors engaged in teaching the same subject. The closer organization into faculties was occasioned in the first instance by questions which arose in 1213, regarding the conferring of degrees. Then came the drafting of statutes for each faculty whereby its own internal affairs were regulated and lines of demarcation drawn between its sphere of action and those of the other faculties. This organization must have been completed within the first half, or perhaps first quarter, of the thirteenth century, since Gregory IX in the Bull "Parens scientiarum" (1231) recognizes the existence of separate faculties. The scholars, on their part, just as naturally fell into different groups. They belonged to various nationalities, and those from the same country must have realized the advantage, or even the necessity, of banding together in a city like Paris to which they came as strangers. This was the origin of the "Nations", which probably were organized early in the thirteenth century, though the first documentary evidence of their existence dates from 1249. The four Nations at Paris were those of the French, the Picards, the Normans, and the English. They were distinctively student associations, formed for purposes of administration and discipline, whereas the faculties were organized to deal with matters relating to the several sciences and the work of teaching. The Nations, therefore, did not constitute the university, nor were they identical with the faculties. The masters in arts were included in the Nations and at the same time belonged to the faculty of arts, because the course in arts was simply a preparation for higher studies in one of the superior faculties, and hence arts formed an "inferior" faculty, whose masters were still classed as scholars. The professors of the superior faculties did not belong to the Nations.

Each Nation elected from among its members a masters of arts as procurator (proctor), and the four procurators elected the rector, i.e. the head of the Nations, not, at first, the head of the university. As, however, the faculty of arts was closely bound up with the Nations, the rector gradually became the chief officer of that faculty, and was recognized as such in 1274. His authority extended later to the faculties of law and medicine (1279) and finally (1341) to the faculty of theology; thenceforward the rector is the head of the entire university. On the other hand, the office of rector did not confer very large powers. From the beginning the chief authority had been exercised by the chancellor, as the pope's representative; and though this authority, by reason of conflicts with the university, had been somewhat reduced during the thirteenth century, the chancellor was still sufficiently powerful to overshadow the rector. Before the university came into existence, the chancellor had conferred the licence to teach, and this function he continued to perform all though the process of organization and after the faculties with their various officials were fully established.

At Bologna, towards the close of the twelfth century, voluntary associations were established by the foreign, i.e., non-Bolognese, students for purposes of mutual support and protection. These students were not boys, but mature men; many of them were beneficed clergymen. In their organization they copied the guilds of travelling tradesmen; each association comprised a number of Nations, enacted its own statutes, and elected a rector who was assisted by a body of consiliarii. These student-guilds were known as universitates, i.e. corporations in the accepted legal sense, not teaching bodies. Originally four in number they were reduced by the middle of the thirteenth century to two: universitas citramontanorum and universitas ultramontanorum. Neither the Bolognese students nor the doctors, being citizens of Bologna, belonged to a "university". The doctors were employed, under contract, and paid by the scholars, and were subject, in many respects, to the statutes framed by the student-bodies. In spite of this dependence, however, the professors retained control of strictly academic affairs; they were the rectores scholarum, while the heads of the universities were rectores scholarium; in particular, the right of promotion, i.e. conferring degrees, was reserved to the doctors. These also formed associations, the collegia doctorum, which probably existed at or before the time of the founding of the student "universities". At first the doctors had full charge of examinations and in their own name granted the licence to teach. But in 1219 Honorius III gave the Archdeacon of Bologna exclusive authority to confer the doctorate, thus creating an office equivalent to that of the chancellor at Paris. The doctorate itself, as implying the right to membership in the collegium, was gradually restricted to the narrower circle of the doctores legentes, i.e. actually teaching. On the other hand, the student control was lessened by the fact that, in order to offset the inducements offered by rival towns, the city of Bologna, towards the end of the thirteenth century, began to pay the professors a regular salary in place of the fees formerly given, in such amounts as they saw fit, by the scholars. As a result the appointment of the professors was taken over by the city, and eventually by the reformatores studii, a board established by the local authority. Meantime the two "universities" were being drawn together in one body and this was brought into closer relations with the college of doctors; so that Clement V (10 March, 1310) could speak of a magistorum et scholarium universitas at Bologna. At the beginning of the sixteenth century there was only one rector.

The growth of Oxford followed, in the main, that of Paris. In the middle of the twelfth century the schools were flourishing: Robert Pullen (q.v.), author of the "Sentences" on which the more famous work of Peter Lombard is largely based, and Vacarius, the eminent Lombard jurist, are mentioned as teachers. The number of students, already considerable, was swelled in 1167 by an exodus from Paris. There were two Nations: the Boreales (Northern) included the English and Scottish students; the Australes (Southern), the Welsh and Irish. In 1274 these coalesced in one Nation, but the two proctors remained distinct. In 1209, owing to difficulties with the town, 3000 scholars dispersed. On their return, the papal legate Nicholas issued (1214) an ordinance enjoining that the town should pay an annual sum for the use of poor scholars and that "in case a clerk should be arrested by the townsmen, he should at once be surrendered on the demand of the Bishop of Lincoln, or the archdeacon of the place or his official or the chancellor, or whomsoever the Bishop of Lincoln shall depute to this office" (Muniments, I, p. 2). The first statutes were enacted in 1252, and confirmed by Innocent IV in 1254. The chancellor at first was an independent official appointed by the Bishop of Lincoln to act as ecclesiastical judge in scholastic matters. Gradually, however, he was absorbed into the university and became its head.

The development at Paris and Bologna explains the term by which the university was first designated, i.e. studium generale. This did not originally and essentially mean a school of universal learning, nor did it include all the four faculties; theology was often omitted or even excluded by the early charters. It first appears at Bologna in 1360, at Salamanca towards the end of the fourteenth century, at Montpellier in 1421; yet each of these schools was a studium generale in the original sense of the term, i.e. a school which admitted students from all parts, enjoyed special privileges, and conferred a right to teach that was acknowledged everywhere. This jus ubique docendi was implied in the very nature of the studium generale; it was first explicitly conferred by Gregory IX in the Bull for Toulouse, 27 April, 1233, which declares that "any master examined there and approved in any faculty shall everywhere have the right to teach without further examination".

Universitas, as understood in the Middle Ages, was a legal term; it got its meaning from the Corpus juris civilis, and it denoted an association taken as a whole, i.e. in its corporate capacity. Employed with reference to a school, universitas did not mean a collection of all the sciences, but rather the entire group of persons engaged at a given institution in scientific pursuits, i.e. the whole body of teachers and students: universitas magistorum et scholarium. This is the meaning of the term in official documents relating to Paris and Bologna; thus Alexander IV (10 Dec., 1255) states expressly that under the name university he understands "all the masters and scholars residing at Paris, to whatever society or congregation they may belong." Gradually, however, the terms universitas and studium came to be used promiscuously to denote an institution of learning: Universitas Ozoniensis and Studium Oxoniense were both applied to Oxford. There is mention as early as 1279 of delicta in universitate Oxoniae perpetrata (Munimenta, I, 39), and in the next century such phrases occur as (1306) in universitate Oxoniae studere (ibid., 87 sqq.). That the terms had become practically synonymous at the beginning of the fourteenth century appears from a statement of Clement V, 13 July, 1312, to the effect that the Archbishop of Dublin, John Lech, had reported that in those parts there was no scolarium universitas vel studium generale. About 1300 also the expression mater universitas was used by the Oxford masters, and these may have taken it from a document of Innocent IV (6 Oct., 1254) in which the pope speaks of Oxford as faecunda mater. Later, the expression alma mater was applied, e.g. to Paris in 1389; Cologna, 1392; Oxford, 1411. Alma was probably suggested by the liturgical use, as e.g. in the hymn beginning "Alma redemptoris mater".

The earliest universities had no charters; they grew ex consuetudine. Out of these others quickly developed, by migration, or by formal establishment. As the universities in the beginning possessed no buildings like our modern halls and laboratories, it was an easy matter for the students and professors, in case they became dissatisfied in one place, to find accommodations in another. Conflicts with the town often led to such migrations, especially where some rival town offered inducements: hence the secessions from Bologna to Vicenza (1204), to Arezzo (1213), to Padua (1222), the "great dispersion" from Paris (1229), and the migration (1209) from Oxford to Cambridge. But causes of a less tumultuous sort were also operative. The privileges enjoyed by the first universities lead other cities to seek similar advantages in order to keep their own scholars at home, and possibly attract outsiders, thereby adding to the local prosperity and prestige. Bologna and Paris served as patterns for the new organizations, and the desired privileges were sought from pope or civil ruler. It became, indeed, usual for the papal charter to include a set formula granting the new university "the same privileges, immunities, and liberties which are enjoyed by the masters and scholars of Paris" (or Bologna); thus Oxford, Cambridge, St. Andrews, and Aberdeen were to a large extent modelled on Paris and Glasgow on Bologna. The Parisian type was also reproduced at the earliest German universities, Prague, Vienna, Erfurt, and Heidelberg; but these soon began to depart from the original. The Nations were of less imprtance; the rector might be chosen from any faculty; the authority was vested in permanent and endowed professrors who predominated in the university council; and the colleges were under the control of the university, which kept the teaching in its own hands.

In Ireland the first step towards establishing a university was taken by John Lech, Archbishop of Dublin. At his instance, Clement V issued, 11 July, 1113, a Bull for the erection of a university near Dublin; Lech, however, died a year later, and nothing was accomplished until his successor, Alexander de Bicknor, in 1320 established a university at St. Patrick's Cathedral with the approval of Pope John XXII. The first chancellor was William Rodiart, Dean of St. Patrick's, and the first graduates William de Hardite, O.P., Edward of Karwarden, O.P., and Henry Cogry, O.F.M. Lectures were still given in 1358; in that year Edward II issued letters-patent protecting the members of the university on their travels, and in 1364, Lionel, Duke of Clarence, founded a lectureship. The university failed from want of endowment, as did also the one founded by the Irish Parliament at Drogheda in 1465.

The Founders: Popes and Civil Rulers

In view of the importance of the universities for culture and progress, it is quite intelligible that there should be considerable discussion and divergence of opinion regarding the authority which should receive credit for their foundation. It has, e.g. been maintained that only the pope could establish a university; contrariwise, it has been held that such an establishment was the exclusive perogative of the civil rulers, i.e. emperor and king. These, however, are extreme positions, neither of which accords with the facts, while both are based on a study of a limited group of universities and, in large measure, on a failure to appreciate the relations of Church and State in the thirteenth century. From misunderstandings on the latter point erroneous conclusions have been drawn, not only regarding the origins of universities, but also the general attutude of the age towards the papacy and vice versa. Once it is settled, e.g. that, according to the view prevalent in the thirteenth century, only the pope could found a university, it is easy to interpret any similar foundation by a monarch or any initiative taken by a municipality, as evidence of hostility to the Holy See and as a first move towards that "emancipation" which actually came to pass in the sixteenth century. By the same sort of reasoning the inference is drawn that the pope resented the action of the civil power in granting charters and repressed all attempts at freedom on the part of the universities themselves. To set these conclusions in the proper light, it is sufficient to glance at the various modes of foundation.

Previous to the Reformation 81 universities were established. Of these 13 had no charter; they developed spontaneously ex consuetudine; 33 had only the papal charter; 15 were founded by imperial or royal authority; 20 by both papal and imperial (or royal) charters. Once the oldest universities, especialy Paris and Bologna, had grown to fame and influence so that their graduates enjoyed the licentia ubique docenti, it was recognized that a new institution, in order to become a studium generale, required the authorization of the supreme authority, i.e. of the pope as head of the Church or of the emperor as protector of all Christendom. Thus in "Las Siete Patridas" (1256-1263), Alfonso of Sabio declares that a "studium generale must be established by mandate of the pope, the emperor, or the king"); and St. Thomas (Op. contra impugn. relig., c. iii): "ordinare de studio pertinet ad eum qi praest reipublicae, et praecipue ad authoritatem apostolicae sedis qua universalis ecclesia gubernatur, cui per generale studium providetus", i.e. in the matter of universities the authority belongs to the chief ruler of the commonwealth and especially to the Apostolic See, the head of the universal Church, "the interest of which is furthered by the university". These last words contain the essential reason for seeking authorization from the pope: the university was not be be a merely local or national institution; its teaching and its degrees were to be recognized throughout the Christian world. On the other hand, in the civil order, the emperor was supreme; hence he conferred on the universities founded by him, without any papal charter, the right to grant degrees in all the faculties, theology and canon law included. The imperial charters were recognized by the popes and, whenever necessary, additional privileges were granted. It cannot then be said that the action of Maximilian I in founding (1502) the University of Wittenberg was an epoch-making event; Charles IV had long before done the same for Siena, Arezzo, an Orange, and the charters with which he founded Pavia and Lucca precceded by twenty years the papal grants.

The kings were not on the same plane as the emperor. They could indeed found a university, appoint the chancellor, and authorize him to confer degrees; but they could not establish a studium generale in the full sense of the term; what they founded was a university respectu regni, i.e. the degrees it granted were valid only within the limits of the kingdom. This was the situation at Naples, founded (1224) by Frederick II, and especially in the Spanish universities. The kings themselves were aware of their limitations in this respect, and accordingly sought the papal authorization. The popes on their part recognized the royal charters as valid, and added to them the character of university required for a studium generale. In some cases the papal intervention was necessary and was sought, not simply to confirm what the king had established, but to save or revive the university: such e.g. were the measures taken by Honorius III (1220) for Palencia, by Clement VII (1379) for Perpignan, and by Julius II (1464) for Huesca — all royal foundations which showed no vitality until the pope came to their assistance. The power of bishops and municipalities was, of course, still more restricted. They could take the initiative by calling professors, establishing courses of study, and providing endowments; but sooner or later they were obliged to seek authorization from the pope. This was notably the case in Italy where the free and enterprising cities (Treviso, Pisa, Florence, Siena), stimulated by Bologna's example, undertook the founding of their own universities. At Siena, it seemed at first that the attempt to get on without either imperial or papal charter would succeed; the studium, inaugurated in 1275, had ample funds and a large body of professors and students which was continually increased by an emigration from Bologna (1312); yet in 1325 it was on the verge of collapsing, and its existence was not secured until it obtained university privileges from Charles IV in 1457 and papal grants from Gregory XII in 1404. St. Andrews in Scotland was more fortunate. It was founded by Bishop Henry Wardlaw in 1411; but shortly after its opening the bishop in a document addressed 27 Feb., 1412, to the masters and scholars speaks of the "universitas a nobis salva tamen sedis apostolice auctoritate de facto instituta et fundata". Six months later (28 Aug., 1412), Benedict XIII (Avignon) issued the charter of foundation, and appointed Wardlaw as chancellor.

There is no ground, then, for the inference that the founding of universities by the civil power and their organization by laymen for lay students was a symptom of antagonism to the Holy See or an attempt at emancipation from the authority of the Church. Such an interpretation of the facts merely projects modern ideas back into a period in which an entirely different spirit prevailed. That spirit was one of co-operation, even of emulation, in a common cause; and neither the spirit nor the cause would have been possible but for the unity of faith and of hierarchical jurisdiction which held the West together in one Church. Had this unity included all Christendom, the East would doubtless have had its share in the university movement; at any rate, it is significant that in Russia and the other countries dominated by the schismatic Greek Church, no university was established during the Middle Ages.

Besides issuing charters the popes contibuted in various ways to the development and prosperity of the universities. (1) Clerics who held benefices were dispensed from the obligation of residence, if they absented themselves in order to attend a university. Both lay and clerical students enjoyed certain exemptions, e.g. from taxation, from military service, from the jurisdiction of the ordinary courts, and from citation to courts at a distance from Paris (privilegium fori). To safeguard these privileges was the special duty of the conservator Apostolic, usually a bishop or archbishop appointed by the pope for this purpose. (2) By the Bull "Parens scientiarum" (1231), the magna charta of the university of Paris, Gergory IX authorized the masters, in the event of an outrage committed by any one on a master or a scholar and not redressed within fifteen days, to suspend their lectures. This right of cessation was frequently made use of in conflicts between town and gown. (3) On various occasions the popes intervened to protect the scholars against the encroachments of the local civil authorities: Honorius III (1220) took the part of the scholars at Bologna when the podestà drew up statutes that interfered with their liberties; Nicholas IV (1288) threatened to disrupt the studium at Padua unless the municipal authorities repealed within fifteen days the ordinances they had framed against the masters and scholars. Even the chancellor of Paris, when he demanded of the masters an oath of obedience to himself, was checked by Innocent III (1212), and his powers were greatly reduced by the action of later popes. It became in fact quite common for the university to lay its grievances before the Holy See, and its appeal was usually successful. (4) In many instances, especially in Germany, the endowment of the universities was drawn, largely if not entirely, from the revenues of the monasteries and chapters. More than once the pope intervened to secure the payment of their salaries to the professors, e.g. Boniface VIII (1301) and Clement V (1313) at Salamanca; Clement VI (1346 at Valladolid: and Gregory IX (1236) at Toulouse, where Count Raymond had refused to pay the salaries. The popes also set the example of endowing colleges, and these, founded by kings, bishops, priests, nobles, or private citizens, became not only residential halls for students but also the chief financial support of the university.

II. ACADEMIC WORK AND DEVELOPMENT

The Academic Year

In the earlier period lectures were given throughtout the year, with short recesses at Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost and a longer vacation in summer. At Paris this vacation was limited by order of Gregory IX (1261) to one month, but by the end of the fourteenth century it had been extended for the arts faculty from 25 June to 25 Aug., for theology and canon law from 28 June to 15 Sept. The year really began on 1 Oct., and was divided into two periods; the grand ordinary, from 1 Oct. to Easter, and the little ordinary, from Easter to the end of June. At Bologna the vacation began 7 Sept., and the scholastic year opened again on 19 Oct.; this, however, was interrupted for ten days at Christmas, two weeks at Easter, and three weeks at carnival. In Germany, there was considerable difference between the calendars of the various universities and even between those of the faculties at the same university. In general, the year began about the middle of October and closed about the middle of June. But at Cologne, Heidelberg, and Vienna there was a little ordinary from 25 Aug., to 9 Oct. The vacation, however, was not a complete suspension of academic work; the extraordinary lectures, given for the most part by bachelors, were continued, and credit was given to students who attended them. About the middle of the fifteenth century, the division of the year into two semesters, summer and winter, was introduced at Leipzig, and eventually was adopted by the other German universities.

Lectures

Both the annual calendar and the daily schedule took into account the distinction between ordinary and extraordinary or cursory lectures. This originated at Bologna where certain books of the civil law ("Digestum Vetus" and "Code") were ordinary, while others ("Infortiatum", "Digestum novum", and the smaller textbooks) were extraordinary. In canon law, the ordinary books were the Decretum and the five books of the Decretals (Gregory IX); the extraordinary were the Clementines and Extravagants. Ordinary lectures were reserved to doctors, and were given in the forenoon; extraordinary lectures, known at Paris as cursory, and given by masters or by bachelors, were assigned to the afternoon during the year; in the vacation they might be given at any time of the day, as the ordinary lectures were then suspended. Cursory meant either that the lecture was followed by the cursores, i.e. candidates for the licence, or that it ran rapidly over the subject-matter, whereas the treatment in the ordinary lecture was more thorough.

In all the faculties the work of teaching centred about books, i.e. the texts, compilations, and glosses which were regarded as the chief authorities in each subject. At the beginning of the year (or semester) the books were distributed among the professors, who were obliged to use them in accordance with the regulations established by each faculty regarding the daily schedule, the length of the course, the hall to be used, the academic dress to be worn, and the method to be followed. The lecture was in the strict sense a praelectio (whence the German Vorlesung); the professor had to read the text; in the ordinary lectures, he was not allowed to dictate anything beyond the divisions and conclusions and such corrections of the text as he deemed necessary. The scholars were supposed to have their own copies of the text; if they were too poor to procure the books, the professor might dictate the text to them, not in the regular lecture but at special classes or exercises (repetitions). The plan of the lecture was analytic: careful explanation and definition of terms (ponere et determinare); division of the matter and discussion of the several points followed by a summary of the essential (scindere et summare); presentation of problems suggested by the text (quaestiones), and solution of objections. In lectures on law the reading of the glosses was an important feature, and cases were frequently proposed to illustrate principles. At the ordinary lectures, the scholars were not supposed to ask questions; at the extraordinary, greater freedom was permitted, the scholars being encouraged to express their doubts as to the meaning of the texts and to request further information on obscure matters. More thorough training, however, was given in the resumption and repetitions which the masters held at stated times for the treatment of special problems. The exercises, conducted in dialectical form, afforded full opportunity for discussion between scholar and master; and they served as examinations by which the progress of the scholar was tested. But the most important of the academic exercises was the disputation. This was of two kinds: d. ordinaria and d. de quodlibet. The ordinary disputation took place every week and lasted from morning till noon, or till evening according to the number of participants. On the day set apart for this purposes the lectures and other exercises were suspended, so that all the masters, bachelors, and scholars might be present at the disputation. One of the masters (disputans) announced, in the form of question or thesis, the subject of the debate; other masters (opponentes) presented arguments against the thesis; answers to the arguments were given by two or three bachelors (respondentes) appointed for the occasion. The number of arguments were fixed by statute or was fixed by the dean of the faculty whose duty it was to preside. Throughout the disputation the syllogistic form was employed. The disputation de quodlibet was held only once a year, but with greater solemnity than the ordinary, and over a wider range of topics. The master elected or appointed for the occasion, and known as the quodlibetarius, had to debate a separate question with each of the other masters who chose to enter the lists. The disputation lasted several days, sometimes a fortnight. The arguments and their solutions were written out and preserved in book form. A specimen may be found in the "Quodlibetales" of St. Thomas. It was mainly out of these lectures, repetitions, and disputations that the works of the medieval doctors grew; so that the various commentaries, summae, and books of "sentences" afford the best idea of university teaching both as to content and as to method.

Courses of Study: Degrees

The distribution of the subjects to be studied and of the books to be read in the course was regulated in view of the degrees, i.e. of the various steps (gradus) by which the student advanced from the stage of a simple scholar to that of a master or doctor. The system of degrees developed out of the necessity of restricting the right to teach, and consequently of fixing the qualifications which the teacher should possess. It did not, any more than the university itself, spring suddenly into existence, nor did it everywhere present the same details. Three degrees, however, were generally recognized: baccalaureate, licentiate, and doctorate or mastership. The requirements for these varied at different periods and in different universities; each faculty, moreover, had its own regulations regarding the length of courses and the subjects of study; in particular, there was a rather broad division between the faculty of arts and the superior faculties of theology, medicine, and law. For the courses of study in arts, see ARTS, BACHELOR OF; ARTS, THE FACULTY OF; ARTS, MASTER OF.

In theology, the texts were the Bible and the "Sentences" of Peter Lombard; in law, the books mentioned above; in medicine, the works of Galen, Avicenna, and other writers prescribed for Montpellier by Clement V in 1309. The medical course included also practical work in anatomy, for which the "Anatomia" of Mondino (1275-1237) of Bologna and a similar text by Henri de Mondeville (1260-1320) of Montepllier, served as guides. The student was further required, before graduation, to accompany the professor on the latter's visits to the sick for the purpose of clinical study. For degrees in the higher faculties, see DOCTOR.

Students

The most conspicuous feature of the student body as a whole was its cosmopolitan character. This is evidenced by the division into Nations mentioned above. The University of Bologna owed its origin mainly to associations of foreign students, and among these the Germans enjoyed exceptional privileges. At Paris the English nation was prominent, and Irish scholars were found in the continental universities long before they were expelled from the English universities in 1423. What the total number was at any of the older universities is a debated question. According to Odofredus, Bologna, at the close of the twelfth century, had 10,000; Oxford, according to Richard Fitz Ralph (d. 1360), had at one time 30,000 and in his own day 6,000, while Wyclif (d. 1384) placed the "heroic" number at 60,000, in his own day at 3,000; the earlier accounts gave Paris between 20,000 and 40,000. Recent estimates have reduced these numbers, allowing Paris a maximum 6000-7000, Bologna about the same, Oxford 1500-3000 (Rashdall, op. cit. infra). For the German universities, the numbers are still smaller; in 1380-1389 Prague had 1027, in the second half of the sixteenth century Vienna had 933, in 1450-1479 Cologne had 852, in 1472 Leipzig had 662; while Greifswald in 1465-1478 had only 103 and Freiburg, in 1460-1500, only 143 (Paulsen). In respect of age the differences were considerable. A boy could begin arts at between twelve or fifteen years of age and graduate at twenty or twenty-one. The students of the superior faculties were, of course, older men. Candidates for the doctorate in theology at Paris must have been over thirty; and it was not uncommon for priests who had already spent some time in the ministry, to matriculate at the university; an abbot, a provost, or even a bishop might become a student without any sacrifice of his dignity.

The frequent use of the work clericus or "clerk" to designate a university student, does not imply that every student was an ecclesiastic. At Bologna the distinction was clearly drawn between the scolaris and the clericus; the statutes concerning the rector provide that he must be a scholar of Bologna and, in addition, "an unmarried cleric, wearing the clerical dress and not belonging to any religious order". Similar provisions are found at Florence, Perugia, and Padua. Long before the rise of the universities, clerics enjoyed certain privileges and immunities, and these were extended, when the universities had been established, to all the students, lay and clerical alike. The layman would naturally wear the clerical garb not merely as an academic costume but as an evidence that he was entitled to clerical privileges. Even at Paris and Oxford, where the ecclesiastical element dominated, the enjoyment of these privileges was not dependent on the reception of tonsure, i.e. on admission to the clerical state in the canonical sense (Rashdall, II, 646). Celibacy, however, was obligatory on all scholars and masters; as a rule, a master who married lost his position, and though married scholars are sometimes mentioned, e.g. at Oxford, they were disqualified for taking degrees. Still, celibacy was not universally enforced; there were married professors of medicine at Salerno, and at the university of the Roman Curia, which was under the direct supervision of the pope, the masters of law had their wives and children. One of the famous canonists of Bologna was Joannes Andrea (1270-1328, whose daughter Novella sometimes lectured in his stead. At Paris the obligation of celibacy for masters in medicine was removed by Cardinal Estouteville in 1452, for those in law by the statutes of 1600. The first rector at Greifswald (1456) was married, as was also the rector at Vienna in 1470. In other German universities the requirement of celibacy remained longer in force, owing in part, at least, to the fact that many of the chairs were endowed with the revenue of canonries; but this did not imply that laymen were excluded from university positions.

An important element in the student body and in the entire life of the university was contributed by the religious orders. In Italy they had long been the recognized teachers of theology, and when the faculty of theology was established at Bologna in 1260, they supplied the professors and the majority of the students. The Dominicans settled at Paris in 1217 and at Oxford in 1221; the Franciscans at Paris in 1230 and at Oxford in 1224. At both universities the Carmelites and Augustinians also had their convents. The members of these orders in their community life enjoyed many advantages; a permanent home in which their material needs were provided for, regular hours of study, discipline, and religious practice; and for each order the bond of membership was a source of strength and solidarity. It is not then surprising that the regulars took high rank as scholars and teachers. Of the secular clerks some lived in apartments, others with their masters, and other again, the "martinets", with the townsmen. The students frequently banded together and lived in a rented hall (hospicium) under the management of one of their own number, a bachelor or a master elected by them as principal. For the poorest students colleges were established and endowed with burses by generous founders. Between 1200 and 1500 Paris had six colleges; Oxford, eleven; Cambridge, thirteen. The founders were mostly bishops, canons, or other ecclesiastics; but the laity, including the sovereigns, did their share (see OXFORD, UNIVERSITY OF: I. Origin and History). At Bologna the most famous was the College of Spain founded by Egidio Albornoz, Cardinal Archbishop of Toledo (d. 1367). The colleges at the German universities were primarily for the benefit of the teachers, though scholars also were received. The college residents at Paris were students in arts or theology; they were known as socii (fellows) and were governed by a master, or by several masters if the students belonged to different faculties. The masters were required to hold repetitions on the subjects treated in the university schools and "faithfully to instruct the scholars in life and in doctrine". This tutoring gradually became more important than the university lectures, and attracted to the colleges large numbers of students besides the holders of burses or scholarships; by the middle of the fifteenth century almost the whole university resided in the colleges, and the public lecture halls served only for determination and inceptions. In this way the Sorbonne, originaly a hospice for poor clerks, became the centre of theological teaching at Paris. The university, however, claimed and exercised the right of visitation and of disciplinary enactments; in 1457 it obliged the martinets to live in or near some college, and forbade the migration of scholars from one master's home to another; and in 1486 it enacted that teachers in colleges should be appointed by the faculty of arts.

With the founding of the colleges, discipline improved. The earlier university regulations dealt chiefly with academic matters, leaving the students quite free in other respects. According to all accounts this freedom meant licence in various forms — fighting, drinking, and graver offences against morality. With due allowance for the exaggeration of some writers who charge the scholars with every crime, it is clear from the college statutes that there was much need of reform. It should, however, be remembered that in any age the boisterous and lawless elements are more conspicuous than the serious, conscientious student; and it is doubtless to the credit of the medieval university, as a social factor, that it succeeded in imposing some sort of discipline upon the motley throngs which it undertook to teach. When the reform did come, it fairly rivalled, in minuteness and strictness, the monastic way of life. But it did not prevent the survival of certain practices, e.g. the initiation or deposition of the bejaunus (yellow-bill), the medieval form of hazing; nor did it establish perfect tranquility in the university.

Agitations of a more serious nature affected the development of the universities. Both Paris (1252-1261) and Oxford (1303-1320) were embroiled in struggles with the mendicant friars. Repeated conflicts with the town, notably the "Slaughter" of 1354 at Oxford, turned eventually to the benefit of the university, which, as Rashdall says (II, 407) "thrived on her own misfortunes". It was the chancellor who profited most and whose jurisdiction was gradually extended until, in 1290, it included "all crimes committed in Oxford where one of the parties was a scholar, except pleas of homicide and mayhem" (Rashdall, II, 401). In 1395, a Bull of Boniface IX exempted the university from all episcopal and archiepiscopal jurisdiction; but in consequence of the archbishop's opposition the Bull was revoked by John XXIII in 1311, only to be renewed by Sixtus IV in 1479. The conflict between Nominalism and Realism was in itself a scholastic feud; yet it was closely connected with the "reform" inaugurated by Wyclif; and while Wyclif may be regarded as a champion of intellectual freedom, it is interesting to note among his errors condemned at Constance (1415) and by Martin V (1418), the proposition that "universities with their studies, colleges, graduations, and masterships, were introduced by vain heathenism; they do the Church just as much good as the devil does" (Denzinger-Bannwart, "Enchiridion", n. 609).

In the calmer appreciation of modern historians the medieval university was a potent factor for enlightenment and social order. It aroused enthusiasm for learning, and enforced discipline. Its training sharpened the intelligence, yet subjected reason to faith. It was the centre in which the philosophy and the jurisprudence of antiquity were restored and adapted to new requirements. From it the modern university has inherited the essential elements of corproate teaching, faculty organization, courses of study, and academic degrees; and the inheritance has been transmitted through the manifold upheavals which submerged the ancient learning and rent Christendom itself asunder.

III. RENAISSANCE AND REFORMATION

The effect of the "new learning" on the German universities was revolutionary. At first the Humanist professors got on fairly well with the rest of the faculty; but when they asserted their superiority as representatives of the only real knowledge, bitter attacks and recriminations ensued. the Humanists ridiculed the barbarous Latin of the university and the wretched translations of Aristotle used in commentaries and lectures. Then they assailed the Scholastic method of teaching with its endless hair-splitting and disputations, and strove to substitute rhetoric for dialectic. Finally they struck at the content itself, declaring that much time was spent in gaining very little knowledge of hardly any value. All the charges were drawn up in publications marked by brilliant style and sharp invective; e.g. the "Epistolae obscurorum virorum", written against the professors of arts and theology, especially those of Leipzig and Cologne. This violent satire contained much that was false or exaggerated, and therefore calculated rather to add new disturbance than to effect the reform which was really needed. The better days of Scholasticism, in fact, had passed; the universities had no longer such leaders of thought as the thirteenth century had produced; both studies and discipline were on the decline. Humanism triumphed, in the first place, because, as a reaction and a novelty, it appealed to the younger men who were anxious to be free from the dryness of Scholastic exercises and the restrictions imposed by college statutes. Their unruly conduct and their ceaseless brawls with the townsfolk afforded the princes and the city authorities a pretext to undertake university reforms; and the reforming was accomplished by placing the Humanists in control. These conflicts and remedial measures, however, were only the surface of a much deeper movement. Before it asserted itself in the universities, Humanism had won over the higher and more influential classes of the people by catering, in the form of literature, to the spirit of luxury which the growth and increasing wealth of the cities had engendered. There was no doubt a charm in the elegant diction of the Humanists; but their attractive force lay in the rehabilitation of those views and ideals of life which the naturalism of the pagan world had expressed in perfect form and which brought men back to themselves and to earth. Aristotle had triumphed in the thirteenth century; he was overcome in the fifteenth by the orators and poets.

The Renaissance, originating in Italy, had thence spread to the northern countries. Its introduction into the universities of Italy and France did not lead to revolt against the Church; the popes were its patrons, and many distinguished Humanists remained loyal to Catholicism. In Germany and England, on the contrary, the Renaissance coalesced with another movement which had far more serious consequences. Luther, though not in sympathy with Humanism, was bent on sweeping away Scholastic theology by returning, as he claimed, to the pure teaching of the Gospel; and he would have made an end to the universities, which he denounced as the devil's workshops. The violent theological discussions aroused by the reform doctrine had a disastrous effect, not only on Humanism but also on the life of the universities. Some of them closed their doors, and nearly all were in danger of dissolution for want of students. Melanchthon declared that philosophy was the worship of idols and that the only knowledge necessary for a Christian was to be obtained from the Bible. But the reformers soon realized that their cause could not dispense with the higher education; and it was Melanchthon himself who reformed the existing universities and organized the new, i.e. Protestant, foundations, Marburg (1527), Königsberg (1544), Helmstadt (1574). The endowment was supplied chiefly from the revenues of confiscated monasteries and other church properties; Classic philology and the new theology took the place of Scholasticism; and the universities became state institutions under the control of secular princes.

As a result, the universities lost in great part their international character. In place of the medieval studium generale, there arose a multitude of institutions each limited to its own territory and devoted to the creed of its founders. During the sixteenth and seventeenth centureis, the traditional organization was preserved; but Classical culture was on the wane, and there was little progress in other lines. "At the end of the seventeenth century the German universities had sunk to the lowest level which they ever reached in the public esteem and in their influence upon the intellectual life of the German people . . . Academic science was no longer in touch with reality and its controlling ideas; it was held fast in an obsolete system of instruction by organization and statutes and toilsome compliance was the sole result of its activity. Added to this was the prevailing coarseness of the entire life. The students had sunk to the lowest depths, and carousals and brawls, carried to the limits of brutality and bestiality, largely filled their days" (Paulsen, "The German Universities", p.42).

When Erasmus came to England in 1497, Classical studies imported from Italy were already cultivated at Oxford by men like Colet, Groeyn, Lynacre, and Sir Thomas More. In 1516, Richard Fox, Bishop of Winchester, endowed the first lectureship in Greek and founded Corpus Christi College. In 1525, Wolsey founded Cardinal College and engaged eminent teachers to "cultivate the new literature in the service of the old Church" (Huber). But his princely designs were checked by the question of Henry's divorce from Catherine of Aragon. At Cambridge also the Renaissance movement was furthered by the teaching of Erasmus and the exertions of Bishop Fisher; but at the same time the writings of Luther were being studies by a group of scholars under Tyndale and Latimer, and it was Cranmer, then a fellow of Jesus College, who suggested that the legality of Henry's marriage should be referred to the universities of Christendom. After some opposition both Oxford and Cambridge gave an opinion favourable to the king; and finally they declared for the separation from Rome which was consummated by the Act of 1534. By the Royal Injunctions of 1535, the teaching of canon law and of the Sentences was abolished; Aristotle, however, was retained, and the study of civil law, Hebrew, mathematics, logic, and medicine was encouraged. The spoliation of the monasteries, which had sheltered many of the poorer scholars, reduced the numbers at the universities. In 1549 a royal visitation eliminated from the statutes every trace of popery, and abolished numerous stipends that had formerly been given for Masses. In a spirit of iconoclasm, altars, images, and statutes were torn from the college chapels, and many valuable manuscripts of the libraries were burned. Under Mary's brief rule the Protestants in turn suffered; Cranmer, Ridley, and Latimer perished at the stake at Oxford, and the anti-Catholic statutes were repealed. During Elizabeth's reign and Leicester's chancellorship, every Oxford student above sixteen years of age was obliged at matriculation to subscribe to the Thirty-Nine Articles and the Royal Supremacy, a measure which made the university an exclusively Church of England institution. At Cambridge a royal mandate in 1613 required all candidates for B.D. or for the doctorate in any faculty to subscribe to the Three Articles. In both universities, Puritanism was a disturbing element, and a number of its adherents were obliged to withdraw from Cambridge. In 1570 the Elizabethan statutes were enacted "on account of the again increasing audacity and excessive licence of men" as the preamble declares. These new regulations circumscribed the powers of the proctors and provided that they should be elected, not as formerly, by the regents, but according to a cycle of colleges. The Elizabethan code remained in force for nearly three centuries. Under Charles I similar provisions were made for Oxford byt he Laudian statutes (1636), and the whole administration of the university was entrusted to the vice-chancellor, the proctors, and the heads of colleges. "This statute effectually stereotyped the administrative monopoly of the colleges, and destroyed all trace of the old democratic constitution which had been controlled only by the authority of the medieval Church" (Brodrick). Oxford was governed by this code until 1854.

In Scotland, after the abolition of papal jurisdiction and ratification of Protestant doctrine in 1560, the universities suffered severely. "To St. Andrews, as to the other universities, the Reformation did serious injury. Their constitution and orgnization were upset by ecclesiastical dissent; their income was sadly reduced by the rapacity of the nobles who appropriated the lion's share of the patrimony of the Church. From a greatly diminished income they had to uphold the stipends of the parishes which belonged to them. This was necessarily accompanied by a reduction of the salaries of the professors, for which certain grants by successive administrations made small but inadequate amends. The attendance of students was also injuriously affected" (Kerr, p. 108). Though various schemes of reform were proposed, especially by Knox, they proved ineffectual owing to the tumults about religion and the alternations between presbytery and episcopacy. The universities became institutions of the state in 1690 and religious tests were enforced for all teachers and officials. Curricula and organizations, however, retained for a long time their medieval features. During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, various modifications were introduced in the courses of study; new chairs were founded and the financial condition improved.

At Paris this period witnessed the long struggle between the university and the Jesuits (see SOCIETY OF JESUS: History; France), the inroads of Gallicanism and Jansenism, and the substitution of royal for papal supremacy. As far back as 1475, Charles VII had placed the university under the jurisdiction of the Parlement; by the end of the sixteenth century the secularization was complete. If Richelieu, by rebuilding the Sorbonne, and Mazarin, by establishing the Collège des Quatre-Nations, enhanced the outward spendour of the university, they did not endow it with vitality sufficient to check the new philosophical movement which culminated in the work of the Encyclopedists and the Revolution. In 1793 the university was suppressed and with it all the other universities of France. Napoleon I reorganized them as faculties under the one imperial university situated at Paris; and this arrangement continued until, in 1896, the faculties were restored to university rank.

IV. MODERN PERIOD

In Germany, the eighteenth century brought decided changes which some authors (Paulsen) regard as the origin of the modern university. From Halle, founded in 1694, Christian Wolff's rationalistic philosophy spread to all the Protestant universities, and from Göttingen (1737) the new Humanism, especially the study of Greek. Freedom of research became the characteristic feature of the university; the systematic lecture replaced the exposition of texts; the seminar exercises supplanted the disputation; and German was used instead of Latin as the vehicle of instruction. The foundation of the University of Berlin (1800) was another advance in the way of free scientific culture. Philosophy became the leading subject of study. Next in importance was philology, Classical Romance, and German. The development of the historical method and its application in all lines of research are among the principal achievements of the nineteenth century. In the natural sciences laboratory training was recognized as indispensable, and the study of medicine was put on a new basis by improved methods of investigation. Specialized reasearch with producting scholarship, rather than accumulation of knowledge, was held up as the aim of university work. As a result the departments of science multiplied and in each the number of courses rapidly increased. This was the case especially in the faculty of philosophy, which came to include practically everything that did not belong to theology, medicine, or law. The B.A. degree disappeared, the M.A. was merged with the doctorate in philosophy, and this had its chief significance as a requisite for teaching. Great importance was attached to the preparation of teachers for the schools and gymnasia, while in the university itself, the recruiting of professors was provided for by the system of Privatdozents, i.e. instructors who have the privilege of teaching but no official duties or salaries. These instructors often teach at various universities before being promoted to a professorship, and thus acquire a wide experience as well as an acquaintance with conditions in different parts of the empire. The students also are encouraged to pass from one university to another. They no longer live in colleges, nor are they exempt from municipal control and military service. Most of them, however, are members of some Verein or Verbindung which develops the social spirit, though it often encourages duelling, drinking, and other practices hardly conducive to moral or intellectual advance.

In England and Scotland the nineteenth century was marked by numerous and far-reaching changes. A succession of statutes revised the system of examinations and degrees: religious tests were abolished at the English universities in 1871, at the Scottish in 1892; many of the traditional oaths disappeared, and the restrictions imposed by the Elizabethan code were in large part removed. The tendency of legislation (Acts of 1854, 1856, 1877) was in line with the reforms advocated by the Royal Commission in 1852, i.e. "the restoration in its integrity of the ancient supervision of the university over the studies of its members by the enlargement of its professorial system, by the addition of such supplementary appliance to that system as may obviate the undue encroachments of that of private tuition . . . the removal of all restriction upon elections to fellowships and scholarships . . . an adequate contribution from the corporate funds of the several colleges towards rendering the course of public teaching, as carried on by the university itself, more efficient and complete". This movement toward a revival of the authority of the university has been furthered by Lord Curzon in his "Principles and Methods of University Reform" (1909). The monopoly of higher education so long enjoyed by Oxford and Cambridge was broken by the creation of new universities; Durham was established in 1832, and the University of London, founded in 1825 and chartered as an examining and degree-conferring institution in 1838, was reorganized on a broader basis in 1889. The university extension movement, inaugurated at Cambridge in 1867, was taken up by Oxford also. Women were admitted to examinations and degrees at London in 1878, Cambridge in 1881, and Oxford in 1884. The Scottish universities were remodelled in 1858 and in 1889; the system of studies and degrees was reorganized and greater uniformity in government was secured. At Aberdeen and Glasgow, however, the rector is still elected by the matriculated students, who are divided into four nations as in the Middle Ages. Women were admitted as students in 1892.

For the earliest foundations in America see UNIVERSITIES, SPANISH-AMERICAN. In the United States the oldest universities grew out of colleges modelled on those of England; Harvard (1636), Yale (1701), Princeton (1726), Washington and Lee (1749), University of Pennsylvania (1751), King's, i.e. Columbia (1754), Brown (1764). The first step towards university instruction was the addition of graduate studies pursued by resident students (mentioned at Harvard towards the end of the eighteenth century). During the first quarter of the nineteenth century, American students began to study in Germany and they naturally, on returning to their own country, sought to introduce elements from the German universities. It was not, however, until 1861 that the doctorate in philosophy was conferred (Yale); since that time, the universities have developed rapidly but not according to any uniform plan of organization. In all these institutions there is a combination of graduate with undergraduate study, and in many of them departments of pure science exist alongside of professional schools; but it would be impossible to select any one of them as the typical American university, and difficult to group them on any purely educational basis. This diversity is largely owing to the fact that the American institutions, especially the more recent, have been organized to meet actual needs rather than to perpetuate traditions; and since these needs are constantly changing, it is quite intelligible that new forms of university organization should appear and that the older forms should be frequently readjusted. Apart, however, from details, what may be called the university situation presents certain features that are noteworthy.

(1) The oldest universities were established and endowed by private individuals, and they have retained their private character. Even where the states have organized universities of their own, no measures have been taken to prevent private foundations; the latter in fact are as a class more influential than those controlled by the State, and, on the other hand, the private universities are empowered to give degrees through charters granted by the State. This freedom is far more in accordance with the spirit of American institutions and more essential to the national welfare than any hard and fast uniformity under state domination.

(2) From the beginning, as the oldest charters explicitly declare, the furthering of morality and religion, not merely in a general way, but in accordance with the belief of some Christian denomination, was an avowed purpose of the founders; and divinity schools are still maintained at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton. But the state universities and nearly all the more recently founded private universities exclude theology. There is a decided tendency with powerful financial support to make the university non-sectarian by elmininating all religious tests and removing denominational influence.

(3) Besides the state appropriations, vast sums of money are contributed by individuals to the endowment of universities and the establishment of instituties for scientific research. Such liberality is an evidence of the practical interest taken in education, which is considered as the best means of improving moral, social, and economic conditions. Whether the final result will be the application of a money test in deciding what is and is not a university, must depend largely on the standards of scholarship which are adopted and the idea of its functions as a social power that is formed by the institution to which so much wealth is entrusted.

(4) The practical character of university training is shown by the attention that is paid to technical instruction in all its forms. The preference for applied science manifested by many students has a serious effect not only on university policies and curricula but also on the work of secondary and elementary schools, in which the relative value of cultural and vocational studies is keenly debated.

(5) As the efficiency of the university is in part determined by the quality and extent of the student's previous education, one of the chief problems demanding solution at present is the relation between the university and the preparatory schools. In the endeavour to secure satisfactory relations between college, high school, and elementary school, the university exerts an inflence which becomes more permeating as the educational system is more thorougly articulated. The entire question of adjustment will probably be settled not so much by discussion or legislation as by the training of teachers, which now holds a prominent place in each of the larger universities.

(6) Although women have long formed the majority of teachers in elementary and public schools, they were not admitted to the universities until about the middle of the nineteenth century. The co-educational movement began in the state universities of the West, received a fresh impetus at the University of Michigan in 1870, and then spread rapidly through the East. In some universities all departments of insturction are now open to women on the same footing as men; in others, women are excluded from the courses in law, medicine, and engineering, and receive separate instruction in affiliated colleges.

(7) Within recent years, university extension, correspondence courses, and local examinations have enabled the university to widen out its sphere of activity. It might seem indeed that the centripetal movement which in the Middle Ages brought students from all parts to the studium generale, were now to be reversed or at least to be reflected in the opposite direction.

V. CATHOLIC ACTION

The universities of France, Italy, and Spain, though affected to some extent by the Reformation, had remained loyal to the Catholic Faith, and preserved their chairs of ecclesiastical science. Louvain especially, while it developed Humanistic sciences to a high degree, resisted the encroachments of Protestantism. The Council of Trent ordained that provision should be made for the study of Scripture, that beneficed studying at universities should enjoy their traditional privileges, that bishops and other dignitaries should be selected by preference from among university professors and graduates (Sess. V, can. i; VII, xiii; XIV, v; XXII, ii; XXIII, vi; XXIV, viii, xii, xvi, xvii). It also provided for the education of priests by its decrees regarding the establishment of ecclesiastical seminaries. (See SEMINARIES, ECCLESIASTICAL.) But the Church did not lose interest in the universities or desist from establishing new ones. In spite of the loss of revenue from the confiscation of church properties, Catholic universities or academies were founded at Dillingen (1549), Würzburg (1575), Paderborn (1613), Salzburg (1623), Osnabruck (1630), Bamberg (1648), Olmutz (1581), Graz (1586), Linz (1636), Innsbruck (1672), Breslau (1702), Fulda (1732), Münster, (1771). To this period also belong the French universities at Douai (1559), Lille (1560), Pont-a-Mousson, later Nancy (1572), and Dijon (1722); the Italian at Macerata (1540), Cagliari (1603), and Camerino (1721); the Spanish at Granada (1526) and Oviedo (1574); Manila in the Philippines (1611), and the South American foundations (see UNIVERSITIES, SPANISH-AMERICAN). Most of these new universities were entrusted to the Jesuits, whose colleges in regard to Classical studies rivalled, and in matters of discipline, surpassed the universities. After the suppression of the Society (1773), the chairs which they had held were either abolished or transferred to secular professors. Among the papal documents bearing on universities should be mentioned: the Constitution, "Imperscrutabilis", addressed by Clement XII (4 Dec., 1730) to Philip V of Spain regarding the University of Cervera; the "Quod divina sapientia", published, 28 Aug., 1824, by Leo XII for the reformation of university studies in the Papal States and some other provinces of Italy; the Brief by which Gregory XVI, 13 Dec., 1833, approved the action of the Belgian bishops in restoring the University of Louvain; and the Apostolic Letter of Pius IX, 23 March, 1852, approving the statutes of the University of Dublin, the founding of which had been decided upon by the Irish episcopate at the Council of Thurles in 1850.

During the latter half of the nineteenth century the Spanish and Italian universities were taken over by the State, and the faculties of theology disappeared. In France, under the present system, there is no faculty of theology in any state university; the Catholic faculties at Paris, Bordeaux, Aix, Rouen, and Lyons were abolished in 1882, and the Protestant faculties at Pais and Montaubon became free theological schools in 1905. In 1875, however, the French bishops established independent Catholic universities or institutes at Angers, Lille, Lyons, Paris, and Toulouse. In Germany, though all universities are state institutions, there are Catholic faculties of theology at Bonn, Breslau, Freiburg, Munich, Münster, Strasburg, Tübingen, and Würzburg. The professors are appointed and paid by the State, but they must be approved by the bishop, who also has the right to superintend the teaching. The Austrian universities, though injured in the eighteenth century by Jansenism and modified in the nineteenth by various reforms, have still retianed the teaching of theology in the faculties of Graz, Innsbruck, Cracow, Lemberg, Prague, Olmutz, Salzburg, and Vienna; and in Hungary at Agram and Budapest. It should be noted, however, that in Germany and Austria the existence of a faculty of Catholic theology does not make the whole university Catholic; the other faculties may include members who profess no creed. This situation naturally gives rise to difficulties for Catholic students, especially in philosophy and history. In countries where a larger freedom is enjoyed, the Holy See has encouraged new foundations. Pius IX gave a charger to Laval, Canada (1876); Leo XIII to Beirut, Syria (1881), and to Ottowa, Canada (1889). The University of Fribourg, Switzerland, established in 1889, was warmly approved by Leo XIII. The project of founding a Catholic university in the United States was suggested at the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore in 1866; its execution was resolved on at the Third Plenary Council in 1884, and the statutes of the Catholic University of America were approved by Leo XIII in the Apostolic Letter of 7 March, 1889.

Present Law of the Church

The principal laws now in force regarding universities are as follows:

• For the establishment of a complete Catholic university, including the faculties of theology and canon law, the authorization of the pope is necessary; and this alone suffices if the foundation is made with ecclesiastical funds or private endowment. If public funds of the state are also used for the purpose, authorization must likewise be obtained from the civil power. The Church, moreover, recognizes the right of the State, or corporations or individuals under control of the State, to establish purely secular facilites, e.g. of law or medicine (Clement XII, Const. "Imperscrutabilis", 1730).
• The Church requires that in universities founded by the civil power for Catholics, the faculties of theology and canon law, once they are canonically established, shall remain subject to the supreme ecclesiastical authority, and moreover, that professors in the other faculties shall be Catholic and that their teaching shall accord with Catholic doctrine and sound moral principles.
• As appears from recent papal charters, the university enjoys autonomy e.g. in the appointment of instructors, the regulation of studies, and the conferring of degrees in accordance with the statutes.
• By the Constitution "Sapienti Consilio", 29 June, 1908, the Congregation of Studies is charged with all questions regarding the establishment of new Catholic universities and important changes in those already founded.
• Degrees in theology and canon law conferred without examination by the Holy See through the Congregation of Studies, give the recipient the same rights and privileges as the degrees conferred after examination by a Catholic university (Cong. Stud., 19 Dec., 1903; Roviano, "De Jure ecclesiae in universitatibus studiorum", Louvain, 1864; Wernz, "Jus Decretalium", III, Rome, 1901).

General Works.-MEINERS, Gesch. der Entstehung u. Entwicklund der hohen Schulen (Gottingen, 1802-05); VON SAVIGNY, Gesch. des rom. Rechts im Mittelalter (2nd ed., Heidelberg, 1834-); NEWMAN, Idea of a University (London, 1852); IDEM, Historical Sketches, III (London, 1872); DRANE, Christian Schools and Scholars (2nd ed., London, 1881); DENIFLE, Die Universitaten des Mittelalters bis 1400 (1 vol., Berlin, 1885); KAUFMANN, Gesch. der deutsch. Universitaten, I (Stuttgart, 1888); HINSCHIUS, System des kathol. Kirchenrechts, IV (Berlin, 1888); RASHDALL, The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages (Oxford, 1895); LAURIE, Rise and Early Constitution of Universities (New York, 1898); NORTON, Readings in the History of Education: Medieval Universities (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1909); WALSH, The Thirteenth the greatest of Centuries (New York, 1910).

Special.-France: Chartularium Univ. Paris., ed. DENIFLE and CHATELAIN (Paris, 1889-97); FOURNIER, Les statuts et privileges des universites francaises (Paris, 1890-94); DU BOULAY, Hist. Univ. Paris (Paris, 1865); JOURDAIN, Hist. de l'universitate de Paris au XXVII siecle (Paris, 1894-). Germany: ERMAN and HORN, Bibliographie der deutsch. Universitaten (3 vols., Leipzig, 1904); ZARNCKE, Die deutsch. Universitaten (Berlin, 1893); PAULSEN, Grundung. . .der deutsch. Universitaten im Mittelalter in VON STREL, Histor. Zeitschr. (1881); IDEM, Gesch. des gelehrten Unterrichts (2nd ed. Leipzig, 1896-7); IDEM, tr. THILLY, The German Universities (New York, 1906); VON SYREL, Die deutsch. u. die auswartigen Universitaten (3rd ed., Bonn, 1883); KAUFMANN, Op. cit., II (Stuttgart, 1896). Great Britain: HURER, tr. F.W. NEWMAN, The English Universities (London, 1843); Munimenta Academica, ed. ANSTEY (London, 1868); Wood, ed. GUTCH, History and Antiquities. . .of Oxford (Oxford, 1792-96); LYTE, Hist. of the Univ. of Oxford (London, 1886); BRODRICK, A Hist. of the Univ. of Oxford (London, 1900); FULLER, Hist. of the Univ. of Cambridge (1655), ed. PRICKETT and WRIGHT (Cambridge, 1840); MULLINGER, Hist. of the Univ. of Cambridge (Cambridge, 1873-1911); Report of Commissioners to visit the Universities of Scotland (London, 1831); KERR, Scottish Education (Cambridge, 1910); WILLIAMS, The Law of the Universities (London, 1910). Italy: MURATORI, Antiquitates Italicae, III; TIRABOSCHI, Storia della letteratura italiana (Milan, 1822); see also bibliography under BOLOGNA, UNIVERSITY OF. Spain: DE LA FUENTE, Hist. de las Universidades. . .en Espana (Madrid, 1884-1889). America: ROSS, The Universities of Canada, Appendix to Report of the Minister of Education (Toronto, 1896); Report of the Commissioner of Education (Washington, D.C.), an annual publication; ZIMMERMANN, Die Universitaten in dem Vereinigten Staaten Amerikas (Freiburg, 1896); PERRY, The American University in Monographs on Education in the U.S., ed. BUTLER (Albany, 1900); S. DEXTER, A Hist. of Education in the U.S. (New York, 1904); DRAPER, American Education (New York, 1909).

Information regarding all the universities of the world is given in Minerva (Strasburg), of which the Handbuch (vol. I, 1911) describes the organization, and the Jahrbuch, now in the twentieth year, contains annual announcements of courses, equipment, and statistics.

EDWARD A. PACE

University of St. Francis Xavier's College

The University of St. Francis, Antigonish, Nova Scotia, was founded in 1885, under the name of St. Francis Xavier's College, by Rt. Rev. Dr. MacKinnon, Bishop of Arichat (now the Diocese of Antigonish). A legislative enactment of 1866 empowered it to confer degrees. A statute of 1882 granted full university powers. The new charter (enacted in 1909) gave it all the powers, rights, and privileges that any university could reasonably demand from the State, including the right to confer all the usual university degrees, and to acquire and hold real and personal property to any value or extent whatsoever. The supreme governing body is a board of twelve governors, of which the Bishop of Antigonish is ex-officio chairman. There are at present (1912) twenty-five professors, lecturers, and tutors. In 1911-12 there were 356 students, the majority of whom came from the eastern provinces of Canada, the New England States, and Newfoundland, and a few from Western Canada, the Pacific States, and Great Britain. Four-year courses lead, respectively, to the degrees of Bachelor of Arts, Bachelor of Science, and Bachelor of Letters. After the sophomore year, excellent opportunities are given to students anxious to devote some of their time to special preparation for scientific pursuits, or for one of the professions. The course in philosophy extends over three years. A short course in law is given, which counts as a year for the degree of LL.B. in the Halifax Law School. The two-year course in engineering admits to the third-year class in any of the leading schools of engineering in Canada or the United States. Some university extension work has been done. Two summer sessions, five weeks each, have been held. Some of the courses were especialy designed to meet the needs of teachers in the public schools. Intended for the education of laymen as well as ecclesiastics, St. Francis Xavier's has given to the State many useful and brilliant men — judges, legislators, physicians, engineers, and to the Church a large number of priests and several bishops. Two archbishops and two other bishops are still living. The late Dr. Cameron, Bishop of Antigonish, and Dr. MacNiel, late Archbishop of Vancouver, are among the presidents whose learning, ability, and zeal have, despite many disadvantages, rendered service to the cause of Catholic education in Eastern Canada. The present Bishop of Victoria, Rt. Rev. Dr. Alexander MacDonald, was for nineteen years one of the professors.

A.J.G. MacECHEN

University of St. Joseph's College

Memramcook, New Brunswick, Canada

Founded in 1864 by Rev. Camille Lefebvre, C.S.C. The institution owes its inception partly to the desire of the late Bishop Sweeny, of St. John, N.B., to secure for the youth of his diocese the advantages of a secondary education, of Memramcook (1852-64); for the intellectual development of the French Acadians entrusted to his care. The college was incorporated, with degree-conferring powers, by an Act of the New Brunswick Legislature in 1868; and, thirty years later, by an amendment to that act, it received its present title. In addition to the faculties of arts and theology, commercial courses in English and French have always occupied a well defined place in the curriculum. It is mainly owing to St. Joseph's that within the past half-century the French inhabitants of Canada's maritime provinces have steadily advanced to a position of acknowledged social, industrial, and professional equality with their fellow-provincialists of other racial descent. Scarcely less notable has been St. Joseph's role in furthering the interests, enlarging the prospects, and elevating the ideals of New Brunswick's English-speaking Catholics. At present, practically all the priests of the Diocese of St. John, including its bishop, are sons of New Brunswick and graduates of St. Joseph's; other graduates hold prominent rank in commerce, law medicine, the Provincial Legislature, and the Federal Parliament.

SORIN, Circular Letters (Notre Dame, Indiana, 1880); POIRIER, Le Père Lefebvre et l'Acadie (Montreal, 1898); St. John Globe (anniversary number, 13 Dec., 1911).

ARTHUR BARRY O'NEILL

Catholic University of Ireland

The project of a Catholic University for Ireland was launched at the Synod of Thurles in 1850. To revive true learning was essential for the well-being of Irish Catholics; the suggestion of Pius IX and the example of Louvain were inspiring; and, above all, it was necessary to provide a seat of higher education on Catholic lines for lay students who kept away from the condemned Queen's Colleges, where religion had no official or collegiate recognition and the governing and academic bodies, as regards Cork and Galway, were foreign to the religious convictions of the people they were intended to educate. The Holy See gave approval in 1852; liberal contributions poured in, and property was acquired in Dublin for university purposes. The bishops had secured John Henry Newman as rector for a short term of years. At their meeting in May, 1854, the hierarchy gave solemn effect to the papal letters regarding the erection of the university. On the Feast of Pentecost following Dr. Newman took the oath of office at a function in the metropolitan church, where Archbishop Cullen delivered an address. Statutes, framed for the government of the university, were sanctioned by the Holy See; papal authority was granted to confer degrees; and in November of the same year the work of the university began. The Irish hierarchy, acting through a committee, constituted the supreme governing body. Among its authorities the senate was the body representative of the university; and the rectorial council was the rector's ordinary adviser. The university had five faculties, viz.-theology, law, medicine, philosophy and letters, science. Newman was careful to secure the services of various distinguished men as professors and lecturers. The first appointments to professorial chairs comprised the names of Edmund O'Reilly, S.J., Dr. P. Leahy, Eugene O'Curry, T.W. Allies, and D.F. McCarthy; and gradually a considerable number of students, including some in high rank, from different European countries, began to frequent the halls of the new university. But the institution itself and its students laboured under the greatest disadvantages. The university had no charter from the State to confer degrees, nor were its lectures recognized elsewhere in Ireland as leading to a degree. It had to depend entirely on voluntary contributions for its revenue. In the immediate issue these obstacles were not to be adequately surmounted even by the fame and genius of Newman, the eminence of the professors, the devoted loyalty of Irish students, and the constant efforts of the bishops. But the determination of Irish Catholics produced highly important results. The Government, confronted with their standing protest, after a time deemed it expedient to attempt to deal with their grievance in the matter of university education. The Liberal plan of a Supplemental Charter, incorporating the Catholic University as a college, not as a university, and enabling the students educated in its halls to obtain degrees from an enlarged Queen's University, failed in 1866; the Conservative scheme of chartering an unendowed Catholic university was announced, considered, and abruptly withdrawn in 1868; Mr. Gladstone's proposal of one Irish university, comprising Catholic and other colleges without public endowment as well as Trinity College and two of the Queen's Colleges with their endowments continued, was defeated in 1873 by an adverse majority of three votes in the House of Commons. But in 1879, on the second reading of a University Bill introduced by the O'Connor Don, the Beaconsfield administration announced that they would themselves introduce a University Bill for Ireland; and the promised Bill became an Act of Parliament in that year. It abolished the Queen's University, while sparing its colleges, and set up in its place the Royal University of Ireland, an examining body entitled to give degrees to all comes on condition of passing the prescribed examinations, and to award prizes for distinguished answering. Moreover, an arrangement was made to provide a small indirect endowment to help the work of the Catholic University through fellowships to be held by a certain number of its professors.

It was for the purpose of arranging the Catholic colleges of higher education in an associated group, to stand against the endowed Queen's Colleges in the competition of the Royal University, that the framework of the Catholic University was considerably modified in 1882. In that year the teaching institution in St. Stephen's Green became University College and the Catholic University, of which Maynooth since 1876 had been constituted a college, was made to embrace an association of colleges, each retaining its own independent collegiate organization. The success of the Catholic colleges cleared the way for Mr. Birrell's University Act in 1909. University College, under the management of the Jesuits from 1883, gave a fine lead in conjunction with the Catholic University School of Medicine. This school, which in 1892 was placed under a governing body of its own, had been founded by the bishops in 1855 in Cecilia St., Dublin, and, unendowed though it was, had been a success from the start, owing to the advantage it enjoyed, in that its teaching was recognized as qualifying a student to stand the examinations for a license to practise. It now merges, like University College, in the new University College, Dublin, which is the leading constituent college of the National University established in 1909. This constituent college has utilized the buildings of the Catholic University. The Catholic University church, built by Dr. Newman, has been made available by the bishops for the catholic members of the National University; but the Catholic University itself still exists, as was affirmed in an important judicial decision by the Master of the Rolls in 1911.

Dr. Newman, who retired in 1858, was succeeded in the rectorial Chair by Dr. Woodlock, Dr. Neville, Dr. Molloy, and Dr. O'Donnell. It is said that £250,000, subscribed mainly in Ireland and America, was collected and expended upon the university. After providing buildings and equipment, that sum would allow little over £8000 a year during the quarter of a century that elapsed before the fellowships of the Royal University were made available. The ideals sustained and the reformed achieved in higher education amply justify the effort. Archbishop Walsh and John Dillon were its students; the "Atlantis" and O'Curry's Lectures were its products. Even in its last years it had among its professors such men as Aubrey De Vere, Dr. Casey, George Sigerson, Dr. Molloy, James Stewart, and Robert Ornsby.

Catholic University of Ireland, Constitution and Statutes; The Catholic University Gazette (1854); WALSH, Irish University Question (Dublin, 1897); Royal Commission on University Education (1902); Royal Commission on Trinity College (1907).

PATRICK O'DONNELL

University College, Dublin

A constitutional college of the National University of Ireland. By its charter, granted 2 Dec., 1908, in accordance with the Irish Universities Act of that year, members of the college include every graduate of the Royal University of Ireland who was a matriculated student of "University College, St. Stephen's Green, Dublin, or of the Medical School, Cecilia Street, Dublin". Thus the history of the existing college is linked with the story of Newman's foundation in Ireland. From 112 November, 1883, when the Irish Jesuits opened University College, St. Stephen's Green, Dublin, in the old Arts School of the Catholic University, to 1 November, 1909, when the new college began its work, the history of Irish Catholic and national university education centred mainly in the St. Stephen's Green institution. The college had two purposes to fulfil; first, to show by its success in the competitive field that Irish Catholics had the material and capacity, given equal opportunity, to establish a university of their own upon the highest academic level; second, to afford a university training to young Irish Catholics, whom conscience prevented from availing of Trinity College, with its Protestant Episcopalian atmosphere, or of the Queen's Colleges, with their secularist atmosphere. The first president of University College was Rev. William Delany, S.J. With an interval filled by Rev. Robert Carbery, S.J., Father Delany continued in office until the new college was founded. His colleagues of the Society at the beginning were Rev. Thomas Finlay, philosopher and economist, Rev. Denis Murphy, Irish historian, Rev. James J. O'Carroll, Gaelic scholar and linguist, Rev. Gerard Hopkins, Oxford Classicist and poet, and Rev. Robert Curtis, mathematician. Of Newman's old guard and their first successors there still remained Thomas Arnold, son of the Master of Rugby, Robert Ornsby, the biographer of Hope Scott, James Stewart, a Cambridge rector who had followed Newman, John Casey, the Irish mathematician, Dr. John Egan, afterwards Bishop of Waterford, and Abbe Polin. Among the assistant professors selected by Father Delany were Mr. William J. Starkie, a Cambridge scholar, now Resident Commissioner of National Education, and Mr. (now Sir) Joseph Magrath, the present registrar of the National University. Father Delany began practically without endowment. The only public assistance received was indirect. Beaconsfield's University Act empowered the senate of the Royal University to appoint Fellows, with a salary of 400 pounds a year out of the university revenues, on condition of their examining for the university and lecturing at certain assigned colleges. Fourteen Fellows, out of twenty-eight, were assigned to University College, the remainder to the Queen's Colleges, already endowed to the extent of 12,500 pounds a year each. Two of the first Fellows were Jesuit Fathers; some years later the number was increased to five, and with their salaries the equipment and maintenance of the college were undertaken.

At the end of the first academic year a hundred of the distinctions awarded by the Royal University were won by Queen's College, Belfast; seventy-nine by University College, Dublin, twenty by Queen's College, Cork, and eight by students of Queen's College, Galway. This success of the unendowed college could not be ignored. In the Parliamentary session following (1885) the Irish Party raised the university question under the new aspect it had assumed. The Chief Secretary (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach) at once admitted the necessity for government action. For the Government he promised that, if they held office in the next session, he would "make some proposal which might deal in a satisfactory way with this most important matter". The year 1886, however, brought its change of Government, Gladstone's first Home Rule Bill, the Liberal Irish Alliance, and its developments; and the university question as a question of practical politics was shelved for a generation.

The University College continued its work with ever-increasing success. Year by year the tabulated results of the examinations of the Royal University showed that the unrecognized Catholic University College was not only doing better than even the most successful of the well-endowed Queen's Colleges, but that it was ever increasing its lead until it far out-distanced the three together. The following table shows the relative endowments of the colleges and the first-class distinctions won by each college in the year 1898 compared with those ten years later.

University College, Dublin
Endowments: £6,000
Prizes and Honours (1898): 40
Prizes and Honours (1908): 99

Queen's College, Belfast
Endowments: £11,400
Prizes and Honours (1898): 28
Prizes and Honours (1908): 22

Queen's College, Galway
Endowments: £11,400
Prizes and Honours (1898): 5
Prizes and Honours (1908): 5

Queen's College, Cork
Endowments: £11,400
Prizes and Honours (1898): 1
Prizes and Honours (1908):

In scholarship, in literature, in the public service, past students began to win honour for their college. Even in the department of scientific research, hampered as was the staff by lack of equipment, the work of Preston, M'Clelland, and Conway established the name of the college in the annals of scientific advance. Murphy's work for Irish history, Hogan's in the Irish language, and Finlay's in the field of practical Irish economics were also far-reaching. An aim of Father Delany had been to train a thoroughly competent staff to meet the time when justice should be done and a wider field opened. This, too, was fulfilled; and the men selected for the first appointments to the chartered college by the commissioners entrusted with the work, unfettered though the commissioners were in their discretion, include, in all the chief departments, a large majority of men who had been educated in University College.

In 1904 Mr. Balfour and Mr. Wyndham made acknowledgement of the Catholic claims; two royal commissions had reported in their favour; but the ministers were deterred by Orange influence from its settlement. Mr. Bryce took up the question in courageous fashion during his brief chief secretary-ship. It was left to Mr. Birrell to carry a measure granting faciliteis for University education under conditions fairly satisfactory to Catholics. The Jesuits facilitated the reform in every way and, though they might have put forward a title to special consideration, they sought no peculiar recognition. Cardinal Logue declared the settlement to be largely due to their labours. The Archbishop of Dublin expressed his admiration for "the fidelity, constancy, and undaunted courage" which they had shown in the enterprise. Many years before, in 1886, when jealous criticism was afoot, Father Delany had already defined their interest to be to establish "a central College, which should be national in its Constitution; should be governed by a body representative of the whole Catholic people, with all its interests; where the main condition of appointments to posts should be excellence of qualification, the best man winning whether priest or layman". The new constitution of the college approaches that ideal. Mr. Birrell, when introducing his University Bill, bore testimony to "the patriotism" of Father Delany's attitude. The passing of the University Act coincided with the silver jubilee of the old college; and when the new college came into existence the Jesuits, in order to facilitate its commencement, surrendered to it, with the approval of the Irish bishops, the old buildings of the Catholic University.

The new Irish Universities Act of 1908 is based on the principle of the non-recognition of theological or religious teaching. No part of the public endowment can be applied for the purpose of such teaching. But the university may recognize a theological faculty or a religious chair provided by private endowment. The indifferentist principle was accepted by Irish Catholics because the scheme of government embodied in the charters both for the National University and for its constituent colleges enabled a sympathetic government to be established. The first senate and the first governing bodies were nominated, and the governing body of University College, Dublin, now consists of twenty-seven Catholics and three Protestants. When it ceases to hold office the new governing body will be constituted mainly of persons elected by the college corporation itself, and by the General Council of Irish County Councils, which represents Irish opinion. In the first appointment of deans of residence two Catholic priests were among those appointed. They voluntarily provide religious lectures in addition to discharging the duties of their office. The bishops of Ireland have also in hand (1912) a scheme for the establishment of a lectureship in theology in the college and have selected Rev. Peter Finlay, S.J., for the office. The growth of this side of the college work would complete its activities as a university institution. All the other faculties are adequately provided for, and include arts, philosophy, Celtic studies (including archæology, history, and philology), science, law, medicine, and engineering. The staff consists of the president (Dr. D.J. Coffey, dean of the old successful medical school), forty-three professors, and eight lecturers. All the professors of philosophy are Catholics. The public endowment of the college is £32,000 a year and the total revenue in 1910-11 was £40,357. Six hundred and ninety-five students were in attendance in that year. The first plan of buildings provides for eight hundred students. One hundred and ten thousand pounds of public grant is available for their erection and equipment, but it will certainly prove inadequate, and must be supplemented from either public or private sources. So far, though the college is open to all, ninety-eight per cent of the students are Catholics.

Universities Act (1908); Charter of the National University (1908); Charter of University College, Dublin (1908); Royal University Acts (1897 and 1881); Royal University Calendars (1884 to 1909); DELANY, The Irish University Question: A plea for Fair Play (Dublin, 1904); Parliamentary Proceedings (1908).

ROBERT DONOVAN

Spanish-American Universities

The University of St. Mark's at Lima enjoys the reputation of being the oldest in America; it has the distinction of having first begun its course by royal decree. The univerity in Santo Domingo in the West Indies was the first to be established by a papal Bull. Other similar institutions soon arose all over Spanish America, flourishing during the colonial period, under the joint auspices of Church and State. Then, when the Revolution came, they passed from the direct control of the former to that of the latter, with the exception of the University of Havana, which remained in possession of a religious order until late in the nineteenth century. It was in 1538 that a Bull of Paul III established the pontifical University of St. Thomas in Santo Domingo, at the request of the Dominicans. However, the institution was not definitively established, until Philip II gave it legal existence in 1558, seven years after the foundation of St. Mark's in Peru. The University of Santo Domingo had faculties of theology, jurisprudence, philosophy, and medicine, and lasted throughout the colonial period. The University of Lima was founded by decree of Charles V in 1551 in the monastery of the Holy Rosary, remaining under the direction of the Dominicans until 1571, when, being confirmed by Pope Pius V, it passed into the hands of seculars. The Dominicans still continued, however, to occupy posts of honour. For centuries the university exercised an influence that spread over all the colonies of Spain in South America, and many eminent men went out from its lecture-rooms. The renowned Pedro Peralta and the French savant, Godin, were among its professors in the eighteenth century, while such men as the poets Oña, Castellanos, and Olmedo, and the first American bibliographer, Leon Pinelo, were among its students. The faculties of the university included theology, jurisprudence, philosophy, medicine, and, for a time, the language of the Incas.

The next in importance of the Peruvian universities was that of Cuzco, founded, in 1598, as the University of San Antonio Abad. In the seventeenth century the University of Guamanga in Peru was established with the same faculties as that of Cuzco. In the meantime, university studies had been inaugurated at Quito with the establishment, in 1586, of the University of San Fulgencio, under the Augustinian fathers, by a Bull of Sixtus V. A second University of Quito, the one which gained the greatest prominence in the colonial period, was that of St. Gregory the Great, founded by the Jesuits in 1620. The early seventeenth century was a period of considerable literary activity and educational work in Spanich America, and several universities were founded. In 1627 the Dominicans succeeded in establishing their royal and pontifical University of Santo Tomas, at Santa Fe de Bogotá, while the Jesuits continued their old Colege of San Luis, founded in 1592, as the Xavierian University. The University of Santo Tomas obtained renown through such eminent jurists as Luis Brochero, and such linguists as the Dominican, Bernardo de Lugo. The celebrated historian of New Granada, Fernández de Piedrahita, Bishop of Panama, was a doctor of this university.

The Jesuits arrived in Chile in 1593 and at once inaugurated higher studies with chairs of philosophy and theology. However, the honour of founding the first university in Santiago belongs to the Dominicans. It was established in the Monastery of the Holy Rosary, under the title of Santo Tomas in 1619, by a Bull of Paul V, that permitted its existence for ten years. In 1684 its privileges were renewed by Innocent XI for a period to last until Santiago should possess a public university. The faculties included logic, hostory, mental philosophy, physics, mathematics, canon law, and theology. In the meantime, as early as 1621, the Jesuits had obtained from Pope Gregory XV the Bull "In eminenti" which granted the privilege of conferring degrees for ten years. This privilege was renewed by Urban VIII for another ten year s, and finally granted without limitation in 1634. There were thus two pontifical universities in Santiago. Finally, in the first half of the eighteenth century, Santiago beheld the foundation of its Royal University of San Felipe by a decree of Philip IV in 1738, with chairs of theology, canon and civil law, mathematics, cosmography, anatomy, medicine, and Indian language. About the time that the Jesuit and Dominican universities were established at Santiago, Characas, in Upper Peru, now Bolivia, beheld a university arise in that of St. Francis Xavier, founded in 1623. This became one of the most famous in the New World. Towards the end of the eighteenth century, however, the spirit of this university had grown to be quite anti-clerical. Yet it produced a number of distinguished men, such as Mariano Moreno, Bernardo Monteagudo, José Ignacio Gorriti, and Jose Mariano Serrano. In 1622 the Jesuit college at Córdoba del Tucuman, founded a few years earlier in what is now the Argentine Republic, was raise d to the rank of a university by a Bull of Gregory XV and a decree of Philip III. After the expulsion of the Jesuits, it passed for a brief period to the Franciscans, until towards the end of the eighteenth century it was taken over by seculars. Two universities were established in the eighteenth century, the one in Venezuela, the other in Cuba. In 1722 the old seminary of Santa Rosa, founded at Caracas by Don Diego de Baños y Sotomayor, was raised to the rank of a royal and pontifical university by a decree of Philip V and a Bull of Innocent XIII, the faculties of civil law and medicine being added to those that already existed. The year before the granting of the faculties to the University of Venezuela, the Dominicans of Havana had obtained from the same pope the privilege of establishing a university, which owing to some misunderstanding with the bishop, did not finally begin in the Dominican monastery until 1728. The title of Royal and Pontifical University was accorded to it in 1734.

Such was the condition of university education in the West Indies and South America up to the Revolution. Most of the old universities continued, but no longer under the direct control of the Church, passing generally, in course of time, to the Department of Public Instruction. St. Mark's at Lima still exists, and preserves its autonomy, with the old title of pontifical, and with a faculty of theology, though it is said that in its secular departments, its religious influence has passed away. The University of Cuzco occupies to-day a portion of the former Jesuit college. That of San Cristobal at Guamanga became extinct in 1878. The University of St. Augustine at Arequipa still exists, and Trujillo, where a college was founded in 1621, enjoys to-day the benefits of a university. The University of Sucre (Characas) is still regarded as the best in Bolivia, where the Universities, also, of La Paz, Santa Cruz, and Cochabamba exist. The Bolivian universities have faculties of theology, subject to ecclesiastical control.

Colombia has to-day a national university at Bogotá, consisting of faculties in separate colleges. There are also universities at Cauca, Antioquia, Nariño, and Cartagena. At Quito higher education is imparted in the Central University of Ecuador, priests, among them Jesuits, being permitted to hold chairs. Venezuela has actually two universities, the Central University and that of Los Andes. The old Jesuit University of Córdoba is to-day one of the three national universities of Argentina. At Santiago de Chile, the convictorium of St. Francis Xavier has become the Instituto Nacional, that serves as a preparatory school for the National University which is the historical sequel of San Felipe. The University of Havana remained in charge of the Dominicans until 1842, when it was secularized. It still exists, with faculties of letters and science, law, and medicine. At present there are two Catholic universities in South America, the one of Santiago de Chile, founded by Archbishop Casanova in 1888, and the other at Buenos Aires. The former has faculties of law, mathematics, agriculture and industry, and engineering. The Catholic University of Buenos Aires, still in the formative period, has faculties of law and social science. The tendency of South American universities to-day is rather practical than theoretical and classical, much stress being laid upon such studies as engineering and others of a practical nature.

MARKHAM, A Hist. of Peru (Chicago, 1892); IDEM, Peru (London, 1880); IDEM, Cuzco and Lima (London, 1856); GARLAND, El Peu en 1906 (Lima, 1907); CIRIACUS MORELLUS (DOMINGO MURIEL, S.J.), Fasti Novi Orbis et ordinationum apostolicarum ad Indias pertinentium cum annotationibus (Venice, 1776); MENDIBURG, Apuntes historicos del Peru (Lima, 1902); ANGULO, La orden de Santo Domingo en el Peru (Lima, 1906); FUENTES, Lima (Paris, 1866); Anales de la universidad mayor de San Marcos (Lima, 1902-3); Memoria de justicia, instruccion y culto (Lima, 1902); FUENTES, Cuzco y sus ruinas (Lima, 1905); GIESECKE, Memoria del rector de la universidad de Cuzco (Cuzco, 1910); MENENDEZ Y PELAYO, introduction to Antologia de poetas hispano-americanos (Madrid, 1895); GUINAZU, Los frailes en Chile al traves de los siglos (Santiago, 1909); VICUNA SUBERCASEAUX, Memoria sobre la produccion intellectual en Chile (Santiago, 1909); HUNEEUS GANA, Cuadro historico de la produccion intellectual en Chile (Santiago, 1910); BARROS ARANA, Historia jeneral de Chile (Santiago, 1885); IBANEZ, Las cronicas de Bogotá (Bogotá, 1891); VERGARA Y VERGARA, Historia de la literatura en Nueva Granada (Bogotá, 1867); QUIJANO OTERO, Compendio de historia patria (Bogotá, 1883); ROCHERAUX, La vie intellectuelle en Colombie (Santander, Colombia); VAN BRABANT, La Bolivie (Paris and Brussels); GARCIA, Compendio de la historia de Santo Domingo (Santo Domingo, 1896); Universidad de la Havana. Memoria anuario (Havana, 1904); RODRIGUEZ, Vida del presbitero Don Felix Varela (New York, 1878); Anales de la universidad central del Ecuador.

CHARLES WARREN CURRIER

Columbia University

Portland, Oregon

Columbia University, formerly known as Portland University, is located on the east bank of the Willamette River in northern Portland, and is conducted by the Congregation of Holy Cross, whose mother-house is at Notre Dame, Indiana. In 1898 Portland University, conducted by a local Methodist association, failed and was obliged to close its doors. For three years the buildings were unoccupied. In 1901 the schools buildings and property of this institution were acquired by most Reverend Alexander Christie, D.D., Archbishop of Oregon City. For one year the school, now called Columbia University, was conducted by the diocesan clergy. In 1902 Archbishop Christie appealed for teachers to Rev. J.A. Zahm, then provincial of the Congregation of Holy Cross, who at once sent some of his religious to take charge of the new institute. In 1909 the university was incorporated under the laws of Oregon, and empowered to teach collegiate and university courses and to confer certificates, diplomas, honours, and degrees in the arts, sciences, philology, literature, history, mathematics, and other university branches. To meet the need of a thorough preparatory school in the North-West an academic department was founded at Columbia. The first faculties organized were those of arts and letters and science. To-day, besides the college department and preparatory school, Columbia has chairs of philosophy, history and economics, mathematics and languages. There have been three presidents of the university. Rev. E. P. Murphy, of Portland, was chosen as first president; Rev. Michael Quinlan, C.S.C., and Rev. Joseph Gallagher, C.S.C., were his successors. At present (1912) about two hundred students are registered. The faculties are made up of twenty professors including a few laymen. The erection of Christie Hall, recently, has made accommodations for an additional one hundred and fifty students.

J.C. McGINN

De Paul University

De Paul University, Chicago, is the outgrowth of St. Vincent's College, which opened in Sept., 1898. The university was incorporated, 25 Dec., 1907, by ten Vincentian priests and five Catholic laymen. Besides the usual collegiate studies, De Paul offered, at the time of incorporation, courses in mechanical, civil, and electrical engineering, also special work in science. Thirteen priests and six laymen constituted its faculty. The origin of St. Vincent's College may be traced to the desire of Archbishop Feehan to have a Catholic institution for young men on the "North Side" of Chicago. The Vincentians had been here for twenty years, and the Very Rev. T. J. Smith, C.M., with three of his priests, became incorporated as St. Vincent's College in June, 1898. Among the first professors were: Rev. Thomas Finney, C.M., T. F. Levan, C.M., P. A. Finney, C.M., J. Murray, C.M., M. Le Sage, C.M., P. H. McDonnell, C.M., and D. J. McHugh, C.M. In Jan., 1899, Rev. P. V. Byrne, C.M., became president. A man of high ideals, he soon desired to enlarge the educational work, and was warmly seconded by Rev. J. A. Nuelle, C.M., prefect of studies. Engineering courses were accordingly begun in Sept., 1906. No expense was spared in equipping for scientific pursuits the building erected the following year. Pre-medical studies were then undertaken. In July, 1910, the Very Rev. F. X. McCabe, C.M., LL.D., became rector of De Paul university. With the approval of Archbishop Quigley, De Paul entered a new field in 1911, that of enabling women to gain credits and university degrees. The summer school of 1911 was attended by one hundred sisters and lay teachers. Twice this number are now pursing extension work. The students numbered 550 in 1911. The faculty includes sixteen Vincentian priests, and almost the same number of laymen. In the spring of 1912 the Illinois College of Law became the Law Department of De Paul, and library and classes were removed to the university buildings; 150 students were thus added.

DANIEL J. McHUGH

Fordham University

Fordham University developed out of Saint John's College, founded by Bishop Hughes upon the old Rose Hill Farm at Fordham, then in Westchester County, and formally opened on St. John the Baptist's Day, 24 June, 1841. This same year the theological seminary of the New York diocese was moved from Lafargeville, Jefferson Co., to Fordham. In April, 1846, an act of incorporation passed by the New York Legislature granted it the power to "confer such literary honours, degrees or diplomas as are usually granted by any university, college or seminary of learning in the United States". In June, 1846, the Fathers of the Society of Jesus purchased the property from the diocese. The first Jesuit president was the Rev. Augustus Thebaud who, with other members of the early Jesuit faculty, came from St. Mary's College, Marion County, Kentucky. St. Mary's was practically transferred to Fordham, and, as it had been incorporated in 1820 with all the powers of a university, the history of the present college must be considered to begin with its foundation in that year. Under such presidents as Fathers Thebaud, Larkin, Tellier, Doucet, and Tissot, S.J., the college rapidly gained in attendance. In the early fifties there were 200 students. There was a falling off at the time of the Civil War, but in the year 1869-70 there were 257. After a phase of less attendance in the late seventies, there were 327 in 1889 and 1890. The number rose to 500 in the early part of the present decade. Many Fordham students of the early times reached distinction. Among them were: John La Farge the painter; Ignatius Donnely, the author; John R.G. Hassard; the MacMahon brothers, James, Arthur, and Martin, two of whom died nobly in the Civil War, while the third, though badly injured, survived for distinciton on the bench in New York City; Thomas B. Connery for many years editor-in-chief of the "Herald"; Gen. James O'Beirne; Judges Morgan O'Brien, Amend, Hendricks, of the Supreme Court; and many well-known lawyers, Anthony Hirst of Philadelphia, Philip van Dyke, and William B. Moran of Detroit, the latter on the Supreme Bench of Michigan at his death; John A. Mooney of New York, a well-known writer; Ignatius and Thomas McManus, of Mexico, and Michael F. Dooley, of Providence, bankers. Many of Fordham's brightest students have entered the clergy and reached positions of great influence. Among them are Cardinal Farley, Bishop Hoban, Bishop Rosecrans of Columbus, Monsignori Van Dyke (Detroit), O'Connor (Charleston), Lynch (Utica), Mooney (New York), and many distinguished Jesuits. On 21 June, 1904, with the consent of the regents of the University of the State of New York, the board of trustees of St. John's College, during the presidency of Father (now Bishop) John Collins, authorized the opening of a school of law and a school of medicine. The law department rapidly increased until, in 1911, there were 230 on its rolls. The university now (1912) numbers 548 students under 124 professors, distributed as follows: law, 224 students, 12 professors; medicine, 164 students, 96 professors; academical department, 160 students, 16 professors. The Fordham University Press, whose historical publications have a wide diffusion, completes the university organization.

JAS. J. WALSH

Loyola University, Chicago

Loyola University is the outgrowth of St. Ignatius College, founded by the Jesuits in 1869 for the higher education of the Catholic youth of Chicago, and empowered by the Legislature of Illinois (30 June, 1870) to confer the usual degrees in the various faculties of a university. On 21 November, 1909, Loyola University was chartered and St. Ignatius College became the department of arts and sciences. The law department was established in September, 1908, and is now located in the centre of Chicago's business district. The engineering department opened September, 1911, with courses in civil, electrical, chemical, and mechanical engineering. the medical department was founded in 1868 and became a part of the university in June, 1909. The pharmacy school has taken its place among the recognized institutions of the country. The private library of the institution, consisting of 47,000 volumes, is meant primarily for the use of the faculty and the allied schools.

A.J. BURROWES

Loyola University (New Orleans)

Loyola University, New Orleans, Louisiana, is (1912) the only Catholic university in what is popularly designated "The Old South". From a small college of arts and sciences founded by the Jesuit Fathers in 1904 it has grown into an institution with plans under way to organize all the departments of a modern university. The cornerstone of Marquette Hall, the main building of the university group, was laid, 13 November, 1910, by Archbishop Blenk, assisted by fourteen members of the American hierarchy. On the same day ground was broken for the Louise C. Thomas Hall by the Apostolic delegate, Monsignor Falconio. The building dedicated to Father Marquette will always bear witness to the generous cooperation of the clergy and laity of the Archdiocese of New Orleans, who, on the invitation and under the leadership of the Rev. Albert Biever, S.J., president of Loyola College, formed an association on 17 February, 1906, known as "The Marquette Association for Higher Education", which made it its aim to arouse interest in Catholic education while soliciting the financial aid necessary for the upbuilding of a well-equipped Catholic University. The Louise C. Thomas Hall has its name from the devoted lady who subscribed $50,000 towards its erection. The beauty and nobility of her gift is expressed in the stately architecture, which combines artistic qualities with usefulness. Both structures, connected by a graceful arcade or cloister, are in the Tudor Gothic style and stand on the beautiful site which fronts St. Charles Avenue, where that handsome driveway passes Audobon Park.

P.A. RYAN

Unyanyembe

Vicariate apostolic in German East Africa, separated from the Vicariate Apostolic of Nyanza by a Decree of Propaganda, 30 December, 1886. Its limits, as fixed on 10 December, 1895, were: on the N. the Vicariate Apostolic of Southern Nyanza; on the S. a line drawn from Lake Manjara (36°E.) along the mountain ridges to the N. W. of Ugago; on the S. the northern limits of Ujanzi, Ugunda, Ugetta, Uvenza, and Ujiji; on the W. Lake Tanganika and the eastern boundary of the Congo Free State to the village of Ruanda. This district was originally included in the Vicariate of Tanganika; in 1879 R.P. Ganachan of the White Fathers penetrated this hitherto unknown region and endeavoured to settle at Tabora, but was unsuccessful; two years later R.P. Guillet succeeded and opened an orphanage there, which was shortly afterwards transferred to Kipalapala one league distant; in 1844 R.P. Lourdel settled at Djiue-la-Singa, but the post was abandoned on 13 March, 1885. On 11 January, 1887, the mission of Unyanyembe was separated from Tanganika, with R.P. Girault as superior of the provicariate; on 23 August, 1887, Mgr Charbonnier was consecrated bishop in the Kipalapala orphanage chapel by Mgr Livinhac of Uganda; this was the first episcopal consecration in Equatorial Africa. The station at Kipalapala was destroyed in 1889 by the natives. Two years later it was restored, and another was opened at Uchirombo. Towards the close of 1897 five Sisters of Notre-Dame d'Afrique arrived at Uchirombo. In 1900 there were in this mission 20 priests, 6 nuns, 49 catechists, 1842 neophytes, 6000 catechumens, and 150 children in the schools. A German scientist, Dr. Kandt, a Protestant, was so impressed by the good work of the Catholic missionaries that he presented his estate at Tabora to the vicar Apostolic to found a school and hospital. The present and first vicar Apostolic, Mgr François Gerboin, of the White Fathers, born in 1847 and consecrated titular Bishop of Turbubto in 1897, resides at Ushirombo.

Mission statistics (1905): 33 priests; 7 lay brothers; 6 nuns; 72 catechists; 26 schools with 966 pupils; 11 hospitals; 5 leper houses; 17 orphanages with 325 children rescued from slavery; 3,000,000 infidels; 3678 Catholics; 2889 catechumens.

LE ROY in PIOLET, Les missions cath. franç. au XIX siècle, V (Paris, 1902), 410-22

A.A. MACERLEAN

Marquette University

Marquette University of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, is an outgrowth of Marquette College, which was opened in 1881, although it had been planned by Right Rev. John Martin Henni as far back as 1850. In 1848, while in Europe, the bishop met the Chevalier J.G. de Boeye, of Antwerp, who gave him $16,000 to help to found an institution under the care of the Jesuits. The foundation was to be made in the bishop's diocese, in the far North-West, a country first visited by the missionaries Allouez and Marquette. In 1855 Rev. P.J. de Smet, S.J., and Rev. F.X. de Coen, S.J., arrived at Milwauke, commissioned by the Provincial of Missouri to co-operate with the bishop in his plans for the proposed institution. St. Gall's parish was placed under the care of the Jesuit Fathers. Two years later, Rev. Stanislaus P. Lalumiere, S.J., commenced the St. Aloysius Academy, which was soon abandoned. It was resuscitated in 1864, under the name of St. Gall's Academy, under the management of Rev. J. T. Kuhlman, S.J. This school existed until 1872, when it was also abandoned. The project of establishing a college had not been relinquished, and in 1864 a charter was obtained by a special act of the legislature. Marquette College was dedicated, 15 Aug., 1881. The degree of bachelor of arts was conferred for the first time in 1887, and when in 1906 Marquette celebrated its silver jubilee, the college had conferred the degree upon 186 students, Master of Arts on 38, and Bachelor of Science upon one.

In 1907, owing to the munificence of the late Robert A. Johnson, of Milwaukee, who built and donated the structure on Grand Avenue, between Eleventh and Twelfth Streets, Marquette College was enabled to enlarge its usefulness. The charter was amended by the legislature, and the college became a university. That year it affiliated temporarily with the Milwaukee Medical College, which comprised a school of medicine, a school of dentistry, and one of pharmacy. In 1908 the Milwaukee Law School became the Marquette University College of Law. In the same year the College of Applied Sciences and Engineering was opened. In 1910 the Robert A. Johnson College of Economics was organized. It consists of two schools; one of business administration, and another of journalism. In 1911 the Marquette Conservatory of Music was established.

J.E. COPUS

Niagara University

Niagara University, situated near Niagra Falls, New York, is conducted by the Vincentians. It was founded by Rev. John F. Lynch, C.M., later first Archbishop of Toronto, and was chartered by the Legislature, 20 April, 1863, as the Seminary of Our Lady of Angels. The original building was completely destroyed by fire in December, 1864; in April, 1865, one wing of the present building was built, and in 1869, the structure was completed. On 7 August, 1883, the Regents of New York State erected the Seminary of Our Lady of Angels into a college by the name of Niagara University. A medical school was established at Buffalo, and during its existence (1883-1898), it did much to further the study of medicine, and inauguarated the movement which has resulted in requiring four years' study for the doctor's degree in New York State. In 1898 the Niagara medical school was merged into that of the Buffalo University, as was also, in 1891, the Niagara law school. Niagara University has now complete seminary, college, and high school departments, embracing courses in philosophy, higher mathematics, science languages, commerce, and music. The university possesses over 300 acres of ground, a museum, laboratories for scientific work, and a library, containing about 35,000 volumes, begun by Bishop Timon, C.M.

GRACE, Niagara Index (1870-19912); Golden Jubilee Volume.

EDWARD J. WALSH

St. John's University

The legal title of a Catholic boarding-school at Collegeville, Minnesota, conducted by the Benedictine Fathers of St. John's Abbey, which is situated at the same place. It is the oldest Catholic college in the North-West, having been founded in 1857 by the late Archabbot Boniface Wimmer, then Abbot of St. Vincent's Abbey at Beatty, Pennsylvania. Early in 1856 Abbot Wimmer sent Demetrius de Marogna, a capitular of St. Vincent's Abbey, to Minnesota to establish a monastery and an educational institution in what was then the Diocese of St. Paul, whither the Benedictines had been invited by Bishop Cretin, at the instance of the Indian missionary Father Piera. De Marogna was accompanied by two Benedictine clerics, Cornelius Wittmann and Bruno Riss, and two lay brothers. The institution was originally called St. John's Seminary, which name was changed to St. John's University by an Act of the State Legislature, 17 Feb., 1863. In March, 1869, the school was empowered by the State to confer all college and university degrees, and on 16 June, 1878, Leo XIII authorized Abbot Alexius Edelbrock, then president of the University, to confer the degree of doctor in philosophy, theology, and canon law. The institution comprises a theological seminary, a school of arts and science, a high-school, a school of commerce and a preparatory school.

Among its presidents deserving of mention are: Rupert Seidenbusch (1867-1875), who in 1875 was appointed vicar Apostolic of the newly-created Vicariate of Northern Minnesota, and titular Bishop of Halia (d. 3 June, 1895); Alexius Edelbrock (1875-89), who erected the main university building and the beautiful church (d. 18 May, 1908, as rector of St. Anselm's Church, New York City), Bernard Locnikar (1890-94), who made the theological course a model of its kind (d. 7 Nov., 1894). Since 1894, under the presidency of Peter Engel, the university has grown rapidly. The buildings include the main university building, the science hall, the library, the observatory, the gymnasium, and the infirmary. The faculty is composed of 42 professors and instructors, all of whom, except the physical instructor, are Beneictines and members of St. John's Abbey. The number of students during the year 1911-12 in all departments was 441.

HOFFMANN, St. John's University: a sketch of its history (Collegeville, Minnesota, 1907); IDEM, St. John's Seminary in American Ecclesiastical Review, XVII (Philadelphia, 1897), 283-97.

MICHAEL OTT

Upper Nile

Vicariate apostolic; separated from the mission of Nyanza, 6 July, 1894, comprises the eastern portion of Uganda, that is roughly east of a line from Fauvera on the Nile (about 2°13' N. lat.), north-east to the Kaffa mountains, and of a line south from Fauvera past Munynyu near Lake Victoria Nyanza to 1° S. lat. Of the native tribes, the Baganda, partly Caucasian, are much superior intellectually to the others. Their religion was spiritualistic, acknowledging a Divine Providence Katonda, who, being good, was neglected, while the loubalis, or demon, and mzimus, or departed souls, were propitiated. Totemism was prevalent, the mziro, or totem, being usually an animal, rarely a plant. The first Catholic missionaries, the White Fathers arrived in Uganda in 1878. Father Lourdel obtained leave from King Mtesa to enter; on 26 June, 1879, the fathers reached Roubaga.

On Easter Saturday, 27 March, 1880, the first catechumens were baptized; two years later the Arabs induced Mtesa to expel the missionaries; they returned under his successor, Mwanga, 14 July, 1885. Religion spread rapidly, but the Protestants and Arabs stirred up the king to begin a persecution. Joseph Mkasa, chief of the royal pages, was the proto-martyr; on 26 May, 1886, thirty newly baptized Catholics, on refusing to apostatize, were burnt to death; soon more than seventy others were martyred. Then the Arabs plotted to depose Mwanga, but the Catholics by the advice of Father Lourdel remained loyal. The Arabs thereupon expelled the missionaries, who, however, returned in 1889: Father Lourdel endeavoured to induce Mwango to submit to the advancing British Company; on 12 May, 1890, worn out by his labours this pioneer of the Gospel died. His confrères continued to reap a rich harvest, but were opposed by Captain Luard, the British Company's agent. On 23 May, 1893, Uganda passed under the protection of the British Government and the Church gained comparative peace. Mgr Livinhac, now Superior General of the White Fathers, obtained the erection of the eastern portion of Uganda into a separate vicariate under the care of the English congregation of Foreign Missions, Mill Hill, London.

The first vicar Apostolic was Mgr. Henry Hanlon, b. on 7 Jan., 1862, consecrated titular Bishop of Teos in 1894, went to Uganda in 1895; after labouring there for seventeen years, he returned to England for the general chapter of his Society, and retired from active missionary work. He was succeeded (June, 1912) by Mgr. John Biermans, titular Bishop of Gargara. Coming to Uganda in 1896 he proved himself a valuable auxiliary to Mgr. Hanlon. The episcopal residence is at Mengo, Buganda, near Entebbe, capital of Uganda. In the mission there are 24 priests, 6 Missionary Franciscan Sisters of Mary; 15 churches; 12 schools with 1649 pupils; and about 20,000 Catholics. The missionaries have recently compiled and printed in Uganda, a grammar phrase-book, and a vocabulary of a Nilotic language, Dhö Levo, spoken in Kavirondo. The language had not previously been reduced to writing. Some primers, catechisms, and prayer-books also in Dhö Levo have been printed.

LE ROY, in PIOLET, Les missions cath. franç., V (Paris, 1902), 369-455; see also articles in The Month (October, 1893; August, 1893; June, 1904).

A.A. MACERLEAN

Upper Rhine

Ecclesiastical province; includes the Archdiocese of Freiburg and the suffragan Dioceses of Fulda, Mainz, Limburg, and Rottenburg. The German Church was secularized by the Imperial Delegates Enactment of 25 Feb., 1803, confirmed by the German Empire on 24 March, and by the emperor on 27 April. All bishoprics and religious foundations, abbeys, and monasteries, immediate or mediate, were used to compensate those rulers who had been obliged to yield their possessions on the left bank of the Rhine to France. A part of the Archdiocese of Mainz was preserved for the primate Karl Theodore von Dalberg and was transferred to the cathedral church of Ratisbon. Hanover, Brunswick, and Oldenburg also received ecclesiastical lands. None of these thought of providing for the needs of their Catholic subjects by establishing new dioceses. The organization of the Confederation of the Rhine, the dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire, and the supremacy in southern Germany of Napoleon, who had no desire for the settlement of the ecclesiastical confusion in Germany, made it impossible to conclude a concordat.

The condition of the Church grew desolate. New bishops were not elected when the old bishops died, and the cathedral chapters were combined. Besides Dalberg, those who laboured in the districts which now belong to the ecclesiastical Province of the Upper Rhine were: the former Bishop of Speyer, Walderdorf, at Bruchsal (up to 1810), and Joseph Ludwig Colmar, at Mainz (1802-18); in the Duchy of Nassau J. von Hommer, cathedral vicar of Trier; Hubert Corden, at Limburg. There were also vicars of the primate Dalberg at Worms, Ellwangen (from 1817 at Rottenburg), and Constance. From 1800 the vicar-general at Constance was Ignaz Heinrich von Wessenberg (q.v.), a Josephinist, who advocated a national German Church independent of the pope and introduced many anti-clerical innovations.

The Catholics of Germany looked to the Congress of Vienna for the removal of their difficulties. This they hoped all the more, as those territories had been won again from France in compensation for which all landed possessions had been taken from the Church. Cardinal Consalvi, the papal representative at the congress, Wessenberg, the represenative of the primate Dalberg, von Wambold, dean of the cathedral of Worms, formally syndic of the collegiate church of St. Andreas at Worms, presented to the congress a number of memorials and statements on restoration of the earlier rights of the Church, the re-endowment ofdioceses, and the founding of seminaries and parishes. The congress maintained an unbroken silence; moreover, it disposed of the church lands on the recovered left bank of the Rhine. As the congress also divided the territories of the primate Dalberg, after its session closed the Church was poorer than before. In vain Dalberg sought through his representative Wessenberg at the congress, and afterwards at the Diet of the Confederation at Frankfort, to bring it about that the church affairs of the Catholics should be made one of the matters to be settled by the Confederation. The reorganization of the Church and its equipment was left to the good will of the individual rulers. This was most disadvantageous, as Catholic principles were regarded with strong disfavour by Protestants and Freemasons, and by adherents of Febronianism and Josephinism.

After Bavaria and Prussia had begun the negotiations with Rome that led to the concordats of 1818 and 1821, the envoys of several Protestant rulers met at Frankfort in March, 1818, at the instance of Würtemberg, to confer concerning the condition of the Catholic Church in their respective countries, and to discuss the general principles which should be followed by the German states in concluding a concordat. This conference was attended by representatives of Würtemberg, of the Grand Duchies of Baden, Mecklenburg, and Hesse, of the Electoral Principality of Hesse, the Duchy of Nassau, Frankfort, and of several North German states which later withdrew. In the opening address on 24 March, 1818, the envoy of the Roman See the responsibility for the fact that ecclesiastical affairs were not yet in an organized condition in Germany; then he urged a close union of the Protestant governments in their position towards Rome, and announced that the governments would take up the national Church schemes of Febronius in case Rome was not willing to agree to the "favourable conditions" offered by the various countries. He called the church law devised by Febronius and Joseph II, with its episcopal system, the "only salvation" of the Catholic Church. The ends to be attained in negotiations with Rome were: first, the reorganization of religious conditions "without endangering the jura principum circa sacra or granting rights to the Roman Court whereby it could have a disadvantageous effect upon the peace, civil order, and civilization of the states"; secondly, "the introduction of a church system which would bring church affairs more into harmony with the constitution of the State and the present position of enlightenment, in order to set boundaries to the papal system which has lately threatened the states with obscurantism and all its consequences". In the seventeenth session it was decided that a concordat with the Holy See was not to be sought, but that the governments were to communicate to the pope in a "Declaration" what they were ready to concede to the Church; the claims of the state circa sacra were embodied in an "Organic Statute", that was kept secret at first and was to be given to the new bishops of the respective countries at the close of the negotiations.

The "Declaration", in which Baden, Würtemberg, the two Hesses, Nassau, and Frankfort had agreed, were presented to Pius VII, 23 March, 1819, by the ambassadors of the combined governments. On 10 Aug. this declaration was answered by Cardinal Consalvi in a celebrated report, and rejected by the Holy See. As, however, the pope had requested the governments to take in hand, at least provisionally, the circumscription and filling of new dioceses. The representatives of the governments assembled once more at Frankfort, where new negotiations lasted from 22 April, 1820, to 24 Jan., 1821. The proposal for the circumscription of new dioceses was accepted by the governments, and they further agreed among themselves to urge the founding of special dioceses for each country, and to demand that these dioceses should not be exempt, but should be under a metropolitan. The hope was that a church province with an archbishop would be more independent of Rome than exempt, isolated bishops. The church Province of the Upper Rhine, that was to be erected, was to include the Dioceses of Freiburg, Fulda, Limburg, Mainz, and Rottenburg, with the metropolitan see at Freiburg. The desire of the pope to have the archiepiscopal See of St. Boniface re-established at Mainz failed of accomplishment, on account of the opposition of Würtemberg and Nassau. In March, 1821, the draft of an organization and the documents which designated the amounts necessary for the endowment of the sees were sent to the pope. On the basis of these documents Pius VII issued, 16 Aug., 1821 the Bull of circumscription "Provida sollersque" suppressing the Bishopric of Constance and the provostship of Ellwangen, and canonically erecting the church Province of the Upper Rhine with the dioceses already mentioned.

Although the governments were only partially satisfied with the Bull, still it was accepted by their representatives at Frankfort; its publication, however, was postponed. The principles and schemes of the combined governments as to national Churches, concerning which no agreement had been reached with Rome, were set forth by the assembled diplomats in the "Fundamental Instrument" and the "Church Pragmatic". These two documents demanded the complete control of the Church system by the State. It was the intention of the governments, as soon as Rome had established the new dioceses, to force upon the new bishops this right of the State over the Church, which under no circumstances could have received the approval of Rome. In a secret treaty between the states, 8 Feb., 1822, it was agreed that the "Church Pragmatic" was to be made binding upon the new bishops and canons. The governments also hastened to select their candidates for the new sees, some states asking the advice of the deans of the chapters. The candidates thus chosen were bound to observe the "Church Pragmatic". The Holy See, when informed of these proceedings by Vicar General von Kempff, who was under consideration as Bishop of Fulda, rejected on 13 June, 1823, both the candidates nominated for bishops and the whole of the "Church Pragmatic". Negotiations were again broken off. However, the necessity, which was every day more apparent, of reestablishing settled church relations and the lack of agreement among the governments led Baden, first of all, to open new and confidential negotiations for itself with Rome. The results of these negotiations were four propositions which were sent as the ultimatum of the Holy See to the Government of Baden on 8 Dec., 1824. These propositions regulated the method of filling the archiepiscopal see, the first and later appointments of the metropolitan chapter, and the founding of a seminary for priests; they also demanded a, freer intercourse with Rome for the archbishop, and the free exercise of ecclesiastical jurisdiction according to the canons of the Church. Baden accepted these propositions, with some changes conceded by the pope. Divided into six articles these propositions were communicated after this, on 6 July, 1825, to the other courts that had negotiated with the Holy See. The united governments accepted the articles, 4 Aug., 1826, and communicated their acceptance to the pope, 4-7 Sept., demanding, however, the omission of the articles which treated of the endowment of the seminaries and guaranteed the freedom of the administration of the Church. According to their own declarations these reservations of the governments did not imply the validity of the principles of the "Church Pragmatic", and, as the governments made no reply to the explanations which the Pope gave to these points, the pope assumed that the doubts of the Governments over these points had disappeared. Consequently on 11 April, 1827, he issued the supplementary Bull, "Ad Dominici gregis custodiam", which incorporated the articles in their entirety. Upon this the two Bulls, "Provida sollersque" and "Ad Dominici gregis custodiam", were published in full by the Governments of Baden, Hesse-Darmstadt, Hesse-Cassel, Würtemberg, and Nassau. The Bulls received the approval of the Governments only "so far as such have for their object the formation of the ecclesiastical province of the Upper Rhine, the circumscription, equipment, and founding of the five dioceses belonging to it with their cathedral chapters, also the filling of the archiepiscopal see, the episcopal sees, and the offices of the cathedral foundations".

After the Bulls had been proclaimed by the Governments, the new bishops were elected. After the Government of Baden had dropped its former candidate, Wessenberg, the first archbishop was Bernhard Boll, parish priest of Münster; the Bishop of Limburg was Brand; of Rottenburg, J. B. Keller; of Fulda, Rieger; of Mainz, Burg. The ecclesiastical province of the Upper Rhine was now established, and the episcopal sees filled, but satisfactory relations between Church and State had not yet been attained. The Governments did not abandon their plan to extend the rights of the State in ecclesiastical questions as far as possible. No determined resistance was to be expected from most of the new bishops, who were either weak men or confidants of the Governments. Consequently, on 30 Jan., 1830, the Governments issued jointly an "Ordinance respecting the exercise of the constitutional right of the State to protect and supervise the Catholic national Church", containing thirty-nine articles, which were essentially only a revised form of the "Church Pragmatic" of Frankfort. The pope protested at once, although in vain. The Bishop of Fulda and his cathedral chapter also courageously opposed the ordinance, and obtained the mitigation of the most severe regulations. The bishops of the other dioceses accepted at first without opposition the publication of the ordinance of the sovereign. Still, in their dioceses also there were later violent struggles between Church and State.

MÜnch, Vollständige Sammlung aller älteren und neueren Konkordate (2 vols. Leipzig, 1830-31) Longner, Darstellung der Rechts-verhältnisse der Bischöfe in den oberrheinischen Kirchenprovinz (Tübingen, 1840); IDEM, Beiträge zur Geschichte der O.K. provinz (Tübingen, 1863); BRÜKE, Die O.K. von ihrer Gründung bis zur Gegenwart (Mainz, 1868(; Idem, Geschichte der katholischen Kirche in Deutschland, II, III (Mainz, 1889,1896); Maas, Geschichte der katholischen Kirche in Baden, (Freiburg, 1891); Lauer, Geschichte der katholischen Kirche im Grosskerzogtum Baden (Freiburg, 1908); Kissling, Geschichte des Kulturkampfes, I (Freiburg, 1911).

JOSEPH LINS

Ancient See of Upsala

When St. Ansgar, the Apostle of the North, went to Sweden in 829 the Swedes were still heathen and the country contained many sacrificial groves and temples for the worship of idols. One of the most celebrated of the latter was the temple at Upsala in what is now called Old Upsala, the centre of idolatrous worship not only for Sweden but for all Scandinavia. Even after Christianity had spread through Sweden, heathen sacrifices were still maintained at Upsala. The "Bishops' Chronicle", written by Adam of Bremen in the years 1072-76, says, "The Swedes have a well-known heathen temple called Upsala", and adds, "Every ninth year, moreover, a great feast is celebrated at Upsala, which is observed in common by all the provinces of Sweden. None is permitted to avoid participation in the feast . . . . More horrible than any punishment is that even those who have become Christians must purchase exemption from participation in the feast . . . . The sacrifices are made thus: Nine heads are offered for every living creature of the male sex. By the blood of these the gods are appeased. The bodies are hung up in a grove not far from the temple. Dogs and horses may be seen hanging close by human beings; a Christian told me he had seen seventy-two bodies hanging together."

An episcopal see was established at Old Upsala. One of the bishops was St. Henry, who took part in the Crusade to Finland led by St. Eric and suffered martyrdom there in 1157. The bishops of Sweden were first suffragans of the Archdiocese of Hamburg-Bremen, of which see St. Ansgar was archbishop when he died. Afterwards the Swedish bishops were suffragans of the Archbishop of Lund, Primate of Scandinavia. In 1152 Cardinal Nicholas of Albano, later Pope Adrian IV, visited Sweden and held a provincial synod at Linköping. He had been commissioned to establish an independent Church province in Sweden, but the matter was deferred, as the Swedes could not agree upon the see of the archbishop.

However, in 1164, Pope Alexander III established a separate ecclesiastical province of Sweden with the see at Upsala. The suffragans were the Bishops of Skara, Linköping, Strengnäs, and Westerås; at a later date the dioceses of Wexiö and Åbo in Finland were added. The first Archbishop of Upsala was Stephen, a Cistercian monk from the celebrated monastery of Alwastra. Cardinal William of Sabina came as papal legate to Sweden during the archiepiscopate of Jarler, a Dominican monk (1235-55). The legate had been commissioned, among other things, to establish cathedral chapters wherever such were lacking, and to grant them the exclusive right of electing the bishops. Another important matter which the legate had been ordered to carry out was the enforcement of the law of clerical celibacy. At a provincial synod held at Skenninge in 1248 under the presidency of the cardinal, the rules as to celibacy were made more severe. The pious and energetic Archbishop Jarler and his successor Laurentius (1257-67), a Franciscan, constantly strove to elevate the clergy and to enforce the law of celibacy. A century later the great saint of Sweden, St Bridget (d. 1373), laboured zealously for the enforcement of the same law.

A new era arose in the history of the archdiocese when Archbishop Folke (1274-77) transferred the see from Old Upsala to Aros, a town near by on the Fyris which was given the name of Upsala. This change was approved by the pope, the king, and the bishops. The relics of the national saint, St. Eric, were also transferred to the new see. The cathedral of Upsala, the most important church of Sweden and the largest in Scandinavia, was built by the French architect Etienne de Bonnuille in 1287. It was a masterpiece of the Gothic style, and is a monument of what Catholic art and Catholic self-sacrifice were able to create under the leadership of zealous archbishops and prelates. The labours of the archbishops extended in all directions. Some were zealous pastors of their flocks, such as Jarler and others; some were distinguished canonists, such as Birger Gregerson (1367-83) and Olof Larsson (1435-8); others were statesmen, such as Jöns Bengtsson Oxenstjerna (d. 1467), or capable administrators, such as Jacob Ulfsson Örnfot, who was distinguished as a prince of the Church, royal councillor, patron of art and learning, founder of the University of Upsala, and an efficient helper in the introduction of printing into Sweden. He died in the Carthusian monastery of Mariefred (Mary's Peace) in 1522. There were also scholars, such as Johannes Magnus (d. 1544), who wrote the "Historia de omnibus gothorum sueonumque regibus" and the "Historia metropolitanæ ecclesiæ upsaliensis", and his brother Olaus Magnus (d. 1588), who wrote the "Historia de gentibus septentrionalibus" and who was the last Archbishop of Upsala.

The archbishops and secular clergy found active co-workers among the regulars. Among the orders represented in Sweden were the Benedictines, Cistercians, Dominicans, Franciscans, Brigittines (with the mother-house at Wadstena), Carthusians, etc. The monks not only laboured in things spiritual, but were also the teachers of the people in agriculture and gardening. Still greater credit is due the members of the orders, both men and women, for their services in the intellectual training of the people of Sweden. A Swedish Protestant investigator, Carl Silfverstolpe, writes: "The monks were almost the sole bond of union in the Middle Ages between the civilization of the north and that of southern Europe, and it can be claimed that the active relations between our monasteries and those in southern lands were the arteries through which the higher civilization reached our country." The beneficial labours of the Catholic Church were forgotten in the stormy days of the Reformation, but in the present era they have been once more recognized by more dispassionate investigators. Dr. Claes Annerstedt, the historian of the University of Upsala, says: "One of the finest results of modern research is that the highly important labours of the Roman Church have received proper recognition by the exhibition of its services in the preservation and spread of civilization."

HergenrÖther, Handbuch der allgemeinen Kirchengeschichte, II (Freiburg, 1879), 720; Adami Gesta Hammaburgensium Episcoporum, IV (Hanover, 1876), 174; Flavigny, Ste. Brigitte de Suède, IV (Paris, 1910), 148-151; XVI, 714-717; Reuterdahl, Svenska Kyrkans historia, II, pt. II (Lund, 1838-1866), 413; Hildebrand, Sveriges Medeltid, III (Stockholm, 1898-1903), 839; Silfverstolpe, Klostret i Wadstena in Historiskt Bibliotek, I (Stockholm, 1875), 2; Annerstedt, Upsala, Universitets historia, I, pt. I (Upsala, 1877), 2; Krogh Tonning, Die hl. Birgitta von Schweden (Kempten and Munich, 1907); Perger, Jesuiterpateren Lauritz Nielsen, saakaldt "Klosterlasse" (Christiania, 1896); Baumgartner, Nordische Fahrten.

GUSTAF ARMFELT

University of Upsala

The oldest and most celebrated university of Sweden. Even today the arrangement of its buildings in the city of Upsala (about 23,000 inhabitants) shows that it is the creation of the Catholic Church. The venerable Gothic cathedral, which contains in a silver reliquary the remains of St. Eric the King (d. 1161), is surrounded by the colleges, houses of the "nations", clinical hospitals, infirmaries, astronomical observatory, and library. The proposal to call foreign scholars to Upsala to give lectures is said to have been made at the church synod held at Arboga in 1417. It is certain that the bishops were commissioned by the Synod of Södercöping (1441) to take measures to obtain a studium generale. Shortly after this Denmark sought to establish a university at Copenhagen. This led Archbishop Jakob Ulfsson, primate of the Swedish Church (470-1515), a man who did much for Sweden, to seek from the pope the privilege of founding a university. In the summer of 1477 the envoy of the archbishop and the royal council, Canon Ragvald Ingemundi, returned from Rome bringing with him from Pope Sixtus IV a Bull, dated 27 February, 1477, granting the charter. The university was to be modelled on that of Bologna, to have the same privileges and liberties, and to include the faculties of theology, canon and civil law, medicine, and philosophy. The Archbishop of Upsala was to be the licentiate, doctor, and master. After receiving the Bull, the archbishop and his six suffragans, the administrator of the kingdom, Sten Sture I, and the twenty-three members of the royal council of Strengon 2 July, 1477. The lectures began in the autumn of the same year, and the university developed and flourished greatly.

Religious schism appeared at the university during the rectorship of Laurentius Petri, who had studied at Wittenberg under Luther, and who, as the first Protestant Archbishop of Upsala, introduced the Reformation into Sweden. In consequence of the schism the university was closed in 1580. Its place was taken, for Catholics, by a collegium regium, at Stockholm. where the instruction was given for a time by Jesuits. In 1593 the University of Upsala was revived by order of the General Council of Sweden. Originally, it was only intended to have the faculties of Protestant theology and philosophy, but the others were added later. The university also received its old privileges, so that it was able to maintain its independence until modern times, notwithstanding all the violent changes in the kingdom. Its second period of prosperity began during the reign of King Gustavus II Adolphus, who endowed it with his valuable landed property. Among the university professors of the eighteenth century was the well-known natural scientist Karl von Linnæus, who received the honorary title of Botanicorum princeps. In the nineteenth century the most distinguished professor was the historian and poet, Eric Gustav Geijer. The students are distributed, according to the district they come from, among the thirteen "nations", all of which, in the middle of the past century, united into one student body. As in other Swedish institutions of higher education, the organization and instruction are regulated by the royal statutes of 10 January, 1876. The presiding officer is a chancellor elected for three years by the council of professors and confirmed by the king; the substitute for the chancellor is the Lutheran archbishop. In the year 1911-12 there were 68 professors. 70 dozenten, and 2261 students.

KARL HOEBER

Uranopolis

A titular see of Asia Minor, suffragan of Ancyra in Galatia Prima. It is vainly sought in any "Notitiæ episcopatuum" or in any geography, ancient or modern, profane or ecclesiastical. It is a faulty spelling or variation of Verinopolis, so named in honour of Verina, mother-in-law of the Emperor Zeno. Le Quien (Oriens christ., I, 481) mentions three bishops: Stephen, present at the Trullan Council, 692; Anthimus, at the second Council of Nice, 787; Sisinnius, at the Councils of Constantinople, 869, 878. The diocese is described, about 640, in the "Ecthesis" of pseudo-Epiphanius (Gelzer, "Ungedruckte . . . Texte der Notitiæ episcopatuum", 536); about 900, in the "Notitia episcopatuum" of Leo the Philosopher (Gelzer, op. cit., 552), under the name of Stauros; and about 940, in the "Notitia" of Constantine Porphyrogenitus (Georgii Cyprii, ed. Gelzer, "Descriptio orbis romani", 63). Stauros is not a substitute for Verinopolis, but rather the name of a neighbouring locality. Ramsay (Asia Minor, 247) and Anderson (Studia Pontica, 25) say that Verinopolis is the Byzantine name of Evagina, a station described by the "Tabula Peutinger" (X, I) and by Ptolemy (V, iv, 7) under the altered name of Phubagina. The ruins of Evagina-Verinopolis were discovered a little to the south-west of Keuhne, a nahiÈ in the sandjak of Yuzgad, vilayet of Angora.

MÜLLER, ed. DIDOT, Notes on Ptolemy, I, 852; RAMSAY, Asia Minor (London, 1890), 247 sq.; ANDERSON, Studia Pontica (Brussels, 1903), 25-29; PAULY-WISSOWA, Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft (3d ed.), s.v. Evagina.

S. VAILHÉ

Pope Urban I

Reigned 222-30, date of birth unknown; died 23 May, 230. According to the "Liber Pontificalis," Urban was a Roman and his father's name was Pontianus. After the death of Callistus I (14 October, 222) Urban was elected Bishop of Rome, of which Church he was the head for eight years, according to Eusebius (Hist. eccl., VI, 23). The document called the Liberian catalogue of popes puts the beginning of his pontificate in the year 223 and its close in the year 230. The dissension produced in the Roman Church by Hippolytus (q.v.) continued to exist during Urban's pontificate. Hippolytus and his adherents persisted in schism; it was probably during the reign of Urban that Hippolytus wrote his "Philosophumena", in which he attacked Pope Callistus severely. Urban maintained the same attitude towards the schismatical party and its leader that his predecessor had adopted. The historical authorities say nothing of any other factious troubles in the life of the Roman Church during this era. In 222 Alexander Severus became Roman emperor. He favoured a religious eclecticism and also protected Christianity. His mother, Julia Mammaea, was a friend of the Alexandrine teacher Origen, whom she summonded to Antioch. Hippolytus dedicated his work on the Resurrection to her. The result of the favourable opinion of Christianity held by the emperor and his mother was that Christians enjoyed complete peace in essentials, although their legal status was not changed. The historian Lampridius (Alex. Sever., c. xxii) says emphatically that Alexander Severus made no trouble for the Christians: "Christianos esse passus est." Undoubtedly the Roman Church experienced the happy results of these kindly intentions and was unmolested during this emperor's reign (222-235). The emperor even protected Roman Christians in a legal dispute over the ownership of a piece of land. When they wished to build a church on a piece of land in Rome which was also claimed by tavern-keepers, the matter was brought before the imperial court, and Severus decided in favour of the Christians, declaring it was better that God should be worshipped on that spot (Lampridius, "Alex. Sever.", c. xlix).

Nothing is known concerning the personal labours of Pope Urban. The increase in extent of various Roman Catacombs in the first half of the third century proves that Christians grew largely in numbers during this period. The legendary Acts of St. Cecilia connect the saint, as well as her husband and brother-in-law, with Urban, who is said to have baptized her husband and her brother-in-law. This narrative, however, is purely legendary, and has no historical value whatever; the same is true of the Acts of the martyrdom of Urban himself, which are of still later date than the legend of St. Cecilia. The statement of the "Liber Pontificalis" that Urban converted many by his sermons, rests on the Acts of St. Cecilia. Another statement on the same authority, that Urban had ordered the making of silver liturgical vessels, is only an invention of the later editor of the biography early in the sixth century, who arbitrarily attributed to Urban the making of certain vessels, including the patens for twenty-five titular churches of his own time. The particulars of the death of Urban are unknown, but, judging from the peace of his era, he must have died a natural death. The "Liber Pontificalis" states that he became a confessor in the reign of Diocletian; the date added is without authority. His name does not appear in the "Depositio Episcopoirum" of the fourth century in the "Kalendarium Philocalianum".

Two different statements are made in the early authorities as to the grave of Urban, of which, however, only one refers to the pope of this name. In the Acts of St. Cecilia and the "Liber Pontificalis" it is said that Pope Urban was buried in the Catacomb of Praetextatus on the Via Appia. The Itineraries of the seventh century to the graves of the Roman martyrs all mention the grave of an Urban in connexion with the graves of several martyrs who are buried in the Catacomb of Praetextatus. One of the Itineraries gives this Urban the title "Bishop and Confessor." Consequently, from the fourth century, all Roman tradition has venerated the pope of this name in the Urban of the Catacomb of Praetextatus. In excavating a double chamber of the Catacomb of St. Callistus, De Rossi found, however, a fragment of the lid of a sarcophagus that bore the inscription OUPBANOCE [piskopos]. He also proved that in the list of martyrs and confessors buried in the Catacomb of St. Callistus, drawn up by Sixtus III (432-40), the name of an Urban is to be found. The great archaeologist De Rossi therefore came to the conclusion that the Urban buried in St. Callistus was the pope, while the saint of the same name buried in St. Praetextatus was the bishop of another see who died at Rome and was buried in this catacomb. Most historians agree with this opinion, which, however, chiefly founded on the Acts of St. Cecilia. The lettering of the above-mentioned epitaph of an Urban in St. Callistus indicates a later period, as a comparison with the lettering of the papal epitaphs in the papal crypt proves. In the list prepared by Sixtus III and mentioned above, Urban is not given in the succession of popes, but appears among the foreign bishops who died at Rome and were buried in St. Callistus.

Thus it seems necessary to accept the testimony that Pope Urban was buried in the Catacomb of Praetextatus, while the Urban lying in St. Callistus is a bishop of a later date from some other city. This view best reconciles the statements of the "Martyrologium Hieronymianum". Under date of 25 May (VIII kal. Jun.) is to be found the notice: "Via nomentana miliario VIII natale Urbani episcopi in cimiterio Praetextati" ("Martyr. Hieronym.", ed. De Rossi-Duchesne, 66). The catacomb on the Via Nomentana, however, is that which contains the grave of Pope Alexander, while the Catacomb of Praetextatus is on the Via Appia. Duchesne has proved (Lib. Pontif., I, xlvi-xlvii) that in the list of graves of the popes from which this notice is taken a line dropped out, and that it originally stated that the grave of Pope Alexander was on the Via Nomentana, and the grave of Pope Urban on the Via Appia in the Catacomb of Praetextatus. Consequently 25 May is the day of the burial of Urban in this catacomb. As the same martyrology contains under the date of 19 May (XIV kal. Jun.) a long list of martyrs headed by the two Roman martyrs Calocerus and Partenius, who are buried in the Catacomb of St. Callistus, and including an Urban, this Urban is apparently the foreign bishop of that name who lies buried in the same catacomb.

J. P. KIRSCH

Pope Bl. Urban II

(Otho, Otto or Odo of Lagery), 1088-1099, born of a knightly family, at Châtillon-sur-Marne in the province of Champagne, about 1042; died 29 July, 1099. Under St. Bruno (afterwards founder of the Carthusians) Otho studied at Reims, where he later became canon and archdeacon. About 1070 he retired to Cluny and was professed there under the great abbot St. Hugh. After holding the office of prior he was sent by St. Hugh to Rome as one of the monks asked for by Gregory VII, and he was of great assistance to Gregory in the difficult task of reforming the Church. In 1078 he became Cardinal Bishop of Ostia and Gregory's chief adviser and helper. During the years 1082 to 1085 he was legate in France and Germany. While returning to Rome in 1083 he was made prisoner by the Emperor Henry IV, but was soon liberated. Whilst in Saxony (1084-5) he filled many of the vacant sees with men faithful to Gregory and deposed those whom the pope had condemned. He held a great synod at Quedlinburg in Saxony in which the antipope Guibert of Ravenna and his adherents were anathematized by name. Victor III had already been elected when Otho returned to Rome in 1085. Otho appears to have opposed Victor at first, not through any animosity or want of good will, but because he judged it better, at so critical a time, that Victor should resign the honour he was unwilling to retain. After Victor's death a summons was sent to as many bishops of the Gregorian party as possible to attend a meeting at Terracina. It was made known at this meeting that Otho had been suggested by Gregory and Victor as their successor. Accordingly, on 12 March, 1088, he was unanimously elected, taking the title of Urban II. His first act was to proclaim his election to the world, and to exhort the princes and bishops who had been loyal to Gregory to continue in their allegiance: he declared his intention of following the policy and example of his great predecessor--"all that he rejected, I reject, what he condemned I condemn, what he loved I embrace, what he considered as Catholic, I confirm and approve".

It was a difficult task which confronted the new pope. To enter Rome was impossible. The Normans, on whom together with Matilda he could alone rely, were engaged in civil war. Roger and Bohemund had to be reconciled before anything could be done, and to effect this the pope set out for Sicily. He met Roger at Troina, but history is silent as to what took place between them. The year following, however, saw peace between the two princes, and Urban's first entry into Rome in November, 1088, is said by some to have been made possible by Norman troops. His plight in Rome was truly pitiable; the whole city practically was in the hands of the antipope, and Urban had to take refuge on the Island of St. Bartholomew, the approach being guarded by Pierleone, who had turned the theatre of Marcellus on the left bank of the river into a fortress. Nor was the outlook in Germany calculated to hold out hopes of the triumph of the papal party; its stoutest adherents in the episcopate had died, and Henry was steadily gaining ground. From amidst the poverty and want of his wretched island, Urban launched sentence of excommunication against emperor and antipope alike. Guibert retorted by holding a synod in St. Peter's before which he cited Urban to appear. The troops of pope and antipope met in a desperate encounter which lasted three days; Guibert was driven from the city, and Urban entered St. Peter's in triumph. He was now determined to unite his partisans in Italy and Germany. The Countess Matilda had lost her first husband, Godfrey of Lorraine. She was now well advanced in years, but this did not prevent her marriage with Count Welf of Bavaria, a youth of eighteen, whose father, Duke of Welf IV of Bavaria, was in arms against Henry. Urban now turned his steps southwards again. In the autumn of 1089 seventy bishops met him in synod at Melfi, where decrees against simony and clerical marriage were promulgated. In December he turned back to Rome, but not before he had effected a lasting peace between Roger and Bohemund, and had received their full allegiance. The fickle Romans had again renounced him on the news of Henry's success against Matilda in north Italy, and had summond Guibert back to the city. The latter celebrated Christmas in St. Peter's whilst Urban anathematized him from without the walls.

For three years Urban was compelled to wander an exile about southern Italy. He spent the time holding councils and improving the character of ecclesiastical discipline. Meanwhile Henry at last suffered a check from Matilda's forces at Canossa, the same fortress which had witnessed his humiliation before Gregory. His son Conrad, appalled, it is said, at his father's depravity, and refusing to become his partner in sin, fled to the faction of Matilda and Welf. The Lombard League--Milan, Lodi, Piacenza, and Cremona--welcomed him and he was crowned king in Milan, the centre of the imperial power in Italy. The way was now clear for Urban's entry into Rome, but still the partisans of Guibert held the strong places of the city. This time the pope took up his residence in the fortress of the Frangipani, a family which had remained faithful to him and which was entrenched under the Palatine near the Church of Sta. Maria Nuova. His condition was piteous, for he had to depend on charity and was already deeply in debt. A French abbot, Gregory of Vendôme, hearing of Urban's plight, hurried to Rome "that he might become a sharer of his sufferings and labour and relieve his want". In return for this he was created Cardinal Deacon of Sta. Prisca. Shortly before Easter, 1094, the governor of the Lateran palace offered to surrender it to Urban on payment of a large sum of money. This money Gregory of Vendôme supplied by selling certain possessions of his monastery; Urban entered the Lateran in time for the Paschal solemnity, and sat for the first time on the papal throne just six years after his election at Terracina.

But it was no time for tarrying long in Rome. Henry's cause was steadily growing weaker, and Urban hurried north to hold a council at Piacenza in the interests of peace and reform. The unfortunate Praxedis, Henry's second wife, had suffered wrongs which were now the common property of Christendom. Her cause was heard, Henry not even attempting to defend himself. She was publicly declared innocent and absolved from any censure. Then the case of Philip of France, who had repudiated his wife Bertha and espoused Bertrada, the wife of Fulk of Anjou, was dealt with. Several bishops had recognized the union, but Archbishop Hugh of Lyons had had the courage to excommunicate Philip for adultery. Both king and archbishop were summoned to the council, and both failed to appear. Philip was granted a further respite, but Hugh was suspended from his office. At this council Urban was able to broach the subject of the Crusades. The Eastern Emperor, Alexius I, had sent an embassy to the pope asking for help against the Seljuk Turks who were a serious menace to the Empire of Constantinople. Urban succeeded in inducing many of those present to promist to help Alexius, but no definite step was taken by Urban till a few months later, when he summoned the most famous of his councils, that at Clermont in Auvergne. The council met in November, 1095; thirteen archbishops, two hundred and twenty-five bishops, and over ninety abbots answered the pope's summons. The synod met in the Church of Notre-Dame du Port and began by reiterating the Gregorian Decrees against simony, investiture, and clerical marriage. The sentence, which for some months had been threatening Philip of France, was now launched against him, and he was excommunicated for adultery. Then the burning question of the East was discussed. Urban's reception in France had been most enthusiastic, and enthusiasm for the Crusade had spread as the pope journeyed on from Italy. Thousands of nobles and knights had met together for the council. It was decided that an army of horse and foot should march to rescue Jerusalem and the Churches of Asia from the Saracens. A plenary indulgence was granted to all who should undertake the journey pro sola devotione, and further to help the movement, the Truce of God was extended, and the property of those who had taken the cross was to be looked upon as sacred. Those who were unfitted for the expedition were forbidden to undertake it, and the faithful were exhorted to take the advice of their bishops and priests before starting. Coming forth from the church the pope addressed the immense multitude. He used his wonderful gifts of eloquence to the utmost, depicting the captivity of the Sacred City where Christ had suffered and died--"Let them turn their weapons dripping with the blood of their brothers against the enemy of the Christian Faith. Let them--oppressors of orphans and widows, murderers and violaters of churches, robbers of the property of others, vultures drawn by the scent of battle--let them hasten, if they love their souls, under their captain Christ to the rescue of Sion." When the pope ceased to speak a mighty shout of Deus lo volt rose from the throng. His most sanguine hopes had not anticipated such enthusiasm as now prevailed. He was urged repeatedly to lead the Crusade in person, but he appointed Ademar, Bishop of Le Puy, in his stead, and leaving Clermont travelled from city to city in France preaching the Crusade. Letters were sent to bishops who had been unable to attend the council, and preachers were sent all over Europe to arouse enthusiasm. In every possible way Urban encouraged people to take the cross, and he did not easily dispense from their obligations those who had once bound themselves to undertake the expedition.

In March, 1096, the pope held a synod at Tours and confirmed the excommunication of the French king, which certain members of the French episcopate had endeavoured to remove. In July, 1096, the king, having dismissed Bertrada, was absolved by Urban in a synod held at Nîmes, but having relapsed, he was again excommunicated by the pope's legate in 1097. Some of the greater prelates of France had now to be brought to subjection to the pope, amongst them being the Archbishop of Vienne, who had refused to abide by the papal decision regarding the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Grenoble, and the Archbishop of Sens, who had declined to recognize the Archbishop of Lyons as papal legate. After a triumphal progress through France, Urban returned to Italy. On his way to Rome he met the crusading princes at Lucca, and bestowed the banner of St. Peter upon Hugh of Vermandois. It is said by some that this crusading host enabled Urban to enter Rome, which at this time was again held by the antipope. If this was so, the entry appears, according to the statement of an eyewitness to have been effected without fighting. No doubt the presence of well-disciplined troops, under the most distinguished knights of Christendom, struck terror into the wild partisans of Guibert. But Urban's final triumph over the "imbecile" was now assured. Northern and central Italy were in the power of Matilda and Conrad, and Henry was at last forced to leave Italy. A council was held in the Lateran in 1097, and before the end of the year Urban was able to go south again to solicit help from the Normans to enable him to regain the Castle of S. Angelo. The castle capitulated in August, 1098. He was now enabled to enjoy a brief period of repose after a life of incessant activity and fierce strife, which had brought exile and want. His friendship with the Normans was strengthened by the appointment of Count Roger as papal legate in Sicily, where the Church had been almost swept away by the Saracens; the antipope was within his Archbishopric of Ravenna, and Henry's power, though strengthened by Count Welf, who had forsaken Matilda, was not strong enough to be any longer a serious menace.

In October, 1098, the pope held a council at Bari with the intention of reconciling the Greeks and Latins on the question of the filioque; one hundred and eighty bishops attended, amongst whom was St. Anselm of Canterbury, who had fled to Urban to lay before him his complaints against the Red King. The close of November saw the pope again in Rome; it was his final return to the city. Here he held his last council in April, 1099. Once more he raised his eloquent voice on behalf of the Crusades, and many responded to his call. On 15 July, 1099, Jerusalem fell before the attack of the crusaders, but Urban did not live to hear the news. He died in the house of Pierleone which had so often given him shelter. His remains could not be buried in the Lateran because of Guibert's followers who were still in the city, but were conveyed to the crypt of St. Peter's where they were interred close to the tomb of Adrian I. Guibert of Nogent asserts that miracles were wrought at the tomb of Urban, who appears as a saint in many of the Martyrologies. Thus there seems to have been a cult of Urban II from the time of his death, though the feast (29 July) has never been extended to the Universal Church. Amongst the figures painted in the apse of the oratory built by Calixtus II in the Lateran Palace is that of Urban II with the words sanctus Urbanus secundus beneath it. The head is crowned by a square nimbus, and the pope is represented at the feet of Our Lady. The formal act of beatification did not take place till the pontificate of Leo XIII. The cause was introduced by Mgr Langenieux, Archbishop of Reims, in 1878, and after it had gone through the various stages the decision was given by Leo XIII on 14 July, 1881.

R. URBAN BUTLER

Pope Urban III

Reigned 1185-87, born at Milan; died at Ferrara, 19 October, 1187. Uberto, of the noble Milanese family of the Crivelli, was created cardinal by Lucius III in 1182 and Archbishop of Milan in 1185. On 25 November of this year Lucius died at Verona, and the archbishop was elected to succeed him on the same day; he was crowned on 1 December. This haste was probably due to fear of imperial interference. Urban inherited from his predecessor a legacy of feud with the great Emperor Frederick Barbarossa, and this was embittered by personal enmity, for at the sack of Milan in 1162 the emperor had caused several of the pope's relatives to be proscribed or mutilated. It has been noticed that the breach between Lucius III and Frederick coincided with the arrival in Northern Italy (August, 1185) of Constance, the heiress of the Kingdom of Sicily, who was betrothed to Frederick's son Henry. The marriage, which was celebrated at Milan on 4 Jan., 1186, six weeks after Urban's accession, "constituted for the papacy the gravest check it had suffered for a long time. By it was ruined the whole political edifice so laboriously raised by the popes of the eleventh and twelfth centuries to keep in check the power of the Emperors in Italy and to assure the independence of the Papal States" (Chalandon, II, 390). By this marriage was lost that Norman support on which the papacy had so long relied in its contest with the empire. Nor was this the only cause of quarrel. The treaty of 1177 had left unsettled the question of the succession to the estates of Matilda of Tuscany, while Frederick had seized the revenues of vacant German bishoprics and suppressed nunneries for the sake of their property.

Urban maintained the refusal of Lucius III to crown Henry, and the Patriarch of Aquileia was induced by the emperor to perform the office, although it belonged to the pope in right of the Archbishopric of Milan which he had retained, possibly to that end, after his election. Urban replied by excommunicating the patriarch and the bishops who had assisted at the ceremony. On 31 May he promoted to the cardinalate the archdeacon Folmar, and next day consecrated him as Archbishop of Trier, contrary to a promise he had made to the emperor, for though Folmar had been canonically elected, Frederick had granted investiture to Rudolf, the candidate of the minority. The emperor clossed the passes of the Alps against the pope's messengers to Germany, and sent Henry to ravage the Papal States. Urban had hoped for support from the German bishops, but at the Diet of Gelnhausen (April or May, 1187), from which the papal legate, Philip von Heinsberg, Archbishop of Cologne, was excluded, Frederick won the bishops to his side and caused them to send letters to the pope urging him "to do justice to the Emperor in those things which were justly demanded of him" (Arnold of Lübeck, III, 18). Urban replied by summoning the emperor to appear before his tribunal at Verona, and was only prevented from pronouncing excommunication against him by the Veronese, who, as Frederick's subjects, would not permit the sentence to be promulgated in their city. Urban set out for Venice, where he would have been able to carry out his threat, but died at Ferrara, after a pontificate of a year and eleven months. His death is ascribed by Benedict of Peterborough to grief at the news of the utter defeat of the crusaders at the battle of Hattin, and it is commonly stated that it was caused by the news of the fall of Jerusalem, but William of Newburgh assures us that the report of the disaster of Hattin (3-4 July) did not reach the Holy See till after the election of Gregory VIII, so it is hardly probable that Urban III ever heard of the surrender of the Holy City which took place on 2 October.

A curious story is told by Peter of Blois, Archdeacon of Bath, who claims to have been intimate with the pope ("in scholis Urbani socius et descipulus fueram Maldyebyrig") and connects his death with his wrath against Baldwin, Archbishop of Canterbury. At the very beginning of his pontificate Urban had granted the request made to his predecessor by Henry II of England, and appointed Baldwin Apostolic legate in the Province of Canterbury, but in the latter's quarrel with the monks of his cathedral the pope had taken the part of the monks, and the archbishop had proved obdurate. Perhaps this was not the only cause of the pope's anger; for Baldwin, moved probably by jealousy, had persuaded the king to conduct back to Normandy the legates sent to crown John as King of Ireland (Benedict of Peterborough, "Gesta regis Henrici Secundi"). The pope even sent a gold crown ("coronam auro contextam") for this purpose. He exerted himself to bring about peace between England and France, and on 23 June, 1187, his legates by threats of excommunication prevented a pitched battle between the armies of the rival kings near Châteauroux, and brought about a two years' truce. Urban's letters show zeal for the Holy Land and a desire to promote peace among the quarrelling Christian potentates of Syria. Unfortunately, it cannot be ascertained whether the interesting letter addressed to Philip of France (Jaffé, "Regesta", 15,924) really belongs to this pope. The number of privileges in favour of the Knights Hospitallers is remarkable. The letters and privileges of Urban III are given in P.L., CCII. His tomb, "a handsome sarcophagus resting on four columns" (Gregorovius), may still be seen in Ferrara cathedral.

RAYMUND WEBSTER

Pope Urban IV

Reigned 1216-64 (Jacques Pantaléon), son of a French cobbler, born at Troyes, probably in the last years of the twelfth century; died at Perugia, 2 Oct., 1264. He became a canon of Laon and later Archdeacon of Liège, attracted the attention of Innocent IV at the Council of Lyons (1245), and in 1247 was sent on a mission to Germany. There his chief work was the restoration of ecclesiastical discipline in Silesia and the reconciliation of the Teutonic Knights with their Prussian vassals. He became Archdeacon of Laon two years later, and in 1251 was sent into north Germany with the commission to obtain recruits for the cause of William of Holland, the papal candidate for the empire. He was made Bishop of Verdun in 1253 and Patriarch of Jerusalem in 1255, at a time of great difficulty and distress for the Christians of the Holy Land. On the death of Alexander IV (25 May, 1261) he had returned to the west and was at Viterbo. After a three months' conclave, protracted by the jealousies of the eight cardinals who composed the whole Sacred College, the Patriarch of Jerusalem was elected on 29 August, 1261. Alexander IV, the feeblest and most pacific of the popes who were engaged in the struggle with the imperial house of Germany, had left two heavy tasks for his successor to accomplish: the wresting of Sicily from the Hohenstaufen and the restoration in Italy of the influence which the Holy See had lost through his indecision. The Latin Empire of Constantinople came to an end with the capture of the city by the Greeks a fortnight before Urban's election, and for a while he intended a crusade for its re-establishment; but he felt that the tasks near home had the first claim on him. In 1268 Conradin, the last of the Hohenstaufen, died on the scaffold at Naples; it was Urban IV's action in calling Charles of Anjou into the field against Manfred that brought this about. "The fact", says Ranke, "that Urban IV contrived this combination, places him among the important popes."

His experience of affairs and his personal character fitted him for his work. He had had an excellent education and was active, capable, self-reliant, and always ready for any work that presented itself. His life was a full one, yet business had not banished piety. "The Pope does what he will", reports a Sienese ambassador, "there has been no Pope since Alexander III so energetic in word and deed . . .There is no obstacle to his will . . .he does everything by himself without taking advice" (Pflug-Harttung, "Iter Italicum", 675). Had his reign been longer, he would have been one of the most striking figures in the history of the papacy. Urban's great antagonist was Manfred, son of Frederick II, and usurper of the Sicilian crown. Manfred's chief gift was tact; as an administrator he had his father's highly centralized system to rely on, but as a warrior he was lacking in decision and boldness. After the battle of Montaperti, he became the hero of half Italy, the centre of the Ghibelline party and of all opposition to the papacy. He was anxious for peace and recognition from the pope, and Urban was able to keep him in play until the long drawn-out negotiations with Charles of Anjou were nearly complete. Within less than a year of his election the pope created fourteen new cardinals. Of these six were relatives or dependents of the eight who had elected him, but seven were Frenchmen, including his own nephew and three who had been St. Louis's counsellors. Thus Urban was sure of a majority in the Sacred College, but he brought into being a French party which was a principal factor in ecclesiastical policy for the rest of the thirteenth century and in the fourteenth century became practically the whole College. Among the new cardinals were the three future popes, Clement IV, Martin IV, and Honorius IV, who were to have the greatest share in finishing and defending his work.

Urban's first step towards the restoration of his power in Italy was to put the finances in order and pay his predecessor's debts. He changed the bankers of the Apostolic Camera, employing a Sienese firm whose services did much to assure the ultimate success of his plans. Urban's Italian policy gives a complete picture of his statesmanship--astute and diplomatic on occasions, but with a marked predilection for energetic measures. He aroused dissensions between rival Ghibelline cities and, by an adroit use of the then generally acknowledged right of the Holy See to declare null all obligations towards persons excommunicate, was able to throw their commercial affairs into confusion (for some curious details see Jordan, "Origines", 337 sq.). He established an ascendancy over his partisans and raised up a new Guelph party bound to him by personal interest, which eventually furnished Charles of Anjou with monetary support without which his expedition must have failed. In the Papal States new officers were appointed, important points fortified, and the defensive system of Innocent III restored. At Rome Urban obtained the recognition of his sovereignty, but he never risked a visit to the city. In Lombardy his most important act was the strengthening of the traditional alliance between the Holy See and the House of Este. By the middle of 1263 the general results of Urban's extra-Sicilian Italian policy were seen in the almost complete restoration of order in the Papal States, the weakening of Manfred's alliances in Lombardy, and the resurrection in Tuscany of the crushed Guelphs.

A foreign conqueror for Sicily was necessary to attain the expulsion of Manfred, for after the defeat of Alexander IV's forces at Foggia (20 Aug., 1255) all hope was lost of a direct conquest by the papacy. In 1252 Innocent IV had granted the crown of Naples to the English Henry III for his second son, Edmund; but the king had his hands too full at home and was himself too prodigal to allow him to embark on the very costly Sicilian adventure. Charles of Anjou, though he had refused the offer of Innocent IV, had both the power and the ambition necessary for such an undertaking. St. Louis's scruples as to the rights of Conradin and Edmund were overcome, and though he refused the crown for himself or his sons, he finally permitted its offer to his brother. In the mind of the holy king the Sicilian expedition appeared as a preliminary to a great crusade: he saw that Sicily would, in the hands of a French prince, be an ideal starting-point. Yet Louis had been desirous of peace between the pope and Manfred, and even the pope for a time seemed prepared to recognize him as King of Sicily, but the negotiations finally failed. Urban made it his business to prove that the fault lay with his opponent, for European opinion was interested in a struggle in which great princes such as Alphonsus of Aragon and Baldwin, the exiled Latin Emperor of Constantinople, had intervened on the side of peace. It was about May, 1263, that St. Louis made up his mind, and shortly afterwards the envoy of Charles of Anjou appeared in Rome. The chief conditions laid down by Urban were as follows: Sicily must never be united to the empire, its king must pay an annual tribute, take an oath of fealty to the pope, and abstain from acquiring any considerable dominion in Northern Italy; the succession also was strictly regulated. The treaty in fact "was to be the last link in the long chain of acts which had established the suzerainty of the Holy See over Sicily" (Jordan, 443).

The negotiations dragged on slowly as long as the pope felt no acute need of French intervention in Italy, but by May, 1264, the fortunes of the Church were threatening to decline quickly, in face of the rising activity and fortunes of the Ghibellines. Urban sent the French Cardinal Simon de Brion to France as his legate with power to concede certain disputed points: he was, however, to insist on a guarantee that Charles would not retain in perpetuity the Senatorship of Rome; vows to go on a crusade to the Holy Land were to be commuted for the crusade against Manfred and his Saracens, which was to be preached throughout France and Italy. Urban's position was daily growing more dangerous in spite of the incomprehensible inactivity of Manfred. He feared a simultaneous attack from north and south, and even attempts to assassinate himself and Charles of Anjou by the emissaries of Manfred's reputed ally, the "Old Man of the Mountains". In August St. Louis's last objections to the treaty were overcome, and various concessions made to Charles's demands. The legate held several synods to obtain from the French clergy the tithes granted by the pope for the expedition. In Italy fortune continued to favour the Ghibellines; a Guelph army was defeated in the Patrimony, and Lucca deserted to the enemy. Sienese intrigue threatened Urban's security at Orvieto, and on 9 Sept. he set out for Perugia, where he died.

"Thus the man, whose bold initiative was to influence so greatly the destinies of three great countries, to bring to a close the most glorious period of medieval Germany by the ruin of the Hohenstaufen, to introduce a new dynasty into Italy, and to direct French policy in a direction as yet unknown, quitted the stage before he had seen the consequences of his acts at the very hour when the negotiations, commenced at his accession and continued throughout his reign, had reached completion" (Jordan, op. cit., 513).

If Urban's treatment of Manfred appear harsh and unscrupulous, it must be remembered how the Church had suffered at the hands of the Hohenstaufen ever since the days of Frederick I. In the eyes of feudal law Manfred was a usurper without rights: he had callously seized his nephew Conradin's crown, and even that nephew could not inherit from a grandfather who had been deprived of his fief for rebellion against his suzerain. At this period, too, the papal Government, owing in part to its very weakness, stood for municipal freedom, while the Hohenstaufen had in Sicily substituted for the aristocratic hierarchy of feudalism a bureaucratic despotism supported by the arms of their devoted Saracens.

Two other points in Urban's policy must be noted: his dealings with the Byzantine Empire and with England. Manfred's designs on the territories of Palaeologus, together with the exiled Baldwin's secret attempt to reconcile Manfred with St. Louis, made the Greek emperor, politically, at least, the natural ally for a pope fearful of an increase in the power of the Sicilian king. Urban sought an understanding with Michael Palaeologus, and here too gave a lasting direction to papal policy, setting it on the path which led to the union (inoperative though it was) of Lyons in 1274. In England Urban's collectors of money were exceedingly busy; like St. Louis, he supported Henry III against the barons. He absolved the king from his promise to observe the Provisions of Oxford, declared oaths taken against him to be unlawful, and condemned the rising of the barons. He was buried in the cathedral at Perugia. The Feast of Corpus Christi (q.v.) was instituted by Urban IV.

RAYMUND WEBSTER

Pope Bl. Urban V

Guillaume de Grimoard, born at Grisac in Languedoc, 1310; died at Avignon, 19 December, 1370. Born of a knightly family, he was educated at Montpellier and Toulouse, and became a Benedictine monk at the little priory of Chirac near his home. A Bull of 1363 informs us that he was professed at the great Abbey of St. Victor at Marseilles, where he imbibed his characteristic love for the Order of St. Benedict; even as pope he wore its habit. He was ordained at Chirac, and after a further course of theology and canon law at the universities of Toulouse, Montpellier, Paris, and Avignon, he received the doctorate in 1342. He was one of the greatest canonists of his day; was professor of canon law at Montpellier, and also taught at Toulouse, Paris, and Avignon; he acted successively as vicar-general of the Dioceses of Clermont and Uzès, was at an unknown date (before 1342) affiliated to Cluny, became prior of Notre-Dame du Pré (a priory dependent on St. Germain d'Auxerre), and in 1352 was named abbot of that famous house by Clement VI. With this date begins his diplomatic career. His first mission was to Giovanni Visconti, Archbishop and despot of Milan, and this he carried out successfully; in 1354 and 1360 he was employed on the affairs of the Holy See in Italy; in 1361 he was appointed by Innocent VI to the Abbacy of St. Victor at Marseilles, but in 1362 was once more dispatched to Italy, this time on an embassy to Joanna of Naples. It was while engaged on this business that the abbot heard of his election to the papacy. Innocent VI had died on 12 Sept. The choice of one who was not a cardinal was due to jealousies within the Sacred College, which made the election of any one of its members almost impossible. Guillaume de Grimoard was chosen for his virtue and learning, and for his skill in practical affairs of government and diplomacy. He arrived at Marseilles on 28 Oct., entered Avignon three days later, and was consecrated on 6 November, taking the name of Urban because, as he said, "all the popes who had borne the name had been saints". The general satisfaction which this election aroused was voiced by Petrarch, who wrote to the pope, "It is God alone who has chosen you".

On 20 November King John of France visited Avignon; his main purpose was to obtain the hand of Joanna of Naples, ward of the Holy See, for his son Philip, Duke of Touraine. In a letter of 7 November Urban had already approved her project of marriage with King James of Majorca, a king without a kingdom; by so doing the pope safeguarded his own independence at Avignon, which would have been gravely imperilled had the marriage of Joanna, who was also Countess of Provence, united to the Crown of France the country surrounding the little papal principality. The letter written by Urban to Joanna on 29 Nov., urging the marriage with Philip, was probably meant rather to appease the French king than to persuade the recipient. The betrothal of the Queen of Naples to James of Majorca was signed on 14 Dec. The enormous ransom of 3,000,000 gold crowns, due to Edward III of England from John of France by the treaty of Bretigny, was still in great part unpaid, and John now sought permission to levy a tithe on the revenues of the French clergy. Urban refused this request as well as another for the nomination of four cardinals chosen by the king. John also desired to intervene between the pope and Barnabò Visconti, tyrant of Milan. He was again refused, and when Barnabò failed to appear within the three months allowed by his citation, the pope excommunicated him (3 March, 1363). In April of the same year Visconti was defeated before Bologna. Peace was concluded in March, 1364; Barnabò restored the castles seized by him, while Urban withdrew the excommunication and undertook to pay half a million gold florins.

The Benedictine pope was a lover of peace, and much of his diplomacy was directed to the pacification of Italy and France. Both countries were overrun by mercenary bands known as the "Free Companies", and the pope made many efforts to secure their dispersal or departure. His excommunication was disregarded and the companies refused to join the distant King of Hungary in his battles with the Turks although the Emperor Charles IV, who came to Avignon in May, 1365, guaranteed the expenses of their journey and offered them the revenues of his kingdom of Bohemia for three years. War now broke out between Pedro the Cruel of Navarre and his brother Henry of Trastamare. Pedro was excommunicated for his cruelties and persecutions of the clergy, and Bertrand Duguesclin, the victor of Cocherel, led the companies into Navarre; yet they visited Avignon on their way and wrung blackmail from the pope. The Spanish war was quickly ended, and Urban returned to his fomer plan of employing the companies against the Turk. The Count of Savoy was to have led them to the assistance of the King of Cyprus and the Eastern Empire, but this scheme too was a failure. Urban's efforts were equally fruitless in Italy, where the whole land was overrun with bands led by such famous condottieri as the German Count of Landau and the Englishman Sir John Hawkwood. In 1365, after the failure of a scheme to unite Florence, Pisa, and the Italian communes against them, the pope commissioned Albornoz to persuade these companies to join the King of Hungary. In 1366 he solemnly excommunicated them, forbade their employment, and called on the emperor and all the powers of Christendom to unite for their extirpation. All was in vain, for though a league of Italian cities was formed in September of that year, it was disolved about fifteen months later owing to Florentine jealousy of the emperor.

Rome had suffered terribly through the absence of her pontiffs, and it became apparent to Urban that if he remained at Avignon the work of the warlike Cardinal Albornoz in restoring to the papacy the States of the Church would be undone. On 14 September, 1366, he informed the emperor of his determination to return to Rome. All men rejoiced at the announcement except the French; the king understood that the departure from Avignon would mean a diminution of French influence at the Curia. The French cardinals were in despair at the prospect of leaving France, and even threatened to desert the pope. On 30 April, 1367, Urban left Avignon; on 19 May he sailed from Marseilles, and after a long coasting voyage he reached Corneto, where he was met by Albornoz. On 4 June the Romans brought the keys of Sant' Angelo in sign of welcome, and the Gesuati carrying their branches in their hands and headed by their founder, Blessed John Colombini, preceded the pope. Five days later he entered Viterbo, where he dwelt in the citadel. The disturbed state of Italy made it impossible for Urban to set out to Rome until he had gathered a considerable army, so it was not till 16 Oct. that he entered the city at the head of an imposing cavalcade, under the escort of the Count of Savoy, the Marquess of Ferrara, and other princes.

The return of the pope to Rome appeared to the contemporary world both as a great event and as a religious action. The pope now set to work to improve the material and moral condition of his capital. The basilicas and papal palaces were restored and decorated, and the Papal treasure, which had been preserved at Assisi since the days of Boniface VIII, was distributed to the city churches. The unemployed were put to work in the neglected gardens of the Vatican, and corn was distributed in seasons of scarcity; at the same time the discipline of the clergy was restored, and the frequentation of the sacraments encouraged. One of Urban's first acts was to change the Roman constitution, but it may be questioned whether "the sacrifice offered to the Pontiff as the reward of his return was the liberty of the people" (Gregorovius).

On 17 October, 1368, the emperor joined the pope at Viterbo. Before leaving Germany he had confirmed all the rights of the Church, and Urban hoped for his help against the Visconti, but Charles allowed himself to be bribed. On 21 Oct. the pope and emperor entered Rome together, the latter humbly leading the pontiff's mule. On 1 Nov. Charles acted as deacon at the Mass at which Urban crowned the empress. For more than a century pope and emperor had not appeared thus in amity. A year later the Emperor of the East, John V Palaeologus, came to Rome seeking assistance against the infidel; he abjured the schism and was received by Urban on the steps of St. Peter's. These emperors both of West and East were but shadows of their great predecessors, and their visits, triumphs as they might appear, were but little gain to Urban V. He felt that his position in Italy was insecure. The death of Albornoz (24 Aug., 1367), who had made his return to Italy possible, had been a great loss. The restlessness of the towns was exemplified by the revolt of Perugia, which had to be crushed by force; any chance storm might undo the work of the great legate. At heart, too, the pope had all a Frenchman's love for his country, and his French entourage urged his return to Avignon. In vain were the remonstrances of the envoys of Rome, which had gained "greater quiet and order, an influx of wealth, a revival of importance" from his sojourn; in vain were the admonitions of St. Bridget, who came from Rome to Montefiascone to warn him that if he returned to Avignon he would shortly die. War had broken out again between France and England, and the desire to bring about peace strengthened the pope's determination. On 5 Sept., 1370, "sad, suffering and deeply moved", Urban embarked at Corneto. In a Bull of 26 June he had told the Romans that his departure was motived by his desire to be useful to the Universal Church and to the country to which he was going. It may be, too, that the pope saw that the next conclave would be free at Avignon but not in Italy. Charles V joyfully sent a fleet of richly adorned galleys to Corneto; the pope did not long survive his return (24 Sept.) to Avignon. His body was buried in Notre-Dame des Doms at Avignon but was removed two years later, in accordance with his own wish, to the Abbey Church of St. Victor at Marseilles. Miracles multiplied around his tomb. His canonization was demanded by King Waldemar of Denmark and promised by Gregory XI as early as 1375, but did not take place owing to the disorders of the time. His cultus was approved by Pius IX in 1870.

Urban V was a man whose motives cannot be called in question: his policy aimed at Eurpoean peace; shortly before his death he had given orders that preparations should be made to enable him personally to visit and reconcile Edward III and Charles V. He had shown great zeal for the Crusade. On 29 March, 1363, Pierre de Lusignan, King of Cyprus and titular King of Jerusalem, appeared at Avignon to appeal for assistance against the Turks, and on 31 March (Good Friday) Urban preached the Crusade and gave the cross to the Kings of France, Denmark, and Cyprus; the chivalrous King John, who was to have been chief commander, died a quasi-prisoner at London in 1364, and though the King of Cyprus captured Alexandria (11 Oct., 1365), he was unable to hold the city. The crusading spirit was dead in Europe. In an age of corruption and simony Urban stood for purity and disinterestedness in church life: he did much for ecclesiastical discipline and caused many provincial councils to be held; he refused to bestow place or money on his relatives, and even caused his own father to refund a pension bestowed on him by the French king. His brother, whom he prompted to the cardinalate, was acknowledged by all to be a man most worthy of the dignity. The pope's private life was that of a monk, and he was always accessible to those who sought his aid.

But Urban was a patriotic Frenchman, a defect in the universal father of Christendom. He estranged the English king by the help given to his rival, and aroused hostility in Italy by the favour shown to men of his own race whom he made his representatives in the States of the Church. He was a great patron of learning, founded universities at Cracow (by a Bull of 1364) and at Vienna (by a Bull of 1365), and caused the emperor to create the University of Orange; he revised the statutes of the University of Orléans; and gave great assistance to the universities of Avignon and Toulouse. At Bologna he supported the great college founded by Albornoz and paid the expenses of many poor students whom he sent thither. He also founded a studium at Trets (later removed to Manosque), but his greatest foundations were at Montpellier. His buildings and restorations were considerable, especially at Avignon, Rome, and Montpellier. He approved the orders of Brigittines and Gesuati, and canonized his godfather, St. Elzéar of Sabran.

RAYMUND WEBSTER

Pope Urban VI

Bartolomeo Prignano, the first Roman pope during the Western Schism, born at Naples, about 1318; died at Rome, 15 October, 1389; according to many he was poisoned by the Romans. At an early age he went to Avignon, where he gained many powerful friends. On 21 March, 1364, he was consecrated Archbishop of Acerenza in the Kingdom of Naples, and on 14 April, 1377, Gregory XI transferred him to the archiepiscopal See of Bari, on the coast of the Adriatic. Meanwhile the Cardinal Vice-Chancellor, Peter of Pampelon, remaining at Avignon, Prignano was given the management of the papal chancery. After the death of Gregory XI the Conclave proposed him as a candidate for the tiara. Not only his business ability, integrity, and knowledge of law, but also his being a subject of Queen Joanna of Naples favoured his eligibility. The Conclave of 1378, which opened on 7 April (nine days after Gregory's death), was influenced by the public opinion of Rome; it consisted of four Italian cardinals, five French, and seven belonging to the Limoges faction. The Italian and French cardinals, though anxious to push forward their own candidates, unanimously determined to oppose one of the Limoges party. The latter were not strong enough to advance a candidate, but they hoped to make an alliance with the less important parties and so attain their end. Their plan, however, was frustrated, the French and Italians having previously resolved to choose a prelate outside the Sacred College. Robert of Geneva (one of the French cardinals) even resigned his claim in favour of Prignano, and Pedro de Luna (Robert's successor in the See of Avignon) did the same. In this way Prignano's chances increased considerably. An Italian, though not a Roman, he was supported by the rivalry of the parties. Perhaps the French and Italian cardinals expected that, not being a cardinal, he would be an obedient pope, and for this reason some of the Limoges party, uneasy about the coalition between the French and the Italian cardinals, were drawn to this candidature.

This conclave was one of the shortest in history. When the cardinals entered the Vatican some of the populace stole into the palace and tried to extort the promise that an Italian pope would be chosen. Cardinal d'Aigrefeuille declared that the cardinals could not make any such concessions, but the disappointed people remained in the Vatican the whole night, drinking the wine and crying: "Romano lo volemo, o al manco Italiano." The next morning, while the cardinals were at Mass, the tocsin was rung, and suddenly the bells of St. Peter mingled their tones with it. Fear and disorder overtook the cardinals; the guardian of the conclave besought them to hasten, saying that the people wanted a Roman or an Italian, and that the resistance would be dangerous . Then Pedro de Luna (Benedict XIII) proposed the election of the Archbishop of Bari, adding that he was, as they all knew, a saintly, learned man, of mature age. This proposal obtained the desired effect. After some hesitation, the cardinals, excepting Orsini (who declared himself not sufficiently free), agreed to accept Prignano, but preferred to keep their choice secret until certain that the latter would accept. Prignano was requested to repair to the Vatican accompanied by several other prelates, so as to conceal from the people the person chosen. The uproar did not abate, and the cardinals began to fear that their choice would not satisfy the multitude. During a comparative calm they went to breakfast and renewed the election of Prignano. The lawfulness and renewed choice thus having been established, Orsini announced the election of a pope to the people, omitting to mention the name. Various suppositions soon ran through the crowds, some saying that the chosen one was Tebaldeschi (an aged Italian cardinal) and others that Jean de Bar (one of the most detested servants of Gregory) was elected. The confusion increased. Suddenly the cardinals took a desperate resolution. They presented Tebaldeschi, in the papal insignia, to the people and commenced the "Te Deum", paying no attention to his refusal and protests. Meanwhile, Prignano had reached the Vatican and declared that he accepted the papal dignity and the homage of all the cardinals. One fact seems evident: the moment the cardinals regarded the choice of Prignano as valid, they removed all doubt by a re-election and honoured him as the rightful successor of St. Peter.

It is to be regretted that after his election Prignano did not show the good qualities which had distinguished him before. Soon he quarrelled with the Sacred College. Desirous of reforming the Church in head and members, he began aright by a reform of the Curia, though perhaps not with the necessary prudence. It was unwise to abuse the cardinals and high dignitaries of the Church and to insult Otto of Brunswick (husband of Joanna of Naples). Nevertheless, public opinion was in the beginning favourable to him, and not only the cardinals in Rome, but also the six who remained at Avignon submitted to him. However the tempest, which broke out at Fondi in September of the same year, was already brewing at Rome a few weeks after his election. Urban's ambassadors, doubtless inspired by the French and Limousin cardinals, left Rome too late, when the calumnies concerning the illegitimacy of the pope's election were widespread. The ground having thus been prepared, the opposition was strengthened at Rome; Castel Sant'Angelo never hoisted Urban's colours, and the discontented found there a refuge and the protection of armed soldiers. The heat of early May afforded the dissatisfied cardinals a pretext for leaving Rome for Anagni, but no public sign of rebellion showed itself, Urban's opponents preferring, perhaps, to conceal their project for the present. The pope's suspicions were eventually aroused, and in June he requested the three Italian cardinals who had not followed the others to join their colleagues and to try and restore kinder feelings. The French cardinals renewed their protestation of fidelity to the pope, but assembled the same day to establish the unlawfulness of the April election. Moreover they eventually won over the Italian members of the Sacred College.

Meanwhile, in the name of the pope, the aforesaid cardinals proposed two expedients to settle the differences, a general council or a compromise. Both these means were made use of at the time of the Western Schism. But the opponents of Urban resolved on violent measures and declared their intentions in a letter of the utmost impertinence. On 2 August this letter was followed by the famous "Declaration", a document more passionate than exact, which assumed at once the parts of historian, jurist, and accuser. Seven days later they published an encyclical letter, repeating false and injurious accusations against Urban, and on 27 August left Anagni for Fondi, where they enjoyed the protection of its lord (Urban's arch-enemy), and were near Joanna of Naples; the latter at first had shown great interest in Urban, but was soon disappointed by his capricious ways. On 15 September the three Italian cardinals joined their colleagues, influenced, perhaps, by the hope of becoming pope themselves, or perhaps frightened by the news that Urban was about to create twenty-nine cardinals in order to supply the vacancies left by the thirteen French ones. Charles V of France, more and more doubtful of the lawfulness of Urban's election, encouraged the Fondi faction to choose a rightful pope and one more agreeable to France. A letter from him arrived on 18 September, and hastened a violent solution. On 20 September Robert of Geneva was chosen pope, and on this day the Western Schism began.

The Italians abstained from the election but were convinced of its canonical character. Robert assumed the name of Clement VII. The obediences of the two popes assumed definite limits between September, 1378, and June, 1379. All Western Europe (except England, Ireland, and the English dominions in France) submitted to Clement VII; the greater part of Germany, Flanders, and Italy (with exception of Naples) recognized Urban. The obedience of Urban was more numerous, that of Clement more imposing. Meanwhile, Urban created twenty-eight cardinals, four of whom refused to accept the purple. It is very difficult to decide exactly how far the schism is to be attributed to Urban's behaviour. Indisputably the long exile at Avignon was its principal cause, as it diminished the credit of the popes and inversely increased the ambition of the cardinals, who were always striving to obtain more influence in the government of the Church. Whatever may have been the causes of this event, it is certain that the election of Urban was lawful, that of Clement uncanonical.

If the first days of Urban's pontificate were unhappy, his whole reign was a series of misadventures. It is true that he was successful in reducing Castel Sant' Angelo and subduing a revolt of the Romans, but these are the only successes of his reign. Naples was soon in turmoil. Queen Joanna went over to the Clementines and was deposed by Urban. Charles of Durazzo took her place. He arrested the queen and took possession of the kingdom, but soon lost favour with the pope for not fulfilling his engagements towards Francesco Prignano (Urban's unworthy and immoral nephew), in whose regard Urban is not free from nepotism. The pope now went to the south of Italy, against the advice of his cardinals, was received at Aversa by the king himself, but imprisoned on the night of his arrival (30 Oct., 1383). Through his cardinals a compromise was reached, and Urban left Aversa for Nocera. Here he had to endure the most unworthy treatment from Margaret, the wife of Charles. The misunderstanding between Urban and Charles increased after the death of the latter's enemy, Louis of Anjou; the pope, obstinate and intractable, continued in a half-hostile, half-dependent, attitude towards Charles, and created fourteen cardinals, only the Neapolitans accepting the dignity. He became daily more estranged from the older members of the Sacred College. No one conversant with the ideas current at this time in the Sacred College will wonder that the example of 1378 found imitation. Highly irritated by Urban's inconsiderate behaviour, the Urbanist cardinals mediated a more practical way of proceeding; they proposed to depose or, at least, arrest him. But their plot was revealed to him, and six of them were imprisoned and their possessions confiscated. Those who did not confess were tortured, and the King and Queen of Naples, being suspected as accomplices, were excommunicated. In consequence Nocera was besieged by the king. Urban courageously defended the place, two or three times a day anathematizing his foes from the ramparts. After nearly five months, Nocera was relieved by the Urbanists, Urban escaping to Barletta, whence a Genoese fleet transported him and the imprisoned cardinals to Genoa. During the voyage the Bishop of Aquila, one of the conspirators, was executed, and the cardinals, excepting Adam Aston, were put to death at Genoa, in spite of the intervention of the doge. It may be taken for certain that the cardinals had conspired against Urban, with a view of deposing him; that they intended to burn him as an heretic may be a fantastic rumour. At all events he acted very unwisely by treating them so cruelly, for he then alienated faithful adherents, as is proved by the manifesto of the five cardinals, who remained at Nocera and renounced his obedience.

After King Charles was murdered in Hungary (February, 1386) Urban again undertook to establish his authority in that kingdom; he left for Lucca, refused to treat with the dowager-queen Margaret, and declined the proposal of a general council, which some German princes proposed at the insistence of Clement VII, though he himself had formerly proposed the same expedient. He insulted the ambassadors and pressed the German king, Wenceslaus, to come to Rome. In August, 1387, he proclaimed a crusade against Clement, and in September he set out for Perugia, where he remained till August, 1388, recruiting soldiers for a campaign against Naples, which had again fallen into the hands of the Clementines, and the possession of which was very important for his own safety. The soldiers, not receiving their pay, deserted, and Urban returned to Rome, where his refractory temper brought him into difficulties that could only be removed by an interdict. It was at Rome, also, that he fixed the interval between the jubilees at thirty-three years, the first of which was to be celebrated the next year, 1390. But he did not live to open it. Urban might have been a good pope in more peaceful circumstances; but he certainly was unable to heal the wounds which the Church had received during the exile of Avignon. If the genius of a Gregory VII or an Innocent III was scarcely able to triumph over the ambition of the cardinals, the bad conduct of the higher and lower clergy, and the unruliness of the laity, these impediments could not but shipwreck the inconstant and quarrelsome Urban.

WILLIAM MULDER

Pope Urban VII

Giambattista Castagna, born at Rome, 4 Aug., 1521; elected pope, 15 September, 1590; died at Rome, 27 September, 1590. His father, Cosimo, was a Genoese nobleman; his mother, Costanza Ricci, was a Roman and sister of Cardinal Jacovazzi. He studied civil and canon law at various universities of Italy and graduated as doctor of both laws at Bologna. Soon after he became auditor of his uncle, Cardinal Girolamo Verallo, whom he accompanied as datary on a papal legation to France. On his return to Italy, Julius III made him referendary of the Segnatura di Giustizia and on 1 March, 1553, appointed him Archbishop of Rossano. He was ordained priest 30 March, and consecrated bishop by Cardinal Verallo, 4 April. Julius III sent him as governor to Fano in 1555, and under Paul IV he was for a short time Governor of Perugia and Umbria. During the reign of Pius IV he settled satisfactorily a long-standing boundary dispute between the inhabitants of Terni and Spoleto. From 1562 to 1563 he assisted at the Council of Trent, where he was made president of various congregations and manifested great prudence nad learning. In 1565 he accompained the cardinal-legate Buoncompagni (afterwards Gregory XIII) to Spain, where he remained seven years as papal nuncio at the Court of Philip II. On his return to Italy he voluntarily resigned the archiepiscopal See of Rossano in January, 1573, and was sent by Gregory XIII as nuncio to Venice, whence he was transferred as governor to Bologna in 1577. A year later he was sent as legate extraordinary to Cologne, to represent Gregory XIII at the peace conference between Philip II and the United Provinces. Upon his return to Rome he was appointed Consultor of the Holy Office and the Ecclesiastical State. On 12 December, 1583, Gregory XIII created him cardinal priest with the titular Church of S. Marcello, and on 8 October, 1584, appointed him legate of Bologna. During the reign of Sixtus V (1585-90) he was highly influential. On 19 November, 1586, he became Inquisitor-General of the Holy Office.

Sixtus V having died 27 August, 1590, the cardinals, 54 in number, entered the conclave at the Vatican on 7 September, and elected Cardinal Castagna as pope on 15 September. The news of his election was a cause of universal joy. The new pontiff was not only highly esteemed for his piety and learning, he had also, in the many important and difficult positions which he filled as archbishop and cardinal, manifested extraordinary prudence and administrative ability. He chose the name Urban in order that this name, which in Latin signifies "kind", might be a continuous reminder to him to show kindness towards all his subjects. One of his first acts was to have a list made of all the poor in Rome that he might alleviate their needs. He also gave liberal alms to those cardinals whose income was insufficient, paid the debts of all the monts-de-piété in the Ecclesiastical State, and ordered the bakers of Rome to make larger loaves of bread and sell them cheaper, indemnifying their losses out of his own purse. Desirous of checking the luxury of the rich, he forbade his chamberlains to wear silk garments. In order to give occupation to the poor, he ordered the completion of the public works that had been commenced by his predecessor. He appointed a committee of cardinals, consisting of Paleotti, Fachinetti, Lancelotti, and Aldobrandini, for the reform of the Apostolic Datary. Strongly opposed to nepotism, he expressed his purpose never to appoint any of his relatives to an office in the Curia and forbade them to make use of the title "Excellence", which it was customary to give the nearest relatives of the pope. A few days after his election he became seriously ill. The faithful united in prayers for his recovery; public processions, expositions of the Blessed Sacrament, and other pious exercises were conducted. The pope confessed and communicated every day of his illness. He once expressed a desire to remove to the Quirinal, where the air was purer and more wholesome, but, when told that it was not customary for the pope to be seen in the city before his coronation, he remained in the Vatican. He died before the papal coronation could take place and was buried in the Vatican Basilica. On 22 September, 1606, his remains were transferred to the Church of S. Maria sopra Minerva, where a magnificent monument was erected in his honour. His temporal possessions, consisting of 30,000 scudi, he bequeathed to the Archconfraternity of the Annunciation to be used as dowries for poor girls.

MICHAEL OTT

Pope Urban VIII

Maffeo Barberini, born at Florence in April, 1568; elected pope, 6 August, 1623; died at Rome, 29 July, 1644.

His father Antonio Barberini, a Florentine nobleman, who died when Maffeo was only three years old, his mother, Camilla Barbadoro, brought him to Rome at an early age. He lived with his uncle, Francesco Barberini, who was then prothonotary Apostolic, and was educated at the Collegio Romano under the direction of the Jesuits. In 1589 he graduated from Pisa as Doctor of Laws, and returning to Rome he became abbreviator Apostolic and referendary of the Segnatura di Giustizia. In 1592 Clement VIII made him Governor of Fano, then prothonotary Apostolic, and in 1601 papal legate to France to present his felicitations to King Henry IV on the birth of the dauphin, the future King Louis XIII. In 1604 he was appointed Archbishop of Nazareth and sent as nuncio to Paris, where he became very influential with Henry IV. In recognition of his services in France, Paul V created him cardinal-priest, 11 September, 1606, with the titular Church of S. Pietro in Montorio, which he exchanged for that of S. Onofrio, 5 September, 1610. On 17 October, 1608, he was transferred to the See of Spoleto, where he convened a synod, completed the seminary, and built two other diocesan seminaries, at Spello and Visso. In 1617 Paul V made him legate of Bologna and prefect of the Segnatura di Giustizia. On 19 July, 1623, fifty-five cardinals entered conclave to elect a successor to Gregory XV; on 6 August Cardinal Maffeo Barberini received fifty votes. The new pope took the name of Urban VIII. Being attacked by the fever which was raging in Rome, he was obliged to postpone his coronation until 29 September. It is related that, before allowing himself to be vested in the pontifical robes, he prostrated himself before the altar, praying that God might let him die if his pontificate would not be for the good of the Church.

He began his reign by issuing on the very day of his election the Bulls of canonization of Philip Neri, Ignatius Loyola, and Francis Xavier, who had been canonized by Gregory XV. Urban himself canonized Elizabeth of Portugal, 25 May, 1625; and Andrew Corsini, 22 April, 1629. He beatified:

• James of the Marches, a Minorite, 12 August, 1624;
• Francis Borgia, a Jesuit, 23 November, 1624;
• Andrew Avellino, 10 June, 1625;
• Felix of Cantalice, a Minorite, 1 October, 1625;
• Mary Magdalen de' Pazzi, 8 May, 1626;
• Cajetan, the founder of the Theatines, 8 October, 1629;
• John of God, 21 September, 1630; and
• Josaphat Kuncevyc, 16 May, 1643.

He reserved the beatification of saints to the Holy See and in a Bull, dated 30 October, 1625, forbade the representation with the halo of sanctity of persons not beatified or canonized, the placing of lamps, tablets, etc., before their sepulchres, and the printing of their alleged miracles or revelations. In a later Bull, dated 13 September, 1642, he reduced the number of holy days of obligation to thirty-four, besides Sundays. Urban introduced many new offices into the Breviary. He composed the whole proper Office of St. Elizabeth and wrote the hymns, as they are in the Breviary, for the feasts of St. Martina, St. Hermenegild, and St. Elizabeth of Portugal. A book of poems, written by him before he became pope, was published during his pontificate under the title: "Maphei Cardinalis Barberini poemata" (Rome, 1637). In 1629 he appointed a committee for the reform of the Breviary. Their incomplete and often ill-advised corrections were approved by Urban, 19 September, 1631, and embodied in the official edition of the Roman Breviary which was issued the following year (see BREVIARY -- Reforms of the Breviary). In 1627 Urban gave the final shape to the celebrated Bull, "In Coena Domini." In 1634 he enjoined upon all ruling bishops, including cardinals, to observe the episcopal residence as decreed at the Council of Trent. During Urban's pontificate occurred the second trial and condemnation of Galileo by the Roman Inquisition. On 6 March, 1642, he issued the Bull, "In eminenti," condemning the "Augustinus" of Jansenius (q. v.).

Urban was a great patron of Catholic foreign missions. He erected various dioceses and vicariates in pagan countries and encouraged the missionaries by word and financial assistance. He extended the sphere of activity for the Congregation of Propaganda (q. v.), and in 1627 founded the Collegium Urbanum, whose object was the training of missionaries for foreign countries. For the Maronites he had already founded (1625) a college on Mount Lebanon. In order to increase the number of missionaries in China and Japan he opened these two countries to all missionaries in 1633, although Gregory XIII had given the Jesuits the exclusive right to those missions in 1585. In a Bull, dated 22 April, 1639, he strictly prohibited slavery of any kind among the Indians of Paraguay, Brazil, and the entire West Indies. In his efforts to restore Catholicism in England Urban had little success. In 1624 he sent Richard Smith as vicar Apostolic to that country, but the latter's imprudent insistence on exercising full episcopal authority in England and Scotland brought him into public conflict with the Jesuits and other missionaries of religious orders. The Government issued new hostile measures against the Catholics, and in 1631 Smith was obliged to flee. Three years later Urban sent Gregorio Panzani to England. Having gained greater liberty for the Catholics, he was succeeded in 1638 by George Conn, an Englishman, who had previously been secretary to Cardinal Francesco Barberini. Forced to return to Rome in 1639, on account of ill-health, he was replaced by Rossetti. Repeated requests made through him to the pope for financial aid in the war brewing between the king and Parliament were refused by Urban except on condition of the king's conversion. The ensuing war put an end to all negotiations. (See the letters of Panzani, Conn, and Rossetti to Cardinal Barberini in the Record Office Transcripts.) The religious orders found a zealous promoter in Urban. In 1628 he approved the Congregation of Our Saviour, a reformed branch of Augustinian canons, founded by Peter Fourier in 1609, and in 1632, the Lazarists or Priests of the Mission, a secular congregation founded by Vincent of Paul. He also approved the following sisterhoods: Canonesses of the Holy Sepulchre, 1631; Sisters of the Incarnation, 1633; Nuns of Our Lady of Nancy, 1634; and Sisters of Our Lady of Mercy, 1642. The Jesuitesses, founded by the Englishwoman Mary Ward in 1609, he suppressed in 1631 for insubordination.

Urban's greatest fault was his excessive nepotism. Three days after his coronation he created Francesco Barberini, his nephew, cardinal; in 1627 he made him librarian of the Vatican; and in 1632 vice-chancellor. Francesco did not abuse his power. He built the large Barberini Palace and founded the famous Barberini Library which was acquired and made part of the Vatican Library by Leo XIII in 1902. Urban's nephew, Antonio Barberini, the Younger, was created cardinal in 1627, became camerlengo in 1638, then commander-in-chief of the papal troops. He was legate at Avignon and Urbino in 1633; at Bologna, Ferrara, and Romagna in 1641. Urban's brother Antonio, who was a Capuchin, received the Diocese of Senigaglia in 1625, was created cardinal in 1628, and later appointed grand penitentiary and librarian of the Vatican. A third nephew of Urban, Taddeo Barberini, was made Prince of Palestrina and Prefect of Rome. It is scarcely credible what immense riches accrued to the Barberini family through Urban's nepotism. Finally, tormented with scruples concerning his nepotism, Urban twice appointed a special committee of theologians to investigate whether it was lawful for his nephews to retain their possessions, but each time the committee decided in favour of his nephews. Among the members of the second committee were Cardinal Lugo and Father Lupis.

In the government of the Papal territory Urban, as a rule, followed his own judgment; even his nephews had little influence during the first ten years of his pontificate. He honoured the cardinals by ordering them to give precedence only to crowned heads, and in a Decree of 10 June, 1630, bestowed upon them the title of "Eminence," their former title having been "Illustrious and Most Reverend." In 1626 he extended the Papal territory by inducing the aged Duke Francesco Maria della Rovere to cede his Duchy of Urbino to the Church. Towards the end of his pontificate his nephews involved him in a useless war with Odoardo Farnese, the Duke of Parma, with whom they had quarrelled on questions of etiquette during his visit to Rome in 1639. In revenge they induced Urban to prohibit the exportation of grain from Castro to the Roman territory, thus depriving Farnese of an income without which he could not pay the interest on his monti, or bonds. The duke's creditors complained to the pope, who took forcible possession of Castro, 13 October, 1641, in order to assure the payment. This proved ineffective, and on 13 January, 1642, Urban excommunicated Farnese and deprived him of all his fiefs. Backed by Tuscany, Modena, and Venice, the duke set out towards Rome at the head of about 3000 horsemen, putting to flight the papal troops. Peace negotiations were concluded near Orvieto, but not accepted by the pope. In 1643 hostilities were renewed and continued without decisive success until the pope finally concluded a disgraceful peace on 31 March, 1644. He was obliged to free the duke from the ban and restore all the places taken by the papal troops.

Urban spent heavy sums on armaments, fortifications, and structures of every kind. At Castelfranco he erected the costly but unfavourably situated Fort Urbano, established an extensive manufactory of arms at Tivoli, and transformed Civitavecchia into a military port. He strongly fortified the Castel of Sant' Angelo, Monte Cavallo, and built various fortifications on the right side of the Tiber in Rome. He erected the beautifully situated papal villa at Castle Gandolfo, founded the Vatican Seminary, built various churches and monasteries, beautified streets, piazzas, and fountains. The three bees in his escutcheon attract the attention of every observant visitor in Rome. In the Basilica of St. Peter he erected the baldachin over the high altar, the tomb of Countess Matilda, translating her remains from Mantua, and his own tomb, opposite that of Paul III. For some of these structures he used bronze from the roof of the Pantheon, thus causing the well-known but unwarranted pasquinade: "Quod non fecerunt Barbari, fecerunt Barberini."

The pontificate of Urban extended over one of the most critical periods in the history of the Catholic Church, the Thirty Years War. Ranke and Gregorovius attribute Urban's actions in this war to his intention to humiliate the two Houses of Habsburg (Austria and Spain), whose too great power was a constant menace to Italy and Rome; hence, they declare, he favoured France and did not subsidize Emperor Ferdinand II in his war against Gustavus Adolphus and the Protestants. An unbiased study of the situation will lead to a different conclusion. Neither as pontiff not as temporal ruler could Urban remain a disinterested onlooker, and he had no other motive than the welfare of the Catholic Church. As the common Father of Christendom he interposed concerning the Valtellina, a strategically important valley between Venice and the Grisons, which was eagerly coveted by France as well as Spain. He refused to join the alliance which France had made with Venice and Savoy against Spain in 1624, and was instrumental in bringing about the Treaty of Monzon, 5 March, 1626, which gave equal rights upon the Valtellina to France and Spain. He also refused to enter the league which France had concluded with Venice and Savoy at the beginning of the war of the Mantuan succession in 1629. "It is impossible for me," he writes to Nagni, the French nuncio, 2 April, 1629, "to put in jeopardy the common fatherhood and, in consequence, to be no longer able to heal and pacify, which is the proper business of the pope as vicar of Christ" (Nunziatura di Francia, Vat. Lib. Cod. 71, and Nicoletti, III, 1451-58).

Equally false are the accusations of Ranke and Gregorovius that Urban opposed the election of Ferdinand's oldest son as King of Rome and advocated the dismissal of Wallenstein as commander-in-chief of the imperial army through his nuncio at the Electoral Diet of Ratisbon in 1630. The first accusation was already branded as a calumny by Cardinal Francesco Barberini in a conference with the imperial ambassador Savelli on 16 March, 1629 (Nunziatura di Germania, Cod. 118, fol. 89); the second is refuted by Urban himself, who on 17 January, 1632, congratulated Wallenstein on his reassumption of the command and sent him the Apostolic blessing (Registrum brevium, XXXI, 87). It is, however, true that Urban did not subsidize the imperial army and the Catholic League as liberally as he could and should have done. Nevertheless, he sent (1632-34) two million francs out of his own means to the Catholic troops in Germany. Urban did not join the League of the Catholic Estates, which was planned by the emperor, as the League was directed not only against Gustavus Adolphus, but also against France; hence it could not be joined by the pope as the common father of Catholics. He urged Louis XIII and Richelieu to desist from subsidizing the King of Sweden, but refused to excommunicate them, as he feared a repetition of what had occurred in England under Henry VIII and Elizabeth (Nunziatura di Germania, Cod. 127, fol. 266).

The greatest calumny that has been spread about Urban is his alleged sympathy with Gustavus Adolphus, whose death he is said to have mourned and for whose soul he is said to have celebrated a Requiem Mass. What Urban thought of the Swedish king and how he mourned his death is manifest from a Brief, addressed to Ferdinand on 14 December, 1632, when the pope received the news that Gustavus Adolphus had fallen in battle (16 November, 1632). The Brief is published in the original Latin by Ehses. The following quotation will suffice: "We give eternal thanks to the Lord of vengeance because he rendered retribution to the proud and shook from the neck of the Catholics their most bitter enemy." The Mass which he is said to have celebrated in the German National Church, the Anima, at Rome on 11 December, was in reality a Mass of thanksgiving, of which Alaleone, the papal master of ceremonies, says expressly: "This Mass was celebrated in thanksgiving upon receiving the message of the death of the King of Sweden" (Cod. Vat. 9252, II, 71 sq.). On the next day the "Te Deum" was sung in the Sistine Chapel in presence of the pope, "ob laetitiam necis regis Sueciae interfecti," after which the pope himself chanted the versicles and orations.

It is as yet difficult to pass a correct judgment on Urban from every point of view. His life remains still to be written fairly. His private life was beyond all reproach, and the common welfare of the Church seems to have been the mainspring of his pontifical labours. His one fault was squandering money on his nephews, army, and fortifications, while stinting Ferdinand and the Catholic League in Germany.

MICHAEL OTT

Urbi et Orbi

The term Urbi et Orbi (which means "for the city and for the world") signifies that a papal document is addressed not only to the City of Rome but to the entire Catholic world. This phrase is applied especially to the solemn blessing with plenary indulgence which, before the occupation of Rome, the pope was accustomed to impart on certain occasions from the balcony of the chief basilicas of the city. This blessing was given annually at St. Peter's on Holy Thursday, Easter, and the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul; at St. John Lateran on the Ascension; at St. Mary Major on the Assumption. It was imparted also on extraordinary occas ions, as at St. Peter's when the pope was crowned, at St. John's when he was enthroned, at various times during the holy year, or jubilee, for the benefit of pilgrims. The blessing Urbi et Orbi of Ascension Day was sometimes postponed till Pentecost on account of the inclemency of the weather, illness of the pope, etc. Innocent X in the jubilee of 1650 on the Ephiphany, Pentecost, and All Saints, as well as later popes, including Pope Pius IX, for special reasons, gave this solemn blessing from the balcony of the Quirinal Palace.

ANDREW B. MEEHAN

Archdiocese of Urbino

(URBINATENSIS)

Province of Pesaro and Urbino, Italy. The city of Urbino is situated on a hill between the valleys of the Metaurus and Foglia, in a mountainous but well-cultivated country. The cathedral, near the ducal palace, was designed by Count Federico da Montefeltre; but was completely transformed in the nineteenth century, as the cupola added in the sixteenth century and a large portion of the edifice were ruined in 1789. Some valuable pictures are still preserved there, a "Last Supper" and a "San Sebastiano of Barocci" in the sacristy, the "Scourging" by Pier della Francesca, in the oratory of the crypt a "Pietà" of Giovanni da Bologna. Other churches; S. Francesco (completed in 1350), partly Roman, partly Gothic, contains exquisite sculptures of Constantino Trappola, paintings by Barocci, Procaccini, and others. S. Dominico (1365), originally Gothic, but completely transformed in 1732; over the main door is a high relief of Lucca della Robbia. S. Agostino was also Gothic. The frescoes in the oratory of S. Giovanni Battista by Jacopo and Lorenzo Sanseverino, including a "Crucifixion", are important in the history of painting: S. Spirito (standards of Luca Signorelli), S. Bernardino (Bramante), S. Giuseppe (Adoration of the Magi, a relief by Brandini). The ducal palace was erected by Duke Federico, with Luciano di Laurana (1447) as architect; illustrious sculptors and painters were engaged to adorn it, but many of their works are now in foreign museums. Among those remaining are the statue of Duke Federico; the carvings on the edges of the doors, windows, and chimney-pieces; paintings by Margaritone, Antonio da Ferrara ("Crucifixion", "Baptism of Christ"), Paolo Uccello ("Profanation of the Host"), Giusto di Grand ("Last Supper"), Giovanni Santi, Raphael's father ("Timoteo Viti"); Titian ("Resurrection"). The duke's study, with its magnificent inlaid door and its ceiling, contains two oratories. The Castracane palace has an important collection of paintings. Urbino has a university with faculties of law, mathematico-physics, and a school of pharmacy and obstetrics, and a hospital founded in 1265. Urbino is the native place of Bartolommeo Carusi, theologian and professor at Bologna and Paris; Federico Commandini (1509), mathematician; Bernardini Baldi (seventeenth century), poet; Ludovio della Vernaccia (thirteenth century), poet; Laura Battiferri-Ammanati (seventeenth century), poet; the archeologist, Mgr. Fabretti (1619); the painters, Raffaello Sanzio and Federico Barocci; Bramante and Genga, father and son, architects; the sculptor, Federico Brandani, and Clement XI.

Urbino is the ancient Urbinum Mataurense, a Roman municipium. The city and its environs are rich in inscriptions, one of which is certainly Christian. Urbino was held by the Goths, but was captured by Belisarius (538). Under Pepin it became part of the pontifical domain. By the eleventh century it had a commune. Becoming the capital of the counts of Montefeltre, it increased in importance. In 1213 Bonconte di Montefeltro was elected podestà of Urbino. The Urbinese rebelled, formed an alliance with the commune of Rimini (1228), and by 1234 were masters of the city. He and his descendants were leaders of the Ghibellines of the Marches and the Romagna. Montefeltrano succeeded (1214-55), and Guido (1255-86 and 1293-6). Boniface VIII absolved him from censures and employed him against Palestrina and the Colonna. Federico I (1296-1322) increased his domains by taking from the Holy See Fano, Osimo, Recanati, Gubbio, Spoleto, and Assisi. His exorbitant taxes led to his murder, and the city recognized the papal supremacy. But in 1323 his son Nolfo (1323-59) was proclaimed lord of Urbino. In 1355, on the coming of Cardinal Albornoz, the papal sovereignty was again recognized, but not without loss of territory. Federico II was entirely despoiled. His son, Antonio (1377-1403), profited by the rebellion of the Marches and Umbria against the Holy see (1375) to restore his authority in Urbino. Guido Antonio (1403-43) was appointed by Martin V (1419) ruler of the Duchy of Spoleto, and carried on war against Braccio di Montone with varying fortune. Oddo Antonio, after a few months' government, was assassinated for his crimes. The Urbanese then offered the lordship to Federico III (1444-82), the illegitimate son of Guido Antonio, a pupil of Vittorino da Feltre's school and a lover of art. Under him Urbino became the resort of the brightest minds of the Renaissance. He was implicated in the wars against Sigismondo Malatesta, the pope, Rene of Anjou, and Florence. Sixtus IV conferred on him the title of Duke of Urbino (1474). Guidubaldo I (1492-1508) escaped by flight the plots of Caesar Borgia. He adopted Francesco Maria della Rovere (1508-38), his sister's child, and thus the signoria of Sinigaglia was united to Urbino. He aided Julius II in reconquering the Romagna. Leo X deprived him of his territory, which was given to Lorenzo de' Medici, and later to Giovanni Maria Varano (1516-21). On Leo's death Federico III reascended the throne. The internal government was almost entirely in the hands of duchess Eleonora Gonzaga. Guidubaldo II (1538-74), by his marriage with Giullia di Varano, obtained the Ducy of Camerino, which he had to cede in 1539 to Paul III for 60,000 scudi. In 1572 the Urbinese rebelled against taxation, but were suppressed. Francesco Maria II (1574-1631) endeavoured to reduce the taxes imposed by his father. In 1606 and 1626 he withdrew from the government to study natural sciences, and appointed a commission of eight to rule. On the assassination of his only son, Federico Ubaldo, in 1624, he placed his domains under the Holy See.

The first known bishop of Urbino is Leontius, to whom St. Gregory entrusted the Diocese of Rimini (592). Other bishops: Theodoricus, who in 1021 transferred the cathedral within the city (the ancient cathedral was outside); Blessed Mainardo (1057). Under Bishops Egidio (1288) and Carrado, O. S. A. (1309), Blessed Pelnigotto, a Franciscan Tertiary and Blessed Clare of Rimini lived in the city. Marco Boncioni, O. P. (1342); Fra Bartolommeo Carusi, O. S. A. (1347), theologians. Under Francesco, O. Min. (1379), the hermitage of the Gerolamini on Monte Cesana was established; Oddone Colonna (1380), later Martin V; Gian Pietro Arrivabeni (1491), learned writer and restorer of discipline; Cardinal Gregorio Cortese, O. S. B. (1542); Felice Tiranni (1551), reformer of religious life. In 1563 Pius IV made the see metropolitan, with the suffragans, Cagli, Sinigaglia, Pesaro, Forssombrone, Montefeltro, and Gubbio. Under Antonio Giannotti (1578) the seminary was opened; Ascanio Maffei (1646) restored many churches; Ignazio Ranaldi, oratorian (1819), restored the discipline of the seminary and the religious orders. The archdiocese has now, as suffragans, S. Angelo in Vado, Cagli, and Pergola, Fossambrone, Pesaro, Senigallia; it contains 99 parishes; 32,600 inhabitants; 130 secular and regular priests; 1 house of religious (men); 4 convents of nuns; 4 educational institutions for boys and 2 for girls.

CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d' Italia, III (Venice, 1845); LIPPARINI, Urbino in Italia artistica, VI (Bergamo, 1907); UGOLINO, Storia dei conti e dei duchi di Urbino (Florence, 1859); ALBANI, Memorie concernenti la citta di Urbino (Rome, 1724); GUERRINI, Degli womini illustri di Urbino (Urbino, 1879); DENNISTOWN, Memories of the Dukes of Urbino illustrating the arms, arts, and literature of Italy from 1440 to 1630 (London, 1851); DELABORDE, Les ducs et la cour d'Urbino in revue des Deux Mondes, II (1851), 393-440.

U. BENIGNI

Urbs Beata Jerusalem dicta pacis visio

The first line of a hymn of probably the seventh or eighth century, comprising eight stanzas (together with a doxology) of the form:

Urbs beata Jerusalem, dicta pacis visio,
Quæ construitur in coelo vivis ex lapidibus,
Et angelis coronata ut sponsata comite.

Sung in the Office of the Dedication of a Church, the first four stanzas were usually assigned to Vespers and Matins, the last four to Lauds. In the revision by the correctors under Urban VIII (see BREVIARY) the unquantitative, accentual, trochaic rhythm was changed into quantitative, iambic metre (with an addition syllable), and the stanza appears in the Breviary with divided lines:

The original hymn for Lauds (Angularis fundamentum lapis Christus missus est) was changed into "Alto ex Olympi vertice", etc. Hymnologists, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, criticise adversely the work of the correctors in general. Of this hymn in particular some think that, where as it did not suffer as much as some others, yet it lost much of its beauty in the revision; others declare that it was admirably transformed without unduly modifying the sense.

However this may be, the changed rhythm and the additional syllable did not deter the editors of the Ratisbon Antiphonary from including a melody, which fitted admirably the rhythm of the "Pange lingua gloriosi", but which was greatly marred and rendered hardly singable when updated to the reversed rhythm of the "Coelestis Urbs Jerusalem". A different textual revision, ascribed to Sebastian Besnault, appeared in the Sens Breviary of 1626:

Neale thinks this is inferior to the original, but superior to the Roman revision. Roundell admits the blemishes in the original that would suggest emendation, but thinks that the Roman revision left out "most of the architectural imagery", and notes that the Sens Breviary omitted "the whole conception of the Heavenly City 'as a bride adorned for her husband'". He nevertheless considers the revisions, if looked at as new hymns, "spirited and attractive". The Parisian Breviary of 1736 gives the form:

Urbs Jerusalem beata Dicta pacis visio
Quæ construitur in coelis Vivis ex lapidibus,
Et ovantum coronata Angelorum agmine.

The hymn finds its Scriptural inspiration in Eph., ii, 20; I Pet., ii, 5; Apoc., xxi. Including all forms of the hymn, there are about thirty translations into English verse.

H.T. HENRY

Andrés Urdaneta

Augustinian, born at Villafranca, Guipúzcoa, Spain, 1498; died in the City of Mexico, 1568.

He had studied Latin and philosophy, but having been left an orphan resolved to devote himself to military life, and in the Italian wars obtained the rank of captain. Returning to Spain he took up the study of mathematics and astronomy, which gave him an inclination for a seafaring life, and induced him to accompany Jofre de Loaiza in an expedition to the Molucca Islands in 1525. He served there for eleven years. On his return to Europe he landed in Lisbon, where he was prosecuted by the Portuguese Government for having told the story of his voyage to the islands when he passed through New Spain. Charles V did not give him a very favourable reception, and, wearied by his many adventures, he returned to the City of Mexico and entered the Augustinian Order.

At the death of the viceroy, D. Luis de Velasco, in 1564, New Spain had passed under the government of the Audiencia, one of whose first cares was to equip an expedition for the conquest and colonization of the Philippine Islands. This had been ordered by Philip II in 1559, Fray Andrés de Urdaneta having been designated as the commander, and the viceroy had the matter under consideration at the time of his death. Urdaneta was considered a great navigator, and especially fitted for cruising in Indian waters. Philip II wrote urging him to join the expedition, and offering him the command. Urdaneta agreed to accompany the expedition but refused to take command, and the adelantado, Don Miguel López de Legazpi, was appointed commander. The expedition, composed of the "Capitana", which carried on board Legazpi and Urdaneta, the galleons "San Pablo" and "San Pedro", and the tenders "San Juan" and "San Lucas", set sail on 21 November, 1564.

After spending some time in the islands Legazpi determined to remain, and sent Urdaneta back for the purpose of finding a better return route and to obtain help from New Spain, for the Philippine colony. He left the Island of Cebu in July, 1565, and was obliged to sail as far as 36 degrees North latitude to obtain favourable winds. Urdaneta had to assume command in person, fourteen of his crew died, and when the ship reached the port of Acapulco on 3 October, 1565, only Urdaneta and Felipe de Salcedo, nephew of Legazpi, had strength enough to cast the anchors. From Mexico he went to Europe to make a report on the expedition, and returned to New Spain, intending to continue on to the Philippines, but he was dissuaded by his friends. He wrote two accounts of his voyages; the one giving the account of the Loaiza expedition was published; the other, which gives the account of his return voyage, is preserved in manuscript in the archives of the Indies.

[Editor's note: Dr. J.H.F. Sollewijn Gelpke, a noted expert on the early history of New Guinea and the Moluccas, offers this supplement in 1998:

"This article contains an error where it states that in Lisbon in about 1536/7 he ran into trouble for having told about 'the islands' (apparently the Spice Islands Ternate and Tidore) 'when he passed through New Spain.'

At that time the Spaniards in the Moluccas were evacuated by the Portuguese and sent home around Africa, not by way of America. In fact, their big problem was to find the way back from the Moluccas to New Spain, and this search led to the discovery by Saavedra of the island which Ortíz de Retes baptised as New Guinea in 1545. As the entry correctly states, the North Pacific route was found only in 1564 (by Arellano on an unauthorized journey), and shortly afterwards by Urdaneta, who got the credit for this discovery.

Urdaneta being prosecuted in Lisbon for sending information to (New?) Spain, would seem to fit well in the cloak and dagger atmosphere around the Moluccas in the years 1525-1540 under the 6th and 7th Portuguese Captains Tristao de Ataíde and António Galvao. Actually, however, after Emperor Charles V had mortgaged his claim to the Moluccas in 1529 to Portugal, the Portuguese didn't any longer strictly impose the 1504 decree of secrecy on nautical information.

My field being the (proto-)history of New Guinea and the Moluccas, I regret being unable to tell you what really happened to Urdaneta in Lisbon."]

CAMILLUS CRIVELLI

Urgel

(Urgellensis).

Diocese in Spain, suffragan of Tarragona; bounded on the N. by France; E. by the Provinces of Gerona, Barcelona, and LÈrida; S. and W. by LÈrida, which includes most of the diocese, the latter, however, extends to some towns of Gerona, Huesca, and the valleys of Andorra. The capital, Seo de Urgel, is situated in the northern part of LÈrida, between the Segre and Balira, and has 4000 inhabitants. The city, one of the most ancient of Spain, belonged to the Ilergetas and is called Orgia or Orgelia on the Iberian coins.

Christianity was introduced into Urgel at a very early period. St. Justus, Bishop of Urgel, attended the Second Council of Toledo in 527. He also attended the First Council of LÈrida, 546, and wrote on the Canticle of Canticles a work dedicated to Sergius, Archbishop of Tarragona. St. Isidore mentions him and his three brothers in his "Varones ilustres". Simplicius, Bishop of Urgel, figures in the Third Council of Toledo and the names of his successors, in later councils of Tarragona, and the Second Council of Barcelona. Lubericus, at the time of the Mohammedan invasion, attended the Sixteenth Council of Toledo. The line of bishops continued uninterruptedly during the period of the Mohammedan dominion. The city, however, was totally destroyed, a district called Vicus Urgelli alone surviving. Reconquered and taken possession of by the French the see was governed by Felix who with Elipandus of Toledo propagated Adoptionism (q. v.), a heresy in which it appears he died, notwithstanding the fact that he had several times abjured it. Learned and except for his heretical tendencies, virtuous, he died in exile in León, 804, and for this reason the people of Urgel in ancient times venerated him as one of their seven holy bishops. About 885 Bishop Ingobert was expelled from his see by the intruder Selva, who, under the protection of the Count of Urgel, was consecrated in Gascony. This usurper also unlawfully placed Hermemiro over the See of Gerona. In 892 a synod was held in the Church of Santa María in Urgel; the two usurpers were deposed, their vestments rent, their crosiers broken over their heads, and they were deprived of their sacerdotal faculties. Bishop Saint Amengol died on 3 Nov., 1035. Another saint and Bishop of Urgel was Odo, son of Count de Pallas (1095-1122). Arnaldus of Perexens retired to the monastery of Bellpuig in 1194. His successor Bernardo de Castelló attended the Third Council of the Lateran, and in 1198 retired to the monastery of Aspir in the Diocese of Elne. In the last century JosÈ Caixal, who distinguished himself at the Vatican Council and was so cordially detested by the Liberals, was Bishop of Urgel (1853-79). When Seo de Urgel was captured by Martínez Campos during the civil war the bishop was taken prisoner, exiled and died at Rome.

ANDORRA

The bishops of Urgel have from very ancient times been sovereign princes of the Andorra valleys. When Charlemagne liberated the City of Urgel from the Saracen yoke he conferred on its bishop Posidonius I the right to one tenth of the tithes of the valleys. When the territory was reconquered and colonized by Louis the Pious he conferred the sovereignty on the Count of Urgel. These counts and the bishop contended for the rights over the Andorran valleys until 26 Oct., 1040, when on the occasion of the dedication of the cathedral of Urgel the Countess Constancia accompanied by her son Armengol, a minor, ceded to Bishop Eribaldus her right of sovereignty over Andorra. The contentions, however, were renewed between Count Armengol and Bishop Bernardo de Castelló. The latter had recourse to Raimundo Roger I, Count of Foix, promising to share with him the government of Andorra. Relying on this agreement Roger Bernardo III, Count of Foix, in 1264, invaded the estates of the Bishop of Urgel. This war was ended by arbitration. Jatvert, Bishop of Valencia, acting with the other arbitrators, drew up an agreement known as the "Pariatges", which was accepted by the Count de Foix on 7 Sept., 1278, and later confirmed by Martin IV. This convention still forms the Constitution of Andorra, a neutral territory, known as a republic. According to it the valleys recognized as their lawful sovereigns the Count de Foix and the Bishop of Urgel, each of whom appointed a veguer (vicar), who jointly administered the government. The rights of the counts of Foix passed to the Bourbons, kings of France, and subsequently to the French Government; the bishops of Urgel still retain a nominal suzerainty and the title of "principes soberanos" of Andorra.

The ancient cathedral of Andorra was destroyed; the present cathedral dates from the time of Bishop Eribaldus and was consecrated in 1040, although the building was continued until late into the thirteenth century. It is an example of the Romanesque of the second period resembling the transition period architecture of France. Adjoining the church is a twelfth-century cloister, restored in the sixteenth century. The cathedral possesses a rich collection of ancient jewelled altar-vessels and ornaments. The archives contain a famous collection of very ancient documents, some of which date from the time of the Frankish kings. Inside the cathedral is the parish of St. Odo, and outside are the churches of San Miguel and San Augustín. To the east of the city are situated the citadel, the castle, and the tower of Solsona, which figured prominently in the late civil wars. The first seminary was erected by a Bull of Clement VIII, 13 August, 1592; the new seminary was built by Bishop Caixal and is one of the finest buildings in the city. The episcopal palace is also striking. There are two hospitals, military and civil, the latter being installed in the former Convent of the Augustinians. There is a convent of sisters devoted to Christian education, a foundling and an orphan asylum. The cathedral was declared a minor basilica on 9 Dec., 1905. The diminutive republic (6000) is governed by a popularly elected council of ex-members and a syndic or president, elected by the council for life. Its inhabitants are mostly shepherds, and speak Catalan.

Statistics

The present Bishop of Urgel is Mgr. Juan Bennloch y Vivo, b. at Valencia, Spain, 30 Dec., 1864; ordained, 25 Feb., 1888; Vicar-General of Segovia in 1899; named titular Bishop of Hermopolis Major, 12 Dec., 1901, and Apostolic Administrator of Solsona, consecrated, 2 Feb., 1902, and transferred to Urgel, 6 Dec., 1906, in succession to Mgr. Juan JosÈ Lagnarda y Fenollera. There are about 100,000 Catholics; 19 archpriests; 600 priests; 395 parishes; 400 churches; 575 chapels. The religious (male) include the Franciscans, Trappists, Missionaries of the Immaculate Conception, and Piarists (with 3 colleges). Among the nuns there are: Carmelites, Poor Clares, Little Sisters of the Poor, Dominican Tertiaries, Carmelite Sisters of Charity, and Sisters of the Holy Family (with 14 schools), of the Holy Guardian Angel, and of St. Joseph; there are 3 hospitals in care of nuns.

MenÉndez y Pelayo, Heterodoxos españoles (Madrid, 1897); FlÓrez, España ságrada, V (Madrid, 1855); de la Fuente, Hist. ecles. de España (Barcelona; 1859); de Bofarull y Broca, Hist. de Cataluna (Barcelona, 1876); Vidal, L'Andorre (Paris, 1866); Piferrer, Cataluna (Barcelona, 1884).

RAMÓN RUIZ AMADO

Urim and Thummim

The sacred lot by means of which the ancient Hebrews were wont to seek manifestations of the Divine will. Two other channels of Divine communication were recognized, viz. dreams and prophetical utterance, as we learn from numerous passages of the Old Testament. The three forms are mentioned together in 1 Kings, xxvii, 6. "And he (Saul) consulted the Lord, and he answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by priests (Hebrew, Urim, LXX delois), not by the prophets." There can be no doubt that in this instance the Douay translation of "priests" is wrong, based on the mistaken rendering "sacerdotes" of the Latin Vulgate. The etymological signification of the words, at least as indicated by the Masoretic punctuation, is sufficiently plain. Urim is derived from the Hebrew for "light", or "to give light", and Thummim from "completeness", "perfection", or "innocence". In view of these derivations it is surmised by some scholars that the sacred lot may have had a twofold purpose in trial ordeals, viz. Urim served to bring to light the guilt of the accused person, and Thummim to establish his innocence. Be that as it may, the relatively few mentions of Urim and Thummim in the Old Testament leave the precise nature and use of the lot a matter more or less plausible conjecture, nor is much light derived from the ancient versions in which the term is subject to uncertain and divergent renderings. In the xxvii chapter of Exodus ("P") where minute directions are given concerning the priestly vestments, and in particular concerning the "rational" (probably "pouch" or "breastplate") we read (v. 30): "And thou (Moses) shalt put in the rational of judgement doctrine and truth (Heb. the Urim and the Thummim), which shall be on Aaron's breast when he shall go in before the Lord; and he shall bear the judgment of the children of Israel on his breast in the sight of the Lord always." From this it appears that at least towards the close of the Exile, the Urim and Thummim were considered as something distinct from the ephod of the high priest and the gems with which it was adorned. It also shows that they were conceived of as material objects sufficiently small to be inserted in the "rational" or "pouch", the main purpose of which seems to have been to receive them. In Leviticus, viii, 7-8 we read: "He (Moses) vested the high priest with the strait linen garment, girding him with the girdle, and putting on him the violet tunick, and over it he put the ephod, and binding it with the girdle, he fitted it to the rational, on which was doctrine and truth" (Heb. the Urim and the Thummim). Again in Numbers xxvii, 21: "If anything be to be done, Eleazar the priest shall consult the Lord for him" (Heb. "and he [Eleazar] shall invoke upon him the judgment of Urim before the Lord"). These passages add little to our knowledge of the nature an use of the oracle, except perhaps the importance attached to it as a means of the Divine communication in the post-Exilic period.

Some of the earlier Old-Testament passages are more instructive. Among these may be mentioned 1 Kings, xiv, 41-2. After the battle with the Philistines during which Jonathan had unwittingly violated the rash oath of his father, Saul, by tasting a little wild honey, the latter consulted the Lord but received no answer. Desiring to ascertain the cause of the Divine displeasure, Saul calls together the people in order that the culprit may be revealed and thus addresses the Lord: "O Lord God of Israel, give a sign, by which we may know, what the meaning is, that thou answerest not thy servant today. If this iniquity be in me, or in my son, Johathan, give a proof (Vulgate da ostensionem = Urim): or if this iniquity be in they people, give holiness (Vulgate da sanctitatem = Thummim). And Jonathan and Saul were taken, and the people escaped. And Saul said: Cast lots between me and Jonathan my son. And Jonathan was taken." The above rendering of the Vulgate is confirmed by the Greek recension of Lucian (see ed. Lagarde), and by the evidently corrupt Massoretic thamim at the end of verse 41. From this and various other passages which it would be too long to discuss here (v.g. Deut. Xxxiii, 8, Heb., I Kings, xiv, 36, I Kings, xxiii, 6-12 etc.) we gather that the Urim and Thummim were a species of sacred oracle manipulated by the priest in consulting the Divine will, and that they were at times used as a kind of Divine ordeal to discover the guilt or innocence of suspected persons. The lots being two in number, only one question was put at a time, and that in a way admitting of only two alternative answers (see I Kings, xiv, 41-42; ibid., xxiii, 6-12). Many scholars maintain that in most passages where the expression "consult the Lord" or its equivalent is used, rcourse to the Urim and Thummim is implied (v.g. Judges, I, 1-2; ibid., xx, 27-28; I Kings, x, 19-22; II Kings, ii, 1, etc.). The speculations of later Jewish writers including Philo and Josephus teach us nothing of value concerning the Urim and Thummim. They are often fanciful and extravagant, as is the case with many other topics (see "Jewish Encyclopedia", s.v.). The only instance in the New Testament of anything resembling the use of the sacred lot as a means to discover the Divine will occurs in the Acts (I, 24-26) in connection with the election of Matthias.

GIGOT, "Outlines of Jewish Hist." (New York, 1903); 87, 316; MUSS-ARNOLT, "The Urim and Thummim, a Suggestion as to their original Nature and Significance" in "American Journal of Semitic Literature, XVI (Chicago, 1900), 218 seq.

JAMES F. DRISCOLL

Urmiah

A residential see in Chaldea, in the Province of Adherbaidjan, Persia. The primitive name of this city seems to have been Urmui, or rather Urmedji (Barbier de Meynard, "Dictionnaire de la Perse", 27). It is said, but with little truth, that it is the native place of Zoroaster, and that he lived in a grotto near by. Nothing is known of its primitive history. Some wrongly locate at Urmiah Bishop John of Persa, or Perha, present at the Council of Nicae in 325 (Gelzer, "Patrum Nicænorum nomina", xxxix and lxvii). The "Synodicon" of the Chaldean Church during several centuries has no mention of Urmiah. On the other hand there existed from A.D. 420 to the thirteenth century, a See of Adherbaidjan, a suffragan of Arbela (Le Quien, "Oriens Christianus", II, 1283). But there is no proof that its bishop resided at Urmiah rather than in any other city of this province. In the sixteenth century the Nestorian Metropolitan of Ielu, Seert, and Salamas embraced Catholicism; he was recognized by rome in 1582 as the Chaldean patriarch, under the name of Simeon, and fixed his residence at Urmiah. His successors took the name of Mar Seman, and remained Catholics until 1670; then they returned to Nestorianism, and established themselves at Kotchannes in Kurdistan, where they may be found today (Assemani, "Bibliotheca orientalis", I, 621; II, 457; III, 621; Le Quien, op. cit., II, 1327). The present Chaldean Diocese of Urmiah was established by Rome in 1890; it has 5000 Catholics, 42 priests, 44 churches and chapels, 70 secondary stations, several schools for boys and girls under the direction of the Lazarists and the Sisters of Charity. The Lazarists established themselves at Urmiah in 1838; the Sisters of Charity in 1856. The first possess a seminary and a Syrian printing press, where P. Bedjan has published many editions of the ancient texts. The city contains 40,000 inhabitants, and is the centre of the American Protestant missions. It is situated on the Tchahar-Tchai, near Lake Urmiah.

MORGAN, Mission scientifique en Perse, I (Paris, 1891), 289-355; Revue de l'Orient chretien (Paris, 1896), 451; PIGLET, Les missions catholiques francaises au XIX siecle, I (Paris), 202-209; Missiones catholicae (Rome, 1907), 813.

S. VAILHÉ

Juan José Urráburu

Scholastic philosopher, born at Ceanuri, Biscay, 23 May, 1844; died at Burgos, 13 August, 1904. He entered the Society of Jesus on 3 May, 1860, at Loyola (Guipûzcoa). He was professor of rhetoric, and after having finished his own studies he taught philosophy in the Jesuit house of studies, and later theology at Poyanne, France. In the Scholastic revival promoted by Leo XII, Urráburu was called to Rome (1878) to teach philosophy in the Gregorian University. He remained there nine years and on his return was made rector of the College of Valladolid (1887-90); of the Colegio Maximo, Oña (1891-97); and of the seminary of Salamanca (1898-1902). His principal work is entitled "Institutiones philosophiæ quas Romæ in Pontificia Universitate Gregoriana tradiderat . . .", Valladolid: I, Logica, 1890; II, Ontologia, 1891; III, Cosmologia, 1892; IV, Psychologiæ part 1, op. 1894; V, Psychologiæ part 2, 1896; VI, Psychologiæ part 2 (continuation), 1898; VII Theodiceæ vol. I, 1899; VIII, Theodiceæ vol. II, 1900. Other works are: "Compendium philosophiæ scholasticæ . . .", 5 vols., Madrid 1902-1904; "El verdadero puesto de la filosofía entre las demás ciencias", articles published in "Razón y Fe", I, 57, 137 (1901); "El principio vital y el materialismo ante la ciencia ya la filosofía", ibid., VIII 313 (1904); IX, 180, 325 (1904); X, 219 (1904); XI, 54 (1905); posthumous: "La mente de la Compañia acerca de las doctrinas escolásticas que se refieren á la constitución de los cuerpos. Pláctia familiar" (Oña, printed privately). Two chapters (Disputat., XI) of "Psychologia fusior", translated into Spanish by Antonio Madariaga, were published at Madrid, 1901, with the title "Principios fundamentales de antropologia". The value of Urráburu's philosophical work is fully attested by the favour with which it was received and the care with which it was examined by the most competent critics. The influence of his teaching has been notable, especially among the members of his order; the "Institutiones" has been constantly consulted by professors and students (new edition, "Logica", 1908); the "Compendium" is the textbook used at present in the Jesuit scholasticates of Spain and other countries. Father Carlos Delmas published an exhaustive appreciation in the "Etudes bibliograph.", March, 1893, in "Etudes", LXXXVIII, 123. Father José Epsí contributed a serious study, "Un neuvo libro de filosofía escolástica" in "Razon y Fe", IV, 51. To these articles may be added Nadal's notice, "La psicologia del P. Urráburu" in "Razón y Fe", XIV, 314. Urráburu's work, a lasting monument to the School in general, and particularly to that of Suárez, is solid, learned, uncompromising towards error, moderate in expression, and well-balanced by common sense.

ANTONIO NADAL

Ursperger Chronicle

A history of the world in Latin that begins with the Assyrian King Ninius and extends to the year 1229. At the present day it can hardly be doubted that the chronicle was written by Burchard of Biberach. Burchard was born in the latter half of the twelfth century in Biberach, an imperial free city of Swabia. He spent the years 1198-99 in Italy and was ordained priest at Constance in 1203. In 1205 he entered the Premonstratensian monastery, Schussenried, and in 1209 he became its provost. In 1215 he was called as provost to Ursperg, where he died in 1230. He began to collect material for his work at an early age and, in particular, made use of his stay at Rome to examine the papal Regesta. The basis of the first part of his work is the chronicle of the world written by Ekkehard of Aura which he copied almost word for word; for a later period he used the records concerning the Guelphs made by the monk of Weingarten, and for the time of Frederick I Barbarossa the records of the priest John of Cremona. Burchard's original work does not begin until the last years of Henry I; from this point on he narrates independently but in clumsy language the events in which he has taken part himself, or concerning which he has gained reliable information. He does not disguise his adherence to the Hohenstaufen party, and often speaks bitterly of the papal policy. The chronicle was last edited by Abbel and Weiland in the "Mon. Germ. Hist.: Script." XXIII, 337-83; also separately for school use (Hanover, 1874).

PATRICIUS SCHLAGER

St. Ursula and the Eleven Thousand Virgins

The history of these celebrated virgins of Cologne rests on ten lines, and these are open to question. This legend, with its countless variants and increasingly fabulous developments, would fill more than a hundred pages. Various characteristics of it were already regarded with suspicion by certain medieval writers, and since Baronius have been universally rejected. Subsequently, despite efforts more ingenious than scientific to save at least a part, the apocryphal character of the whole has been recognized by degrees. Briefly, for the solid reconstruction of the true history of the virgin martyrs, there is only the inscription of Clematius and some details furnished by ancient liturgical books. Unfortunately, these latter are very meager, and the inscription is in part extremely obscure. This document, carved on a stone which may be seen in the choir of the Church of St. Ursula at Cologne, is couched in the following terms:

DIVINIS FLAMMEIS VISIONIB. FREQVENTER
ADMONIT. ET VIRTVTIS MAGNÆ MAI
IESTATIS MARTYRII CAELESTIVM VIRGIN
IMMINENTIVM EX PARTIB. ORIENTIS
EXSIBITVS PRO VOTO CLEMATIVS V. C. DE
PROPRIO IN LOCO SVO HANC BASILICA
VOTO QVOD DEBEBAT A FVNDAMENTIS
RESTITVIT SI QVIS AVTEM SVPER TANTAM
MAIIESTATEM HVIIVS BASILICÆ VBI SANC
TAE VIRGINES PRO NOMINE. XPI. SAN
GVINEM SVVM FVDERVNT CORPVS ALICVIIVS
DEPOSVERIT EXCEPTIS VIRCINIB. SCIAT SE
SEMPITERNIS TARTARI IGNIB. PVNIENDVM

Its authenticity, which is accepted beyond the shadow of a doubt by the most eminent epigraphists (de Rossi, Ritschl), has sometimes been suspected without good reason, and Domaszewski (C. I. L., XIII, ii, 2, no. 1313) is mistaken in asserting that the stone was not carved until the fifteenth century. It belongs indisputably to the fifth century at the latest, and very probably to the fourth. The recent hypothesis of Reise, according to which the first eight lines, as far as RESTITVIT, belong to the fourth century, while the rest were added in the ninth, is more elegant than solid. With still greater reason must we reject as purely arbitrary that of J. Ficker, which divides the first eight lines into two parts, the first being of pagan origin and dating from before the Christian Era, the second dating from the second century. But despite its authenticity the inscription is far from clear. Many attempts have been made to interpret it, none of them satisfactory, but at least the following import may be gathered: A certain Clematius, a man of senatorial rank, who seems to have lived in the Orient before going to Cologne, was led by frequent visions to rebuild in this city, on land belonging to him, a basilica which had fallen into ruins, in honour of virgins who had suffered martyrdom on that spot.

This brief text is very important, for it testifies to the existence of a previous basilica, dating perhaps from the beginning of the fourth century, if not from the pre-Constantinian period. For the authentic cult and hence for the actual existence of the virgin martyrs, it is a guarantee of great value, but it must be added that the exact date of the inscription is unknown, and the information it gives is very vague. It does not indicate the number of the virgins, their names, or the period of their martyrdom. Nor does any other document supply any probable details on the last point. Our ignorance on the first two is lessened to a certain extent by the mention on 21 Oct. in various liturgical texts (martyrologies, calendars, litanies) of virgins of Cologne, now five, now eight, now eleven, for example: Ursula, Sencia, Gregoria, Pinnosa, Martha, Saula, Britula, Saturnina, Rabacia, Saturia, and Palladia. Without doubt none of these documents is prior to the ninth century, but they are independent of the legend, which already began to circulate, and their evidence must not be entirely overlooked. It is noteworthy that in only one of these lists Ursula ranks first.

After the inscription of Clematius there is a gap of nearly five hundred years in our documents, for no trace of the martyrs is found again until the ninth century. The oldest written text, "Sermo in natali sanctarum Coloniensium virginum", which seems to date from this period, serves to prove that there was at Cologne no precise tradition relating to the virgin martyrs. According to this, they were several thousand in number, and suffered persecution during the reign of Diocletian and Maximian. The names of only a few of them were known, and of these the writer gives only one, that of Pinnosa, who was then regarded as the most important of the number. Some persons, probably in accordance with an interpretation, certainly questionable, of the inscription of Clematius, considered them as coming from the East, and connected them with the martyrs of the Theban Legion; others held them to be natives of Great Britain, and this was the opinion shared by the authors of the "Sermo". Apparently some time after the "Sermo" we find the martyrology of Wandalbert of Prum, compiled about 850, which speaks of several thousand virgins. On the other hand Usuard, in his martyrology dating from about 875, mentions only "Martha and Saula with several others". But as early as the end of the ninth century or the beginning of the tenth, the phrase "the eleven thousand virgins" is admitted without dispute. How was this number reached? All sorts of explanations have been offered, some more ingenious than others. The chief and rather gratuitous suppositions have been various errors of reading or interpretation, e.g., "Ursula and her eleven thousand companions" comes from the two names Ursula and Undecimillia (Sirmond), or from Ursula and Ximillia (Leibniz), or from the abbreviation XI. M. V. (undecim martyres virgines), misinterpreted as undecim millia virginum, etc. It has been conjectured, and this is less arbitrary, that it is the combination of the eleven virgins mentioned in the ancient liturgical books with the figure of several thousand (millia) given by Wandalbert. However it may be, this number is henceforth accepted, as is also the British origin of the saints, while Ursula is substituted for Pinnosa and takes the foremost place among the virgins of Cologne.

The experiences of Ursula and her eleven thousand companions became the subject of a pious romance which acquired considerable celebrity. Besides the subsequent revisions of this story there are two ancient versions, both originating at Cologne. One of these (Fuit tempore pervetusto) dates from the second half of the ninth century (969-76), and was only rarely copied during the Middle Ages. The other (Regnante Domino), also compiled in the ninth century, had a wide circulation, but adds little of importance to the first. The author of the latter, probably in order to win more credence for his account, claims to have received it from one who in turn heard it from the lips of St. Dunstan of Canterbury, but the serious anachronisms which he commits in saying this place it under suspicion. This legendary account is well known: Ursula, the daughter of a Christian king of Great Britain, was asked in marriage by the son of a great pagan king. Desiring to remain a virgin, she obtained a delay of three years. At her request she was given as companions ten young women of noble birth, and she and each of the ten were accompanied by a thousand virgins, and the whole company, embarking in eleven ships sailed for three years. When the appointed time was come, and Ursula's betrothed was about to claim her, a gale of wind carried the eleven thousand virgins far from the shores of England, and they went first by water to Cologne and thence to Basle, then by land from Basle to Rome. They finally returned to Cologne, where they were slain by the Huns in hatred of the Faith.

The literary origin of this romance is not easy to determine. Apart from the inscription of Clematius, transcribed in the Passion "Fuit tempore" and paraphrased in the "Regnante Domino" Passion and the "Sermo in natali", the writers seem to have been aware of a Gallic legend of which a late version is found in Geoffrey of Monmouth: the usurper Maximus (as Geoffrey calls the Emperor Maximian), having conquered British Armorica, sent there from Great Britain 100,000 colonists and 30,000 soldiers, and committed the government of Armorica to his former enemy, now his friend, the Breton prince, Conanus Meriadocus. The latter decided to bring women from Great Britain to marry them to his subjects, to which end he appealed to Dionotus, King of Cornwall, who sent him his daughter Ursula, accompanied by 11,000 noble virgins and 60,000 other young women. As the fleet which carried them sailed towards Armorica, a violent storm destroyed some of the ships and drove the rest of them to barbarian islands in Germany, where the virgins were slain by the Huns and the Picts. The improbabilities, inconsistencies, and anachronisms of Geoffrey's account are obvious, and have often been dealt with in detail: moreover the story of Ursula and her companions is clothed with a less ideal character than in the Passions of Cologne. However, this account has been regarded by several writers since Baronius as containing a summary of the true history of the holy martyrs. Like the Passions of Cologne, it has been subjected to the anti-scientific method, which consists in setting aside as false the improbabilities, impossibilities, and manifest fables, and regarding the rest as authentic history. As a consequence two essential traits remain: the English origin of the saints and their massacre by the Huns; and then, according as adherence is given to the "Sermo in natali", Geoffrey of Monmouth, or the Passion "Regnante Domino", the martyrdom of St. Ursula is placed in the third, fourth, or fifth century. In order to account for all the details, two massacres of virgins at Cologne have been accepted, one in the third century, the other in the fifth. The different solutions with their variations suggested by scholars, sometimes with levity, sometimes with considerable learning, all share the important defect of being based on relatively late documents, unauthoritative and disfigured by manifest fables.

No conclusion can be drawn from these texts. Nevertheless, the fables they contain are insignificant in comparison with those which were invented and propagated later. As they are now unhesitatingly rejected by everyone, it suffices to treat them briefly. In the twelfth century there were discovered in the Ager Ursulanus at Cologne, some distance from the Church of St. Ursula, skeletons not only of women, but of little children, and even of men, and with them inscriptions which it is impossible not to recognize as gross forgeries. All this gave rise to a number of fantastic legends, which are contained in the accounts of the vision of St. Elizabeth of Schonau, and of a religious who has been regarded as identical with Blessed Hermann Joseph of Steinfeld. It may be remarked in passing that visions have played an important part in the question of the Eleven Thousand Virgins, as may be seen in those of Clematius and of the nun Helintrude contained in the Passion "Regnante Domino". Those of the twelfth century, in combination with the inscriptions of the Ager Ursulanus, resulted in furnishing the names of a great many of the male and female companions of Ursula, in particular -- and this will suffice to give an idea of the rest -- that of a Pope Cyriacus, a native of Great Britain, said to have received the virgins at the time of their pilgrimage to Rome, to have abdicated the papal chair in order to follow them, and to have been martyred with them at Cologne. No doubt it was readily acknowledged that this Pope Cyriacus was unknown in the pontifical records, but this, it was said, was because the cardinals, displeased with his abdication, erased his name from all the books. Although the history of these saints of Cologne is obscure and very short, their cult was very widespread, and it would require a volume to relate in detail its many and remarkable manifestations. To mention only two characteristics, since the twelfth century a large number of relics have been sent from Cologne, not only to neighbouring countries but throughout Western Christendom, and even India and China. The legend of the Eleven Thousand Virgins has inspired a host of works of art, several of them of the highest merit, the most famous being the paintings of the old masters of Cologne, those of Memling at Bruges, and of Carpaccio at Venice.

The Order of Ursulines, founded in 1535 by St. Angela de Merici, and especially devoted to the education of young girls, has also helped to spread throughout the world the name and the cult of St. Ursula.

For the inscription of Clematius, often published and commentated see KRAUS, Die Christliche Inshriften der Rheinlande, I (1890), 143-47. The Latin accounts of the Eleven Thousand Virgins, with mention of all editions, have been catalogued by the Bollandists in Bibliotheca hagiographica latina, no. 8426-51. See also KROMBACH, S. Ursula vindicata (Cologne, 1847), a large but uncritical compilation; RETTBERG, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, I (1846), III, 23; SCHADE, Die Sage von der heiligen Ursula (Hanover, 1854), an essay in which the exegesis is unfortunately mythological; DE BUCK in Acta SS., Oct. III, 73-303; FRIEDRICH, Kirchengeshichte Deutschlands, I (1867), 141-66; KLINKENBERG in Jahrb=81cher des Vereins von Alterthumsfreunden im Rheinland, LXXXVIII (1889), 79- 95; LXXXIX (1890), 105-34; XCIII (1892), 130-79; D=9ANTZER, ibidem (1890), 150-63; DELPY, Die Legende von der heiligen Ursula in der K=94lner Malerschule (Cologne, 1901); TOUT, Legend of St. Ursula in Historical Essays, by members of Owens College, Manchester (London, 1902), 17-56; MAIN, L'inscription de Clematius in M=82langes Paul Fabre (Paris, 1902), 51-64; HAUCK, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, I (1887), 24-25 (3rd-4th ed., 1904), 25; REISE, Die Inschrift des Clematius in Bonner Jahrb=81cher, CXVIII (1909), 236-45; ZILLIKEN, ibid., CXIX (1910) 108-09; cf. Analecta bollandiana, X, 476; XVI, 97-99; XXII, 109-11; XXIII, 351-55; XXX, 339; 362-63.

ALBERT PONCELET

Society of the Sisters of St. Ursula of the Blessed Virgin

Religious congregation of women founded in 1606 at Döle (then a Spanish possession), France, by the Venerable Anne de Xainctonge (1587-1612). Its aim is twofold: the sanctification of its members by the observance of the vows of religion (simple and perpetual), and the salvation and sanctification of their neighbours. The latter is specially attained by teaching, as well as by works of mercy, spiritual and corporal. At a time when the education of girls was more than neglected, Mademoiselle de Xainctonge, amid extraordinary trials, realized her inspired thought to do for girls what St. Ignatius had done for boys. This idea was then an unusual one. Anne de Xainctonge may be called a pioneer in the education of girls. The classes opened at Döle, on 16 June, 1606, were public, without distinction of rich or poor, and absolutely free. From Dôle, the institute spread rapidly to France, Switzerland, and Germany. With the Church it suffered persecution, but on being driven from one country, the Ursules found children and freedom of teaching in another. During the French Revolution, their houses were closed and the religious compelled to return to the world; as soon as peace was restored, however, they resumed their former life. Mother de Verse reopened the convent at Dôle, and Mother Roland de Bussy (formerly of Dôle) upon the advice of Father de Clorivière, S.J., and with the blessing of Pius VII (then a prisoner at Fontainebleau), founded a new house at Tours (1814). A number of new foundations were made from Tours, until, through the anti-religious laws of 1901, the nuns were expelled and their property confiscated. The mother house of Tours was transferred to Haverloolez-Bruges (Belgium). Foundations were successively made: in New York, 1901, (branch house, Providence, Rhode Island, 1911); Rome, 1904; Sluis (Holland), 1911. Besides in Belgium, Italy, and the United States of North America, the sisters are now carrying on their work in Switzerland, Germany, and England.

The society was formally approved by a Brief of Innocent X (1648), which was confirmed by Innocent XI (1678). The Constitutions are those of St. Ignatius as far as they apply to women; the first draft was begun by Mother de Xainctonge aided by Father Guyon, S.J., rector of the college at Dôle, but was finished only in 1623, after her death. These Constitutions were observed until the Revolution, but when the various houses re-opened, the bishops of the different dioceses modified them according to their own views. In 1898, upon request of the religious of Tours, the original Constitutions, revised conformably to the new regulations of the Church for religious orders, were definitively approved by Leo XIII, and their branch erected as a generalate. In 1902 the words "Of the Blessed Virgin", were added to the title to distinguish the non-cloistered daughters of Anne de Xainctonge from the cloistered daughters of St. Angela.

The system of teaching employed by the order is similar to that of the Jesuits; the plan of studies conforms to the requirements of the Board of Education in each country.

MOTHER HELENE MARIE

The Ursulines

A religious order founded by St. Angela de Merici for the sole purpose of educating young girls. It was the first teaching order of women established in the Church, and up to the present date has adhered strictly to the work of its institute. Though convinced of her divinely appointed mission to lay the foundations of an educational order, Angela for seventeen years could do no more than direct a number of young women who were known as "The Company of St. Ursula" but who continued to live in the midst of their own families, meeting at stated times for conferences and devotional exercises. The many difficulties that hindered the formation of the new institute gave way at last, and in 1535, twelve members were gathered together in a community with episcopal approbation, and with St. Angela de Merici as superioress. The movement was taken up with great enthusiasm and spread rapidly throughout Italy, Germany and France. Within a few years the company numbered many houses, each independent. Constitutions suited to the special work of the institute were developed and completed shortly before the death of the foundress in 1540. In 1544 the first approbation was received from Paul III, and the Rule of St. Augustine adopted. Many important details were left unsettled at this time, and, as a result, several congregations developed, all calling themselves Ursulines but differing widely in dress and customs. The largest and most influential of these were the Congregation of Paris and the Congregation of Bordeaux. In 1572 St. Charles Borromeo, Cardinal Archbishop of Milan, obtained for the new congregation the status of a monastic order with enclosure. In some of the older European convents, in Canada and Cuba, strict enclosure is still observed; in other sections, though nowhere entirely abolished, the enclosure has been modified to meet local conditions. A Bull of final approbation was given in 1618 by Paul V.

In the early part of the seventeenth century an appeal was made from Canada for bands of religious women to undertake the arduous task of training the Indian girls to Christian habits of life. It met with an instant and generous response. In 1639 Madame de la Peltrie, a French widow of comfortable means, offered herself and all that she had to found a mission in Canada. In May of that year she sailed from Dieppe accompanied by three Ursulines and three hospital sisters. At Quebec the latter founded a Hôtel-Dieu, the former, the first Ursuline convent on the western continent. The superioress of the new foundation was mother Marie de l'Incarnation Guyard, whose heroic virtues won from the Holy See the title of venerable in the year 1877, and the process of whose canonization is about to be presented. The earliest establishment of the Ursulines in the United States also owes its origin to French initiative. in 1727 Mother Marie Tranchepain, with then companions, embarked from L Orient to found their convent at New Orleans. After years of struggle a firm foothold was secured, and the Ursulines still flourish in the city of their original foundation. A notable feature of Ursuline labours in the United States may be found in the history of the Rocky Mountain Missions where for years they have laboured for the Indians, and have established ten flourishing centres. From these western foundations have sprung two branches in Alaska. In accordance with the wish of Leo XIII, a congress of Ursulines from all parts of the world convened at Rome during the fall of the year 1900. Representatives were sent from the United States, South America, Java, and all parts of Europe. Under the auspices of the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars, the Roman Union of Ursulines was then formed, with the most reverend Mother Mary of St. Julien as the first mother-general. Cardinal Satolli was appointed the first cardinal protector. To this union belong over a hundred communities; aggregations are made from year to year. The united communities are divided into eight provinces as follows: Italy; Austro-Hungary; Hungary; the East of France; the West of France; Holland-Belgium-England-German; the North of the United States; the South of the United States; Spain and Portugal. Many large and important communities still retain their independent organization. Of late years the Ursulines have suffered severely in France and Portugal. The members of the expelled communities have become affiliated to other foundations both in Europe and the United States.

The habit of the order is of black serge, falling in folds, with wide sleeves. On ceremonial occasions a long train is worn. The veil of the professed religious is black, of the novice white. The guimpe and bandeau are of plain white linen. the cincture of black leather. There are two grades in each community; the choir religious, so called from their obligation to recite the office daily in choir; and the lay sisters. The former are occupied in teaching, the latter in domestic duties. Candidates for either grade pass six months probation as postulants in the community in which they desire to become stabilitated. This period is followed by two years of preparation in a central novitiate, at the expiration of which the three vows of religion are pronounced temporarily, for a term of three years. At the end of the third year the profession is made perpetual. In some Ursuline communities solemn vows are taken, and there papal enclosure is in force. The vows of the Ursulines in the United States, though perpetual, are simple. From their earliest foundations the Ursulines have been thorough and progressive teachers. Their system might be termed eclectic, utilizing the effective points of all methods. The European houses are fore the most part boarding schools; in the United States, combinations of boarding and day-schools. The nuns also conduct many parochial schools, which, like the others, comprise all grades: elementary, academic and college courses. The first Catholic college for women in New York State was founded by the Ursulines at New Rochelle [New York] in 1904. The Ursulines in several other parts of the United States have followed the precedent, and are labouring practically to further the higher education of women. The German Ursulines, who were expelled through the influence of the Kulturkampf and re-admitted after an exile of ten years, are permitted to resume their teaching, but for pupils of high-school grade only. In Europe and America alike the Ursulines make it a point to secure State approval, and avail themselves of every advantage offered by the public institutions.

URSULINES OF QUEBEC, Glimpses Of the Monastery (1897); O'REILLY, Life Of St. Angela (1880); Circular Letters of the Mother-General (1904-11); HUBERT, Die heilige Angela Merici (Mainz, 1891).

MOTHER MARY FIDELIS

The Ursulines of Quebec

The Ursuline monastery of Quebec is the oldest institution of learning for women in North America. Its history begins on 1 August, 1639, when its first members landed in Canada, thirty-one years after Champlain had founded Quebec (1608) and only four after his death. The monastery was established by Marie Huyard de l'Incarnation, declared Venerable by the Holy See (1874), and Madame de la Peltrie, a rich widow of Alen on in Normandy. The former, after ten years of widowhood, had joined the Ursulines at Tours. Her first biographer was her son, Dom Claude Martin, a Benedictine, who died in the odour of sanctity, in 1696. His "Life of the Venerable Mother of the Incarnation" was approved (1677), by the venerable Bishop Laval. Bossuet (Etats d'oraison, IX) calls Marie de l'Incarnation "the Theresa of her time and of the New World." The letters royal sanctioning the foundation and signed by Louis XIII are dated 1639. After three years spent in the Lower Town, near Champlain's Habitation, the nuns entered (1642) the convent built on the ground they still occupy, conceded to them (1639) by the Company of New France. Their first pupils were Indians, with whom they succeeded better than the Jesuits with their native boys. Marie de l'Incarnation mastered the difficult Indian languages thoroughly, composed dictionaries in Algonquin and Iroquois, also a sacred history in the former, and a catechism in the latter idiom. The first monastery was burned in 1650, but was soon rebuilt. The Constitutions, written by Father Jérôme Lalemant, uncle of the Jesuit martyr, Gabriel Lalemant, combined the rules of the two Congregations of Paris and Bordeaux, and were observed until Bishop Laval decided (1681) in favor of the former, which binds its members by a fourth vow to teach girls.

The monastery shared at all times the country's fate. It was threatened by the Iroquois in 1661-2, when one of its chaplains, the Sulpician Vignal, was slain and devoured near Montreal by those savages. It underwent the siege and bombardment of Quebec by Phips (1690) and by Wolfe (1759). After the fateful battle of 13 Sept., 1759, the French hero, Montcalm, was buried by night in the convent chapel. The first English governor, Murray, used part of the monastery as his headquarters. On that occasion the rations served to the nuns for nursing the wounded and sick saved them from perishing of starvation. The governors and viceroys, both English and French, were always friendly to the institution.

The foundress, who died in 1672, one year after Madame de la Peltrie, practised devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and had established it in the cloister years before the revelation to the blessed Margaret Mary. The first celebration of the feast in the New World took place in the monastery 18 June, 1700 (Mandement of Bishop de St-Vallier, 30 March, 1700. The register of the Confraternity of the Sacred Heart begins in 1716. Clement XI (1718) enriched it with indulgences. The first superior elected (1760) after the conquest was Esther Wheelwright, a New England captive, rescued from the Abenakis by the Jesuit Bigot, and a protégée of the first governor, Vaudreuil. Besides the French, the Irish, Scotch and American elements in Canada have given distinguished subjects to this cloister, prominent among whom was mother Cecilia O'Conway of the Incarnation, the first Philadelphia nun, one of Mother Seton's earliest associates. The list of alumnae is not less remarkable. Conspicuous among its pupils were Jeanne Le Ber, the saintly "recluse of Montreal", and Venerable Mother D'Youville, foundress of the Grey Sisters at Montreal. The Quebec monastery founded convents at Three Rivers (1697), Roberval (1882), Stanstead (1884), and Rimouski, with normal school (1906), besides sending missionaries to New Orleans (1822), Charlestown (Boston) (1824), Galveston (1849), and Montana (1893). During the Revolution several French refugees were chaplains to the monastery, the most notable being Abbé L.-P. Desjardins, who died in France, Vicar-General of Paris. Through him were procured the valuable paintings by Philippe de Champaigne, Lebrun, Collin de Vermont, Peter of Cortona, and others, that adorn the chapel.

Glimpses Of The Monastery (Quebec, 1897); CHAPOT, Histoire de la V n. Marie de l'Incarnation (Paris,1892); Les Ursulines de Qu bec (Quebec, 1863); RICHAUDEAU, Lettres de la Vén. Marie de l'Incarnation (Tournai, 1876); CASGRAIN, Histroire de la Vén. M. del Incarnation (Quebec, 1864); La Vén. Marie de l'Incarnation (Paris, 1910).

LIONEL LINDSAY

St. Ursus

Patron of the principal church of Solothurn (Soleure) in Switzerland, honoured from very early times, as a martyr of the Theban Legion, and recorded in the Roman Martyrology, with St. Victor, on 30 September. Relics of him are shown in many churches of Switzerland, and since the twelfth century the baptismal name Ursus is very common in the neighbourhood of Solothurn. The legend, by St. Eucher of Lyons (Acta SS., Sept. VIII, 461), classed by Delehaye ("Legends of the Saints," New York, 1907, p. 120) among the historical romances, says that Ursus, after many cruel torments suffered for his constancy in refusing to sacrifice to the idols, was beheaded c. 286 under the Emperor Maximian Herculeus and the Governor Hyrtacus. Between the years 473 and 500 the body of St. Victor was brought to Geneva by the Burgundian Queen Theudesinde; it is probably that about the same time a church was built over the remains of St. Ursus. In 1519 the old coffin was found and the event was commemorated at Solothurn and Bern. The Roman urn containing the relics bears the inscription:

Conditus hoc sanctus
Tumulo Thebaidus Ursus.

(Buried in this tomb is the holy Ursus the Theban.)

FRANCIS MERSHMAN

Urubamba

(MISIONES DE SANTO DOMINGO DE URUBAMBA Y MADRE DE DIOS)

This prefecture apostolic was created by a Decree of the Holy See in 1899 at the request of the Peruvian Government. On 10 April, 1902, three Dominican Fathers of the Spanish province took charge of the missions, their number being gradually increased to eleven, which is the number at present working there, ten Spaniards, and one Peruvian. Still more recruits for this work are expected, the vastness of the territories and the class of people to be civilized and evangelized requiring a still greater number for the work. All these missionaries are under the jurisdiction of the prefect Apostolic, the Rev. Fray Ramon Zubieta, to whose efforts so much of the progress in civilization, as well as the religious and geographical survey of the Montana region in the eastern part of Peru, is due. The territorial limits of these missions cannot be determined with certainty, but they are about one-eighth of the entire area of Peru. They are bounded on the north by Brazil and Bolivia; on the south by Puno and Cuzco; on the east by the Department of the Ucayabi and Cuzco; on the west by Bolivia. The inhabitants are for the most part savages, numbering about 60,000. The remaining are whites or mestizos who devote themselves to the exploitation of the india rubber industry and commercial pursuits. Some of these have preserved some vestiges of the Catholic Faith, but for the greater part they live in a state of complete indifference. The savages have no religion whatsoever, preserving only a vague sort of superstition concerning a supreme being and a spirit of evil.

These missions, after passing through many vicissitudes and surmounting great difficulties, have been able to establish six stations: in Cuzco, Challabamba, San Jacinto, Sto Domingo, San Vicente, and San Luis. Of these the four last mentioned besides their chapels have free schools, the only ones among the savages. In 1911, 360 baptisms, 241 confirmations, and 22 marriages were registered. The greatest good, however, that the missionary exercises in these regions is to uplift and maintain a moral level among these people, who without him would fall into the most hopeless demoralization. He is the sole representative of right, of humanity, and of religion.

VICTORINO OSENDE

Uruguay

(REPUBLICA ORIENTAL DEL URUGUAY).

The smallest independent state in South America, extending from latitude 30° to 35 degrees S. and from longitude 53° to 58° 30' W., lies south of the Province of Río Grande do Sul, Brazil, and east of the Río Uruguay, hence its local name, Banda Oriental, given in the old Spanish days. Its boundaries are; west, the Río Uruguay; south the Río Uruguay, south the Río de la Plata, which separate it from the Argentine Republic for a distance of 425 miles, south also and east, the Atlantic ocean for 200 miles, and Lago Mirim, a lagoon dividing Uruguay from the southeast of Brazil. The northern boundary, 450 miles in extent, was definitively settled by treaty with Brazil on 15 May, 1852, as the Río Quarim, the Cuchilla de Santa Ana to the Río San Luis, thence to the Río Jaguarão, and the western shore of Lago Mirim. Uruguay's greatest length is about 350 and breadth 300 miles, and its area 72,170 square miles, approximately six times the size of Belgium, or double the size of the State of Indiana, U.S.A. The capital, Montevideo (properly San Felipe y Santiago de Montevideo) is situated in latitude 34 degrees 54' S. and longitude 58° 32' W.

Natural Features

The northern portion of the republic is hilly, the ranges being continuations of the Brazilian mountains; though the hills are termed cuchillas (knives), the summits are not sharp, but gently rounded. The chief groups are the Cuchilla de Santa Ana, 80 miles long and 1600 feet high on the border of Brazil, the Cuchilla Grande, 210 miles long and 1500 feet high, running south- east across the country, and the Cuchilla de Haedo in the northwest, 275 miles long. The culminating point is Acequa in the Cuchilla Grande near the Brazil frontier, with an elevation of 2040 feet. The country lying along the Atlantic is low, dismal, swampy, and sandy, and contains many lagoons. The west and south is composed of beautiful fertile plains, not quite level like the argentine pampas lying west of the Río Uruguay, but undulating gently. This region is intersected by numerous arroyos, or small streams, rendering it suited for agricultural and pastoral pursuits, while vegetation is very thick in the neighbourhood of the rivers. The most important rivers rise in Brazil and are the Río Uruguay, 1000 miles long, and its tributary the Río Negro, which flows south-west for 350 miles, almost bisecting the country. There are a few islands in the Río de la Plata belonging to Uruguay, one of which, Flores, serves as a quarantine station for Montevideo; Lobos, lying to the south-east of Uruguay, in the Atlantic off Maldonado, is a centre of the sealing industry. There are no good natural harbours in Uruguay, but the port of Montevideo has been deepened so as to admit ships drawing 24 feet of water; the Government is developing the port of La Paloma. The climate is very healthy, epidemics being almost unknown; the northern regions are subject to extremes of heat and cold, but in the south the temperature is moderate, varying ordinarily between a maximum of 86 degrees and a minimum of 35° F. Very severe sudden storms known as pamperos blow frequently from the south-west. The mean annual rainfall is 43 inches.

Though the river banks are well wooded, there are no extensive forests in Uruguay. Excellent timber for cabinet work is found in the west; the most noteworthy native trees are the algarobo, the quebracho, and the nandubay, which is much used for fuel, and has a facility for petrifying. Palms are found in the valleys of the Sierra José Ignacio and in Maldonado, Minas, and Paysandu. Aromatic shrubs are plentiful and over 400 species of medicinal plants are found. Many European trees have been introduced—acacia, alder, aloe, mulberry, oak, and willow, but the eucalyptus and poplar thrive best. The chief wild animals are the deer; fox, tapir, ounce, puma, and wild cat; rattlesnakes are found occasionally especially in Minas; poisonous spiders are common. The American ostrich-rhea is still plentiful, as are parakeets, partridges, quails, and water-birds. Seals breed on the Lobos and Castillos islands in the Atlantic; the sealing industry is very strictly preserved by the Government, but during the season the killing is carried out without judgment, and the industry is in danger of perishing. The mineral wealth of Uruguay is as yet unknown; silver, copper, and iron ores have been found; gold is mined to a small extent at Cunapiru; coal has been discovered in Santa Lucia, Cerro Largo, and Montevideo but has not been worked; crystals, gems, and diamonds also occur.

Religion

By articles 130 and 132 of the Constitution religious freedom is granted to everyone, but article 5 provides that Catholicism is the state religion. There is a small government grant in favour of religion; the civil power is unsympathetic when not actively hostile to the activities of the Church. Almost the entire population is at least nominally Catholic, there being only about 6000 Protestants, chiefly Swiss German Evangelicals, Waldensians, and Anglicans. At present the entire republic forms one ecclesiastical unit—the Archdiocese of Montevideo. In 1878 Montevideo was created a diocese, Mgr. Vera being appointed bishop; in 1897 it was made an archdiocese, and two suffragan sees Melo (q.v.) and Salta (q.v.) were erected, but owing to political troubles no appointments to them have yet been made. There are, however, two auxiliary bishops at Montevideo, Mgr. Ricardo Isasa (b. in the capital, 7 Feb., 1847; appointed 15 Feb., 1891) and Mgr. Pio Cajentano Stella (b. at Paso del Molino, 7 Aug., 1857; appointed 22 Dec., 1893). The former has been administering the diocese since 26 Sept., 1908, when the first archbishop, Mgr. Mariano Soler, died. Mgr. Soler was born at San Carlos, Maldonado, 25 March, 1846, studied at Santa Fe and Rome. On his return he established a paper "El Bueno", and a Catholic club at Montevideo. He was elected to the House of Representatives, was made bishop, 29 Jan., 1891, and archbishop, 19 April, 1897. He was six times a pilgrim to the Holy Land, where he founded a celebrated convent and sanctuary, "Hortus Conclusus", a little south of Bethlehem. He was an able writer, and published among other works in Spanish an account of his travels, the "Ruins of Palmyra", "A Voyage in the Land of the Bible", and social writings such as "The New Spirit", "The Social Question". He went to Rome for the jubilee of Pius X, but fell ill in Italy and died off Gibraltar on his return journey. His obsequies took place at Montevideo in presence of the president and the cabinet. The diocesan seminary at Montevideo is entrusted by the archbishop to the Jesuits; the most noteworthy churches in the capital are the Cathedral of Saints Philip and James, with its towers 133 feet high, in the Plaza Constitucion; it is in the Renaissance style and was built in 1803-4, becoming the cathedral in 1878; it was renovated in 1905; also the churches of the Capuchins (Renaissance), Redemptorists (Romanesque), and Jesuits (Renaissance). There are many communities of nuns: Perpetual Adoration, Dominican, Good Shepherd, Mercy, and Charity, most of them with schools or charitable institutes. The Sisters of Charity have care of the great Hospital de Caridad, founded in 1788 by Francisco Antonio Maciel. It has 600 beds and is supported by a government lottery. There are a foundling hospital, a beggars asylum, and over 40 charitable associations in the metropolis. Concerning marriage it may be noted that a law of 1885 makes civil marriage obligatory; this may account practically for the high rate of illegitimacy mentioned below; divorce; however is not recognized for any cause. At Montevideo on 5-8 November, 1911, the Fourth National Catholic Congress was held under the presidency of Mgr. Isasa. There were present 360 delegates representing over 500 parishes, associations etc. The Unión Católica, founded in 1889, was dissolved to form three new unions-Social, Economic, and Civic—each with a directive committee of five members; a central committee consisting of the three presidents and two members elected by each of the unions was appointed. The Congress received a special blessing from Pius X.

History

Uruguay was discovered in 1512 by Juan Diaz de Solis, Piloto mayor of the Kingdom of Castille, who on a second visit in 1516 landing in Colonia at Martin Chico, was slain by the Charruas. It was visited by Magalhães in 1519-20, and by Sebastian Cabot in 1526-7. At the time of its discovery Uruguay was inhabited by about 4000 Indians, the Charruas who dwelt on the north shore of the Río de la Plata as far as the Río San Salvador, the Yaros, Bohanes, Arachanes, Guenoas, and Chanas. The last named were converted by the Franciscan pioneers, but the others proved more intractable. The Charruas were very dark in colour, thick-lipped, small-eyed, and very warlike, but were not cannibals as has been asserted. They made constant war on the other Indians, and were a source of terror to the Spaniards, whom they prevented for over a century from establishing colonies. Early in the seventeenth century the Jesuits began to convert and civilize the Indians (for the wonderful results of their labours see REDUCTIONS OF PARAGUAY). After the expulsion of the Jesuits (1767), the Indians, deprived of their teachers and protectors, rapidly dwindled, through the violence of the whites, and finally General Rivera, first President of Uruguay, slaughtered all the Charruas in 1832. The first permanent settlement in Uruguay was made by the Spaniards who followed the Jesuits to Santo Domingo de Soriano on the Río Negro in 1624. Colonia (del Sacramento) was founded by the Portuguese in 1680; for nearly a century Portugal, relying on the Treaty of Tordesillas (7 June, 1494), disputed with Spain for possession of Uruguay, but finally recognized the Spanish claims by the Treaty of San Ildefonso (1 Oct., 1777). Montevideo was established in 1726 by Mauricio Zabala, Governor of Buenos Aires, to thwart the efforts of the Brazilian traders. It was captured by the British on 23 Jan., 1807, but was soon evacuated, on Whitelocke's defeat before Buenos Aires. On the declaration of independence by the Argentine, 23 May, 1810, Uruguay became part of the united provinces of Río de la Plata. In 1811 the Spaniards were routed by José Gervasio de Artigas, but held Montevideo, till their fleet was destroyed by Almirante Brown, in May, 1814, while General Alvear attacked the city by land. In 1816 the Portuguese attacked Uruguay but were driven off. In 1821, however, Brazil, having become independent, annexed Uruguay as the Provincia Cisplatina. In 1825 thirty-three exiles at Buenos Aires—the Treinta y Tres—returned to Florida under Lavalleja, raised the standard of revolt, and with the assistance of the Argentine defeated the Brazilians, Brown destroying the latter's fleet in February, 1827, while their land forces were overthrown at Ituzaingo. Uruguay's independence was soon recognized by both the Argentine and Brazil in the Treaty of Montevideo, 27 August, 1828.

In November, 1828, José Rondeau was appointed provisional governor at San José. The Constitution was promulgated on 18 July, 1830. General Fructuoso Rivera was elected first president on 25 October, 1830, and inaugurated twelve days later. Unfortunately the rival political leaders soon plunged the country in bloodshed. The history of Uruguay for the next seventy years was a series of revolutions and civil wars, one of which lasted practically from 1835 to 1851, when Manuel Oribe, the chief of the Blancos, rebelled with the assistance of the tyrant Rosas of Buenos Aires, and subjected Montevideo to what is known as the "nine year siege". From 1864 till 1870 president Flores, aided by the Argentine and Brazil made war on Paraguay. The country was eventually brought to the verge of ruin and bankruptcy, but President Cuesta (1897-1902) succeeded in placing it on a firmer financial basis. On 1 March, 1911, José Batlle y Ordóñez, who had already been president (1903- 1907), was again placed in power. He is agitating for the adoption of a new constitution like that of Switzerland. The two chief political parties in Uruguay for years have been the Colorados (Red) and Blancos (Whites), so called form the emblems worn by the adverse parties in the struggles caused by Oribe. The former, who represent the landed proprietors more than the peasant class, have generally been in power; there is practically no difference in the policies of the two parties, the struggle being merely for the emoluments derived from being in office.

Government and Justice

The republican Constitution of Uruguay sworn to on 18 July, 1830, is still unchanged. The Legislature consists of a Senate and a House of Representatives, meeting from 15 February to 15 July yearly. In the interim two senators and five representatives act with the presidents, a permanent administrative committee. Senators must be over 32 years of age and possess property worth $10,000 or its equivalent. There are 19 in number, one for each department, and are chosen by an electoral college elected by popular vote. They hold office for six years, one-third of their number retiring every second year. The vice- president of the republic is ex-officio chairman of the Senate. The representatives, one for every 3000 adult literate males, are elected for 3 years. They now number 75. The president, who is chosen by the Senate and Representatives, receives an annual salary of $35,000 and may not be elected for successive terms. The departments are administered by governors appointed by the Executive, and by a locally elected council. Slavery was abolished in Uruguay in December, 1843. There is a Supreme Court of five judges, appointed by the chambers; its president is elected annually by its members from their own number. There are two inferior courts of appeal, with three judges each. Montevideo has eleven local courts of first instance. Each department has a departmental court, and there are smaller judicial sections (205) with justices of the peace and alcaldes. Uruguayan laws are based on the Code Napoléon. The death penalty was abolished in 1907, penal servitude for a maximum of 40 years being substituted. In 1908 an extradition treaty with the United States became law. Provision is being made of a pension system, and laws regulating child and female labour.

Population and Education

On 31 December, 1909, Uruguay had 1,094,688 inhabitants, or 15.1 persons per square mile, of whom 291,465 resided at Montevideo, the most thickly populated departments after Montevideo being Canelones, Colonia, and Maldonado. Over 25 per cent of the population is foreign, principally Italian (73,000), Spanish (58,000), and Brazilian (28,000). For the years 1906-10 the annual number of immigrants averaged 144,897, and emigrants 127,161. In 1910 there were 6818 marriages; 16,515 deaths; 35,927 living births (25.9 per cent illegitimate), and 1317 still-birth the figures in 1900 being respectively 4549; 13,882; 31,593; and 1004. The Uruguayans from a physical point of view are the finest South American people. Among the country-folk there are some (Chinos) who give clear evidence of Indian blood. The Gauchos or farm hands seem to have some Charruan blood, which may account for their indifference to animal and even human suffering; they are restless and willingly join in any uprising, forming as a rule the main body of the revolutionary forces that have almost ruined the country. Uruguayan education is in a very backward state, though primary education is nominally obligatory. In 1907-8 there were 671 public free primary and 289 private schools, with only 78,727 children on the rolls, though there were 227,770 children of school age. In 1910 the public schools numbered 788, and the children enrolled 117,000. Teachers averaged 2 per public and 3 per private school. In 1908 the number of illiterates over 6 years of age was 350,547 (of whom 84,502 were foreigners). Montevideo has two normal schools, a state technical school with 185 free students; a university with faculties of law, medicine, mathematics, sociology, agriculture, veterinary sciences, and commerce. In 1905 the university had 112 professors; 530 undergraduates, and 661 students receiving a secondary education. The National Library contains over 47,500 volumes, and 9700 MSS. A pedagogic museum and library with 7000 volumes was founded in 1888 at Montevideo. Religious instruction is given in the public schools.

Commerce and Finance

Uruguay has over 5500 miles of good roads; 1472 miles of railroad in 3 systems running from the capital; 170 of tramway, the system at Montevideo being electric; 319 telegraph and 1018 post offices; there are 2 telephone companies, and 2 wireless stations. The traction systems are almost entirely in British hands. The chief ports are La Paloma and Maldonado on the Atlantic; Montevideo and Colonia on the Plata; Mercedes on the Río Negro; and Paysandú, Fray Bentos and Salto on the Uruguay. In 1910 over 16,964,000 tons of shipping entered and cleared Montevideo. Vessels of light draught can ascend the Río Negro for 55 miles, and the Río Uruguay for over 200. Imports in 1911 amounted to 9,756,000-chiefly cottons, wollens, coal, and iron; exports amounted to 9,476,000-chiefly tallow, and wool, as against 5,041,000 and 5,901,000 respectively in 1901. The public debt in 1910 was $135,805,784. The Bank of the Republic, whose directors are nominated by the Government, can alone issue notes; on 1 Jan., 1911, it had notes to the value of $18,076,842 in circulation. In 1912 the Government created a national insurance bank with a monopoly of accident, fire, labour, and life insurance; the fixing of a date for the enforcement of this monopoly is left to the Government's discretion. Only foreign gold is in circulation, the standard silver coin is the peso or dollar ($1.034 in United States currency). In 1897 the use of the metric system was made compulsory. Uruguay's well-watered alluvial soil and undulating plains made it primarily an agricultural and pastoral country. Sheep-farming is carried on especially in Durazno and Soriano, and an excellent variety of wool is exported. The centre of the cattle industry is in Salto, Paysandú, and Río Negro; the beasts, chiefly of English stock, are destined chiefly for the saladero trade, that is sun-dried salted meat or jerked beef, which is exported to Brazil and Cuba. Fray Bentos is the headquarters of large factories for the manufacture of extract of beef. Vineyards were introduced into Salto about 1874, and have spread to Montevideo, Colonia, and Canelones; the production of wine amounting to over 4 million gallons in 1908. Wheat and other cereals, as well as tobacco, are extensively grown, but not yet in sufficient quantity to develop an export trade.

MULHALL, Handbook of the River Plate Republics (London, 1893); AKERS, Hist. of S. America (London, 1904); KOEBEL, Uruguay (London, 1911); Uruguay, publ. by Internat.. Bur. of Amer. Rep. (Washington, 1902 and 1909); Anuario estadistico de la Rep. Oriental del Uruguay (Montevideo, 1909-11); ARAUJO, Nueva hist. del Uruguay (Montevideo, 1909); MAESO, El Uruguay a traves de un siglo (Montevideo, 1910); MULHALL, Between the Amazon and the Andes (London, 1881).

A.A. MACERLEAN

Uruguayana

(URUGUAYANESIS)

Diocese; suffragan of Porto Alegre, Brazil. By a Decree dated 15 August, 1910, the See of Sao Pedro Do Rio Grande was raised to archiepiscopal rank, with the title of Porto Alegre, three new dioceses being separated from its territory. Fifteen parishes were allotted to the Diocese of Uruguayana, which includes the western portion of Rio Grande do Sul, bounded on the south by the Provinces of Artigas and Rivera (Uruguay) and on the west b y the Rio Uruguay. This fertile territory has important stock breeding and dried beef industries. The town of Uruguayana (14,000 inhabitants) is situated on the Rio Uruguay, 360 miles west of Porto Alegre, with which it is connected by rail; it lies opposite the argentine town of Restoratión and has extensive trade by river and rail with Montevideo and Buenos Aires. It was founded in 1843 by order of the revolutionary Government of Rio Grande. On 5 August, 1865, it was taken by the invading Paraguayan army, but on 18 September following, the invaders, numbering 6000 men, had to capitulate to the allied forces of Brazil, Argentina, and Uruguay. the two other chief towns are Allergen (9000 inhabitants) on the left bank of the Rio Ibirapuitan, and Quarry (6500 inhabitants) opposite the town of Santo Eugenia (Uruguay). Numerous flourishing missions were founded by the Jesuits in this territory along the eastern banks of the Rio Uruguay from 1632 to 1707, but the fruits of their labors were lost on the expulsion of the order (see REDUCTIONS OF PARAGUAY). The first bishop of the new see is Mgr. Hermes Joseph Pinheiro, b. at Traipu, in the Diocese of Alagoas, 1871; he studied at Olinda, was ordained in 1901, appointed parish priest at Boa Vista and canon of Olinda, and nominated Bishop of Uruguayana on 12 May, 1911. The cathedral church is dedicated to St. Anne.

GALANTI, Compendio de historia do Brazil (San Paulo, 1896-1905).

A.A. MACERLEAN

Ushaw College

(College of St. Cuthbert)

A combined college and seminary for the six dioceses that were comprised in the old Northern Vicariate of England. The government is vested in a united board of the bishops of these dioceses, with a president, a vice-president, and staff of about 30 professors. The average number of students is over 300, divided into three courses: the preparatory course, including about 80 boys, the humanity course with about 130, and the philosophical and theological with about 100.

History

The suppression of the "Grands Anglais" at Douai the seminary which for 200 years had meant the Catholic Faith to England, was only one of the many far-reaching results that the French Revolution brought in its train. The immediate necessity under which the English Catholics found themselves of providing for the continuation of its work led to a project of establishing one college for the whole of England on English soil. Many difficulties supervened and finally the question arranged itself by the division of the refugee students from Douai into two bodies, one of which found shelter at Old Hall near Ware, while the remainder (mainly composed of students who were destined for the Northern Vicariate), after temporary sojourns at Tudhoe and Pontop, two villages in the vicinity of Durham, settled on 15 Oct., 1794, at Crook Hall, about eleven miles N.W. of that city. There they re-established Douai for the north of England, and it lived its life under the guidance of one of its former professors, Thomas Eyre, of John Lingard, the future historian, and of John Daniel, the actual president of Douai at its suppression, who seems to have been formally installed as president for a few days. Ten years' growth made Crook Hall inadequate for its purpose, and in 1804 Bishop William Gibson began the buildings at Ushaw to which four years later, the colony finally migrated, the first detachment on 19 July, the rest on 2 August, 1808. There they found three sides of a massive quadrangle, with a frontage of about 170 feet and a depth of 220, ready for their habitation. The fourth side of this quadrangle was not added till 1819, under the president who succeeded Eyre in 1811, Dr. John Gillow; but no further material addition was made to the buildings until the fourth president, Charles Newsham, succeeded in 1837. He realized that, if Ushaw was adequately to continue its career, no pains nor expense must be spared to enlarge its capacity and to bring its arrangements into line with more modern requirements. The pioneers of the Gothic revival were at hand to assist him in this, and from the plans of the two Pugins and the two Hansoms the second church with its attendant chapels, the library, infirmary, museum, exhibition hall, lavatories, kitchens, and farm buildings, and a separate establishment for the younger boys, all sprang up around the old Georgian quadrangle.

In much more than a convention sense Monsignor Newsham may be called the founder of modern Ushaw; and the best evidence of how far-seeing were his plans and achievements lies in the fact that for twenty years after his death, in 1863, practically no addition was made to the fabric. In 1883 Monsignor Wrennal found it necessary to build a third church. Under Bishop Wilkinson, who assumed the presidency in 1890, which he held conjointly with the Bishopric of Hexham and Newcastle till his death in 1909, a fresh period of activity began. A covered swimming bath, a gymnasium, two new dormitories, and over forty new living rooms, the enlargement of the exhibition hall, the elaborate decoration of the church with the erection of a new high altar, are all the products of his nineteen years of presidency. Two presidents have held office since his death: Monsignor Joseph Corbishly, who survived him only a year, and Monsignor William Henry Brown, under whom new lecture rooms have been erected to accommodate the largely increased numbers of philosophy and divinity students. Altogether the present blocks of buildings, with their enclosed courts, cover a rectangle 880 feet long by 420 feet broad; the outbuildings, grounds, and campus cover over 100 acres, and the whole estate, with its home and outlying farms, includes between 1200 and 1300 acres.

Many objects of historical and artistic interest are preserved in the college. Lingard bequeathed to it all his books and papers, which included an early MS. and the proof sheets of his "History of England" with about 1500 of his letters; Wiseman is represented by the MSS. of "Fabiola" and the "Hidden Gem", and of many sermons, lectures, and letters, while Eyre gathered for it a valuable collection of documents dealing with the English Catholic history of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and intended for a continuation of Dodd's "Church History". The library, in which these are stored, contains about 45,000 volumes, mainly of theological and historical interest. It is especially rich in early printed liturgical books and in seventeenth-century controversy. Examples of Wynken de Worde's "York Manual", Higden's "Polychronicon", the "Nuremburg Chronicle", the "Ulm Cosmographs", the "Complutensian Polyglot", are found on its shelves, and, perhaps more interesting than all, about forty works that belonged to the pre-Reformation library of Durham Abbey and which still retain the original monastic bindings. The manuscripts include, in addition to the collection already mentioned, a large number of old English missals, psalters, and books of hours, as well as many documents connected with the history of the colleges at Douai, Lisbon, and Valladolid, and with the progress of Catholicism in the north of England. The museum, too, is rich in relics of persecution times, several missals and altar stones and an old wooden crozier that belonged to Bishop Dicconson being among the most remarkable. The church treasury contains several splendid examples of church plate, a chalice assigned to Benvenuto Cellini taking the place of honour. It also preserves a chasuble that tradition connects with Westminster Abbey and another that belonged to Cuthbert Tunstall, the last Catholic Bishop of Durham. The collection of relics is one of the largest extant in private hands, and includes a large relic of the True Cross and a ring that was taken from the body of St. Cuthbert when the tomb at Durham was rifled during the Reformation.

Education

In her system of education Ushaw has clung tenaciously, though progressively, to the traditions she inherited from the "Alma Mater Duacensis" which she was founded to replace. No other college in England has found it possible permanently to retain, throughout the whole of its career, the essential characteristic of the Douai system -- the co-education of clerical and lay students throughout their humanities. the classical element still predominates in the course, and even the old class names, rhetoric, poetry, syntax, grammar, and figures, are still retained. For nearly fifty years after leaving France the Douai authors were read and the Douai time-table observed with scarcely an alteration. Then the second spring began to make its influence felt in education as in all other things Catholic. Catholic colleges were affiliated to London University in 1840, and Catholic scholarship was at last able to find a criterion to test its standing. Ushaw found she had no reason to shrink from the comparison. Her first two candidates for a degree in arts obtained a first class, and their example was so persistently followed that twenty years later the London examinations in arts were made the standard for the course. Roughly speaking, during the thirty-three years from 1863 to 1896, three-fourths of the candidates presented were successful, the exact numbers being 574 and 717. But in the latter year several causes combined to make another standard of comparison desirable, and, in accordance with a general movement among the Catholic colleges, Ushaw substituted the Oxford local and certificate papers for the London examinations. About the same time, availing herself of the privilege newly granted by the Holy See, Ushaw utilized the university training which she found close at hand. The college was affiliated to Durham University in 1900, and during the next ten years 22 students took the degree of arts, 16 obtaining classical honours at the final examination, and 27 scholarships of the aggregate value of over 1000 have been secured. But once more the necessity of spending much time on uncongenial subjects has compelled a change of front and the college has returned to the London University course, which during the interval has been entirely remodelled.

The history of the philosophical and theological courses, which occupy two and four years respectively, follows on very similar lines. The Douai theses and the customs of "dictates" held for the first quarter of the nineteenth century. The value of the course was soon recognized. By a Brief dated Feb., 1813, Pius VII gave Ushaw and old Hall he power of granting degrees in theology, through there is no record of the privileges ever having been exercised. The introduction of more modern methods began with Monsignor Newsham and today the various chairs are held by professors who have received their training at Ushaw and graduated at foreign universities. With very few exceptions professors have always been chosen from former alumni. Generally speaking, the more promising students are selected for special training at the end of their humanities, then, after studying philosophy, they teach the lower schools for three years, with the title of "minor" professors. They then proceed to their divinity, where a further selection is made for specialized study, which is generally taken at some university on the Continent. Long experience has shown the advantage of this system of training professors; another inheritance from the traditions of Douai.

Prominent Alumni

The roll of alumni (1912) includes close on to 5000 names. It embraces over 1000 priests, 30 bishops, 5 archbishops, and 4 cardinals: Wiseman, De la Puente, Bourne, Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster, and the Cardinal Secretary of State, Merry del Val, who was not only a student but also a "minor" professor at Ushaw. prominent names in almost every profession and almost every country can be found there. Law is represented in England by Mr. Justice Shee, the first Catholic post-Reformation judge; by Judge O'Connor, former deputy chairman of committees in the House of Commons; in India by Mr. Justice John Power Wallis, Judge of the High Court of Madras; in Canada by the Hon. James Foy, Attorney-general of Ontario; in the United States by Joseph Scott of Los Angeles, a prominent official of the Knights of Columbus. Statesmanship is represented by the present Under-Secretary for the Home Office, William Patrick Byrne, C. B.; the services by General Montague Gerard, K. C. B., Major Miles O'Reilly; commander of the Irish Brigade at Castelfidardo, and Commodore Edward f. Charlton, Commodore of the Eastern Destroyer Flotilla; art by Charles Napier Hemy, the Royal Academician; architecture by George and Edward Goldie and the youngest Pugin; literature by such names as Lingard the historian, Francis Thompson the poet, Wilfred Ward the present editor of the "Dublin Review", and Joseph Gillow, the compiler of the well-known "Bibliographical Dictionary of the English Catholics".

LAING, Ushaw College, A Centenary Memorial (Newcastle, 1894); BUTLER, Records and Recollections of Ushaw (Durham, 1885); J. Gillow, Haydock Papers (London, 1888); OAKLEY, Introduction to Wiseman, Hidden Gem (London, 1859); WILBERFORCE, Ushaw College in Dublin Review, XLV (1858); BONNEY, Life and Letters of Lingard (London, 1911); WARD, Life and Times of Card. Wiseman (London, 1899); GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Engl. Cath. (London, 1885); Ushaw Magazine, I-XXI (1891), sq. Catholic Who's Who (1911); Catholic Magazine, I, II (1831-2); Cath. Miscellany, III (1824); Catholic University Bulletin (1908).

E. BONNEY

Usilla

A titular see of Byzacena in Africa. Nothing is known of the history of this city; it is mentioned by Ptolemy (IV, 3, 10) and with variations in the spelling of the name by the Peutinger Tables (ii) which call it a municipality, and by other ancient geographical documents, according to which it was thirty-two miles from Thysdrus (today El Djem) and twenty-eight miles from Thaenae (Benshir Tina). The ruins are known as Inshilla, among them being the remains of a Byzantine basilica. We have the names of six bishops of Usilla: Felix, present at the Council of Carthage (256); Cassianus, at the Council of Carthage (349); Theodore, one of the Donatist partisans of Maximianus, who at the Council of Cabarsussi (393) condemned Primianus, and in turn at the Council of Bagai (394) was condemned by the partisans of the latter, as one of the consecrators of Maximianus; Privatus, present at the Conference of Carthage (411); Victorinus, exiled by Huneric (484); Laurentius, a signer of the letter addressed by the Council of Byzacene (641), to the Byzantine emperor against the Monothelites.

SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Georgr., s. v. Usilla; MULLER, Notes on Ptolemy, ed. DIDOT, I, 623; TOULOTTE, Geog. de l' Afrique chretienne, Byzacene et Tripolitaine (Montreuil, 1894), 227-29.

S. PÉTRIDÈS

Martyrology of Usuard

Usuard was a Benedictine monk of the Abbey of St-Germain-des-Prxs, Paris. He seems to have died about the year 875, and the prologue in which he offers to Charles the Bald his most important work, the "Martyrology", which he had undertaken at that monarch's instigation, was apparently written very shortly before the author's death. Usuard was a prominent member of his order and he had been sent on a mission to Spain in 858 to procure certain important relics, of which journey an account is still preserved (see Acta SS., July, VI, 459). The "Martyrologium" which bears his name, a compilation upon which the existing Roman Martyrology depends very closely, remained throughout the Middle Ages the most famous document of its kind, and is preserved to us in innumerable manuscripts, of which Dom Quentin gives a partial list (Martyrologes historiques, 1908, pp. 675-7). The rather complicated history of the evolution of the early medieval martyrologia culminating in Usuard's work has for the first time been accurately told by Dom Quentin in the book just cited. It has, however, long been known that Usuard provided what was substantially an abridgement of Ado's "Martyrology" (see ADO OF VIENNE) in a form better adapted for practical liturgical use. In certain points, however, Usuard reverted to a Lyonese recension of Bede's augmented "Martyrology", which was attributed to the famous archdeacon Florus. But the story of the relation of these texts, unravelled for the first time by Dom Quentin, is too complicated to be detailed here. The text of Usuard's "Martyrologium" was carefully edited by Dom Bouillant (Paris, 1718) from manuscript Latisi 13745 at Paris, which, if not the autograph of the author, dates at any rate from his time. A still more elaborate edition was brought out by the Bollandist Du Sollier in Acta SS., June, VI. It has been reprinted in P.L., CXXIII-CXXIV.

HERBERT THURSTON

Usury

In the article INTEREST we have reserved the question of the lawfulness of taking interest on money lent; we have here to consider first, usury as condemned by all honest men.

Plato (Laws, v. 742) and Aristotle (Politics, I, x, xi) considered interest as contrary to the nature of things; Aristophanes expressed his disapproval of it, in the "Clouds" (1283 sqq.); Cato condemned it (see Cicero, "De officiis, II, xxv), comparing it to homicide, as also did Seneca (De beneficiis, VII, x) and Plutarch in his treatise against incurring debts. So much for Greek and Roman writers, who, it is true, knew little of economic science. Aristotle disapproved of the money trader's profit; and the ruinous rates at which money was lent explain his severity. On the other hand, the Roman and Greek laws, while considering the mutuum, or loan for consumption, as a contract gratuitous in principle, allowed a clause, stipulating for the payment of interest, to be added to the bond. The Law of the Twelve Tables allowed only unciarium fenus, probably one-twelfth of the capital, or 8.33 per cent. A plebiscitum, lex Ganucia, 412 a.u.c. went so far as to forbid all interest whatever, but, at a later period, the Roman law allowed interest at 1 per cent monthly, or 12 per cent per annum. Justinian laid down as a general rule that this maximum should be reduced by half (L. 26, I, c. De usuris, IV, 32). Chaldea allowed interest on loans (cf. Law of Hammurabi, 48 sqq.). No absolute prohibition can be found in the Old Testament; at most, Exod., xxii, 25, and Deut., xxiii, 19, 20, forbid the taking of interest by one Jew from another.

In the Christian era, the New Testament is silent on the subject; the passage in St. Luke (vi, 34, 35), which some persons interpret as a condemnation of interest, is only an exhortation to general and disinterested benevolence. A certain number of authors, among them Benedict XIV (De synodo diocesana, X., iv, n. 6), believed in the existence of a Patristic tradition which regarded the prohibitory passages of Holy Scripture as of universal application. Examination of the texts, however, leads us to the following conclusions: Until the fourth century all that can be inferred from the Fathers and ecclesiastical writers is that it is contrary to mercy and humanity to demand interest from a poor and needy man. The vehement denunciation of the Fathers of the fourth and fifth centuries were called forth by the moral decadence and avarice of the time, and we cannot find in them any expression of a general doctrine on this point; nor do the Fathers of the following centuries say anything remarkable on usury; they simply protest against the exploitation of misfortune, and such transactions as, under the pretence of rendering service to the borrower, really threw him into great distress. The question of moderate rates of interest seems scarcely to have presented itself to their minds as a matter of discussion. The texts bearing on the question are collected in Vermeersch, "Questiones morales de justitia" II, n. 359. The councils condemned in the first place clerics who lent money at interest. This is the purpose of the 44th of the Apostolic Canons; of the Council of Arles (314), and of the 17th canon the First Council of Niceaea (325). It is true that a text of the Council of Elvira (305 or 306) is quoted which, while ordering the degradation of clerics, would also have punishment inflicted on laymen, who obstinately persisted in usurious practices; but the mention of layman is of extremely doubtful authenticity. It may then be said that until the ninth century canonical decrees forbade this profit, shameful as it was considered, only to clerics.

Nevertheless, the 12th canon of the First Council of Carthage (345) and the 36th canon of the Council of Aix (789) have declared it to be reprehensible even for laymen to make money by lending at interest. The canonical laws of the Middle Ages absolutely forbade the practice. This prohibition is contained in the Decree of Gratian, q. 3, C. IV, at the beginning, and c. 4, q. 4, C. IV; and in 1. 5, t. 19 of the Decretals, for example in chapters 2, 5, 7, 9, 10, and 13. These chapters order the profit so obtained to be restored; and Alexander III (c. 4, "Super eo", eodem) declares that he has no power to dispense from the obligation. Chapters 1, 2, and 6, eodem, condemns the strategems to which even clerics resorted to evade the law of the general councils, and the Third of the Lateran (1179) and the Second of Lyons (1274) condemn usurers. In the Council of Vienne (1311) it was declared that if any person obstinately maintained that there was no sin in the practice of demanding interest, he should be punished as a heretic (see c. "Ex gravi", unic. Clem., "De usuris", V, 5).

It is a curious fact that for a long time impunity in such matters was granted to jews. The Fourth Council of the Lateran (1215), c. 27, only forbids them to exact excessive interest. Urban III, c. 12, "De usuris" (V. 19) and St. Louis in twenty-three of his regulations extended the prohibition to the Jews. With the exception of c. 27 of the Fourth Council of the Lateran, we know of no canon law which takes into consideration the question of moderate interest; and canon law nowhere states distinctly that interest is, under any circumstances whatsoever, contrary to justice.

Theologians and canonists of the Middle Ages constructed a rational theory of the loan for consumption, which contains this fundamental statement: The mutuum, or loan of things meant for immediate consumption, does not legalize, as such, any stipulation to pay interest; and interest exacted on such a loan must be returned, as having been unjustly claimed. This was the doctrine of St. Thomas and Scotus; of Molina, Lessius, and de Lugo. Canonists adopted it as well as the theologians; and Benedict XIV made it his own in his famous Encyclical "Vix pervenit" of 1 November, 1745, which was promulgated after thorough examination, but addressed only to the bishops of Italy, and therefore not an infallible Decree. On 29, July, 1836, the Holy Office incidentally declared that this Encyclical applied to the whole Church; but such a declaration could not give to a document an infallible character which it did not otherwise possess. The schismatic Greeks, at least since the sixteenth century, do not consider the taking of interest on loans as intrinsically bad.

While Luther, Melanchthon, and Zwingle condemned loaning for interest, Calvin permitted interest on money advanced to rich persons; his disciple Salmasius gave effect to this opinion by a systematic code of rules. By degrees a certain number of Catholic writers relaxed their severity. Scipio Maffei, a friend of Benedict XIV, wrote a celebrated treatise, "Dell' impiego del danaro", to justify an opinion which in this matter resembles that of Calvin. Economists generally uphold the theoretical lawfulness of interest on loans. For a long time civil law was in agreement with canon law; but as early as the sixteenth century, Germany allowed interest at 5 percent; in France, on the contrary, interest on loans was forbidden until the Decree of 2 and 3 October, 1789. Contemporary laws always consider the loan for consumption as gratuitous in principle, but allow a stipulation for the payment of interest to be added. In modern legislation two questions remain to be decided:

• whether it is desirable to establish a maximum legal rate; and
• by what means usurious exactions may be prevented.

The Holy See admits practically the lawfulness of interest on loans, even for ecclesiastical property, though it has not promulgated any doctrinal decree on the subject. See the replies of the Holy Office dated 18 August, 1830, 31 August, 1831, 17 January, 1838, 26 March, 1840, and 28 February, 1871; and that of the Sacred Penitentiary of 11 February, 1832. These replies will be found collected in "Collectio Lacensis" (Acta et decreta s. conciliorum recentiorum), VI, col. 677, Appendix to the Council of Pondicherry; and in the "Enchiridion" of Father Bucceroni.

Everyone admits that a duty of charity may command us to lend gratuitously, just as it commands us to give freely. The point in question is one of justice: Is it contrary to the equity required in mutual contracts to ask from the borrower interest in addition to the money lent? It may be remarked that the best authors have long since recognized the lawfulness of interest to compensate a lender for the risk of losing his capital, or for positive loss, such as the privation of the profit which he might otherwise have made, if he had not advanced the loan. They also admit that the lender is justified in exacting a fine of some kind (a conventional penalty) in case of any delay in payment arising from the fault of the borrower. These are what are called extrinsic grounds, admitted without dispute since the end of the sixteenth century, and justifying the stipulation for reasonable interest, proportionate to the risk involved in the loan. Another discussion, which has not been closed, but only suspended, relates to the question whether the civil law creates a new and real title, whether the State can, in order to extend and promote credit for the good of the community, permit interest on loans. We think it can. But there will scarcely be any need for such a law except in circumstance which already justify the general practice of lending for interest. (On these extrinsic rights see: Funk, "Geschichte des kirchlichen Zinsverbotes"; Lehmkuhl, "Theologia moralis", I, n. 1306 sqq., 11th ed.)

The precise question then is this: if we consider justice only, without reference to extrinsic circumstances, can the loan of money, or any chattel which is not destroyed by use, entitle the lender to a gain or profit which is called interest? To this question some persons, namely the economists of the classic school, and some Catholic writers, answer "yes, and always"; others, namely Socialists and some Catholic writers, answer, "no, never"; and lastly some Catholics give a less unconditional answer, "sometimes, but not always"; and they explain the different attitudes of he Church in condemning at one time, and at another authorizing, the practice of taking interest on loans, by the difference of circumstances and the state of society.

The principal argument in favour of the first opinion is that the lender does the borrower a service which should be paid for. This is, of course, a materialistic view of human service, which when rendered in a spirit of active benevolence is repaid by gratitude: only onerous service, which costs or represents some trouble or privation, is sold or hired for money. Now, at times when opportunities for investing money in commercial undertakings or converting it into revenue-producing property were comparatively rare, a loan made to a solvent person, instead of being onerous to the lender, was rather an advantage, in giving him full security for his money, for the borrower insured him against its accidental loss. And we have just shown that the loan of things for immediate consumption was not, as such, a source of revenue. Father Ballarini, (Opus morale, III, pt. III, ii) thought that the justice or injustice of taking interest depends on one's intention; thus, we may give credit gratuitously, or we may give the use of our money for a consideration. In the first case the contract is essentially gratuitous; and as formerly this gratuitous contract was the ordinary practice, the Church was opposed to all claim of interest. However, as the use of money has its value, like the use of anything else, the Church on this ground at the present day permits the lending of money for interest. In spite of the assent of many authors to this explanation, we do not approve it. In Roman Law, gratuitousness was not essential to the mutuum, but only presumed in the absence of any stipulation to the contrary. Persons who openly or secretly demanded interest proved conclusively that they were not actuated by motives of benevolence; and the Church, in condemning them, did not raise the question of their intention. The answer to Ballerini is that rent is a price paid for the use of a thing not destroyed by use. The expenditure of money may be productive, and the person lending money and so depriving himself of profit may claim a compensation for that privation; but this is a question of extrinsic circumstances, not of justice itself.

Others with Claudio-Jannet (Le capital, la spéculation et la finance, iii, II and III) distinguish between the loan for consumption and the loan for production: we may ask interest from the borrower who takes money or credit in order to produce or gain money; but not from one who borrows under pressure of necessity, or for some unproductive expenditure. The increased frequency of loans for production considered in the connection with the different extrinsic circumstances would seem to justify the demand for interest on such loans at the present day. In a spirit that is not irreconcilable with the rulings of the Fathers in the matter, this system contains this element of truth, that the lender of a sum of money which is intended for productive use may refuse to lend except on condition of being made a partner in the undertaking, and may claim a fixed interest which represents that share of the profit, which he might reasonably expect to receive. The system, nevertheless, is formally condemned by the Encyclical "Vix pervenit", and contradicts the principle of the just value; it tends in fact to make the borrower pay the special advantage, while the compensation is regulated by the general advantage procured by the possession of a thing, not by the special circumstances of the borrower. Others justify the existing practice by a presumption of extrinsic circumstances, which is confirmed, according to some persons, by the permission of the civil law. This explanation appears to us to be unsatisfactory. The extrinsic circumstances do not always exist, while we can always lend at interest, without any scruple on the score of justice. And what is there to show that modern legislators pass laws merely to quiet men's consciences?

But we may correct this last opinion by the aid of the general principles of contractual justice; and we shall then more fully understand the strictness of the laws of earlier times, and the greater liberty allowed at the present day. The just price of a thing is based on the general estimate, which depends not in all cases on universal utility, but on general utility. Since the possession of an object is generally useful, I may require the price of that general utility, even when the object is of no use to me. There is much greater facility nowadays for making profitable investment of savings, and a true value, therefore, is always attached to the possession of money, as also to credit itself. A lender, during the whole time that the loan continues, deprives himself of a valuable thing, for the price of which he is compensated by the interest. It is right at the present day to permit interest on money lent, as it was not wrong to condemn the practice at a time when it was more difficult to find profitable investments for money. So long as no objection was made to the profitable investment of capital in industrial undertakings, discouragement of interest on loans acted as an encouragement of legitimate trade; it also led to the creation of new contractual associations, such as insurance companies, which give a reasonable hope of gain without risk. The action of the Church has found distinguished defenders, even outside her own pale, among the representatives of contemporary economic science. We may mention three English authors: Marshall, professor of political economy at the University of Cambridge (Principles of Economics, I, I, ii, secs. 8 etc.); Ashley, professor at the new university of Birmingham (An Introduction to English Economic History and Theory, I, I, i, sec. 17); and the celebrated historian of political economy, Professor Cunningham (Growth of English Industry and Commerce, I, II, vi, sec. 85, third edition). Even at the present day, a small number of French catholics (Abbé Morel, "Du prêt à intéret"; Modeste, "Le prêt à intérecirc;t, dernière forme de l'esclavage") see in the attitude of the Church only a tolerance justified by the fear of greater evils. This is not so. The change in the attitude of the Church is due entirely to a change in economic matters that require the present system. The Holy See itself puts its funds out at interest, and requires ecclesiastical administrators to do the same. One writer, Father Belliot of the friars minor, denounces in loans for interest "the principal economic scourge of civilization", though the accumulation of wealth in the hands of a few capitalists, which he deplores so much, does not arise so much from lending money at proper interest as from industrial investments, banking operations, and speculations, which have never been condemned as unjust in principle. There has never been at any time any prohibition against the investment of capital in commercial or industrial undertakings or in the public funds.

Lending money at interest gives us the opportunity to exploit the passions or necessities of other men by compelling them to submit to ruinous conditions; men are robbed and left destitute under the pretext of charity. Such is the usury against which the Fathers of the Church have always protested, and which is universally condemned at the present day. Dr. Funk defined it as the abuse of a certain superiority at the expense of another man's necessity; but in this description he points to the opportunity and the means which enable a man to commit the sin of usury, rather than the formal malice of the sin itself. It is in itself unjust extortion, or robbery. The sin is frequently committed. In some countries are found the exaction of interest at 30, 50, 100 percent and more. The evil is so great in India that we might expect legal provisions to fight against such ruinous abuse. The exorbitant charges of pawnbrokers for money lent on pledge, and, in some instances, of persons selling goods to be paid for by installments, are also instances of usury disguised under another name. As a remedy for the evil, respectable associations for mutual lending have been instituted, such as the banks known by the name of their founder, Raiffeisen, and help has been sought from legislators; but there is no general agreement as to the form which legislation on this subject should take.

A. VERMEERSCH

Utah

The thirty-second state admitted to the Union, takes its name from an Indian tribe known as the Utes or Yutas -- a Shoshonian offshoot -- whose hunting grounds embraced three-fourths of the territory enclosed by the boundaries of the State of Utah. It is 350 miles long and 275 miles wide. Its area is 84990 square miles (54,390,000 acres) and of these square miles 2780 are of water surface. The population according to the thirteenth census is 373,351. The state extends westerly to the Nevada line, and on the east to Colorado and Wyoming, on the south it is bounded by Arizona, and on the north by Idaho and Wyoming.

PHYSIOGRAPHY

The Wasatch and Uintah Ranges of the Rocky Mountain system traverse the state from north to south with collateral elevations stretching across the face of the land forming a picturesque variety to the basins and valleys. These mountains are furrowed with gorges and canyons through which the waters, formed by melting snow and rain, rush to the lowlands where they are diverted into irrigating canals. These canyons range in depth from 400 to 5000 feet. There are crests of the Wasatch Range from 12,000 to 14,000 feet above sea level. The Great Salt Lake -- the largest body of inland water in the United States west of the Missouri -- rests in the north central part of Utah. The lake has a surface measurement of 2,125 square miles, is 75 miles long by 50 wide, and is 4210 feet above sea level. With Sevier and Utah Lakes, Great Salt Lake is all that remains of Bonneville Sea, a great inland body of water that at some period in the past covered nearly all Utah. Sevier Lake is a saline body of water of varying dimensions which in dry seasons practically evaporates, leaving a crystalline residuum of impure sodium chloride and sulphates, five inches in depth. Jordan River, draining the fresh water lake, Utah, the Weber and Bear Rivers and many small streams flow into Salt Lake and compensate for the evaporation which has been in uninterrupted progress for ages and has made of the waters of Silt Lake a nearly saturated brine.

The mean annual temperature of Utah is 49 degrees. The highest temperature ever recorded was 115 degrees above, and the lowest 36 degrees below zero. Humid air currents travelling eastward from the Pacific Ocean air currents travelling eastward from the Pacific Ocean suffer a condensation of their vapours, and when they pass over the state become drying winds.

MATERIAL SOURCES

About two-thirds of Utah's population engage in agriculture. There are 2,135,000 acres of land under irrigation, with 10,000,000 more ready for irrigation. There are large farms which grow nothing but grain, but these are known as dry or arid farms. Those which are under irrigation are necessarily small, and the product is extra-ordinarily large. Three crops of alfalfa are harvested in the same year. The production and value of the leading crops in 1910 was as follows: corn, 394,000 bushels, valued at $331,000; wheat, 5,108,006 bushels $4,795,000; oats, 2,494,000 bushels, $1,197,000; barley, 468,000 bushels, $281,000; potatoes 2,130,000. The first irrigating canals were opened in Utah fifty years ago. One that carries water forty miles from Utah lake to Salt Lake City was built more than forty years ago and still furnishes water for irrigating large stretches of land. About one-third of the area of state is capable of cultivation, or is serviceable as ranges for sheep and cattle. Probably two-fifths of the area is covered by mountain ranges filled with precious metals. The remainder is desert land. Utah, which was the pioneer of irrigation in the inter-mountain states, has been converted from deserts and sage-brush wastes into fertile fields. This followed from the conservation of water, impounding it in great reservoirs, and distributing the water scientifically over the land.

In 1909 the state produced gold valued at $4,243,907; and the production of silver amounted to 11,242,301 ounces; the lead production in 1910, according to local estimates, was 112,209,256 pounds valued at $4,985,831; in the same year the copper production was 125,000,000 pounds valued at $15,937,500; the zinc product was 15,337,367 pounds valued at $851,243. The total value of metal, for 1910 was $33,028,909. The coal production of the state has steadily increased, amounting in 1909 to 2,266,899 tons valued at $3,757,060. Oil is developed San Juan County, and in southeastern Utah; about 265,000 barrels of sat are produced annually:

HISTORY

Long before Utah had a name or the region was even geographically placed, the Franciscan Fathers began their missionary labours in this region. In those days the missionary regions of the Southwest lay outside the jurisdiction of any Mexican or Spanish bishop. The Franciscan fathers labouring in these unexplored lands enjoyed, by special pontifical indult, exceptional privileges. There can be no doubt that if this immense territory, including Utah, Idaho, Colorado, and Wyoming, had remained under the control of Spain, the roving and sedentary tribes would have been converted to the Faith, civilized, and made useful citizens. From the time of the consecration of Fray Juan de Zumaraga as Bishop of Mexico, 2 Sept, 1530, until November, 1823, when Mexico won its independence and declared for a republic, the present State of Utah was Spanish territory. On 29 July, 1776, two Franciscan priests, Spaniards, Silvestre Velez de Escalante and Atanazio Dominguez, left Santa Fe, N. Mex., explored portions of Colorado, entered Utah, and were the first white men to look out upon the pleasant waters of Utah Lake. They remained with the Laguna tribe for some days, preaching to them and instructing them in Christian doctrine. Leaving here, 25 Sept. 1776, they continued on through southern Utah; crossed from the east, for the first time by white men, the Grand Canyon of the Colorado, and returned to Santa Fe, 2 January, 1977. They charted the explored lands, described the tribes they had visited the botany of the country, named the rivers and mountains, and bequeathed to us a valuable history of their expedition. From 1823 until 2 Feb., 1848, Utah belonged to the Republic of Mexico, and when the Mormons, American citizens, settled, July, 1847, in the valley of the Great Salt Lake they became, unconsciously, intruders on Mexican soil. By the Treaty of Peace, signed 2 Feb., 1848, by the American and Mexican representatives at Guadalupe-Hidalgo, the home-town of the famous shrine and pilgrimage of Our Lady of Guadalupe -- Utah came under the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. So that in less than one hundred years the region now known as the State of Utah was possessed by three separate nations.

It matters not to the present age or to Utah's future greatness whether Brigham Young and his hardy followers were directed to Salt Lake Valley by the great missionary, Father De Smet, by chance, or, as the Mormons claim, by Divine revelation. They came, they toiled; their settlement attracted many of their faith, and many who did not accept that faith. A territory was organized, a fine city was laid out, the mountain streams diverted over the arid land, and the land that was arable brought under cultivation. On 15 September, 1847, the American troops under General Winfield Scott took possession of Mexico City, and on 2 Feb., 1848, the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo was signed, ceding for a consideration of $15,000,000 all territory north and east of the of the two republics, including the states California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah. The Latter Day Saints now, 1848, became subjects of the United States and, after organizing a provisional government, applied for admission into the Union under the title of the State of Deseret. Pending the will of Congress, the Mormons established their own mint and issued gold pieces of the value of 2.50, 5, 10, and 20 dollars. They also put in circulation paper currency and organized as a quasi-independent state. In the spring of '49 Utah's political history opened with the adoption of a constitution for the State of Deseret. Ignoring the application of the Mormons for statehood, Congress passed an act granting to Utah territorial rights. The bill was signed by President Millard Fillmore, 9 September, 1850. The boundaries of the new territory were defined in the Congressional Act to be: Oregon on the north, California on the west, the summit of the Rocky Mountains on the east, and the 37th parallel of latitude on the south. By the decree of the President of the United States, Brigham Young, the Mormon hierarch and head of the Church of the Latter Day Saints, was appointed first Governor of the Territory of Utah, 28 Sept., 1851, thus establishing a theocratic form of government, or an imperium in imperio, within the limits of the republic.

On the first Monday in April, 1851, the first municipal election was held in Salt Lake City. A charter for the city had been granted by the Assembly of Deseret, and on 9 Jan., 1851, the city was incorporated. By order of Congress the Legislature of Deseret was dissolved 5 April, 1851, when a territorial legislature for Utah was established and a delegate to Congress elected. At that time, according to a census taken in April, 1851, the population of Utah was 11,354. Polygamy, which had been proclaimed -- and publicly for the first time at a special conference held in Salt Lake City, 28 August, 1852 -- was abolished by the "manifesto" of the October conference held in 1890 signed on 8 May, 1895 by Wilford Woodruff, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. The Constitution was framed and adopted by popular vote, 5 Nov., 1895. By proclamation of the President of the United States, signed 4 January, 1896, Utah was admitted as a state of the Union. Salt Lake, the capital of Utah, is one of the most picturesque and attractive cities of America. Its streets are 132 feet wide and its population in 1910 was 92,777. Ogden, Provo, Logan, Murray, and Park City are prosperous towns of the state.

LEGISLATION

The Legislature for Utah consists of 63 members elected by the people: 45 in the House of Representatives and 18 in the Senate. Population forms the basis of representation both for the local Legislature and for Congress where Utah is represented by two senators chosen by the Legislature and one congressman elected, by popular vote. Under the criminal law murder is punished by death, the criminal having the choice of death by hanging or shooting. Blasphemy, arson, and perjury are statutory offenses, but blasphemy only when it constitutes a breach of the peace. Polygamy and bigamy are crimes against society and those proved guilty of either are punished by imprisonment not exceeding five years or by a fine of $500. Under the civil law all priests and ministers attached to churches, all judges, mayors of cities, and justices of the peace are empowered to marry applicants, who must have the consent of parents or guardians if they are under age, that is 21 years for male and 16 for female. Cruelty, desertion, impotency, adultery, permanent insanity, habitual drunkenness, and conviction of felony are legal causes for divorce in Utah. Sunday is a legal holiday. School attendance is compulsory for all children between the ages of eight and sixteen. Clergymen, lawyers and doctors are privileged witnesses under state law.

EDUCATION

The school population of Utah (1910) was 108,924. A larger percentage of the population of Utah is within the school age than can be found in any other state of the Republic. There are two universities, the University of Utah, and the University of the Latter Day Saints, thirty-five high schools, a state Normal school, State School of Mines, State Agricultural College, State School for Deaf and Dumb, the Brigham Young Colleges at Provo and Logan, a Presbyterian college, the All Hallows (Catholic) College, St. Mary's Academy (Holy Cross Sisters), Salt Lake City, the Academy of the Holy Cross Sisters, Ogden, many private institutions of learning and 670 common schools. To have an accurate idea of the educational standing of Utah it is well to remember that, according to a late report of the State Superintendent of Education, there are only six states of the Union which expend more per capita of the total population for schools, than does the State of Utah. The expenditure for educational purposes was $2,832,273 in 1910, and the valuation of school property was $5,902,801.

RELIGIOUS DENOMINATIONS

Sectarian Protestantism is represented in Utah by many ecclesiastical bodies including Protestant Episcopal, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Scientist, Bible Christian, Methodist, Methodist Episcopal, Congregational, Baptist, Theosophist, Spiritist, Unitarian, Latter Day Saints, Reorganized Latter Day Saints, Adventists, and other minor bodies. It is estimated that fully 30 per cent of the population of Utah attend no place of worship, and as divorce is increasing and becoming a menace to the stability of society, particularly in the cities and towns, the church population is threatened with more serious emaciation. Ecclesiastical property in the state is vested in corporations organized for ecclesiastical or charitable purposes, in a bishop properly incorporated, or it is held in trust under law by matured persons.

ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY

We have seen that as early as 1776 two Spanish Franciscan priests left Santa Fe, New Mexico, and, crossing south-western Colorado, discovered Utah Lake, instructed the Laguna family of Utes, crossed the State of Utah from north to south preaching to the tribes on their way, and, returning to Santa Fe, January, 1776, made known the existence -- of the great inland body of water, now known as Salt Lake. Not till 1841 do we again read of a Catholic priest visiting Utah. In that year the heroic Jesuit missionary and explorer, Father Pierre-Jean de Smet, passed through the valley of Salt Lake on his way to Green River, Wyoming. This remarkable priest was, in the autumn of 1846, the guest of the Mormon leader, Brigham Young, who was wintering with his followers near Council Bluffs, preparing to enter the Great American Desert in the spring of 1847. As the Mormon president had not yet determined where he and his people would finally settle, he was greatly impressed with Father de Smet's description of Salt Lake and Cache Valleys stretching away from the Wasatch Mountains. "They asked me a thousand questions about the regions I had explored", writes the priest to his nephew, "and the valley which I have just described to you pleased them greatly from the account I gave them of it. Was this what determined them to settle there? I would not dare to affirm it. They are there!" In the summer of 1863, sixteen years after the Mormons entered Utah, that exemplary priest, John Baptist Ravardy, came from Denver, Colorado, and passed some days in Salt Lake City. He was the guest of General Patrick Edward Connor, then in command of the troops at Fort Douglas, built on a bench a little to the east of the city. Father Ravardy found no Catholics in Salt Lake and, after administering the Sacraments of Penance and Holy Communion to some soldiers at the military post, he returned to Denver, where he died, 18 November, 1889. Early in June, 1866, Rev. Edward Kelly visited Salt Lake by request of Bishop O'Connell of Sacramento, who believed his jurisdiction extended over the entire State of Utah. Father Kelly offered up the Holy Sacrifice -- the first Mass said in Salt Lake City -- on the morning of 29 June, 1866, in the Assembly Hall of the Latter Day Saints, courteously placed at his disposal by the president, Brigham Young.

On 5 Feb., 1868, Colorado and Utah were erected by Papal Brief into a vicariate Apostolic and the Very Rev. Joseph P. Machebeuf of Denver was, on 16 August of the same year, raised to the episcopate and entrusted with the vicariate. On 30 Nov., 1868, Bishop Machebeuf, having already appointed Rev. James P. Foley missionary rector of Salt Lake, visited the Mormon stronghold and confirmed fourteen soldiers. The bishop, during his visit of ten days, was the guest of General Connor, who accompanied him in some of his visits to the few Catholics then in Salt Lake. Father Foley remained in the city two years and on a lot purchased by his predecessor, Rev. Patrick Walsh, built in 1869 an unpretentious church, the first Catholic church erected in the State of Utah. In 1870, the Holy See, on the urgent pleading of Bishop Machebeuf, placed Utah under the jurisdiction of Archbishop Alemany of San Francisco, who entrusted the mission to the care of the Rev. Patrick Walsh. Father Walsh began his sacerdotal duties in Salt Lake early in 1871. He remained on the mission for two years, organized a parish in the city, destroyed the little adobe chapel of Father Foley and built a brick church under the patronage of St. Mary Magdalene. On 14 Aug., 1873, Rev. Lawrence Scanlan, missionary rector of Petaluma, Archdiocese of San Francisco, succeeded Father Walsh, and with him the history of the Church in Utah practically begins. When Father Scanlan entered Salt Lake he became missionary rector over the largest parish in extent in the United States. In a state population of 87,000 there were, perhaps, 800 Catholics. In Salt Lake and Ogden there were, by actual count, 90 Catholics; the remainder were dispersed along railroad divisions, in mining camps, and on the ranches. The little brick church to which he fell heir carried a debt of $6000. It was the only Catholic church in a region of 85,000 square miles. Father Scanlan soon began, on foot and on horseback, a visitation of his immense charge, the hardships of which taxed to the limit the vital forces of a splendid physique. On 29 June, 1887, he was, in recognition of his administrative ability and of fidelity to the duties of his priestly mission, appointed vicar Apostolic over all Utah and a large area of Nevada. He was later consecrated Bishop of Larandum in the Cathedral of San Francisco by Archbishop Riordan, assisted by Bishops O'Connell and Minogue. In 1891 the Vicarate Apostolic of Utah and Nevada was canonically constituted a diocese, and bishop Scanlan fixed his cathedral in Salt Lake City. The newly erected diocese embraced the, as it does now, 153 square miles, constituting it the largest diocese in the United States.

The era of Gentile -- as distinguished from the Mormon -- emigration practically began with the building of the Union Pacific to Ogden in March, 1869, and with the elevation to the episcopal throne of the Very Reverend Lawrence Scanlan in 1887, Catholicism entered Utah as an organized religion. Since then, the Church, so far as adverse conditions have permitted, has kept step with the educational, industrial; and political expansion of the state. For one not familiar with conditions as they existed in Utah until the present, it would be next to impossible to understand the almost insuperable difficulties which opposed, and are yet opposing, the spiritual and material expansion of religion in Utah. The state is enclosed by the mineral belt of the South-west, and mining is one of the most important of its industries. When a report is heard on the streets of Salt Lake that gold or silver has been uncovered in one of the gulches, canyons, or streams of the Wasatch Range, there is at once a rush for the "diggings". If facts verify the rumour, a mining camp is established which, in time, becomes a town of three or four thousand energetic men; among them will be many Catholics clamouring for a church and a priest. The bishop goes in person, to inspect conditions, is satisfied with the encouragement he receives, and, returning to Salt Lake, commissions one of his priests to take up his residence and build a church at "Silver Reef" or "Goldville". A year after the church is built and partially paid for, the "workings" give out and the town is abandoned, leaving the church vacant and the priest a pastor without a flock. This is not an incident in the experience of Bishop Scanlan, it is a repetition in his episcopal life. Many towns and villages, of from two to seven thousand souls, are entirely Mormon and are outside the influence of the Catholic Church. The Catholic population of Utah is sparse; nevertheless, the bishop has achieved marvels. He brought the Sisters of the Holy Cross from Indiana to Salt Lake City, to Ogden, to Park City, and Eureka. In Park City and Eureka the Sisters teach select and parochial schools; in Ogden they conduct the Sacred Heart Academy; in Salt Lake City the Sisters conduct St. Mary's Academy and also Holy Cross Hospital. The Kearns' St. Ann's Orphanage, built by Senator and Mrs. Kearns, has, since its completion in 1900 been under the care of eleven Sisters of the same order. In 1885 Bishop Scanlan founded and built the All Hallows College now one of the leading Catholic colleges of the South-west, and in 1889 he invited the Marist fathers to take charge of the institution. On 15 August, 1909, St. Mary Magdalene's Cathedral was dedicated by Cardinal Gibbons. In January, 1910, Bishop Scanlan introduced into his diocese the Sisters of Mercy and placed under their charge the "Judge Memorial Home", which was built, at a cost of $175,000 by the late Mrs. Mary Judge, and given to the bishop to be used as a hospital and home for aged and disabled miners.

Confronted with unfavorable localities and uncertainties of the permanency of mining towns, the Bishop of Salt Lake has succeeded in establishing in his diocese permanent parishes, outside of Salt Lake and Ogden, at Park City, Eureka, Helper, and Green River, Utah; and at Austin, Tonopah and Eureka, Nevada. Annexed to these parishes are some forty missions and mining stations visited by the diocesan priests at measured intervals.

WHITNEY, Hist. of Utah (Salt Lake City, 1892); CHITTENDEN, Life and Travels of Father De Smet (Harper, N.Y., 1893); HARRIS, The Catholic Church in Utah (Salt Lake City, 1909); TALMAGE, Great Salt Lake (Salt Lake City, 1900); State Papers and Reports.

W.R. HARRIS

Uthina

A titular see of Africa Proconsularis, suffragan of Carthage. Uthina is mentioned by Ptolemy (IV, 3, 34), Pliny (V, 4), and the Peutinger Tables. Pliny and an inscription call it a colony. From the accounts given by geographers the site seems to be the ruins known as Henshir Oudna, near a station on the railway from Tunis to Kef, Tunisia. These ruins occupy a surface nearly three miles in circumference, covering a hilly plateau, and commanding the left bank of the Milian wâdys; there are the remains of a fortress, cisterns, an aqueduct, triumphal arch, theatre, amphitheatre, basilica with a circular crypt, bridge, etc. Many beautiful mosaics are to be found there. Uthina had a bishop in the time of Tertullian by whom he was severely criticized (De Monogamia, xii). Five others are known: Felix, present at the Council of Carthage (256); Lampadius, at the Council of Arles in Gaul (314); Isaac, at the Conference of Carthage (411), where he had as rival the Donatist, Felicianus; Gallonius, at the Council of Carthage (419); and Quietus at that of 525.

GUERIN, Voyage archeologique dans la regence de Tunis, II (Paris, 1862), 283; TOULOTTE, Geogr. de l'Afrique Chretiene proconsulaire (Paris, 1892), 316-18.

S. PÉTRIDÈS

Utica

A titular see in Africa Proconsularis. The city was founded by Tyrian colonists at the mouth of the Bagradas River in the vicinity of rich mines, 1110 B.C. or 287 years before Carthage. It had two harbours, and during the Punic Wars was the ally rather than the vassal of Carthage. In 212 B.C., it was seized and plundered by the Roman, Ottacilius. After the fall of Carthage, 146 B.C., Utica became the capital of the Roman province of Africa, and was a civitas libera (free city), perhaps even immunis (exempt from taxes). It was here that Cato the Younger, called Cato of Utica, killed himself after his defeat at Thapsus, 46 B.C. Augustus granted the right of citizenship to the inhabitants of Utica, which under Adrian became a colony, under the name of Colonia Julia Ælia Hadriana Augusta Utica, and under Septimius Severus and Caracalla, a colonia juris italici. When Carthage again became the capital of Roman Africa, Utica passed to the second rank. On 24 Aug., 258 A.D., more than 153 martyrs, according to Saint Augustine, and according to Prudentius about 300, suffered for the Faith at Utica; they are known under the name of Massa candida, and later a basilica was built there in their honour (Monceaux, "Histoire littéraire de l'Afrique Chrétienne", II, 141-147). A number of bishops are mentioned by historians (Morcelli, Africa Christiana", I, 362, II, 150; Gams, "Series Episcoporum", I, 470; Toulotte, "Géographie de l'Afrique Chrétienne, Proconsulaire", 318-323). The oldest-known bishop, Aurelius, was present at the Council of Carthage, 256; the last, Potentinus, in 684, at the Council of Toledo in Spain, where he had taken refuge after the Arab invasion. This invasion and the choking up of its harbours with sand washed in by the Bagradas, hastened the downfall of Utica. Its ruins are at Bou-Chateur, not far from Porto-Farina, with which it is sometimes wrongly confounded. One may see here large reservoirs, an amphitheatre, and some remains of a wall.

SMITH, Dict. Greek and Roman Geog., s.v.

S. VAILHÉ

Utilitarianism

(Lat. utilis, useful).

Utilitarianism is a modern form of the Hedonistic ethical theory which teaches that the end of human conduct is happiness, and that consequently the discriminating norm which distinguishes conduct into right and wrong is pleasure and pain. In the words of one of its most distinguished advocates, John Stuart Mill,

the creed which accepts as the foundation of morals, utility or the greatest happiness principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness is intended pleasure and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain and the privation of pleasure (Utilitarianism, ii, 1863).

Although the term Utilitarianism did not come into vogue until it had been adopted by Bentham, and until the essential tenets of the system had already been advocated by many English philosophers, it may be said that, with the important exception of Helvetius (De l'esprit, 1758), from whom Bentham seems to have borrowed, all the champions of this system have been English. The favour which it has enjoyed in English speculation may be ascribed in a great measure to the dominance of Locke's teaching, that all our ideas are derived exclusively from sense experience. This epistemological doctrine, hostile to all shades of intentionalism, finds its ethical complement in the theory that our moral ideas of right and wrong, our moral judgments, and conscience itself are derived originally from the experienced results of actions.

Tracing the stream of Utilitarian thought from its sources, we may start with Hobbes (Leviathan, 1651), whose fundamental ethical axiom is that right conduct is that which promotes our own welfare; and the social code of morals depends for its justification on whether or not it serves the wellbeing of those who observe it. A Protestant divine, Richard Cumberland (De legibus naturæ, 1672), engaged in the refutation of Hobbes's doctrine, that morality depends on civil enactment, sought to show that the greatest happiness principle is a law of the Gospel and a law of nature: "The greatest possible benevolence of every rational agent towards all the rest constitutes the happiest state of each and all. Accordingly common good will be the supreme law." This view was further developed by some other theologians of whom the last and most conspicuous was Paley (Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy, 1785), who reasoned that since God wills the happiness of all men it follows that if we would conform our conduct to God's will we must act so as to promote the common happiness; and virtue consists in doing good to all mankind in obedience to the will of God and for the sake of everlasting happiness. Moral obligation he conceived to be the pressure of the Divine will upon our wills urging us to right action. More in harmony with the spirit of the later Utilitarians was Hume, the slightest of whose preoccupations was to find any religious source or sanction of morality. In his Inquiry concerning the Principles of Morals (1751) he carried out an extensive analysis of the various judgments which we pass upon our own character and conduct and on those of others; and from this study drew the conclusion that virtue and personal merit consist in those qualities which are useful to ourselves and others. In the course of his speculation he encounters the question which is the irremovable stumbling block in the path of the Utilitarian theorist: How is the motive of self-interest to be reconciled with the motive of benevolence; if every man necessarily pursues his own happiness, how can the happiness of all be the end of conduct? Unlike the later thinkers of this school, Hume did not discuss or attempt systematically to solve the difficulty; he dismissed it by resting on the assumption that benevolence is the supreme virtue.

In Hartley (Observations of Man, 1748) we find the first methodical effort to justify the Utilitarian principle by means of the theory of association to which so large a part in the genesis of our moral judgments is assigned by subsequent speculators, especially those of the Evolutionist party. From sensations and the lower elementary or primary emotions, according to Hartley, result higher feelings and emotions, different in kind from the processes out of which they have arisen. The altruistic motives, sympathy and benevolence, are then accounted for. With Bentham arises the group of thinkers who have appropriated the name of Utilitarians as their distinctive badge. The leaders after Bentham were the two Mills, the two Austins, and Godwin, who are also known as the Philosophic Radicals. While the members of this party devoted considerable thought to the defence and development of theoretical Utilitarianism and made it the starting-point of their political activity, they became remarkable less as philosophic speculators than as active reformers of social and economic conditions and of legislation. The keynote of their doctrines and policy is struck by Bentham in the opening of his Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789):

Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do as well as what we shall do. On the one hand the standard of right and wrong, on the other the chain of cause and effect are linked to their throne. They govern us in all we do, every effort we can make to throw off their subjection will serve but to demonstrate and confirm it. In a word man may pretend to abjure their empire; but in reality he will remain subject to it all the while. The principle of utility recognizes this subjection, and assumes it for the foundation of that system the object of which is to rear the fabric of felicity by the hand of reason and law.

Staunchly standing by the principle of unqualified egoism, Bentham rids himself of the task of reconciling self-interest and altruism:

Dream not that men will move their little finger to serve you, unless their advantage in doing so is obvious to them. Men never did so and never will while human nature is made of its present materials. But they will desire to serve you when by so doing they can serve themselves, and the occasions on which they can serve themselves by serving you are multitudinous (Deontology, ii, 1834; posthumous work).

In the hands of Bentham and his disciples Utilitarianism dissociates morality from its religious basis and, incorporating Determinism with its other tenets, becomes pronouncedly Positivistic, and moral obligation is resolved into a prejudice or a feeling resulting from a long-continued association of disagreeable consequences attending some kinds of actions, and advantages following others. The word ought Bentham characterizes as an authoritative impostor, the talisman of arrogancy, indolence, and ignorance. It is the condemnation of Utilitarianism that this estimate of duty is thoroughly consistent with the system; and no defender of the utility theory has been able, though some have tried, to indicate the claims of moral obligation on Positivistic Utilitarian grounds. Bentham drew up a curious scheme for computing the worth or weight to be assigned to all sorts of pleasures and pains, as a practical norm to determine in the concrete the moral value of any action. He assumes that all pleasures are alike in kind and differ only in quantity, that is in intensity, certainty, duration, etc. His psychological analysis, besides the original defect of making self-interest the sole motive of human action, contains many errors. Subsequent writers have abandoned it as worthless for the very good reason that to calculate, as its employment would demand, all the results of every action, and to strike a balance between the advantages and disadvantages attendant upon it, would require an intellect much more powerful than that with which man is endowed.

The classic expression of the system is John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism, which endeavours to raise the Utilitarian ideal to a higher plane than that of the undisguised selfishness upon which Bentham rested it. As the foundation of his structure Mill asserts that every man necessarily acts in order to obtain his own happiness; but finding this ground logically insufficient to furnish a basis for an adequate criterion of conduct, and prompted by his own large sympathies, he quickly endeavours to substitute "the happiness of all concerned" for "the agent's own happiness". The argument over which he, the author of a formidable work on logic, endeavours to pass from the first to the second position, may serve as an example suitable to submit to the beginner in logic when he is engaged in the detection of sophisms. The argument, in brief, is that, as each one desires and pursues his own happiness, and the sum total of these individual ends makes up the general happiness, it follows that the general happiness is the one thing desirable by all and provides the Utilitarian standard of what is right in conduct. "As well might you argue", says Martineau, "that because of a hundred men each one's hunger is satisfied by his dinner, the hunger of all must be satisfied with the dinner of each." To escape some of the criticisms urged against the doctrine as stated by Bentham, who made no distinction in the various kinds of pleasure, Mill claimed that Utilitarianism notes that pleasures differ in quality as well as quantity; that in the judgment of those who have experience of different pleasures, some are preferable to others, that it is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied, better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. Then he slips from "preferable" to "higher", thus surreptitiously introducing a moral classification among pleasures. The only legitimate grounds for attaching higher and lower moral values to various pleasures, is to estimate them according to the rank of the faculties or of the kinds of action to which they belong as results. But to do this is to assume some moral standard by which we can measure the right or wrong of action, independently of its pleasurable or painful consequences. To answer the objection that virtue is desired for its own sake, and men do right frequently without any calculation of the happiness to be derived from their action, Mill enlists the association theory; as the result of experience, actions that have been approved or condemned on account of their pleasurable or disagreeable consequences at length come to be looked upon by us as good or bad, without our actually adverting to their pleasant or painful result.

Since Mill's time the only writer who has introduced any modification into strictly Utilitarian thought is Sidgwick (Methods of Ethics, 1874), who acknowledges that the pleasure-and-pain standard is incapable of serving universally as the criterion of morality; but believes it to be valuable as an instrument for the correction of the received moral code. The general happiness principle he defends as the norm of conduct but he treats it rather as a primary than a demonstrable one. Although he vigorously denounced Utilitarianism, Herbert Spencer's ethical construction (Data of Ethics, 1879), which may be taken as the type of the Evolutionist school, is fundamentally Utilitarian. True, instead of happiness he makes the increase of life, that is, a fuller and more intensive life, the end of human conduct, because it is the end of the entire cosmic activity of which human conduct is a part. But he holds pleasure and pain to be the standard which discriminates right from wrong so that in reality he looks upon the moral value of actions as entirely dependent upon their utility. His account of the genesis of our moral ideas, of conscience, and of our moral judgments is too lengthy and complicated to enter into here. Suffice it to say that in it he sets forth the influence of association with that of heredity as the source of our moral standards and judgments. Our sense of moral obligation is but a transitory feeling, generated by the confluence of our inherited racial experience of the results of action with another feeling that the remote present themselves to our consciousness as possessing more "authoritativeness" than the immediate results. The arguments urged against Hedonism in general are effective against Utilitarianism. Its own peculiar weakness lies in its failure to find a passage from egoism to altruism; its identification of self-interest and benevolence as a motive of conduct; and its claim that the ideas morally right and useful are identical at bottom.

JAMES J. FOX

Utopia

(Greek ou no or not, and topos place), a term used to designate a visionary or an ideally perfect state of society. The name was first used by Sir Thomas More in his work entitled "De optimo reipublicae statu deque nova insula Utopia" (Louvain, 1615), and has since been used as a generic term for political romances. Such a romance, to which More was indebted for many of his ideas, is Plato's "Republic". In this work Plato prescribes a communistic mode of life for the guardians and auxiliaries (not for the productive classes) of the State. The superior qualities of the guardian and auxiliary class were to be maintained by the practice of stirpiculture and state control of the bringing up of children. In the "Republic", the ends sought are political rather than economic. Sir Thomas More, on the other hand, does not confine his attention to the governing class but includes the whole social structure in his plan. He puts most of his narrative into the mouth of a certain Raphael Hythloday, a Portuguese traveller, who criticizes trenchantly the laws and customs of European states, and paints in glowing colours the ideal institutions which he had observed in a five years' sojourn among the Utopians. Hythloday contends that English laws are badly administered. The thief and the murderer alike are punished with death with no consequent diminution of the crime of theft. Means should be taken rather to see that men are not driven to steal. The servant class, for example, should learn trades, so that they need not have recourse to highway robbery when dismissed by their masters. Also some provision should be made for agricultural labourers that they might not follow a like profession when the arable lands were converted into sheep runs, a crying evil in England at that time. He contended further that most of the difficulties of European government grew out of the institution of private property. The objection is made that a nation cannot be prosperous where all property is common because there would be no incentive to labour, men would become slothful, and violence and bloodshed would result. Hythloday answers this objection by giving an account of the institutions and customs of the Utopians.

In the Island of Utopia Iying south of the equator there are fifty-four cities of which no two are nearer together than twenty-four miles. The government is representative in form. From each city three wise and experienced men are sent each year to the capital to deliberate on public affairs. The rural population live in farm-houses scattered throughout the island, each of which contains at least forty persons besides two slaves. For every thirty farm-houses there is a leader called a philarch. Ten philarchs together with their groups of families are under an officer called a chief philarch. The prince of the island is chosen for life by the philarchs from four candidates nominated by the people. He may be deposed if he is suspected of tyranny. The laws are few in number and seldom violated. Among the Utopians agriculture is a science in which all are instructed. The children in the schools learn its history and theory. From each group of thirty farms twenty persons are sent annually to the neighbouring cities to make room for an equal number who come from the city to the country. In the course of time all have a taste of farm life. In addition to agriculture each person is taught a trade. Usually he selects his father's trade, but if he desires to learn another he is allowed to do so. The Utopians work only six hours a day but this is sufficient to provide them with all the necessaries and comforts of life, for the reason that there are so few idlers and that no time is spent in supplying useless or vicious luxuries. In the cities groups of families have common dining-halls, although anyone who chooses to do so may dine at his own house. The menial service in these dining-rooms is performed by slaves, while the women of the various families by turns superintend the preparation of the meals. When the Utopians have produced a supply sufficient to last them for two years, they use any surplus which they may have to carry on commerce with neighbouring nations, securing from them gold, silver, iron, and such other things as they need. They do not use gold and silver as money, since they have common ownership of property, but they procure it principally in order to hire mercenaries from among their neighbours. In music, arithmetic, and geometry they are not surpassed by the Europeans, and in astronomy and meteorology they far outstrip them.

There are different varieties of religion, but their public worship is of such a general nature that they are able to worship together. All beliefs except Atheism are tolerated. Their ethics is Hedonistic and very few of them are attracted by an ascetic life. Those convicted of heinous crimes are reduced to slavery, and persons sentenced to death in other countries are also procured as slaves. Children of slaves do not retain the status of their parents. Persons afflicted with incurable and painful diseases are advised by the priests and magistrates to take their own lives. If they do not wish to do so, however, they are not compelled to. Those who commit suicide without the consent of the priests and magistrates are given dishonourable burial, and those who meet death cheerfully have their bodies cremated as a mark of honour. Women are not allowed to marry under the age of eighteen nor men under the age of twenty-two. Much care is taken to make those contracting marriage acquainted with each other so as to avoid unhappy unions. Divorces are permitted for one cause, and only the innocent party may remarry. The Utopian priests are of extreme holiness but their numbers are small. They are elected by the people by secret ballot. Women are not excluded from the priesthood, though few of them - and these widows and old women - are chosen. The priesthood is held in high honour. The traveller concludes his account by attributing the happiness and concord prevailing in Utopia to the absence of private property.

It is sometimes asked whether More meant to have the proposals in the Utopia taken seriously. Undoubtedly he did not. They were merely a means by which he could call attention to some of the abuses of his day without being taken to task by the king for his freedom. While he shows that he appreciates the weakness of communism, he allows Hythloday to present only its strength. Since More's day many ideal commonwealths in imitation of the Utopia have flourished in literature. Among the best known are:

• Bacon's "New Atlantis" (1624), in which the author dreams of the happiness of mankind attained through the progress of the natural sciences;
• Campanella's "City of the Sun" (1637), which emphasizes community of property and stirpiculture;
• Harrington's "Oceana" (1656); Fénelon's "Telemaque" (1699); Cabet's "Voyage in Icaria" (1840);
• Bellamy's "Looking Backward" (1889);
• William Morris's "News from Nowhere" (1890);
• Hertzka's "Freiland" (1891); and
• H. G. Wells's "A Modern Utopia" (1905) and "New Worlds for Old" (1908).

Morley's "Ideal Commonwealths" contains an English translation of More's "Utopia" as well as of Bacon's "New Atlantis", Campanelia's "City of the Sun", and other imaginary states.

FRANK O'HARA

Ut Queant Laxis Resonare Fibris

The first line of a hymn in honour of St. John the Baptist. The Roman Breviary divides it into three parts and assigns the first, "Ut queant laxis", etc., to Vespers, the second, "Antra deserti teneris sub annis", to Matins, the third, "O nimis felix, meritique celsi", to Lauds, of the feast of the Nativity of St. John (24 June). With hymnologists generally, Dreves ascribes the authorship to Paulus Diaconus aud expresses surprise at the doubt of Duemmler, for which he can see no reason. The hymn is written in Sapphic stanzas, of which the first is famous in the history of music for the reason that the notes of the melody corresponding with the initial syllables of the six hemistichs are the first six notes of the diatonic scale of C. This fact led to the syllabic naming of the notes as Ut, Re, Mi, Fa, Sol, La, as may be shown by capitalizing the initial syllables of the hemistichs:

Guido of Arezzo showed his pupils an easier method of determining the sounds of the scale than by the use of the monochord. His method was that of comparison of a known melody with an unknown one which was to be learned, and for this purpose he frequently chose the well-known melody of the "Ut queant laxis" . Against a common view of musical writers, Dom Pothier contends that Guido did not actually give these syllabic names to the notes, did not invent the hexachordal system, etc., but that insensibly the comparison of the melodies led to the syllabic naming. When a new name for the seventh, or leading, note of our octave was desired, Erich Van der Putten suggested, in 1599, the syllabic BI of "labii", but a vast majority of musical theorists supported the happier thought of the syllable SI, formed by the initial letters of the two words of the last line. UT has been generally replaced by DO because of the open sound of the latter. Durandus says that the hymn was composed by Paul the Deacon on a certain Holy Saturday when, having to chant the "Exsultet" for the blessing of the paschal candle, he found himself suffering from an unwonted hoarseness. Perhaps bethinking himself of the restoration of voice to the father of the Baptist, he implored a similar help in the first stanza. The melody has been found in a manuscript of the tenth century, applied to the words of Horace's Ode to Phyllis, "Est mihi nonum superantis annum" . The hymn offers exegetical difficulties in the stanza "Ventris obstruso", etc. Littledale's version, used in Bute's "The Roman Breviary", refers the "uterque parens" to Mary and Elizabeth:

Caswall translates similarly: "What time Elizabeth and Mary sang." Pauly refers the two words to Zachary (for his canticle of the Benedictus) and Elizabeth (for her address to Mary: "Blessed art thou among women", etc.); and "uterque" would better support this view. Also, "Mysteries find" is a poor version of "Abdita pandit", since it conceals the allusion to the twofold "utterance" of the parents. Greater difficulty is found in the interpretation of the stanza "Serta ter denis", etc. A sufficiently close rendering would be:

This is an evident allusion to the parable of the sower (Matt., xiii, 8) whose seed fell upon good ground and brought forth fruit, "some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, and some thirtyfold"; but the composer of the hymn clearly adds the thought of a triple crown -- perhaps that of Precursor, Prophet, Martyr; perhaps that of Prophet, Virgin, Martyr.

H. T. HENRY

Utraquism

The principal dogma, and one of the four articles, of the Calixtines or Hussites. It was first promulgated in 1414, by Jacob of Mies, professor of philosophy at the University of Prague. John Hus was neither its author nor its exponent. He was a professor at the above-named university, which required its bachelors to lecture on the works of a Paris, Prague, or Oxford doctor; and in compliance with this law, Hus, it seems, based his teaching on the writings of John Wyclif, an Oxford graduate. The opinions of Wyclif -- which were a cause of Utraquism -- were imbibed by the students of Prague, and, after Hus had been imprisoned, the Wycliffian influence showed itself in the Hussites' demand for Communion under both forms as necessary for salvation. This heresy was condemned in the Councils of Constance, Basle, and Trent (Denzinger-Bannwart, 626, 930 sqq.).

Utraquism, briefly stated, means this: Man, in order to be saved, must receive Holy Communion when he wishes and where he wishes, under the forms of bread and wine (sub utraque specie). This, said the Hussite leader, is of Divine precept. For, "Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you" (John, vi, 54). To receive only the Sacred Host is not "drinking" but "eating" the Blood of Christ. That this is of Divine precept, continued the Hussite, is further evident from tradition, as up to the eleventh or twelfth century the Chalice and the Host were offered to the faithful when they communicated. Add to this, that more grace is conferred by the reception of the Eucharist under both forms, and it is clear, so Jacob of Mies maintained, that communion sub uraque specie is obligatory. This conclusion the Council of Constance rejected (Denzinger-Bannwart, 626). Then followed the Hussite wars. To make peace, the Council of Basle (1431) allowed Communion under both forms to those who had reached the age of discretion and were in the state of grace, on the following conditions: that the Hussites confess that the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ were contained whole and entire both under the form of bread and under that of wine; and that they retract the statement that Communion under both forms is necessary for salvation (Mansi, XXX). To this some of the Hussites agreed, and were known as the Calixtines, from their use of the chalice. The others, led by Ziska, and called Taborites, from their dwelling on a mountain top, refused and were defeated by George Podiebrad in 1453, from which date Utraquism in Prague has been practically an empty symbol. But it is still a tenet of Anglicanism, and is enumerated among "The Plain reasons against joining the Church of Rome" (London, 1880). The Catholic Church has never said that Communion under both forms is of itself either sinful or heretical. The Church has withheld the chalice from the laity out of reverence for the Precious Blood, and condemned the Hussites because they argued it was essential to salvation, and threatened to revive a heresy.

The Nestorians were condemned in the patristic period, and the heretics in the Council of Trent, because they denied that the Real Presence was whole and entire under each form (Denzinger Bannwart, 930 sqq.; Mansi, XXX). The Nestorians had denied that the Real Presence was wholly and entirely under each form. The bread, they said, contained only the Body of Christ and the wine only His Blood. This is heretical. Because, as the Church quotes (and the text is the authentic Greek), "whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord" (I Cor., xi, 27). For, "Christ rising again from the dead, dieth now no more" (Rom., vi, 9). Separation of flesh and blood is death, and hence Christ's presence whole and entire under each species is a dogma of Catholic belief. Catholic theology offers this explanation: By the words of consecration, Christ's Body is under the appearance of bread, and His Blood under the appearance of wine. The Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ form one indivisible Person, and must be found together. That virtue or force which unites the body to the blood, and vice versa, in the Eucharist, is known in Catholic theology under the term concomitance. Utraquism tended to undo this dogma, because it declared communion under both forms essential to salvation. This was virtually to deny that Christ was whole and entire under each form. It went further, in declaring that Communion-the reception of the Eucharist-was absolutely necessary to salvation.

Theologians distinguish two kinds of necessity: that of means and that of precept. Necessity of means is that absolutely obligatory use of those things required to attain a purpose. It is an "imperative must "that arises from the very nature of things. Necessity of precept is an obligation imposed by a command, and for good reasons that which is prescribed may be dispensed with. The Hussites contended that the Eucharist was a necessary means to salvation, so that those who died without having received the Eucharist, e.g. the insane, the young could not, according to the Hussites, be saved. All this they inferred from Christ's words: "Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood you shall not have life in you" (John, vi, 54). Now the Catholic Church denies that the Eucharist is necessary as a means to salvation. She commands the faithful to receive the Eucharist, emphasizes its importance, and declares it wellnigh impossible for one to continue long in the state of grace without it. This is a precept; from it dispensations are possible. Hence if any one died without this sacrament, his eternal 1088 would not, merely for this reason, be a necessary consequence. This is clear from the practice of the Early Church. Even when Communion under both forms prevailed, some received under only one species. To the sick it was thus often given, and the Church has never considered them lost. As to the text which seems to oblige Communion under both forms, it is a question of interpretation. The Catholic Church is the only authoritative interpreter of Christ's doctrine; to none other has this power been granted. Omitting here the many meanings Catholic theologians attribute to the verse, "Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you" (John, vi, 54), it should be noted that the Catholic Church has officially declared that these words do not make Communion under both forms obligatory (Denzinger-Bannwart, 930). This conclusion is substantiated by Scripture: "If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world" (John, vi, 52). It is true that some theologians believe more grace is conferred by Communion under both forms. But this question is speculative, not practical. It does not affect the Church's dogma, nor is this opinion by any means common to all Catholic theologians.

B. HUGHES

Archdiocese of Utrecht

Situated in the Netherlands, includes the Provinces of Utrecht, Friesland, Overyssel, Drenthe, Groningen, the larger part of Gelderland, and a small part of North Holland. In 1911 the archdiocese contained 17 deaneries, 282 parishes, 578 secular priests, 390 churches and chapels, and 383,000 Catholics. The cathedral chapter consists of a provost and 8 canons; the Government has no part in the nomination of the archbishop. The archiepiscopal seminary is divided into two sections: one at Driebergen with five professors, the other at Culenberg with twelve. The religious orders and congregations are: Augustinians, Carmelites, Capuchins, Dominicans, Franciscans, Trappists, Redemptorists, Brothers of Mercy, Brothers of Our Lady of the Sacred heart, and Brothers of St. John of God, with altogther 15 houses; Sisters of Our Lady of Mercy, Tertiaries of St. Francis, Tertiaries of St. Dominic, Sisters of Konigsbusch, Sisters of the Society of Jesus of Bois-le-Duc, Sisters of St. Joseph, Benedictine Nuns of the Perpetual Adoration, Sisters of St. Charles Borromeo, Sisters of the Good Shepherd, Carmelite Nuns of the Strict Observance, Daughters of Mary and Joseph, Sorores Matris Boni Succursus, Poor Sisters of the Child Jesus, Poor School Sisters, Sisters of Mercy, Sisters of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary, and Ursuline Nuns; altogether about 80 houses. The principal church of the diocese is the Cathedral of St. Catherine, built in the Gothic style in 1524; the former Catholic Cathedral of St. Martin, built 1251-67 in Gothic style, now belongs to the schismatic Jansenists.

The founding of the Diocese of Utrecht dates back to the Frankish era. In 695 St. Willibrord was consecrated at Rome Bishop of the Frisians. Towards the close of the seventh century, with the consent of the Frankish king, he settled at the market-town of Utrecht and built two churches there, the Church of Our Saviour, and that of St. Martin. The conversion of the Frisians to Christianity, though, progressed very slowly. After Willibrord's death St. Boniface repeatedly gave his attention to the Church of Utrecht without, however, being its bishop. Under the guidance of his friend St. Gregory, the school founded by St. Willibrord became a noted centre of Christian education for the northern part of the Frankish kingdom. During the early years of its existence the diocese suffered greatly from the incursions of the heathen Frisians, and in the ninth and tenth centuries from the plundering expeditions of the Normans, who traversed the territory robbing and burning as they went. Better times appeared during the supremacy of the Saxon emperors, who esteemed the Bishops of Utrecht highly, and frequently summoned them to attend the imperial councils and diets. Through the grants of land and privileges bestowed by these emperors the Bishops of Utrecht became secular princes, and were among the most powerful feudal lords of the north-western part of the empire. In this way, like the other German bishops, they became involved in the quarrels of the emperors and popes. Bishop William (1057-76) was an unswerving partisan of the Emperor Henry IV during the Strife of Investitures. He took part in the synod of Worms which pronounced the deposition of Pope Gregory VII, and signed the decree of deposition directly after the Archbishop of Mainz. His successor Konrad (1078-99) was also a zealous adherent of the emperor. The Concordat of Worms (1122) annulled the emperor's right of investiture, and the cathedral chapter received the right to the free election of the bishop. It was, however, soon obligated to share this right with the four other collegiate chapters which existed in the city of Utrecht. The Counts of Holland and Geldern, between whose territories the lands of the Bishops of Utrecht lay, also sought to acquire influence over the filling of the episcopal see. This often led to disputes at the election of the bishops, and it was but seldom that capable and worthy men gained the See of St. Willibrord. Consequently the Holy See frequently interfered in the election, and after the middle of the fourteenth century repeatedly appointed the bishop directly without regard to the five chapters.

The Great Schism of the West in the latter quarter of the fourteenth century also affected the Diocese of Utrecht. Bishop Arnold II of Horn (1371-78) was opposed by a rival bishop, Floris of Wevelinkhofen (1378-93). The latter was generally recognized when Arnold, in return for a large sum of money, renounced his claims to Utrecht, and was raised to the See of Liege. During the episcopate of Floris, Gerhard Groote, who traversed the diocese as a preacher of repentance, was very successful in his efforts to bring about reforms. Floris was succeeded by one of the best bishops of Utrecht, Frederick of Blankenheim (1392-1423). Frederick's excellent administration was followed by a schism that lasted twenty-five years. Pope Martin V would not recognize Rudolph of Diepholz (1423-55), who had been elected by the chapters, and appointed Rabanus, Bishop of Speyer, as bishop, and, after his resignation, the cathedral provost of Utrecht, Zweder of Culenberg. After Zweder's death in 1433 his brother, Walraf of Mors, was appointed bishop by Pope Eugene IV. As the neighbouring secular rulers took part in the quarrel over the diocese, the country suffered terribly until the general recognition of Rudolph put an end to the schism. After his death the chapters elected Gijsbrecht of Brederode, but Philip of Burgundy was able to obtain at Rome the appointment of his illegitimate son David. During the entire period of his episcopate David (1457-94) maintained himself with difficulty against his enemies, namely the knights of the diocese and the city of Utrecht. He was succeeded by Frederick of Baden (1496-1516) a protégé of Maximilian of Austria, and Philip of Burgundy (1518-24), who did much for the encouragement of art and to improve church discipline. Henry of Bavaria (1524-28) who was also Bishop of Freising and Worms, resigned the see in 1528 with the consent of the chapter, and transferred his secular authority to Charles V, who was also Duke of Brabant and Count of Holland. Thus Utrecht came under the sovereignty of the Hapsburgs; the chapters voluntarily transferred their right of electing the bishop to Charles V, and Pope Clement VII gave his consent to the proceeding. The first bishop appointed by Charles, Cardinal William Enckevorst, died in 1533 without having ever entered his diocese.

In 1550 at the instance of Philip II, the church organization of the Netherlands was entirely changed by forming new dioceses and reorganizing the old ones. Utrecht was taken from Cologne, of which it had been a suffragan, and raised to the rank of an archdiocese and metropolitan see. Its suffragan dioceses were Haarlem, Bois-le-Duc, Middleburg, Deventer, Leeuwarden, and Groningen. But the new ecclesiastical province had not a long existence. During the administration of the first archbishop, Frederick Schenk of Toutenberg (1561-80), Calvinism spread rapidly, especially among the nobility, who viewed with disfavour the endowment of the new bishoprics with the ancient and wealthy abbeys. When the northern provinces of the Netherlands revolted, the archdiocese fell, with the overthrow of the Spanish power. As early as 1573, under the supremacy of the Calvinists, the public exercise of the Catholic faith was forbidden. Proof of the persecution which the Catholics suffered is given by the death of the nineteen martyrs of Gorkum. The two successors appointed by Spain did not receive canonical confirmation, neither could they enter their diocese on account of the opposition of the States-General. From the end of the sixteenth century their place was taken by vicars Apostolic for the United Netherlands, who, however, were generally driven from the country by the States-General and forced to administer their charge from abroad. Although, in addition to this, there was a great lack of priests, still a very large part of the population of the Netherlands remained loyal to the Catholic religion. Among these vicars Apostolic, who were generally made titular archbishops, was John of Neercassel (1662-86), a friend of the Jansenists Arnold and Quesnel, who had fled from France and was inclined to Jansenism himself. His successor, Petrus Cobde (1688-1704), was suspended in 1702 by Clement XI on account of his Jansenistic opinions and his stubborn opposition to the papal see, and in 1704 the pope deposed him. The cathedral chapter of Utrecht, though, illegally elected first a vicar-general (1706), then in 1723 with the approval of the States-General chose the parish priest of Utrecht, Cornelius Steenhoven, as archbishop. Steenhoven was excommunicated by Pope Benedict XIII. This was the origin of the Jansenistic Church of Utrecht, which, however, was joined by only a very small part of the Catholic clergy and laity, although the state favoured it entirely. As the pro-vicars appointed by the pope were not permitted by the Government to enter the country, both the Catholic Church of Utrecht and that of the entire Netherlands was adminstered until the French Revolution by papal internuncios of Cologne and Brussels.

Owing to the occupation of Holland by the French in 1795, the Catholics obtained somewhat more freedom. Still, there was no proper organization of church affairs, not even after the uniting of the Netherlands with Belgium by the Congress of Vienna in 1815. The concordat made with the pope in 1827 was not carried out. In 1833 a vicar for the Netherlands was appointed once more. The Constitutions of 1848 granted the Catholics at last complete parity with the other confessions, and gave the church authorities almost unlimited freedom in purely religious matters and in the administration of the property of the Church. The pope could now plan the restoration of the ecclesiastical hierarchy in the Netherlands. After long negotiations the most essential regulations of the Concordat of 1827 were put into force. The Bull "Ex qua die" of 4 March, 1853, organized the Church of the Netherlands anew. Utrecht was raised once more to an archbishopric, and received the four suffragan dioceses of Haarlem, Bois-le-Duc, Breda, and Roermond. John Zaijsen was appointed the first archbishop; as administrator he also ruled the Diocese of Bois-le-Duc. The archbishop took up with great energy and caution the organization of the new dioceses, the division into deaneries, the settling of the boundaries of the individual parishes. The administration of the lands of the parishes, of the lands of the Church, and the management of the benevolent institutions. By numerous excellent decrees he provided for the improvement of church discipline, for the encouragement of orders and of church associations, for the training of a competent clergy (1857, a seminary for priests was opened), for the establishment of Catholic schools independent of the State, for the improvement of the Press, etc. In 1858 the cathedral chapters of the dioceses were organized and in 1864 the first provincial synod was held. In 1868 the archbishop resigned the archdiocese on account of age, retaining only the direction of the Diocese of Bois-le-Duc. His successors were Andreas Ignatius Schaepman (1868-82), during whose administration the large archiepiscopal museum was established; Petrus Matthias Snickers (1883-95), and Henry van de Wetering (since 1895).

BROM, "Bullarium trajectense" (2 vols., The Hague, 1891-96); "Neerlandia catholica seu provinciae ultrajectensis historia et conditio" (Utrecht, 1887); ALBERS, "Geschiedenis van het herstel der Hierarchie in de nederlanden" (2 vols., Nimwegen, 1903-04); "Archief voor de geschiedenis van het Aartbisdom Utrecht" (Utrecht, 1874--); BLOK, "Geschiedenis van het Nederlandsche Volk" (6 vols., Groningen, 1892-1904); "Onze Pius Almanak" (Alkmaar, 1911); "Naamlist der Dekens, Pastoors etc. van het Aarbisdom van Utrecht" (St. Michiels e-Gestel, 1911).

JOSEPH LINS

Abbey of Saint Vaast

Situated at Arras, the ancient capital of Artois, Department of Pas-de-Calais, France; founded in 667. St. Vaast, or Vedast, was born in western France about 453; and died at Arras in 540. Having lived for some years as a recluse in the Diocese of Toul, he was ordained priest by St. Remi (Remigius), Archbishop of Reims, who deputed him to prepare Clovis for the reception of the Sacrament of Baptism. After this he remained at Reims and acted as archdeacon for St. Remi. In 499 that prelate consecrated him first Bishop of Arras, and his labours in planting the faith in those parts were blessed by many miracles. Ten years later St. Remi committed to him the care also of the Diocese of Cambrai, and these two sees remained united until the eleventh century. At the death of St. Remi he was chosen to succeed him but declined the honour. His own death occurred in 540 and he was buried in his cathedral at Arras. In 667 St. Auburt, the seventh bishop of that see, commenced to build an abbey for Benedictine monks on the site of a little chapel which St. Vedast had erected in honour of St. Peter. St. Vedast's relics were transferred to the new abbey, which was completed by St. Auburt's successor and munificiently endowed by King Theodoric, who together with his wife was afterwards buried there. This Abbey of St-Vaast flourished for many centuries and held an important position amongst the monasteries of the Low Countries. It was ruled by many distinguished abbots, a list of whom, numbering seventy-nine, is given in "Gallia christiana". It was exempt from episcopal jurisdiction and maintained its independence until 1778 when it was aggregated to the Congregation of Cluny. At the Revolution it was suppressed and the conventual buildings became first a hospital and then a barrack. In 1838 the barrack was purchased by the down, a portion being used as a museum and archivium, and the rest becoming the residence of the bishop. The church, which had been desecrated and partially destroyed, was rebuilt and consecrated in 1833 and now serves as the cathedral.

G. CYPRIAN ALSTON

Vacancy

The state of being vacant, free, unoccupied: a term applied to an office or position devoid of an incumbent, as a vacant benefice, bishopric, parish, professorship, etc. Vacancies occur by the voluntary act of the incumbent or by compulsion. Generally speaking any cleric, even the pope, for just reasons may resign his office, the resignation being effective when duly accepted by the competent superior. As the pope has no superior, Celestine V, who renounced the papacy, published a special Constitution (L. I, tit. 7 in 6°) declaring that the College of Cardinals is competent to accept the formal abdication of the pope. Under certain conditions with approval of proper authority, an exchange of benefices or offices is permitted. Certain acts, licit or illicit, are equivalent to tacit renunciation, for example, when one accepts a promotion, makes a solemn religious profession, violates the canons concerning a plurality of benefices, renounces the clerical state. Under compulsion one loses his incumbency by death or removal. Some vacancies are provided for before they actually occur; for example, coadjutors may be named with the right of succession, the pope may make an appointment to go into effect at the death of the present incumbent, an exercise of the so-called jus praeventionis, at one time quite common. Removal ordinarily is a punishment, and no one should be punished without cause (sine culpa, nisi subsit causa, non est aliquis puniendus. Reg. 23 in 6°). The cause is usually, though not always, a crime committed. When removal is a penalty, the crime for which it is inflicted must be proven juridically. If the reason for dismissal be merely unfitness (causa non crimonosa), a juridical trial is not generally obligatory, though certain formalities are necessarily observed to establish the existence of sufficient warrant for removal, as well as to give the occupant an opportunity of being heard. This is particularly true of the administrative removal of parish priests or rectors in accordance with the Decree "Maxima cura" (S.C. Consist., 20 Aug., 1910). This decree permits such removal (without juridical trial) on account of insanity; inexperience or ignorance of such nature as seriously to impede a pastor in his work; deafness, blindness or other ailment, physical or mental, incapacitating a rector for a long time, unless provision can be made for a coadjutor; hatred or ill will on the part of the people, though unjust and not universal; loss of reputation among men of repute; maladministration of temporal affairs; continual neglect after one or two admonitions of parochial duties of moment; disobedience after warning of the bishop's precepts in grave matters.

Some, like removable rectors, are transferable at the will of the bishop. Care however should be taken not to transfer such persons against their will to inferior posts, as this would be considered a punishment. Vicars-general and deans lose their office by the death or resignation of the bishop or the cessation for any reason whatever of his jurisdiction. A vicar capitular or administrator of a vacant see retains his office till the papal Bulls appointing a new bishop are duly presented. No serious change of moment in the status of a diocese is permitted during an interregnum in accordance with the prohibition: Ne sede vacante aliquid innovetur (Decr. L., III, tit. 9).

In liturgy a Sunday is said to be vacant when no mention of it is made in the Office or Mass; such are the Sundays that fall on the feast or the Octave of Christmas, St. Stephen, St. John Evangelist, Holy Innocents, Epiphany or the vigil of Epiphany. Days too are liturgically vacant or free when unoccupied by a feast, privileged vigil or privileged ferial office; they are days to which no special Office is assigned.

ANDREW B. MEEHAN

Abbey of Vadstena

Motherhouse of the Brigittine Order, situated on Lake Wetter, in the Diocese of Linköping, Sweden. Though the abbey was founded in 1346 by St. Bridget with the assistance of Magnus II and Blanche of Namur, St. Catherine, on arriving there in 1374, with the relics of her mother St. Bridget, found only a few novices under an Augustinian superior. They chose St. Catherine as their abbess. She died in 1381, and it was not till 1384 that the abbey was blessed by the Bishop of Linköping. The canonization of St. Bridget in 1391 and her translation in 1394 added greatly to the fame and riches of her abbey. In 1400 Eric of Pomerania was invested at Vadstena by his aunt, Queen Margaret, with full royal rights over Denmark, Norway, and of Sweden. The Brigittine literature consisted mostly of translations into Swedish of portions of the Bible or of the legends of the saints. Such writings as are extant have been published for the most art by the Old Swedish Texts Society (Svenska Fornskrift-Sällskap) of Stockholm. Of these authors the best known belonging to Vadstena are perhaps Margaret Clausdotter, abbess (1473-1496), author of a work on the family of St. Bridget (printed in "Scriptores Rerum Svecicarum", III, I, 207-16), and Nicholas Ragvaldi, monk and general confessor (1476-1514), who composed several works. When he died, end of the abbey was near at hand. It was plundered by Gustavus Vasa in 1523, and lost most of its lands about 1527. In 1540 the larger part of the books and valuables were taken. The little community struggled on in spite of persecution. John III (1569-1592) restored and enriched the abbey, and Possevin, as papal legate, reformed it in 1580. In 1594 it was seized and destroyed by Charles, Duke of Sudermanland, afterwards Charles IX. The abbess, Catherine Olofsdotter, and most of the nuns, fled to the Brigittine nunnery at Danzig. Now only the chapter house and a few cells of the convent of the sisters remain, and form part of a lunatic asylum. A general hospital occupies the site of the convent of the brothers. The abbey church is still standing; it contains a few memorials of St. Bridget. (See BRIGITTINES; CATHERINE OF SWEDEN, SAINT.)

A.W. TAYLOR

Vaga

A titular see of Numidia, frequently mentioned by historians and ancient geographers. Before the Roman conquest it was an important commercial centre. Delivered to the Carthaginians by Massinissa, it was incorporated with the Numidian kingdom, and at a later date became part of Numidia Proconsularis. Metellus destroyed it, but it soon rose from its ruins, and under Septimius Severus was known as Colonia Septimia Vaga. Justinian fortified it, and in honour of his wife Theodora, named it Theodorias=2E It is to-day the small city of Beja, centre of a civil district of about 100,000 inhabitants in tunisia, and a railroad station in the heart of that rich agricultural region. The halls of Justinian still exist, but are greatly modified; the large tower of the Kasba was the donjon of the ancient citadel; one of its gates dates also from the sixth century and there are the remains of a large reservoir. Among the inscriptions of Beja several are Christian; from one we learn that the walls were built by Count Paul; from another that the principal mosque is an ancient Christian basilica, restored under Valentinian and Valens. The bishops known to us are: Libosus, present at the Council of Carthage, 256; Crescens at that of 349; Ampelius and Primulus, both at the Conference of Carthage, 411; the second had been a Donatist, but having abjured his error remained bishop conjointly with the first.

SMITH, Dict. Of Gr. And Rom. Geog., s.v., Vacca; MULLER, Notes on Ptolemy, ed. DIDOT, I, 643; TOULOTTE, Geog. De l'Afrique chretienne. Proconsulaire (Paris, 1892), 330-33; DIEHL, L'Afrique byzantine (Paris, 1896), 157, 220, 416, 530, 583.

S. PÉTRIDÈS

François Vaillant de Gueslis

Jesuit missionary, born at Orlxans, 20 July, 1646; died at Moulins, 24 Sept., 1718. He entered the Society of Jesus, 10 Nov., 1665; came to Canada in 1670; and was ordained priest at Quebec, 1 Dec., 1675. He first evangelized the Mohawks (1679-84). In the beginning of 1688 he was chosen by the Canadian authorities as ambassador to Thomas Dongan, Governor of New York. He was also the first missionary to work among the Indians at Detroit; but he remained only a few months, not entering into the plans of Sieur de Lamothe Cadillac. After the conclusion of peace between the French and the Iroquois he evangelized the Senecas (1702-07). There he contributed not a little to defeat the efforts of Colonel Schuyler at Onondaga who was trying to induce the Five Nations to drive out the French missionaries. The two principal scenes of his zeal in Canada were Quebec and Montreal. At Quebec (1685-91; 1697-1702), he filled the important posts of minister; procurator of the mission, and preacher, and at Montreal (1692-96; 1709-15), he was the first superior of the residence established by the Jesuits in 1692. He founded the Men's Congregation of Villemarie which exists to the present day. He returned to France in 1715.

ARTHUR MELANXON

Alfonso de Valdés

Spanish Humanist and chancellor of the Emperor Charles V, born at Cuenca in Castile about 1500; died at Vienna in October, 1532. His talents gave him early advancement and he accompanied Charles V in 1520 on the journey from Spain to the coronation at Aachen, and in 1521 to the Diet of Worms. From 1522 he was a secretary of the imperial chancellery and as secretary wrote a number of important state papers: in 1525, he drew up the report of the battle of Pavia; in 1526 the energetic, graphic, and at times deliberately sarcastic state paper addressed to Pope Clement VII, in which the faithlessness of the pope is stigmatized, and an appeal is made for the convoking of an Ecumenical Council. After the capture and pillage of Rome in 1527, Valdés wrote the dialogue "Lactantius" in which he violently attacked the pope as a disturber of the public peace, an instigator of war, and a perfidious deceiver, declared the fate of Rome the judgment of God, and called the States of the Church the worst governed dominion in the world. The dialogue was printed in 1529 and was widely read. The papal nuncio at Madrid, Baldassare Castiglione, brought an accusation before the Inquisition, but the trial amounted to nothing because Charles V took his servant under his protection, while the grand inquisitor also declared that it was not heretical to speak against the morals of the pope and the priests. Consequently it was decided that the dialogue was not calumnious. Valdés was full of enthusiasm for the ideas of Erasmus of Rotterdam and sought to gain currency for them in Spain. In 1529 he accompanied the emperor to Italy, Germany, and the Netherlands. At the Diet held at Augsburg in 1530 he was an influential negotiator with Melanchthon and the Protestants, and met them in a pacific and conciliatory spirit; yet it cannot be said that he shared their views or showed that he understood Luther's motives; his point of view was solely that of a statesman. In October, 1531, he wrote from Brussels the letter of congratulation to the Catholic of Switzerland after the victory over Zwingli. He was the brother of Juan Valdés, the heretical movement in Naples, many of whose followers became apostates.

KLEMENS LÖFFLER

Diocese of Valence

(VALENTINENSIS).

Comprises the present Department of Drome. It was re-established by the Concordat of 1802, being formed of the ancient Diocese of Valence, less the portion comprised in the new Diocese of Viviers, and of various portions of the Diocese of Die, Saint Paul-Trois-Châteaux, Vienne (see ARCHDIOCESE OF LYONS), Orange, Vaison, Gap, Sisteron (see DIOCESE OF DIGNE). From 1802 to 1821 Valence was a suffragan of Lyons; since 1821 it has been dependent on Avignon.

Ancient Diocese of Valence

A tradition of the early sixth century attributes the establishment of Christianity at Valentia to the three missionaries sent from Lyons by St. Irenaeus; the priest St. Felix and the deacons Sts. Achilles and Fortunatus, all martyrs. The "Chronicles of the Bishops of Valence", probably compiled about the middle of the twelfth century, gives only confused information with regard to bishops prior to the ninth century. The first historically known bishop was St. AEmilianus (second half of the fourth century), who signed at the Council of Valence in 374. St. Sextus, martyred during the invasion of Chrocus, was erroneously introduced into the list of bishops by the Carthusian Polycarpe de la Riviere. In 450 Pope St. Leo made Valentia a suffragan of Vienne. St. Apollinaris, brother of St. Avitus, occupied the see for thirty-four years during the first half of the sixth century, and after the conversion of Sigismund, King of Burgundy, was exiled by the latter; he is the patron of the diocesan cathedral. Other bishops were: Maximus II (567), during whose episcopate the city was delivered from besieging Lombards by the prayers of St. Galla, a virgin of Bourg-les-Valence; Gontard (1082), who received Urban II at Valence, 1095; St. John I (1141-6), formerly a Cistercian Abbot of Bonnevaux, disciple of St. Peter of Tarentaise; Bl. Humbert de Miribel (1200-20); Gérold (1220-27), formerly Abbot of Cluny, later Patriarch of Jerusalem; St. Boniface of Savoy (1240-42), later Archbishop of Canterbury; Amadeus II, Cardinal of Saluces (1383-89); John VI, Cardinal of Lorraine (1521); Francois-Guillaume de Castclnau, Cardinal of Clermont-Lodève (1524-31); Jean de Montluc, brother of the historian Blaise, who assisted in the nomination of the Duke of Anjou as King of Poland (1553-79), and was suspected of Protestant tendencies. During the Middle Ages Valence recognized only the sovereignty of the emperor, as King of Burgundy and Arles; under him the bishops exercised real dominion. The neighbouring territories bore the title of Countship and Duchy of Valentinois. In 950 Gontard, of the house of the counts of Poitiers, made himself master of the Countship of Valentinois, which passed to the Duke of Savoy in 1419, and to the Dauphin Louis, son of Charles VII, in 1446, becoming united to the Crown of France. In 1498 Louis XII made Valentinois a ducal peerage which he gave to Caesar Borgia.

Diocese of St-Paul-Trois-Châteaux

According to a legend of the fifteenth century, St. Restitutus, first Bishop of St-Paul-Trois-Châteaux, was the man born blind, mentioned in the Gospel. Local traditions also make Sts. Eusebuis, Torquatus, Paulus, Amantius, Sulpicius, Bonifatius, Castorinus, and Michael early bishops of St-Paul-Trois-Châteaux. Mgr. Duchesne regards St. Paulus (fourth or sixth century), patron of the city, as the only known bishop. Owing to Saracen ravages (827-29) the Church of St-Paul-Trois-Châteaux, by Decree of Gregory IV, was united with the Church of Orange until the end of the eleventh century, when the Diocese of Orange was re-established. The Diocese of St-Paul-Trois-Châteaux was always dependent on Arles. Among its bishops were Heraclius (525-42), correspondent of St. Avitus; Saint Martin des Ormeaux (seventh century), who became a solitary.

Diocese of Die

The Carthusian Polycarpe de la Riviere gives St. Martinus (220) as first Bishop of Die. The oldest historically known bishop is St. Nicasius, who attended the Council of Nicaea in 325. After him are mentioned: St. Petronius, followed by his brother St. Marcellus (c. 463), confessor and miracle-worker; Lucretius (541-73), to whom St. Ferreolus of Uzes dedicated his monastic rule. For various reasons Abbé Jules Chevalier omits from the episcopal list: St. Maximus (sixth century); Wulphinus (end of eighth century); Exuperius and Saturninus (ninth century). Other bishops were: Hugh (1073-83), consecrated at Rome by Gregory VII, became a legate of the latter, presided over numerous councils for the reform of the Church, and subsequently became Bishop of Lyons; St. Ismido (1098-1115) of the noble house of Sassenage; Bl. Uric (1129-42), who opposed the Petrobrusian heresy in his diocese and became a Carthusian; Bl. Bernard (1173-76); St. Stephen (1203-8), formerly a Carthusian at the monastery of Portes; Bl. Didier (Desiderius) de Lans (1213-20). After the eleventh century the Diocese of Die, long disputed between the metropolitans of Vienne and Arles, became dependent on Vienne. By Bull of 25 September, 1275, in order to strengthen the Church of Valence in its struggle with the House of Poitiers, Gregory X united the Diocese of Die with that of Valence. This union, which lasted four centuries, was unfortunate for Die. It was annulled in 1687 by Louis XIV, who, to combat Protestantism, appointed a Bishop of Die.

Councils were held at Valence in: 374, at which measures were taken for ecclesiastical discipline; 530, against Pelagianism; 585, King Gontran's donations to the Church were confirmed; 855, against Gottschalk's heresy; 890, Louis, son of Boson, was proclaimed King of Provence; 1100, the Bishop of Autun was suspended as a simoniac; 1209, dealt with the conditions on which the Count of Toulouse should be admitted to absolution. A so-called Council of Valence, held at Montelimar (1248), anathematized Emperor Frederick II and organized the Inquisition in Southern France. The Benedictine Abbey of Notre-Dame-d'Aiguebelle, which was founded in 1045 through Hughues Adhemar, Baron de Grignan, and visited by Paschal II in 1107, subsequently fell to decay. In 1137 the Cistercians of Morimond were summoned by Gontard Dupuy, Lord of Rochefort, to found a new abbey in the neighbourhood of the first. From the end of the fifteenth century it belonged to commendatory abbots. Since 1816, when Pierre-Francois de Paul Malmy (Pere Etienne), a Trappist, secured possession of it, there has been a Trappist congregation at the Abbey d'Aiguebelle. The Canons Regular of St. Rufus, founded at Avignon in 1039, opened at Valence in 1158 a house which became their mother house in 1210, were secularized in 1774. Among the canons were: Anastasius IV, Adrian IV, and Julius II.

Among the saints of the diocese were: May (Marius), Abbot of Bodon (d. 550); Barnard (778-842), Archbishop of Vienne, who became a solitary at Romans, where he founded a large Benedictine monastery and built a church which still stands; Hugh (1053-1132), formerly a canon of Valence and Bishop of Grenoble, one of the founders of the Carthusians; Hugh, Abbot of Lioncel, nephew of the preceding (twelfth century), Blessed Bertrand of Garrigue, companion of Saint Dominic, died at Bouchet in the Diocese of St-Paul-Trois-Châteaux during a mission (1230); Blessed Humbert of Romans, general of the Dominicans, author of ascetical writings, died at the convent of Valence (1277). Adhémar de Monteil, a native of Grignan, Bishop of Le Puy, was accompanied on the First Crusade by Bernard of Valence, first patriarch of Antioch in the new Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, and by Raymond des Agiles, a native of St-Paul-Trois-Châteaux, one of the historians of the crusade. Marie Teyssonnier, called Marie de Valence (1576-1648), had such a reputation for piety that Cardinal de Berulle, St. Francis de Sales, Olier, Father Cotton, and Louis XIII visited her. Christophe d'Authier de Sigaud (1609-67), founder in 1632 of the Congregation of Missionary Priests of the Blessed Sacrament, founded the seminary in 1639.

Two women warriors played an important part in the history of this region: Marguérite de Laye triumphantly led the inhabitants of Montélimar against the Calvinist troops of Coligny; Philis de la Tour du Pin la Charce in 1696 successfully led the inhabitants of Lyons and the neighbouring communes against the invasion of the Duke of Savoy. Madame de Sevigne, the famous writer of letters, died in 1696 in the Chateau de Grignan which belonged to her son-in-law. At Romans Gambretta delivered a famous discourse (18 Sept., 1878) in which he outlined the whole anti-clerical policy of the Third Republic. In the cathedral of Valence a Requiem Mass is sung yearly on 29 August, for the soul of Pius VI, who died at Valence, 29 August, 1799, during his confinement in the citadel. The chief pilgrimages of the diocese are: Notre-Dame-de-Bonne-Combe at St-Germain d'Hauterives, dating from the twelfth century; Notre-Dame-de Chatenay at Lens-Lestang; Notre-Dame-de Consolation at Arpavon; Notre-Dame-de-Mont-Carmel at Chateauneuf-de-Mazenc; Notre-Dame-la Blanche at Mollans.

Before the application of the Associations Law of 1901 there were at Valence: Assumptionists, Capuchins, Marists, Lazarists, Carmelites, and Redemptorists, Oblates of St. Francis de Sales, and various orders of teaching Brothers.

Several orders of women are native to the diocese: Trinitarians, nursing and teaching sisters, established at Valence since 1695; Sisters of the Most Blessed Sacrament, hospital and teaching sisters, founded by Father Vigne, a convert, with mother-house at Romans, 1715; the teaching Sisters of St. Martha, founded in 1815 by Mlle du Vivier with mother-house at Romans; Sisters of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary, founded by Baroness de Mont-Rond and Abbé Née in 1851 for the supervision of work-rooms and studios, with mother-house at Recoubeau. At the end of the nineteenth century the religious orders had in the Diocese of Valence: 28 infant schools, 1 institution for deaf-mutes, 1 infirmary for dependent children, 1 orphanage for boys, 15 orphanages for girls, 3 industrial schools, 1 protective society, 3 reformatories, 12 houses of religious for the care of the sick in their homes, 1 asylum for idiots and epileptics, 10 hospitals. In 1905 the diocese had: 297,321 inhabitants, 37 parishes, 314 succursals, 68 vicariates. The present bishop, Mgr. Jean-Victor-Emile Chesnelong, b. at Orthez, 6 April, 1856, studied at Saint-Sulpice, was ordained at Paris, 1879, and consecrated by Pius X at Rome, 25 Feb., 1906.

Gallia christiana (nova), I (1715), 703-36, instr., 119-129; nova, XVI (1865), 289-344, instr., 101-42, 185-218; ALBANES, Gallia christiana (novissima), St-Paul-Trois-Châteaux (Montbeliard, 1909); ULYSSE CHEVALIER, Notice chronologico-historique sur les eveques de Valence (Valence, 1857); IDEM, Quarante annees de l'histoire des eveques de Valence au moyen-age (Paris, 1869); PERRIER, Histoire des eveques de Valence (Monaco, 1887); NADAL, Histoire hagiologique du diocese de Valence (Valence, 1855); IDEM, Histoire des seminaires du diocese de Valence (Valence, 1895); JULES CHEVALIER, Essai historique sur l'eglise et la ville de Die (Valence, 1888-1909).

GEORGES GOYAU

University of Valence

Erected 26 July, 1452, by letters patent from the Dauphin Louis, afterwards Louis XI, who was very fond of Valence. Pius II approved its erection in the Bull of 3 May, 1459. In February, 1541, the Canon Pierre Morel opened a college for thirteen poor students. In the sixteenth century Valence was famous for its teaching of law, entrusted to Italian professors or to those who had studied in Italy. The Portuguese jurist, Govea, taught at Valence, 1554-55; the French jurist, Cujas (1522-90), from December 1557 to 1559; and Francois Hotman from the end of 1562 until August 1568. It was at the instigation of Hotman that Bishop Montluc obtained from Charles IX the Edict of 8 April, 1565, which united the Universities of Grenoble and Valence. Cujas again filled a chair at Valence, August, 1567-75; he had among his auditors the learned Scaliger, the historian Jacques-Auguste de Thou, the jurist Pithou. The university was a centre of Protestant tendencies. Hotman was a determined Protestant; Cujas passed from Protestantism to Catholicism, but it is doubtful if his conversion was inspired entirely from religious motives. In view of these new tendencies the theological teaching was inadequate, and consequently in 1575 Montluc founded at Valence a college of Jesuits, but this was of short duration. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries the University of Valence was of only minor importance. From 1738 to 1764 its transfer to Grenoble was contemplated but this project was abandoned. It disappeared during the Revolution.

FOURNIER, Statutsa et privileges des universites de France, III (Paris, 1892), 361-412; NADAL, Histoire de l'universite de Valence (Valence, 1861).

GEORGES GOYAU

Archdiocese of Valencia

(VALENTINA).

Located in Spain; comprises the civil Provinces of Valencia, Alicante, and Castellón. The city of Valencia is in the region known in ancient days as Edetania, and has 173,000 inhabitants. Florus says that Junius Brutus, the conqueror of Viriathus, transferred thither (140 B.C.) the soldiers who had fought under the latter. Later it was a Roman military colony. In punishment for its adherence to Sertorius it was destroyed by Pompey, but was later rebuilt, and Pomponius Mela says that it was one of the principal cities of Hispania Tarraconensis.

Nothing positive is known about the introduction of Christianity into Valencia, but at the beginning of the fourth century when Dacianus brought the martyrs St. Valerius, Bishop of Saragossa, and his deacon, St. Vincent of Huesca, to Valencia, the Christians seem to have been numerous. St. Vincent suffered martyrdom at Valencia; the faithful obtained possession of his remains, built a temple over the spot on which he died, and there invoked his intercession. It is said that at the time of the Moorish invasion the people of Valencia placed the saint s body in a boat and tat the boat landed on the cape which is now called San Vincente. The King of Portugal, Alfonso Enriquez, found the body and transferred it to Lisbon. The first historically known Bishop of Valencia is Justinianus (531-46), mentioned by St. Isidore in his "Viri illustres". Justinianus wrote "Responsiones", a series of replies to a certain Rusticus. Bishops of Valencia assisted at the various councils of Toledo. Witisclus, present at the fourteenth Council of Toledo, was the last bishop before the Mohammedan invasion. Abdelazid, son of Muzza, took the city and, breaking the terms of surrender, pillaged it; he turned the churches into mosques, leaving only one to the Christians. This was without doubt the present Church of San Bartolomé or that of San Vincente de la Roqueta.

Valencia was in the power of the Moors for more than five centuries. The Cid (Rodrigo Diaz de Vivar) reconquered it for the first time on 15 June, 1094, turned nine mosques into churches, and installed as bishop the French monk Jérôme. On the death of the Cid (July, 1099), his wife, Doña Ximena, retained power for two years, when Valencia was beseiged by the Almoravids; although the Emperor Alfonso drove them from the city, he was not strong enough to hold it. The Christians set fire to it, abandoned it, and the Almoravid Masdali took possession of it on 5 May, 1109. Jaime the Conqueror, with an army composed of French, English, Germans, and Italians, laid siege to Valencia in 1238, and on 28 September of that year forced a surrender. 50,000 Moors left the city and on 9 October the king, followed by his retinue and army, took possession. The principal mosque was purified, Mass was celebrated, and the "Te Deum" sung. The see was re-established, ten parishes being formed in the city; the Knights Templar and Hospitallers who had helped in the conquest, also Dominicans, Franciscans, Augustinians, Mercederians, and Cistercians, opened houses. The Church of San Vincente outside the walls was rebuilt and beside it a hospital.

The consecration of the Dominican Berenguer de Castellbisbal, bishop-elect of the See of Valencia after the reconquest, was prevented because of the dispute between the Archbishops of Toledo and Tarragona for jurisdiction over the new see. Gregory IX decided in favour of Tarragona, and, as Berenguer had been appointed Bishop of Gerona in the meantime, Ferrer de San Martín, provost of Tarragona (1239-43), was appointed Bishop of Valencia. He was succeeded by the Aragónese Arnau de Peralta (1243-48) who drove the Bishop of Segovia, Pedro Garcés, from his see. The third Bishop of Valencia, the Dominican Andrés Albalat (1248-76), founder of the Carthusian monastery, began the construction of the cathedral; this was continued and finished by his successors: Gasperto de Botonach, Abbot of San Felin (1276-88); the Aragónese Dominican, Raimundo de Pont (1288-1312); the Catalonian raimundo Gastón (1312-48); Hugo de Fenolet, formerly Bishop of Vich (1348-56); and Vidal de Blanes (1356-69. Jaime de Aragón, Bishop of Tortosa and first cousin of Pedro IV, succeeded to the see in 1369. Hitherto the chapter had elected the bishops, but owing to the dissensions at the death of Bishop Blanes, Urban IV reserved the right to name the bishops until 1523, when the right of presentation was granted to the Spanish kings. At the death of Jaime (1396), the antipope Benedict XIII kept the see vacant for more than two years, and then appointed Hugo de Lupia, Bishop of Tortosa (1398-1427). He was succeeded by Alfonso de Borja (Calixtus III). The latter appointed Rodrigo de Borja (Alexander VI) to the See of Valencia; Rodrigo obtained from Innocent VIII the rank of metropolitan for his see (1492) and, after he was raised to the papacy, confirmed this decree. He also raised the studium generale of Valencia to the rank of a university, conferring upon it all the privileges possessed by other universities. Cesar Borgia bore the title of Archbishop of Valencia, and was succeeded by Juan de Borja y Llansol, Pedro Luis de Borja, and Alfonso de Aragón, illegitimate son of Ferdinand the Catholic and also Archbishop of Saragossa (1512-20).

The episcopate of the Augustinian St. Thomas of Villanova (1544-55), founder of the Colegio de la Presentación de Ntra. Señora, called also de Santo Tomás, was one of the most notable in the history of Valencia. St. Thomas was beatified (1619) by Paul V, and canonized (1658) by Alexander VII. His successors, Francisco de Navarra and Martín de Ayala, who attended the Council of Trent, were also men of distinction. Perhaps the most noted of all the archbishops of Valencia was the Patriarch Juan de Ribera (1569-1611). He decided to expel the Moors from the city, after exhausted all possible means to bring them to submission. He founded the Colegio de Corpus Christi and furthered the work of monastic reform, especially among the Capuchins, whom he had brought to Valencia. Many holy men shed lustre upon this era, including St. Louis Bertram, the Franciscan Nicolás Factor, the Carmelite Francisco de Niño Jesús, and the Minim Gaspar Bono. The archbishop and inquisitor general, Juan Tomás Rocaberti, publicly punished the Governor of Valencia for interfering in ecclesiastical jurisdiction: Andrés Mayoral (1738-69) improved the system of charities and public instruction, founded the Colegio de las Escuelas Pías, and the Casa de Ensenanza for girls. He collected a library of 12,000 volumes; this was burnt in the war of independence. The See of Valencia has had two cardinals, Barrio y Fernández and Monescillo y Sancho.

The cathedral in the early days of the reconquest was called Iglesia Mayor, then Seo (Sedes), and at the present time, in virtue of the papal concession of 16 October, 1866, it is called the Basilica metropolitana. It is situated in the centre of the ancient Roman city where some believe the temple of Diana stood. In Gothic times it seems to have been dedicated to the most Holy Saviour; the Cid dedicated it to the Blessed Virgin; Jaime the Conqueror did likewise, leaving in the main chapel the image of the Blessed Virgin which he carried with him and which is believed to be the one which is now preserved in the sacristy. The Moorish mosque, which had been converted into a Christian church by the conqueror, appeared unworthy of the title of the cathedral of Valencia, and in 1262 Bishop Andrés de Albalat laid the cornerstone of the new Gothic building, with three naves; these reach only to the choir of the present building. Bishop Vidal de Blanes built the magnificent chapter hall, and Jaime de Aragón added the tower, called "Miguelete" because it was blessed on St. Michael's day (1418), which is about 166 feet high and finished at the top with a belfry. In the fifteenth century the dome was added and the naves extended back of the choir, uniting the building to the tower and forming a main entrance. Archbishop Luis Alfonso de los Cameros began the building of the main chapel in 1674; the walls were decorated with marbles and bronzes in the over-ornate style of that decadent period. At the beginning of the eighteenth century the German Conrad Rudolphus built the façade of the main entrance. The other two doors lead into the transept; one, that of the Apostles in pure pointed Gothic, dates from the fourteenth century, the other is that of the Paláu. The additions made to the back of the cathedral detract from its height. The eighteenth century-restoration rounded the pointed arches, covered the Gothic columns with Corinthian pillars, and redecorated the walls. The dome has no lantern, its plain ceiling being pierced by two large side windows. There are four chapels on either side, besides that at the end and those that open into the choir, the transept, and the presbyterium. It contains many paintings by eminent artists. A magnificent silver reredos, which was behind the altar, was carried away in the war of 1808, and converted into coin to meet the expenses of the campaign. Behind the Chapel of the Blessed Sacrament is a very beautiful little Renaissance chapel built by Calixtus III. Beside the cathedral is the chapel dedicated to the "Virgen de los desamparados".

In 1409 a hospital was founded and placed under the patronage of Santa María de los Inocentes; to this was attached a confraternity devoted to recovering the bodies of the unfriended dead in the city and within a radius of three miles around it. At the end of the fifteenth century this confraternity separated from the hospital, and continued this work under the name of "Cofradia para el ámparo de los desamparados". Philip IV and the Duke de Arcos suggested the building of the new chapel, and in 1647 the Viceroy Conde de Orpesa, who ad been preserved from the bubonic plague, insisted on carrying out their project. The Blessed Virgin under the title of "Virgen de los desamparados" was proclaimed patroness of the city, and Archbishop Pedro de Urbina, on 31 June, 1652, laid the corner-stone of the new chapel of this name. The archiepiscopal palace, a grain market in the time of the Moors, is simple in design, with an inside cloister and a handsome chapel. In 1357 the arch which connects it with the cathedral was built. In the council chamber are preserved the portraits of all the prelates of Valencia.

Among the parish churches those deserving special mention are: Sts. John (Baptist and Evangelist), rebuilt in 1368, whose dome, decorated by Palonino, contains some of the best frescoes of Spain; The Temple (El Templo), the ancient church of the Knights Templar, which passed into the hands of the Order of Montessa and which was rebuilt in the reigns of Ferdinand VI and Charles III; the former convent of the Dominicans, at present the headquarters of the "capital general", the cloister of which has a beautiful Gothic wing and the chapter room, large columns imitating palm trees; the Colegio del Corpus Christi, which is devoted to the exclusive worship of the Blessed Sacrament, and in which perpetual adoration is carried on; the Jesuit college, which was destroyed (1868) by the revolutionary Committee, but rebuilt on the same site; the Colegio de San Juan (also of the Society), the former college of the nobles, now a provincial institute for secondary instruction.

The seminary was built in 1831; from 1790 it was situated at he former house of studies of the Jesuits. Since the Concordat (1851) it ranks as a central seminary with the faculty of conferring academic degrees. There have been in Valencia, since very remote times, schools founded by the bishops and directed by ecclesiastics. In 1412 a studium generale with special statutes was established. Alexander VI raised it to the rank of a university on 23 January, 1500. Ferdinand the Catholic confirmed this two years later. In 1830 the building was reconstructed; a statute of Luis Vivés adorns the corridor. Among the hospitals and charitable institutions may be mentioned: the Casa de Misericordia; the Provincial hospital; the orphan asylum of San Vicente; and the Infant Asylum of the Marqués de Campo. In Gandi there was a university, and the palace of St. Francis Borgia, now the novitiate of the Society of Jesus, is preserved.

BALLESTER, Hist. Del S. Christo de S. Salvador (Valencia, 1672), containing a list of the bishops of Valencia; TEICIDOR, Observaciones criticas a las antiguedades de Valencia, consulted by VILLANUEVA for the catalogue of bishops of Valencia in his Viaje Literario a las Iglesias de Espana, I; LLORENTE, Valencia in Espana: Sus mon. y artes (Barcelona, 1889); FLOREZ, Espana sagrada, VIII (3rd ed., Madrid); DE LA FUENTE, Hist. De las Universidades, I, II (Madrid, 1885).

RAMÓN RUIZ AMADO

University of Valencia

At the request of Jaime I the Conqueror, Innocent IV in 1246, authorized by a Bull the establishment of estudios generales in Valencia. Although ion virtue of this Bull some university courses were followed in Valencia, the university itself was not founded until 1411. Its foundation was due to the zeal of St. Vincent Ferrer and to the donation of a building by Mosen Pedro Vilaragut. Only very meagre accounts have been preserved of the practical workings of the university. From the time of its foundation the courses included Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, philosophy, mathematics, and physics, theology, canon law, and medicine. The closing years of the seventeenth, and the whole of the eighteenth century, witnessed the most prosperous era of the university, Greek, Latin, mathematics, and medicine being specially cultivated. Among the names of illustrious students that of Tosca, Torricelli's friend, noted physicist and author of important mathematical works, stands out prominently. Escolano says that it was the leading university in mathematics, the humanities, philosophy, and medicine. Large anatomical drawings were made by the students. Valencia was the first university of Spain to found a course for the study of herbs. Many of the Valencian graduates of medicine became famous. Pedro Ximeno discovered the third small bone of the ear. He was professor at Alcalá and had for a pupil the celebrated Vallés. Luis Collado, professor of botany, made some valuable discoveries and carried on exhaustive studies of the plants of the Levant; Vicente Alonzo Lorente wrote works on botany; and the famous botanist Cavanilles was also a student of this university. In the seventeenth century the university divided into two factions, the Thomists and the anti-Thomists. The discussions were heated and aroused partisan feelings throughout the entire Kingdom of Valencia. The university possessed a library of 27,000 volumes which was destroyed by the soldiers under the command of General Suchet. Among the most noted professors of the university was D. Francisco Peréz Bayer, a man of wide culture and great influence in the reign of Charles III. Around the university several colleges for poor students sprang up: the first was founded by St. Thomas of Villanova in 1561 and then followed those founded by Doña Angela Alonsar, and Mosen Pedro Martín. The most famous, called Corpus Christi, was founded by Blessed Juan de Ribera; Philip II founded that of San Jorge; and Melchor de Villena founded the last in 1643.

DE LA FUENTE, Historia de las Universidades, Colegios y demas establicimientos de ensenanza en Espana (1887); ORTI Y FIGUEROLA, Memorias historicas de la fundacion y progresos de la insigne Universidad de Valencia (1730); TEIXDOR, Estudios antiguos y modernos; Manueles de consejos de Valencia; DIAGO, Anales de Valencia; ESCOLANO, Historia de Valencia; DE VECIANA, Cronica de Valencia; XIMENO, Escritores del reino de Valencia (1747); FUESTER, Biblioteca valenciana (1827); MOREJON, Historia de la medicina espanola.

TEODORO RODRIGUEZ

Flavius Valens

Emperor of the East, b. in Pannonia (now Hungary) c. 328; d. near Adrianople, in Thrace, August, 378. Little is known of his origin, which, in spite of the Roman gentile name adopted by him in common with his brother, Valentinian, the Emperor of the West, was most probably barbarian. His elevation to the throne in 364 was due to Valentinian's favour. Valens, however, soon displayed some degree of warlike ability, as well as a barbarous cruelty, in dealing with Procopius, who, alleging as his title a bequest of the Emperor Julian, seized the throne. Having defeated and captured Procopius, Valens caused his rival's legs to be bound to two bent saplings, which were then released, so that the victim's body was torn asunder. A pagan at the time of his elevation, this emperor was baptized, about the year 367, by Eudoxius, the Arian Patriarch of Constantinople. His necessary ignorance of the fundamentals of Christianity, while, in the circumstances, not blameworthy, does not excuse his persecution of the Eastern Catholics from about the year 369 until the end of his reign. The most infamous example of this was in the case of Sts. Urbanus, Theodorus, and other ecclesiastics, to the number of eighty, whose martyrdom is commemorated on 5 September. This company of bishops and priests, having come to Constantinople, in 370, to plead for freedom of Catholic worship, were, by the emperor's orders, embarked on a vessel which then sailed for the coast of Bithynia; on nearing that coast, the crew, still acting upon the imperial instructions, set fire to the ship and abandoned it, leaving St. Urbanus and his companions to perish.

With this ferocity, Valens also evinced the crudely superstitious instincts of the savage. On a journey through Cappadocia, he visited, at Caesarea, St. Basil the Great (q. v.), whom he intended to drive into exile as a conspicuous foe of Arianism; but, the emperor's son falling sick, the bishop was called upon to restore him to health. This Basil agreed to attempt, on condition that the child should be baptized as a Catholic. In the event, an Arian performed the rite, the child died, and the saint escaped the threatened exile. In 347, at Antioch, there was a curious anticipation of modern "spirit rapping": a spirit, asked to spell the name of him who should succeed Valens, was supposed to have rapped out the Greek letters THETA-ETA-OMICRON-DELTA which begin the name Theodorus. The lives of Theodorus, an official of the imperial Court, and of those who had prepared this manifestation were forfeited, though the spirit may have meant to indicate Theodosius.

Throughout his reign, Valens had to defend his frontiers against formidable enemies. From 367 to 369 the Goths battled with the imperial forces, until an agreement was reached, fixing the Danube as the southern boundary of their settlements. Frequent incursions of the Isaurians demanded attention. In 373 Sapor (Shapur) II, King of Persia, having invaded Armenia, was driven back beyond the Tigris. The Huns and Alans were meanwhile pressing upon the rear of the Goths north of the Danube. In 376 the latter obtained permission to settle south of the river as peaceable colonists, unarmed; but when the imperial commissioners abused their authority to plunder the strangers, these turned in exasperation to make common cause with their fellow-barbarians from whom they had but recently fled. Huns, Alans, and Goths under Fridigern were surprised and defeated in 378 by Sebastian, the imperial general, and Valens himself hastened from his capital to complete the conquest before his nephew Gratian, who had succeeded Valentinian, could reach the enemy. As the emperor was leaving Constantinople, a monk openly prophesied his speedy death. Valens caused the prophet of evil to be imprisoned pending his return from Thrace. But the emperor never returned. Defeated by the barbarians near Adrianople, he took refuge in a country house and there perished in the conflagration with which the Goths or their allies unwittingly avenged the death of St. Urbanus and his companions.

(See also ARIANISM; SAINT ATHANASIUS; MELETIUS OF ANTIOCH.)

ST. BASIL, Epistolae in P.G., XXII; DE BROGLIE, L'Eglise et l'Empire Romain; GIBSON, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (London, 1896); NEWMAN, The Arians of the Fourth Century.

E. MACPHERSON

St. Valentine

At least three different Saint Valentines, all of them martyrs, are mentioned in the early martyrologies under date of 14 February. One is described as a priest at Rome, another as bishop of Interamna (modern Terni), and these two seem both to have suffered in the second half of the third century and to have been buried on the Flaminian Way, but at different distances from the city. In William of Malmesbury's time what was known to the ancients as the Flaminian Gate of Rome and is now the Porta del Popolo, was called the Gate of St. Valentine. The name seems to have been taken from a small church dedicated to the saint which was in the immediate neighborhood. Of both these St. Valentines some sort of Acta are preserved but they are of relatively late date and of no historical value. Of the third Saint Valentine, who suffered in Africa with a number of companions, nothing further is known.

Saint Valentine's Day

The popular customs associated with Saint Valentine's Day undoubtedly had their origin in a conventional belief generally received in England and France during the Middle Ages, that on 14 February, i.e. half way through the second month of the year, the birds began to pair. Thus in Chaucer's Parliament of Foules we read:

For this was sent on Seynt Valentyne's day
Whan every foul cometh ther to choose his mate.

For this reason the day was looked upon as specially consecrated to lovers and as a proper occasion for writing love letters and sending lovers' tokens. Both the French and English literatures of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries contain allusions to the practice. Perhaps the earliest to be found is in the 34th and 35th Ballades of the bilingual poet, John Gower, written in French; but Lydgate and Clauvowe supply other examples. Those who chose each other under these circumstances seem to have been called by each other their Valentines. In the Paston Letters, Dame Elizabeth Brews writes thus about a match she hopes to make for her daughter (we modernize the spelling), addressing the favoured suitor:

And, cousin mine, upon Monday is Saint Valentine's Day and every bird chooses himself a mate, and if it like you to come on Thursday night, and make provision that you may abide till then, I trust to God that ye shall speak to my husband and I shall pray that we may bring the matter to a conclusion.

Shortly after the young lady herself wrote a letter to the same man addressing it "Unto my rightwell beloved Valentine, John Paston Esquire". The custom of choosing and sending valentines has of late years fallen into comparative desuetude.

HERBERT THURSTON

Pope Valentine

Date of birth unknown; died about October, 827. Valentine was by birth was Roman, belonging to the Via Lata district. While still a youth he entered the service of the Church. His biographer in the "Liber pontificalis" (ed. Duchesne, II, 71-2) praises his piety and purity of morals, which won him the favour of Paschal I (817-24). Paschal ordained him at the Lateran palace, and placed him as archdeacon at the head of the Roman diaconate. Valentine retained his influential position during the pontificate of Eugene II (824-7), and after Eugene's death (27 August, 827) was unanimously elected his successor by the clergy, nobles, and people of Rome. The election had taken place at the Lateran whence the entire company proceeded to Sancta Maria Maggiore, where Valentine was tarrying in prayer. He was led to the Lateran basilica and placed upon the papal throne. After this, probably on the succeeding Sunday, he was consecrated bishop at St. Peter's, and then enthroned as pope. No information has been preserved of his brief reign, he died after he had occupied the papal see forty days according to the Liber pontificalis", and barely a month according to the testimony of the "Annales" of Einhard (ad an. 827).

J.P. KIRSCH

Valentinian I

(FLAVIUS VALENTINIANUS).

Emperor of the West, 364-75. Born at Cibalis (probably Mikanovici), Pannonia, Hungary, of humble parents, in 321; d. at Bregetio, near Pressburg, 17 Nov., 375. He entered the army early, became a tribune of the scutarii about 360, and accompanied Julian the Apostate to Antioch, whence in 464 he was exiled to Gaul for refusing to honour idols. On Jovian's death Valentinian was proclaimed emperor (26 Feb., 364), and at once ha appointed his brother Valens ruler of the East. In 265 he went again to Gaul to stop the inroads of the Alammani and Burgundians; the former were defeated at Charpeigne and Châlons-sur-Marne, but in 367 captured Mainz. A little later they were overthrown by Valentinian at Solicinium, but with heavy Roman losses. In 374 Valentinian concluded a treaty with their king Macrianus. In 368 the Picts and Scots were driven back from Britain, and the province of Valentia formed. While in Gaul Valentinian repudiated his first wife Valeria Severa, or at least he married a Sicilian, Justina, who became the mother of Valentinian II. In June, 374, the emperor was called to Illyricum by the incursions of the Quadi and Sarmatians; he made his headquarters at Bregetio, where during the negotiations with the Quadi he died from apoplexy. He was buried at Constantinople.

Though a sincere Christian, Valentinian generally abstained from interfering in religious questions, unless public interests forced him to act; probably in his endeavours to observe impartiality, he bestowed more favours on the Arians and heathens; his conduct contrasted strongly with that of Valens who ardently supported the Arians. Valentinian revoked Julian's edict, which forbade Christians to teach. He prohibited nocturnal sacrificial practices and magic, probably because they were causes of public disorder, for at the request of Praetextatus, proconsul of Achaia, he tolerated the mysteries of Eleusis and in 371 declared haruspicia legal. Constantius had formerly applied the property of the pagan temples to Christian churches, and Julian had given the church property to the temples, but Valentinian claimed all this transferred property, possibly from a desire of wealth, as well as from a wish to be impartial to all religions and also to reduce public taxation. He restored the cross and the name of Christ to the labarum from which Julian had removed them, supported Pope Damasus against Ursinus in the dispute concerning the papal election, forbade judicial proceedings on Sundays, exempted Christian soldiers from guarding pagan temples, or Christians from being made gladiators. On the other hand, he increased the privileges of the provincial priests of paganism (as the old Roman religion now began to be called), restricted the right of asylum, forbade the Christian clergy to receive legacies from Christian women unless they were their heirs; though no corresponding restriction was placed on pagan priests. Moreover, lest the wealthy should become clerics to enjoy clerical immunity, he prohibited them form receiving orders unless they first renounced their patrimony; but he ordered bishops to be tried by their peers. The Manichaeans he considered political disturbers and in 372 forbade their meetings at Rome, confiscated their houses, and punished their teachers. He supported the Arian Bishop of Milan, Auxentius, when excommunicated, believing him to be orthodox; however, he confirmed the decrees of the Synod of Illyria (375) against he Pneumatomachians and addressed a special letter to the bishops of Asia, ordering the homousian doctrine of the Trinity to be taught, notwithstanding, as he said, the example and practice of Valens; but his untimely end prevented him from enforcing his instructions on this point. Valentinian was affable and kind, but vain; he was a courageous, skilful soldier, and was ready to profess his faith openly when called upon; he wished to restore matters to the condition in which Constantine had left them, but in doing so abstained from emphasizing his own views; his legislative activity was very great, not the least interesting of his edicts being one in 368, by which he appointed fourteen physicians at rome to care for the poor at the public expense.

ALLARD, Le christianisme et l'empire romain (Paris, 1897); DE BROGLIE, L'eglise et l'empire romain; TILLEMONT, Hist. des empereurs, V; HODGKIN, Italy and Her Invaders, I (London, 1880); SOCRATES, Hist. eccl., IV.

A.A. MACERLEAN

Valentinian II

(FLAVIUS VALENTINIANUS)

Reigned 375-392; born in Gaul, about 371, murdered at Vienne, Dauphiny, Gaul, 15 May, 392. Son of Valentinian I and his second wife Justina. He was never much more than a merely nominal ruler, for while Gratian ruled in the East, most of the West was under the control of Magnus Maximus. Italy was all that was left to him, and even there the real ruler was his mother Justina, with whom he resided at Milan. In 387 Maximus, who had usurped the northern provinces in 383, invaded Italy and Justina and Valentinian fled to Thessalonica to seek the aid of Theodosius, Emperor of the East. Maximus was defeated, but Justina soon died, and Valentinian fell under the evil influence of Arbogast, who had him assassinated later. Valentinian was weak, but just, and loved peace. Justina was opposed to the orthodox party; she endeavoured to set up an Arian bishop at Milan and to procure a church for his followers, but was thwarted by St. Ambrose, who protested that the churches belonged to the bishop not to the emperor. And when the Roman senate attempted in 384 and 391 to restore the altar of victory and the pagan rites, it was St. Ambrose again who triumphed. On 23 January, 386, Valentinian published an edict protecting the Arian supporters of the Council of Ariminum, but this was overruled by Theodosius. On the other hand he supported Pope Damasus against his enemy Ursinus. With Gratian he reaffirmed the exemption of the clergy from the jurisdiction of the civil tribunals in religious matters. In 386 he issued an edict for the erection of the Basilica of St. Paul and directed Sallust, the prefect of Rome, to co-operate with Pope Siricus in this matter. The basilica was consecrated in 390. After Justina's death Valentinian abandoned Arianism, became a catechumen, and invited St. Ambrose to come to Gaul to administer baptism to him, but was not spared to receive it. His body was brought to Milan, where the saint delivered his funeral oration, "De obitu Valentiniani consolatio", in which he dwells on the efficacy of baptism of desire (P.L., XVI).

SOZOMEN, Hist. eccl., VII; DE BROGLIE, L'eglise et l'empire, III; TILLEMONT, Hist. des empereurs, V.

A.A. MACERLEAN

Valentinian III

Reigned 425-55, b. at Ravenna, 3 July, 419; d. at Rome, 16 March, 455; son of Constantius III and Galla Placidia, daughter of Theodosius, succeeded Emperor Honorius. In 437 he married his cousin Eudoxia at Constantinople. During his reign the Western Empire hastened to decay. Britain was abandoned in 446, Ætius failed to hold Gaul against the Franks, Burgundians, and Huns, while Africa was lost in 439 by Boniface, who was defeated by the Vandals under Huneric, later married to Valetinian's daughter Eudoxia. On 17 July, 425, all schismatics were ordered to leave Rome; in the same year the immunity of the clergy from civil jurisdiction was reaffirmed, though Valentinian abrogated this privilege later in 452; on 8 April, 4236, the Jews were forbidden to disinherit their children who became Christians. Valentinian was a strong adversary of the Manichaeans and in 445 declared them guilty of sacrilege, forbade them to reside in cities, and pronounced them incapable of performing any judicial acts. When appealed to by Leo I in the dispute with St. Hilary of Poitiers concerning the latter's metropolitan rights, he addressed a constitution to Ætius, Governor of Gaul, strongly supporting Leo. In it he emphasized the papal supremacy, founded on the position of St. Peter as head of the episcopacy, and pointed out the necessity of one supreme head for the spiritual kingdom, and ordered the civil authorities to bring to Rome any bishop who refused to come there when called by the pope. In 447 he issued an edict to prevent the violation of sepulchres. He was at Rome, with his wife and mother, in February, 450, for the celebration of the feast of the Chair of St. Peter, and after consultation with Pope Leo took active steps for the calling of a general Council, which met at Chalcedon in October, 451. Valentinian presented Xystus III with 2000 lbs. of silver to construct a tabernacle in the Lateran basilica, and in addition with a large golden ornament representing Christ and his Apostles, for the Confessio of St. Peter. As he grew older Valentinian displayed a vindictive, feeble, hesitating character; his training seems to have been purposely neglected by his mother, the real ruler. On the approach of Attila he fled from Ravenna, his imperial residence, to Rome, which was saved later, as is known by Pope St. Leo. After his mother's death (450), he gave way to his passions. In 454 he caused Ætius and his friends to be murdered; at last he was assassinated while attending the chariot races in the Via Labicana, Rome, near the tomb of St. Helena, at the instigation, it is said, of a Roman senator, Petronius Maximus, whose wife he had wronged.

GRISAR, Gesch. Roms und der Papste im Mittelalter, I (Freiburg, 1901), tr. Hist. of Rome and the Popes in the Middle Ages (London, 1911); TILLEMONT, Hist. des empereurs, VI (Paris, 1738); BURY, Later Roman Empire, II (London, 1889).

A.A. MACERLEAN

Valentinus and Valentinians

Valentinus, the best known and most influential of the Gnostic heretics, was born according to Epiphanius (Haer., XXXI) on the coast of Egypt. He was trained in Hellenistic science in Alexandria. Like many other heretical teachers he went to Rome the better, perhaps to disseminate his views. He arrived there during the pontificate of Hyginus and remained until the pontificate of Anicetus. During a sojourn of perhaps fifteen years, though he had in the beginning allied himself with the orthodox community in Rome, he was guilty of attempting to establish his heretical system. His errors led to his excommunication, after which he repaired to Cyprus where he resumed his activities as a teacher and where he died probably about 160 or 161. Valentinus professed to have derived his ideas from Theodas or Theudas, a disciple of St. Paul, but his system is obviously an attempt to amalgamate Greek and Oriental speculations of the most fantastic kind with Christian ideas. He was especially indebted to Plato. From him was derived the parallel between the ideal world (the pleroma) and the lower world of phenomena (the kenoma). Valentinus drew freely on some books of the New Testament, but used a strange system of interpretation by which the sacred authors were made responsible for his own cosmological and pantheistic views. In working out his system he was thoroughly dominated by dualistic fancies.

He assumed, as the beginning of all things, the Primal Being or Bythos, who after ages of silence and contemplation, gave rise to other beings by a process of emanation. The first series of beings, the aeons, were thirty in number, representing fifteen syzygies or pairs sexually complementary. Through the weakness and sin of Sophia, one of the lowest aeons, the lower world with its sujection to matter is brought into existence. Man, the highest being in the lower world, participates in both the psychic and the hylic (material) nature, and the work of redemption consists in freeing the higher, the spiritual, from its servitude to the lower. This was the word and mission of Christ and the Holy Spirit. The Christology of Valentinus is confusing in the extreme. He seems to have maintained the existence of three redeeming beings, but Christ the Son of Mary did not have a real body and did not suffer. The system of Valentinus was extremely comprehensive, and was worked out to cover all phases of thought and action. While Valentinus was alive he made many disciples, and his system was the most widely diffused of all the forms of Gnosticism. His school was divided into two branches, the Oriental and the Italian. The former was spread through Egypt, Syria, and Asia Minor, the latter in Rome, Italy, and Southern Gaul. Among the more prominent disciples of Valentinus, who, however, did not slavishly follow their master in all his views, were Heracleon, Ptolemy, Marcos, and Bardesanes. Many of the writings of these Gnostics, and a large number of excerpts from the writings of Valentinus, are still in existence. Tertullian ascribes to him the apocryphal Gospel of Valentinus, which, according to Irenaeus, was the same as the "Gospel of Truth".

IRENAEUS, Adv. Haer., I, 1 seq., III, 4; HIPPOLYTUS, Philosophumena, VI, 20-37; TERTULLIAN, Adv. Valentin.; EPIPHANIUS, Haer., XXXI; THEODORET, Haer. Fab., I, 7; HEINRICI, Die Valentin. Gnosis u. die heilige Schrift (Berlin, 1871). See bibliography to GNOSTICISM.

PATRICK J. HEALY

Valerian

(Publius Aurelius Licinius Valerianus).

Roman emperor (253-60). Member of a distinguished family, he had held several offices before the army proclaimed him emperor in 253 at Rhaetia. Weak and irresolute, his abilities were unequal to the difficulties of the times; his son and coregent, Gallienus, was lacking also in force. Christian tradition regards him as the originator of the persecution of the Christians under Decius. Though kindly disposed towards the Christians as emperor he was driven to in severe measures by the hostile party, whose leader, the general Macrianus, aimed only to gain advantages for himself through the difficulties internal disturbances would cause the emperor. In 257 Valerian issued a rescript, in kindly language, taking from Christians the right to hold assemblies or to enter the subterranean places of burial, and sending the clergy into exile. In 258, by a new and absolutely merciless edict, bishops, priests, and deacons were executed immediately, men of senatorial and equestrian rank were is punished with degradation and confiscation of goods to be followed by death if they refused to offer heathen sacrifice, women were threatened with confiscation of their property and exile, and Christians in the imperial household were sent in chains to perform forced labour on the imperial domains. In this persecution Christian Rome and Carthage lost their leaders: Pope Sixtus was seized on 6 August, 258, in one of the Catacombs and was put to death; Cyprian of Carthage suffered martyrdom on 14 September. Another celebrated martyr was the Roman deacon, St. Lawrence. In Spain Bishop Fructuosus of Tarragona and his two deacons were put to death on 21 January, 259. There were also executions in the eastern provinces (Eusebius, VII, xii). Taken altogether, however, the repressions were limited to scattered spots and had no great success. Valerian was finally captured by the Persians and died a prisoner. Macrianus and his two sons were killed in the struggle for the throne. Gal1ienus, who became Valerian's successor, annulled at once all his father's laws hostile to Christianity.

TILLEMONT, Histoire des empereurs, III (Brussels, 1707-39); SCHILLER, Geschichte der römischen Kaiserzeit, I (Gotha, 1883) ii, 811-23; GIBBON, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (London, 1854), ch x; LINSENMAYER, Die Bekämpfung der Christen durch den römischen Staat (Munich, 1905), 146-58; HEALY, The Valerian Persecution (Boston, 1905).

KLEMENS LÖFFLER

Validation of Marriage

May be effected by a simple renewal of consent when its nullity arises only from a defective consent in one or both parties. When, however, matrimony is invalid on account of the existence of some ecclesiastical impediment, it may be revalidated by simple dispensation or by that known as Sanatio in Radice.

(1) In the first method, as soon as a simple dispensation from the impediment has been obtained, a renovation of consent of both parties will validate the marriage. When the impediment had affected only one of the parties and the other was unaware of the impediment, it is probably that both must renew their consent. That a true renovation of consent be obtained, it is requisite that the parties be made aware of the nullity of their marriage, unless sanatio in radice be resorted to. The renovation must be made before the authorized ecclesiastical authority and witnesses when the impediment has been public.

(2) The dispensation called sanatio in radice consists in the revalidation of a marriage by reason of a consent formerly given, but ineffective at the time owing to some ecclesiastical impediment. When the impediment is removed, the consent is ipso facto ratified and no renovation is required. In such a case, it is requisite that the consent of both parties to the marriage had not ceased and that their wedlock had had the external appearance of a true marriage. Sanatio is resorted to when there is urgent reason for not acquainting the parties with the nullity of their marriage, or when one of the parties alone is cognizant of the impediment and the other cannot be informed without grave consequences, or when one party would be unwilling formally to renew a consent that is presumably existent. The pope has power to give the dispensation called sanatio in radice for all marriages which are invalid in consequence of an ecclesiastical impediment. Bishops generally have no such power, even when by particular indult they can dispense in diriment impediments. For the granting of sanatio in radice a special apostolic faculty is required. In the United States, the ordinaries may grant such dispensation, under certain limitations, when only of the parties to the marriage is aware of the impediment.

WILLIAM H.W. FANNING

Lorenzo Valla

(DELLA VALLE).

Humanist and philosopher, b. at Rome, 1405; d. there, 1 Aug., 1457. His father came from Placentia. He studied Latin under Leonardo Bruni (Aretino) and Greek under Giovanni Aurispa. At the age of 24 he wished to obtain a position in the papal secretariate, but was considered too young. After his father's death he accepted a chair of eloquence in the University of Pavia, where he wrote his treatise "De voluptate" (1431), an emended edition of which appeared later under the title, "De vero bono". On account of his open letter attacking the jurist Bartolo (1433) and ridiculing the contemporary jurisprudence he was forced to leave Pavia. He went to Milan and later to Genoa, made another effort to succeed at Rome, and finally settled at Naples (1433), where he became secretary to Alfonso of Aragon, whose Court, frequented by the most distinguished writers, was a hotbed of licentiousness and debauchery. Lorenzo confesses that his life there, like his previous life, was not free from moral stain. At Naples he wrote "De libero arbitrio", "Dialecticae disputationes", "Declamazione contro la donazione di Constantino" (1440), "De professione religiosorum" (1442, not printed until by Vahlen in 1869). In 1444 he had a controversy with Fra Antonio da Bitonto on the question of the composition of the Apostles' Creed by each of the Apostles. His philosophical and theological elucubrations caused him to be tried for heresy by the Curia at Naples, but the trial was discontinued through the intervention of King Alfonso. His standard work is "De elegantia linguae latinae", which first placed the study of Latin on a scientific basis. He had laboured on it from 1435, and in 1444 it was published through the indiscretion of Aurispa. The Humanists who preceded him had formed their Latin style rather empirically, and consequently had admitted many constructions peculiar to popular Latin. Though Valla had refrained from personalities, all the literary writers considered his work a provocation, and hurled invectives against the author. This controversy is one of the most unpleasant pages in the history of the Italian Renaissance. The fiercest aggressor was Poggio Bracciolini, who did not confine himself to pointing out errors of style in Valla's works, but accused him of the most degrading vices. Valla's no less virulent answers are collect in his "Invectivarum libri sex". Poggio's invectives could not but create a bad impression at Rome; as Valla still hoped to obtain a position in the Curia, he wrote an "Apologia ad Eugenio IV", excusing himself for his faults and promising amendment. But it was only after the election of Nicholas V that he found favour (1448), obtaining first the position of scriptor, and later of Apostolic secretary. Callistus III bestowed on him a canonry in St. John Lateran, which he was able to hold but for a few years. By order of Nicholas V he translated various Greek authors.

His philosophical and theological works are interesting. In his "Disputazioni dialettiche" he bitterly opposes Aristotle and the Scholastics, but he treats his subject superficially, and rather as a grammarian than as a philosopher. He made no positive contribution to philosophy, but only helped to discredit Scholasticism. His most discussed work is the dialogue "De voluptate". In this Leonardo Bruni (Arentino) defends the Stoic doctrine that a life conformed to nature is the summum bonum; Antonio Beccadelli (Panormita) strongly favours Epicureanism, declaring that the desire of pleasure is to be restrained only lest it might be an obstacle to a greater pleasure and that continence is contrary to nature; finally, Niccolo Niccoli speaks against both in favour of Christian hedonism, holding that perpetual happiness is the summum bonum, and that virtue is practised only as a means of obtaining it. It is uncertain whether Beccadelli or Niccoli (who is declared victor by the onlookers) expresses Valla's personal opinion. It would seem that he had not then (1431) come to a definitive opinion. He confines himself to expounding the three opinions, but gives Epicureanism the most ardent and eloquent defender. The way in which his "Apologia" extenuates what had been said in "De voluptate", arguing on the meaning of the Latin word voluptas, shows that he was undecided.

In the "Declamazione contro la donazione di Costantino", probably inspired by Alfonso, who was at war with Augene IV for possession of the Kingdom of Naples, Valla exhorted the Romans to rebel and their leaders to deprive the pope of his temporal power, which he deems the cause of all the evils then afflicting Italy. The "Annotazioni sul testo latino del Nuovo Testamento" deals chiefly with the Latinity, and less frequently with the translation itself. In the "De professione religiosorum" he denies that the religious state is the most perfect, as there is greater merit in acting spontaneously than in fulfilling what one is obliged to do by vow, and he taxes the monks with arrogance for calling themselves religious, as if other Christians were not so; he refrains, however, from trying to discredit them by relating salacious stories as the other Humanists delighted in doing. In the "De libero arbitrio" he concedes that the foreknowledge of God is not incompatible with free will, but maintains that our intellects are unable to comprehend this truth. Valla first gave expression to many ideas that were taken up later, especially by the reformers. Like the other Humanists of his age he lacked firmness of character.

VALLA, Opera (Basle, 1540); VAHLEN, Laurentii Vallae opuscula tria (Vienna, 1869); GABOTTO, Lorenzo Valla e l'epicuresimo nel 400 (Milan, 1889); MANCINI, Vita di Lorenzo Valla (Florence, 1891); MONNIER, Le Quattrocento (Paris, 1901); ROSSI, Il quattro cento, Storia letteraria d'Italia (Milan, s. d.); PASTOR, Gesch. der Papste, I (3rd ed., Freiburg, 1901), 16.

U. BENIGNI

Archdiocese of Valladolid

(VALLISOLETANA).

Bounded on the north by Palencia, east by Burgos and Segovia, south by Avila and Salamanca, and west by Zamora. Excepting two towns, it comprises the civil Province of Valladolid, and has in its territory six towns which are alternately one year under its jurisdiction and the next under that of the Diocese of Avila. Its suffragan dioceses are Astorga, Avila, Segovia, Salamanca, Zamora, and Ciudad Real. Valladolid (60,000) is built on the site of an ancient Roman city, and remains of Roman ruins are to be found, but it does not seem to be the Pintia which Antoninus says was 106 miles from Astorga. Probably it was founded by the Moors and given the name of Ulid or Walid. The first mention of it is found in the "Cronica de Cardeña" as one of the towns which Sancho II offered to his sister Doña Urraca in exchange for Zamora, the seigniory of which had been conferred upon her by her father. The real founder of Valladolid was the Castilian Count Ansúrez to whom Alfonso VI ceded it in 1074. He built the churches of Santa María la Antigua and Santa María la Mayor, founded the parish of San Nicolas, but he seems to have found already existing the churches of San Julián and San Pelayo. He built he great bridge over the Pisuerga and two hospitals near his own palace. On 21 May, 1095, the Church of Santa María la Mayor was dedicated by D. Bernado, Archbishop of Toledo, assisted by the Archbishops of Palencia, and many other bishops and noted personages. Ansurez and his wife Eylo conferred vast territories upon the abbot and chapter of the collegiate church, for purposes of colonization. This grant consisted of the monasteries of San Julian and San Pelayo, lands in Tierra de Campos, and a great stretch of land between the branches of the River Esgueva.

The first abbots of Valladolid in the twelfth century were Saltus or Agaldus; Hervaeus; Pedro; Martín; Juan; Miguel; and Domingo; in the thirteenth, Juan Domínguez, counsellor of St. Ferdinand; D. Felipe, son of St. Ferdinand; D. Sancho de Aragon, son of Jaime I; D. Martín Alonso, illegitimate son of Alfonso the Wise; and Gómez García of Toledo; in the fourteenth, Juan Fernández de Limia, later Archbishop of Santiago; and Fernando Alvarez de Albornoz, cousin of the celebrated cardinal; in the fifteenth, Diego Gómez de Fuensalida; Cardinal Pedro de Fonseca; the famous Alfonso de Madrigal, called "el Tostado", Cardinal Fr. Juan de Torquemada; Cardinal D. Pedro de Mendoza; and in the sixteenth century, D. Fernando Enríquez, son of the admiral, D. Alfonso Enriquez Villarroel; and D. Alfonso de Mendoza. In 1124, with the assistance of the Cardinal legate Adeodatus, a council of all the prelates of the kingdom was held at Valladolid, and in 1137 another, presided over by Cardinal Guido. On 1 July, 1217, St. Ferdinand III was proclaimed king in this city, on the abdication of his mother Doña Berenguela.

In 1238 another council was held, over which the legate Bishop of Sabina presided. In order to terminate the disputes with Palencia, Philip II, who was born at Valladolid, wished to have it constituted a diocese, and Clement VIII erected it on 25 Sept., 1595, and the king conferred on it a city charter. The first bishop was D. Bartolomé de la Plaza, 1597, and among his successors D. Martin Delgado Cenarro (1743-53) deserves mention. By the Concordat of 1851 the elevation of Valladolid to the rank of a metropolitan was stipulated, and Pius IX at the request of Isabella II issued the Decree for its erection on 4 July, 1857. The first archbishop was D. Luis de Lastra y Cuesta, and his successors were Cardinal Juan Ignacio Moreno, Cardinal Benito Sanz y Fores, and the prelate who has just been raised to the cardinalitial dignity, D. José Cos y Macho. Many noted events have taken place at Valladolid: the marriage of Alfonso X and Dona Violante de Aragon and that of Alfonso XI to Dona Constanza; Columbus died there; and D. Alvaro de Luna was decapitated. The first auto da fe of the Spanish Inquisition was carried out at Valladolid, and the Cortes met there many times. The city owes much to the famous Dona María de Molina, wife of Sancho the Brave, regent during the minorities of Ferdinand IV and Alfonso Xi. The latter conferred many distinctions upon Valladolid and gave it its university. The Court resided several times at Valladolid, the last time from 1601 to 1606 by wish of Philip III, who was much attached to the city.

Churches

Santa María la Antigua was the parish church of the counts of Valladolid and was in existence as early as 1088. Behind the modern cathedral are the remains of the ancient cathedral of Santa María la Mayor, not as founded by the Conde Ansúrez, but as restored a century and a half later. Bishop Lucas of Tuy says that the Abbot Juan, chancellor of St. Ferdinand, later Bishop of Osma, rebuilt and redecorated it, transferring the chapter meanwhile to Santa María la Antigua (1226). Its architecture is of the Transition period. Antolínez de Burgos, who lived in the sixteenth century, describes with enthusiasm its magnificent cloister. When the diocese was erected, Philip II engaged Juan de Herrera, the famous architect of the Escorial, to make the plans of the new cathedral. Herrera began the construction, but was obliged to go back to the Escorial, and was succeeded by D. Alberto da Churriguera, from whom the Spanish style of architecture Churrigueresco (Baroque) takes its name. Notwithstanding this, the influence of Herrera can be traced in the exterior. The principal façade has four Doric half columns, which support the entablature of the first story; between each column rises a magnificent arch overhanging a rectangular door over which is placed the figure of the Assumption, the titular of the cathedral. In the inter- columnar spaces are statutes of Sts. Peter and Paul, and a door at each side. Two towers were to have finished the principal fafacadeccedil;ade; of these one was never built beyond the firs story, and the other which was finished collapsed in 1841. The interior is imposing; along the top is an open gallery finished with a balustrade. The tabernacle built by Juan de Arfe (1590) and the choir stalls, which were brought from the Dominican church, are two of the precious possessions of this cathedral.

The Dominican Convent of San Pablo, founded in 1276 by Doña Violante, wife of Alfonso X, the Wise, deserves special mention. Juan II lived there, and was temporarily buried there until his remains could be transferred to the Cartuja de Miraflores. It is a Gothic building, the most notable feature of which is the fafacadeccedil;ade of its church, built at the expense of Cardinal Juan de Torquemada and Fr. Alonso de Burgos, Bishop of Palencia. Beside it is the Dominican College of San Gregorio, founded in 1488 by Fr. Alonso de Burgos, confessor of Isabella the Catholic. The famous Luis de Granada studied there. Its fafacadeccedil;ade is the best of its kind on account of its original designs. Its cloister, with a double gallery, is also notable. The ancient College of Santa Cruz, founded by Cardinal Mendoza, a building in the plateresque style, has been converted into a museum, and contains many beautiful samples of religious sculptures. The ancient palacio real serves as a court building. This has a beautiful fafacadeccedil;ade, with a tower at each side, and finished with a colonnade of alternating arches having square openings. The episcopal palace is a handsome building, and the conciliar seminary, founded by D. Bartolomé de la Plaza in 1597 and rebuilt in 1847 by D. José Antonio Ribadeneyra, was made a pontifical university by Leo XIII in 1897.

Valladolid has secondary and normal schools, archaeological and art museums, and a library of 30,000 volumes. The Spanish cavalry school is situated here also. Among the charitable establishments may be mentioned the Hospital de la Resurrección; the military hospital, formerly a convent of the Carmelites; the hospital de Esgueva; the Casa de Misericordia, occupying the ancient palace of the counts of Benavente; the asylums for mendicants.

QUADRADO, Espana, sus monumentos y artes, Valladolid (Barcelona, 1885); DE LA FUENTE, Historia de las universidades de Espana, I (Madrid, 1884); IDEM, Hist. eccl. de Espana (2nd ed., Madrid, 1881); GEBHARDT, Historia general de Espana (Barcelona).

RAMON RUIZ AMADO

University of Valladolid

The name of the founder and the date of foundation of the University of Valladolid are not known with certainty. Its origin probably dates from 1260-64; in 1293 the university was in a most flourishing condition. Alfonso XI was the patron of Valladolid, just as Alfonso the Wise had been that of Salamanca. He provided a fixed revenue for the estudios, of one third the tithes received from Valladolid and its surrounding hamlets, conferred many honours on its professors, and finally petitioned Clement VI for papal authorization, which was given in the Bull of 30 July, 1346. All the courses embraced by the great universities, including medicine and surgery, were installed, the latter branch being later separated and constituted a special course. According to Morejón (see bibl.), medical science in Spain substituted the system of Hippocrates for Arab methods much earlier than foreign writers have asserted. In 1513 the physician Barnadino Montana de Monserrata, in his book "Libro de la anatomia del hombre" (folio 3), said that to study surgery it was necessary to go to either Montpelier, Bologna, or Valladolid. At Valladolid the lectures were so famous that Montana at the age of seventy was carried in a litter to hear the lectures of Prof. Alfonso Rodriguez de Guevara. The professor of surgery made twenty-five dissections in the general hospital each term. The professor and students of botany went into the country to make a practical study of plant life. The influence of the university was very great in both State and Church.

From the catalogue of famous students in the "Historia de Valladolid" the following names are taken: Juan Auves, doctor of canon law, librarian of Santa Cruz, and Bishop of Ciudad (d. 1549); Antolinez de Burgos, first historian of the city; Augustin Antolinez, Augustinian, professor of the university and of that of Salamanca; Tomás Arizmendi, counsellor of Castile; Lorenzo Arrazola, chief counsellor of the Crown; Pedro Avila y Soto, professor of the university, counsellor of the Indies and of Castile, criminal prosecutor of the Crown, and counsellor of the army; Gaspar R. Bravo de Somonte, professor and physician to Philip IV and Charles II; Breton y Simancas, Bishop and Viceroy of Naples; Pedro Cevallos, minister of Ferdinand VII; Agustin Esteban Collantes, minister of Isabella II; Dionisio Daza y Chacón, distinguished physician who rendered valuable services at Augsburg during the plague of 1564, was surgeon to Maximilian, the princess Dona Juana, physician of Don Carlos and Don Juan of Austria in the battle of Alpujarra; Diego Escudero, compiler of the "Nueva Recopilación"; José Larra (Figaro), celebrated litterateur; Luis Mercado, prof., and physician to Philip II during the last twenty years of his life, an eminent writer greatly misunderstood by Sprengel; Claudio Moyano, educational reformer, professor, and afterwards minister under Isabella II; José Zorrilla, noted poet. The controversy between the Jesuits and the Dominicans with regard to grace and free will, which interested all the universities of Spain, involved the University of Valladolid even more deeply, as Diego Alvarez, one of its professors, and Avendaño, both Dominicans, opposed the doctrine of Molina. Of all the religious orders the Augustinians alone maintained an independent position. Their moderation contributed to dissipate much ill feeling aroused by the discussion. In 1770 certain royal privileges gave rise to heated controversy.

The early days of the university were mostly unpretentious; it had only seven courses, the deplorable state of the times not permitting anything else. The residence of the Court of Valladolid contributed to its development. In the various grants of privileges given by the kings the services rendered by this university to the Crown are explicitly stated. In the time of Charles V and Philip II the rank of university was conferred upon it. In the time of Charles III the colleges which had grown up around the university were dealt their death blow by the ministry of Roda, and since then the university has suffered from the changes, reforms, and systems which the central government of Spain has imposed on all the universities.

DE LA FUENTE, Historia de las Universidades, colegios y demas establecimientos de Ensenanza en Espana (1887); SANGRADOR Y VITORS, Hist. de Valladolid; ORTEGA Y RUBIO, Hist. de Valladolid (1881); FLORANES, Origenes de las Universidades de Castilla in Revista de la Universidad de Madrid, V (April, 1875), n. 4; ANTOLINEZ DE BRURGOS, Hist. de Valladolid; MOREJON, Hist. de la medicina espana.

TEODORO RODRIGUEZ

Dominic Vallarsi

An Italian priest, born at Verona, 13 November, 1702; died there, 14 August, 1771. He studied with the Jesuits at Verona and after his elevation to the priesthood occupied himself chiefly in archælogical and Patristic studies. In his searches for manuscripts and other antiquities he was aided financially by the City of Verona and its bishop, as well as by Benedict XIV, who gave him a benefice in the Diocese of Vicenza and appointed him reviser for the Oriental languages at the Holy Office. He was also highly respected for his archæological learning by such men as Muratori, Zeno, Mazzuchelli, and others. His one fault was his great dogmatism in expressing h is opinions and his lack of appreciation of the learning of others. His chief work is an edition of St. Jerome; "S. Hieronymi opera omnia post monachorum e congregatione S. Mauri recensionem quibusdam ineditis monumentis aliisque lucubrationibus aucta, notis et observationibus illustrata," (11 vols., Verona, 1734-42; revised and enlarged, Venice, 1766-72, reprinted in P.L., XII-XXX). Though in many respects an improvement upon the Maurist edition by Martinay and Pouget (Paris, 1693-1706), it was still very imperfect. In the opinion of Reifferscheid ("Bibl. Patr. Lat. Italica", Vienna, 1865, p. 66), Vallarsi in many cases neglected to correct the text of former editions in accordance with the excellent manuscripts that were at his disposal. Vallarsi also assisted Scipio Maffei in his revision of the Maurist edition of St. Hilary (Verona, 1730) and brought out an incomplete edition of the works of Rufinus (Verona, 1745). The second volume, which was to contain the Latin translations of Rufinus, did not appear.

MICHAEL OTT

Pietro della Valle

Italian traveller in the Orient, b. at Rome, 2 April, 1586; d. there, 21 April, 1652. He belonged to a noble family and received an excellent education. As a young man he was a poet, orator, a soldier in the papal service, and a member of the Roman Academy of the Umoristi. In 1611 he took part in a campaign against the Barbary States. An unfortunate love-affair was the cause of a pilgrimage, lasting eleven years. On 8 June, 1614, he started from Venice by sea and went first to Constantinople where he remained a year and learned both Turkish and Arabic. On 25 September, 1615, he traveled to Alexandria, thence to Cairo, and in the spring of 1616 on to Jerusalem. After visiting the Holy Places he continued his journey to Damascus, Aleppo, and Bagdad. Here he married a Syrian Christian named Maani who accompanied him on his travels during the succeeding years. It was probably on account of his marriage that he visited Persia, for the parents of his wife had been robbed by Kurds. In 1618 he was hospitably received in Northern Persia by the Shah Abbas the Great whom he followed to the capital Ispahan. He acted as mediator between the shah and the Christians of Persia. During the next four years he explored Persia; then in October, 1621, he started for Perseopolis and Schiras. He was prevented from continuing his journey as far as India by the war between the Portuguese and Persians. His wife died on 30 December, 1621, and he kept her body with him until his return. In 1622 he took part in the siege of Ormus from which the Portuguese were driven. He then spent two years (1623-24) in India, where his headquarters were Surat and Goa. In 1625 he started on the return journey by way of Muscat, Basra, Aleppo, Cyprus, and Naples, and arrived at Rome, 28 March, 1626. Urban VIII appointed him a papal chamberlain. The rest of Valle's life was fairly peaceful. His second wife was a Georgian orphan Mariuccia, who had accompanied him on his travels. The most important of his works is his account of his travels (Viaggi) in fifty-four friendly letters (Lettere famigliari) addressed to Mario Schipano, a professor of medicine at Naples. They appeared first at Rome in three volumes (1650-53) and were translated later into English, French, German, and Dutch. The narrative is distinguished by learning and keen observation but inclines to credulity and stories of marvellous occurrences.

The Travels of Pietro della Valle, ed. GREY (London, 1892); CIAMPI, Della vita e delle opere di Pietro della Valle (Rome, 1880).

KLEMENS LÖFFLER

Charles-Louis-Joseph-Xavier de la Vallée-Poussin

Professor of geology and mineralogy at the Catholic University of Louvain (1863), doctor homoris causa of the same university (1876), foreign member of the Académie Royale de Belgique (1885), vice president of the directing council of the geological map of Belgium (1903), born at Namur in 1827; died at Brussels, 1903. De la Vallée Poussin made his humanities at the Collège Notre-Dame-de-la-Paix, Namur, studied mathematics in Paris, and for ten years devoted himself to literature and philosophy. He attracted attention by his literary and scientific criticisms in various reviews. Appointed professor in 1863 on the recommendation of Omalius d'Halloy, he was the real creator of the teaching of geology and mineralogy at the University of Louvain. His scientific publications, scattered through numerous reviews from 1876 till 1903, placed him in the foremost ranks on Belgian geologists and crystallographers. Especially noteworthy were his memoirs on the microscopic study of the crystalline rocks of Belgium and French Ardennes, several in collaboration with A.F. Renard, particularly the first (1876), which was crowned by the Royal Academy of Belgium and has become a classic; his numerous notes on Belgian carboniferous limestone, which fix the true stratigraphical relations of its beds and destroy Dupont's theory of lacunæ; his researches concerning the formation of the Valley of the Meuse; and his popularizing articles, which rank him with the first promoters of physical geography; finally his share in the preparation of the official geological chart of Belgium.

C. DE LA VALLÉE-POUSSIN

Diocese of Valleyfield

(CAMPIVALLENSIS.)

Valleyfield is a thriving city of about 10,000 inhabitants, situated at the outlet of Lake St. Francis, on the south shore of the St. Lawrence. Founded in 1855, under the name of St. Cecilia, in 1874 it became legally known as Salaberry of Valleyfield. Thefirst pioneers were chielfy fisherman and lumbermen. Today Valleyfield had developed into an important manufacturing centre (cotton, paper, bronze, powder, etc.), the motive energy being derived from on e of the most beautiful water powers of the Province of Quebec. The Diocese of Valleyfield (erected 5 April, 1892) comprises the counties of Beauharnois, Chateauguay, Huntingdon, Vaudreuil, and Soulanges. The first and present bishop is Mgr Joseph-Médard Emard (b. as St. Constant, 31 March, 1853, educated at St. Thérèse and Montreal seminaries, ordained priest, 10 June, 1876, appointed curate at Mile End). He completed his theological studies at Rome, and after three years received the degrees of Doctor of Theology and of Canon Law. He was appointed curate at St. Joseph's Church, Montreal;, 1880, summoned by the late Archbishop Fabre to the palace, 1881, when he fulfilled the duties of vice-chancellor, gave lectures on ecclesiastical history at Laval University, became chancellor of the archdiocese, 1891, and was consecrated Bishop of Valleyfield, 9 June 1892. He is the author of: "Voyage en Terre Sainte"; several "Messages"; and many important pastoral letters on "I'Eglise", "La justice", "Devoir electoral", "Temperance", "Le serment", "L'autorité paternelle", "La femme chrétienne", "Communion fréquente", "Congrès Eucharistique de Montreal", which last was quoted at length by Cardinal Vanutelli during the festivities of the Eucharistic Congress held at Montreal, 1910.

Bishop Emard founded a classical college affiliated to Laval University, a "jardin de l'enfance", a monastery for cloistered nuns (Clarisses), and a normal school for young ladies, took an active part in the first Plenary Council of Quebec (1909), and is supervising the restoration of the cathedral of the diocese, which contains admirable life-size portraits of the twenty-two popes who established the Catholic Church in Canada, and is conspicuous for its beauty or architecture. The Diocese of Valleyfield is composed chiefly of French Canadian families distributed among forty parishes. There are many Irish Catholic families in the parishes of Valleyfield, Huntingdon, Ormston, Hemmingford, where the service are largely given in English. The descendants of the Iroquois Indians are ministered to by a resident missionary priest at St. Regis. There are in the diocese: 14 convents and academies, 2 classical colleges, 1 seminary, 4 asylums, and 3 orphanages. The education of children in the parochial schools and other institutions is confided to lay and religious professors and to secular priests. The religious orders are men -- Frères Viateurs; women -- Soeurs de la Congrégation Notre Dame; Soeurs de Jésus Marie; Soeurs de la Providence; Soeurs Grises; Soeurs de Ste Anne; Soeurs Clarisses (cloistered), and Soeurs de la Ste Famille. Among the secular organizations are: the St. Vincent de Paul Society; Les Artisans; Société St. Jean Baptiste; Catholic Foresters; and Knights of Columbus.

J. DORAIS

Thomas de Vallgornera

Dominican theologian and ascetical writer, renowned for his learning and piety, born in Catalonia about 1595; died 15 September, 1665. He was a member of the convent of Barcelona, and for some time, while Catalonia was subject to the French, was its vicar-general, about 1642. His principal work is a mystical theology first published at Barcelona in 1662 under the title "Mystica theologia D. Thomx, utriusque theologix scolasticx et mysticx principis", etc. Three years later, 1665, a new and augmented edition appeared. The second edition exceeded the first by eighty-five pages. The work having become rare and difficult to obtain, a new edition was brought out by the Dominican Father Berthier at Turin, 1890. The latest edition contains the text of the original edition of 1662 in the body of the work, and the editions which appeared in the edition of 1665 in the form of added notes are given in an appendix. The doctrine of the book is the doctrine of St. Thomas, of which the author writes in his prologue, "The mystical doctrine of St. Thomas is of such great authority, precisely because it is founded on Scholastic doctrine, that it can scarcely be expressed in words. That mystic doctrine which is not repugnant to the principles of scholastic doctrine has a firm foundation, and therefore readers who study mystical theology in St. Thomas find it firm and well-established; on the contrary, those who read it in other books which treat of mystical matters alone, without any teacher or guide, under the appearance of devotion in somewhat severe words, absorb material for errors." Besides his "Mystical Theology" Vallgornera is the author of a book on the Rosary of the Blessed Virgin, "De Rosario B. Marix Virginis", which appeared at Barcelona about 1662. It consists of pious meditations.

A.C. O'NEIL

Valliscaulian Order

("Vallis Caulium", or "Val-des-Choux", the name of the first monastery of that order, in Burgundy).

Founded towards the end of the twelfth century by Viard, a lay brother of the Carthusian priory of Loubigny, in the Diocese of Langres. Viard was permitted by his superior to lead the life of a hermit in a cavern in a wood, where he gained by his life of prayer and austerity the reputation of a saint. The Duke of Burgundy, in fulfilment of a vow, built a church and monastery on the site of the hermitage; Viard became prior in 1193, and framed rules for the new foundation drawn partly from the Carthusian and partly from the Cistercian observance. The order of the "Brethren of the Cabbage- Valley" was formally confirmed by Pope Innocent III, on 12 February, 1265, in a rescript preserved in one of the Scottish houses) in the Register of Moray, and entitled "Protectio Apostolica". In the same year Odo III, Duke of Burgundy, gave the brethren a large grant of forest land round the priory, which was further endowed by the Duke's successors, by the Bishops o Langres, and other benefactors. Helyot states, on the authority of Chopin (Traite des droits religieux et des monastres, II, tit. i, no. 20), that there were thirty dependent houses of the order, but he names of only twenty are known. Seventeen of these were in France, the principal one being at Val-Croissant, in the Diocese of Autun; and the remaining three were in Scotland. References in the statues of 1268 and elsewhere show that priories of the order existed also in Germany. A complete list of the priors-general has been preserved, from the founder Viard (also styled Guido), who died after 1213, to Dorothée Jallontz, who was also abbot of the Cistercian house of Sept-Fons, and was the last grand-prior of Val-des-Choux before the absorption of the Valliscaulian brotherhood into the Cistercian Order. In the middle of the eighteenth century there were but three inmates of the mother-house; the revenues had greatly diminished, and there had been no profession in the order for twenty-four years. Gilbert, Bishop of Langres, strongly urged the remaining members to unite with the Cistercians, whose rule they had originally, in great part, adopted. The proposal was agreed to, the change was authorized by a Bull of Clement XIII in 1764, and Val-des-Choux was formally incorporated with Sept-Fons in March, 1764, the Parliament of Burgundy having previously ratified the arrangement. For the next quarter of a century the monastery flourished under its new conditions; but it was swept away in the Revolution of 1789, with the other religious houses of France. Of the three Scottish houses of the order, Ardchattan, Beauly, and Pluscarden, the first two became Cistercian priories, and the third a cell of the Benedictine Abbey of Dunfermline, a century before the dissolution of the monasteries in Scotland. (See ARDCHATTAN, THE PRIORY OF; PLUSCARDEN PRIORY).

BIRCH, Ordinale conventus Vallis Caulium (Rule of the Order of Val-des- Choux), from the original MSS. (London, 1900); HELYOT, Histoire des ordres monastiques, VI (Paris, 1718), 178-80; MIGNARD, Histoire des principales fondations en Bourgogne (Paris and Dijon, 1864), 200, 207, 218, 221, etc.; MACPHAII., Hist. of the Religious House of Pluscardyn (Edinburgh, 1881), with illustrations of Val-des-Choux in 1833; BATTEN, The Charters of the Priory of Beauly (Edinburgh, 1877); Registr. Episcopatus Moraviensis (Edinburgh, 1837), 331, 332.

D.O. HUNTER-BLAIR

Vallumbrosan Order

The name is derived from the motherhouse, Vallombrosa (Latin Vallis umbrosa, shady valley), situated 20 miles from Florence on the northwest slope of Monte Secchieta in the Pratomagno chain, 3140 feet above the sea.

I. THE FOUNDER

St. John Gualbert, son of the noble Florentine Gualbert Visdomini, was born in 985 (or 995), and died at Passignano, 12 July, 1073, on which day his feast is kept; he was canonized in 1193. One of his relatives having been murdered, it became his duty to avenge the deceased. He met the murderer in a narrow lane and was about to slay him, but when the man threw himself upon the ground with arms outstretched in the form of a cross, he pardoned him for the love of Christ. On his way home, he entered the Benedictine Church at San Miniato to pray, and the figure on the crucifix bowed its head to him in recognition of his generosity. This story forms the subject of Burne-Jones's picture "The Merciful Knight", and has been adapted by Shorthouse in "John Inglesant". John Gualbert became a Benedictine at San Miniato, but left that monastery to lead a more perfect life. His attraction was for the cenobitic not eremitic life, so after staying for some time with the monks at Camaldoli, he settled at Vallombrosa, where he founded his monastery. Mabillon places the foundation a little before 1038. Here it is said he and his first companions lived for some years as hermits, but this is rejected by Martène as inconsistent with his reason for leaving Camaldoli. The chronology of the early days of Vallombrosa has been much disputed. The dates given for the founder's conversion vary between 1004 and 1039, and a recent Vallumbrosan writer places his arrival at Vallombrosa as early as 1008. We reach surer ground with the consecration of the church by Bl. Rotho, Bishop of Paderborn, in 1038, and the donation by Itta, Abbess of the neighbouring monastery of Sant' Ellero, of the site of the new foundation in 1039. The abbess retained the privilege of nominating the superiors, but this right was granted to the monks by Victor II, who confirmed the order in 1056. Two centuries later, in the time of Alexander IV, the nunnery was united to Vallombrosa in spite of the protests of the nuns.

The holy lives of the first monks at Vallombrosa attracted considerable attention and brought many requests for new foundations, but there were few postulants, since few could endure the extraordinary austerity of the life. Thus only one other monastery, that of San Salvi at Florence, was founded during this period. But when the founder had mitigated his rule somewhat, three more monasteries were founded and three others reformed and united to the order during his lifetime. In the struggle of the popes against simony the early Vallumbrosans took a considerable part, of which the most famous incident is the ordeal by fire undertaken successfully by St. Peter Igneus in 1068 (see PETER IGNEUS, BLESSED, and Delarc, op. cit.). Shortly before this the monastery of S. Salvi had been burned and the monks ill-treated by the anti-reform party. These events still further increased the repute of Vallombrosa.

II. DEVELOPMENT OF THE ORDER

After the founder's death the order spread rapidly. A Bull of Urban II in 1090, which takes Vallombrosa under the protection of the Holy See, enumerates fifteen monasteries besides the motherhouse. Twelve more are mentioned in a Bull of Paschal II in 1115, and twenty-four others in those of Anastasius IV (1153) and Adrian IV (1156). By the time of Innocent III they numbered over sixty. All were situated in Italy, except two monasteries in Sardinia. About 1087 Bl. Andrew of Vallombrosa (d. 1112) founded the monastery of Cornilly in the Diocese of Orléans, and in 1093 the Abbey of Chezal-Benoît, which became later the head of a considerable Benedictine congregation. There is no ground for the legend given by some writers of the order of a great Vallumbrosan Congregation in France with an abbey near Paris, founded by St. Louis. The Vallumbrosan Congregation was reformed in the middle of the fifteenth century by Cassinese Benedictines, and again by Bl. John Leonardi at the beginning of the seventeenth century. In 1485 certain abbeys with that of San Salvi at Florence at their head, which had formed a separate congregation, were reunited to the motherhouse by Innocent VIII. At the beginning of the sixteenth century an attempt was made by Abbot-General Milanesi to found a house of studies on university lines at Vallombrosa; but in 1527 the monastery was burned by the troops of Charles V. It was rebuilt by Abbot Nicolini in 1637, and in 1634 an observatory was established. From 1662-80 the order was united to the Sylvestrines. In 1808 Napoleon's troops plundered Vallombrosa, and the monastery lay deserted till 1815. It was finally suppressed by the Italian Government in 1866. A few monks remain to look after the church and meteorological station, but the abbey buildings have become a school of forestry founded in 1870 on the German model, the only one of its kind in Italy. Vallombrosa is also a health resort.

The decline of the order may be ascribed to the hard fate of the motherhouse, to commendams, and to the perpetual wars which ravaged Italy. Practically all the surviving monasteries were suppressed during the course of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The present Vallumbrosan monasteries, besides Vallombrosa itself, are: Passignano, where St. John Gualbert is buried; S. Trinità at Florence, where the abbot-general resides; Sta Prassede, in Rome; Galloro in the Diocese of Albano, with the sanctuary of Bl. Benedict Ricasoli (d. 1107); and the celebrated sanctuary of Montessoro in the Diocese of Leghorn. The modern monastery of Signol near Loriol, Drôme, France, was suppressed by the Ferry laws in 1880. The present abbot-general is Fedele Tarani. The monks now number about 100. The shield of the order shows the founder's arm in a tawny-coloured cowl grasping a golden crutch-shaped crozier on a blue ground. The services rendered by the order have been mostly in the field of asceticism. Besides the Vallumbrosan saints alluded to in other parts of this article there may also be mentioned: Bl. Veridiana, anchoress (1208-42); Bl. Giovanni Dalle Celle (feast, 10 March); the lay brother Melior (1 Aug.). By the middle of the seventeenth century the order had supplied twelve cardinals and more than 30 bishops. F. E. Hugford (1696-1771), born at Florence of English parents, is well known as one of the chief promoters of the art of scagliola (imitation of marble in plaster). Abbot-General Tamburini's works on canon law are well known. Galileo was for a time a novice at Vallombrosa and received part of his education there.

III. RULE

St. John adopted the Rule of St. Benedict but added greatly to its austerity and penitential character. His idea was to unite the ascetic advantages of the eremitic life to a life in community, while avoiding the dangers of the former. Severe scourging was inflicted for any breach of rule, silence was perpetual, poverty most severely enforced. The rule of enclosure was so strict that the monks might not go out even on an errand of mercy. The main point of divergence lay in the prohibition of the manual work, which is prescribed by St. Benedict. St. John's choir monks were to be pure contemplatives and to this end he introduced the system of lay-brothers who were to attend to the secular business. He was among the first to systematize this institution, and it is probable that it was largely popularized by the Vallumbrosans. The term conversi (lay brothers) occurs for the first time in Abbot Andrew of Strumi's Life of St. John, written at the beginning of the twelfth century. The Vallumbrosans do not, strictly speaking, form a separate order, but a Benedictine congregation, though they are not united to the confederated congregations of the Black Monks. The oldest extant MS. of the customs of Vallombrosa shows a close relationship with those of Cluny. The Vallumbrosans should be regarded only as Benedictines who followed the customs observed at that time by the Black Benedictines throughout Europe. "Horror of simony was a special bond between them and Cluny, and it was only special circumstances which caused them later to be looked upon as a peculiar institute within the Benedictine order" (Albers, op. cit. infra). The habit, originally grey, then tawny coloured, is now that of the Black Monks. The abbots were originally elected for life but are now elected at the general chapter, held every four years. The Abbot of Vallombrosa, the superior of the whole order, had formerly a seat in the Florentine Senate and bore the additional title of Count of Monte Verde and Gualdo.

IV. NUNS

Shortly after the founder's death we find attached to the monastery of Vallombrosa lay sisters who, under the charge of an aged lay brother, lived in a separate house and performed various household duties. This institute survived for less than a century, but when they ceased to be attached to the monasteries of monks, these sisters probably continued to lead a conventual life. Bl. Bertha (d. 1163) entered the Vallumbrosan Order at Florence and reformed the convent of Cavriglia in 1153. St. Umiltà is usually regarded as the foundress of the Vallumbrosan Nuns. She was born at Faenza about 1226, was married, but with the consent of her husband, who became a monk, entered a monastery of canonesses and afterwards became an anchoress in a cell attached to the Vallumbrosan church of Faenza, where she lived for twelve years. At the request of the abbot-general she then founded a monastery outside Faenza and became its abbess. In 1282 she founded a second convent at Florence, where she died in 1310. She left a number of mystical writings. In 1524 the nuns obtained the Abbey of S. Salvi, Florence. There are still Vallumbrosan nunneries at Faenza and S. Gimignano, besides two at Florence. The relics of Bl. Umiltà and her disciple Bl. Margherita are venerated at the convent of Spirito Santo at Varlungo. The habit is similar to that of the Benedictine Nuns.

RAYMUND WEBSTER

Henri Valois

(HENRICUS VALESIUS).

Philologist, b. at Paris, 10 Sept., 1603; d. at Paris, 7 May, 1676. He belonged to a family of Norman gentlemen settled near Bayeux and Liseux; his grandfather, the youngest of the family, became rich in trade in Paris. Henri Valois made excellent studies with the Jesuits, first at Verdun and then at the Collège de Clermont at Paris, where he had Pétau as professor of rhetoric. He studied law at Bourges (1622-24) and returned to Paris, where, to please his father, he practised law against his inclination for seven years. When he regained his liberty he plunged into study, which he had never entirely abandoned. Peirese had purchased a MS. in Cyprus containing the work of Constantine Porphyrogenitus on virtue and vice. Valois took from it numerous unedited fragments which he published in 1634: "Polybii, Diodori Siculi. . .Nicolai Damasceni, Dionysii Halicarn., Appiani, Alexandri, Dionis et Ioannis antiocheni excerpta". In 1636 he edited "Ammiani Marcellini rerum gestarum lib. XVIII", with abundant notes which illumined all the history of that period and its institutions. He succeeded in recognizing the rhythm of the phrases in the establishment of the text, at the same time making no display of his discovery. In 1650 the assembly of the French clergy commissioned him to publish the ecclesiastical historians, after Mgr. Monchal of Toulouse was compelled to resign the task. In 1659 he issued Eusebius of Caesarea's ecclesiastical history and biography and panegyric of Constantine, as well as Constantine's discourse in the assembly. The text was accompanied by a new Latin translation, scholarly notes, four dissertations on Donatism, Anastasius, the Septuagint, and the Roman Martyrology. In 1668 he published Socrates and Sozomen with three books of observations on the history of St. Athanasius, on that of Paul, Bishop of Constantinople, and the sixth canon of Nicaea (against Lamouy). In 1673 he completed his book with Theodoret, Evagrius, and the excerpts from Philostorgius and Theodore the Lector. In 1664 he had married a young girl who bore him seven children. At first he had only the slender means left him by his father, but later pensions from President de Mesmes, the clergy of France, Mazarin, and Louis XIV provided him with the necessary leisure and the assistance of a secretary, for his sight was never good, and as early as 1637 he ceased to have the use of his right eye. Yet he did important work, and though the MSS. at his disposal were not always the best, we cannot but admire the tact and certainty of his criticism. His temperately and sanely learned notes are excellent documents of the French learning of the seventeenth century. Valois was associated with the greatest scholars of his time, with whom however he always maintained his liberty of judgment. He wrote the funeral eulogies of Sirmond, Pierre Depuy, and Pétau. He also wrote several occasional Latin poems, but to posterity he is the learned and exact editor of the Greek ecclesiastical historians.

DE VALOIS, De vita Henrici Valesii in the 2nd ed. of EUSEBIUS (Paris, 1677), also in the Cambridge edition (1720); SCHWARTZ, Eusebius Werke, Die Kirchengesch., III (Leipzig, 1909).

PAUL LEJAY

Valona

Titular see, suffragan of Dyrrachium, in Epirus Nova. The ancient name was Aulon, mentioned for the first time by Ptolemy (Geographia, III, xii, 2). Other geographical documents, such as Peutinger's "Tabula" and the "Synecdemus" of Hierocles, also mention it. Among the known bishops are Nazarius, in 458, and Soter, in 553 (Farlati, "Illyricum sacrum", VII, 397-401). The diocese at that time belonged to the Patriarchate of Rome. In 733 it was annexed, with all eastern Illyricum, to the Patriarchate of Constantinople, and yet it is not mentioned in any "Notitiae episcopatuum" of that Church. The bishopric had probably been suppressed, for, though the Bulgarians had been in possession of this country for some time, Aulon is not mentioned in the "Notitiae episcopatuum" of the Patriarchate of Achrida. During the Latin domination a Latin see was established, and Eubel (Hierarchia catholica medii aevi, I, 124) mentions several of its bishops. Valona, or Vlora, in Albania, is now a caza of the sandjak of Berat in the vilayet of Janina. The city, which has a port on the Adriatic, has about 10,000 inhabitants; there is a Catholic parish, which belongs to the Archdiocese of Durazzo. Several of the Latin bishops mentioned by Le Quien (Oriens christianus, III, 855-8), and whom Eubel (op. cit., I, 541) mentions under the See of Valanea in Syria, belong either to Aulon in Greece (now Salona) or to Aulon in Albania (Valona).

S. VAILHÉ

Hyacinthe de Valroger

French Oratorian, born at Caen, 6 January, 1814; died 10 October, 1876. He first studied medicine, and was later ordained priest (1837), and made director of the lesser seminary of Bayeaux. In 1847 he became titular canon of the cathedral of Bayeaux. In 1852 he joined Père Gratry in the work of restoring the French Oratory, where he became professor of theology, master of novices, and assistant general. He was a man of great learning, but being equally modest, always hesitated to publish his works lest they should not be opportune of sufficiently exact. Besides many articles in Catholic reviews he published: "Etudes critiques sur le rationalisme contemporain" (Paris, 1846); "Essai sur la crédibilité de l'histoire évangélique en réponse au Dr. Strauss' (Paris, 1847); "Du christianisme et du paganisme dans l'enseignement" (Paris, 1852); "Introduction historique et critique aux livres du Nouveau Testament" (Paris, 1861); "L'âge du monde et de l'homme d'après la Bible et l'église" (Paris, 1869); "La genèse des espèces, études philosophiques et religieuses" (Paris, 1873); "Pensées philosophiques et religieuses du Comte de Maistre" (Paris, 1879).

A.M.P. INGOLD

Dioceses of Valva and Sulmona

(VALVEN. ET SULMONEN.)

Located in Italy; united aeque principaliter. Valva, a medieval castle belonging to the Bishop of Sulmona, Baron of Valva, is situated near the ancient Corfinium, chief town of the Peligni, A Samnite tribe. In the Social War it was the capital of the Italici, who called it Italia, a name found on some coins. Of the ancient city there remains the Church of S. Pelino, which recalls the race of the Peligni rather than a saint. The ruins contained a great number of inscriptions. Corfinium, like Valva, had apparently its own bishop; S. Pelino was the cathedral. In the vicinity of Valva is the sanctuary of S. Michele, near which is a large natural grotto. Sulmona, formerly Sulmo, is situated in a fertile plain, watered by the Gizzio, a tributary of the Pescara, at the base of the Maiella and Monte Morrone. The inhabitants are engaged in agriculture, the manufacture of liquors, confetti, and musical strings, and tanning. Among the churches are S. Maria della Tomba, the Annuziata, S. Francesco. Near the city is the monastery of the Spirito Santo, erected by Celestine V for his monks; it is noted for its architecture. The town hall dates from the fifteenth century. Sulmona was a Pelignian city, and is first mentioned in the wars of Hannibal, during which is remained faithful to the Romans. In the Social War it was destroyed by Sulla. Ovid, who celebrates the salubrity of its climate, was born there. There are ruins of temples and ancient buildings in the vicinity. In the Lombard period the city was subject to the Duchy of Spoleto; later it belonged to the counts of the Marsi. When the Normans conquered the Abruzzi, Sulmona increased in importance. Frederick II made it the capital of the "Gran Giustizierato" of the Abruzzi. In 1451 Alfonso of Aragon defeated there Count Ruggierone, an ally of Rene of Anjou; the city was regained by Piccinino, who was later defeated and slain by Ferdinand I.

Legend associates the evangelizing of the district with the name of St. Britius, Bishop of Spoleto, in the second century. The first known Bishop of Sulmona is Palladius (499); in 503 a Fortunatus Valvensis is mentioned. St Pamphilus, Bishop of Valva, renowned for his sanctity and miracles, died about 706; as he was buried in the cathedral of Sulmona, the sees had possibly been united then. Four or five other bishops of Valva are known, but none of Sulmona until 1054, when Leo IX named as Bishop of Valva, the Benedictine Domenico, and determined the limits of the Dioceses of S. Pelino (Valva) and S. Pamphilus (Sulmona), which were to have only one bishop, elected by the two chapters. Under Bishop Giacomo di Penne, a monk of Casa Nova (1252), it was arranged that the two chapters should unite in making the election, as frequent disputes had arisen when they acted separately. Other bishops were: Bartolomeo of Tocco (1402), highly esteemed for his learning by Innocent VII, who gave him his own mitre; Donato Bottini (1448), an Augustinian, who enriched the cathedral; Pompeo Zambeccari (1547), nuncio in Poland, who restored the episcopal residence; Francesco Bonapaduli (1638), who founded the seminary; Pietro Antonio Corsignani (17380, the historian of the Abruzzi. During the dispute between the Holy See and the Kingdom of Naples the see remained vacant from 1800 till 1818. The See of Sulmona is immediately subject to the Holy See. It contains; 58 parishes; 150,000 inhabitants, 200 secular, and 48 regular, priests; 3 houses of monks; 3 convents of nuns; 2 educational institutes for boys, and 1 for girls.

CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, XXI; DI PIETRO, Memorie storiche della citta di Sulmona (Naples, 1804); CORSIGNNI, Regia marsicana (Naples, 1738).

U. BENIGNI

Vincent de Valverde

Born at Oropesa, Spain towrds the close of the fifteenth century; d. at the Island of Puná, near Guayaquil, 31 Oct., 1541. He was the son of Francisco de Valverde and Ana Alvarez de Vallegada, and was related to many noble families, in particular, to that of Pizarro, the conqueror of Peru, and that of Cortes, the conqueror of Mexico. Valverde became a professed member of the Dominicans at the convent of San Esteban, Salamanca, April, 1524. In 1529 he accompanied Pizarro as a missionary, on his intended voyage of conquest to Peru. Before the battle of Caxamarca, 16 Nov., 1532, Valverde endeavoured to obtain Atahuallpa's peaceful submission; later he instructed and baptized the unfortunate Inca monarch. When Charles V learned of Pizarro's victories, he named Valverde first Bishop of Cuzco, the royal city of the Peruvian kings; Paul III ratified his choice in a consistory held in January, 1537. The new bishop found his spiritual duties arduous, for he had already been charged with the office of Protector of the Natives. This forced him to cross the rude soldiery constantly, as the adverturers who made up the Spanish armies had no thought of justice or mercy to the Indians. He strove to settle the feud between Almagro and Pizarro and after the assassination of the latter was forced to flee from Peru. Making his way to Panama, he halted for a brief stay at the Island of Puná, where he was put to death by the Indians. The fame of Bishop Valverde depends on his conduct at Caxamarca. If the tradition be true that the Spanish monk addressed Atahuallpa with haughtiness and disdain, and when his words were not heeded called his compatriots to attack the unoffending Peruvians, then Valverde merits general condemnation. The great religious historians, however, such as Valera, Melendez, Remesal, deny the charge as false. Xerez, an eye-witness, in his account (Seville, 1534) states that when the Inca refused to yield, Valverde returned and informed Pizarro, who then ordered his men to advance; he makes no mention of anything unworthy in the friar's conduct, nor does Pedro Pizarro, one of the earliest writers (his "Relacion" being dated 1571). Particularly bitter to Valverde are Alonzo Enrique and Oviedo, who gives the account of Diego de Molilna, a solider of the expedition, but both of these were partisans of Almagro. Later writers take differing views. The case is not proven either way. In consideration of the extraordinary completeness of the details of Valverde's actions, one must conclude that they are not authentic but the result of political or personal bias.

Cf. all early histories of Spanish America.

JOSEPH V. MOLLOY

Ludwig Van Beethoven

Born at Bonn, probably on 16 December, 1770; died at Vienna, 26 March, 1827. The date of his birth has never been positively ascertained but is inferred from the fact that the baptismal registry of his parish church gives 17 December as the date of his baptism, and that it is customary in Catholic countries to baptize infants the day following their birth.

Beethoven's father was tenor singer in the court chapel of the Prince-Archbishop of Cologne, where his grandfather, a native of Holland, had for a number of years the post of musical director. He was therefore brought up from his earliest youth in a musical atmosphere. While the father was rigorous and not always reasonable in his rule over the young genius, his mother was often over-lenient with him, a fact which may account for some of the traits of character the young man developed later on.

At the age of five years his father began to instruct him in violin playing, and at eight the musical director, Pfeifer, undertook his training on the piano, while the court organist Van den Eden, and his successor, Christian Gottlob Neefe, instructed him in organ playing, harmony, and composition. As a pianist he made such rapid progress that in a few years he was able to interpret Bach's "Well-tempered Clavichord" and improvise in a masterly fashion. At thirteen years of age he gave forth his first compositions, a set of six sonatas. These and some other productions of his early youth he later repudiated and destroyed. When he was fifteen, Elector Maximilian, whose assistant court organist he had in the meantime become, enabled young Beethoven to visit Vienna. A short sojourn in the imperial city served the good purpose of causing him to realize the incompleteness of his musical as well as his general education. A few years later, in 1792, his patron sent him anew to Vienna with the avowed plan of studying with Joseph Haydn. Instruction under this master did not continue with any system or for any length of time, owing to a radical difference of temperament between the two men.

Beethoven soon found his way to the great contrapuntist, Albrechtsberger, through whose guidance and the private study of J.J. Fux's treatise of theory and counterpoint, "Gradus ad Parnassum", he acquired the solidity and freedom of style which soon commanded the admiration of the musical world. Assiduous study of the works of Handel, Haydn, and Mozart completed what Bach had begun for him in the creative domain. The protection of his patron, the Elector Maximilian, brother of Joseph II, and his striking gifts as player and improvisor served to secure for him, in a comparatively short time, a prominent position in the social and artistic world of Vienna. Archduke Rudolph, afterwards a cardinal, became his pupil and lifelong friend, while numerous music-loving nobles patronized him. As a composer he attracted more and more attention, not only in Austria and Germany but throughout the world. Beethoven's position in life at this time was probably more congenial and agreeable than was that of any contemporary or preceding master. He was enabled to live in comparative ease without the necessity of accepting a fixed engagement or of regularly giving instruction; he was much sought after as an instructor, but he entertained an intense aversion to teaching. His productions of this period, while bearing more and more the stamp of his individuality, yet reflect the influence and manner of his contemporaries, Mozart and Haydn. It was probably more on account of the success of the oratorios of the latter than because he realized the sublimity of the subject that Beethoven undertook the composition of a work in this form, his "Christ on the Mount of Olives". It is well known that in after years he regretted having published it. Especially was he dissatisfied with his treatment of the part of Christ. He had not yet risen to the height of his capacity, or superior to the conventional standard of his superficial surroundings.

When Beethoven was about thirty years old, he contracted a cold which at first impaired his hearing and at length, through neglectful treatment and his careless and irregular manner of living, resulted in almost total deafness. This affliction was destined to have a momentous effect on his life and to determine in a large measure the character of his productions. To be shut off to a great extent from social intercourse, for which, on account of his generous nature, he always had a craving, and to be unable to hear even his own creations, was his painful lot till the end of his days. The isolation and suffering brought about by his infirmity, the deception on the part of people whom he had trusted, and the misconduct of the nephew whom he had adopted, involving him in all kinds of money troubles, caused him to experience periods of depression which almost bordered on despair. Extreme sensitiveness, irritability, and a suspicion of almost everybody he was obliged to have dealing with, added to his increasing misfortunes. General ill health gradually developed into dropsy. In the last stages he was operated on four times without obtaining relief; but through all this time of trial he never ceased composing. Even on his death-bed he sketched a new symphony. He died during a terrific hailstorm after having devoutly received the last sacraments.

Beethoven has left us some 135 works, among them chamber music in every form, 9 symphonies, 1 oratorio, 1 opera, and 2 Masses. Most of these creations must be classed with the greatest music compositions the human mind has produced. In Beethoven, instrumental music, the vehicle of subjectivism par excellence, finds its culmination after a gradual development extending over almost three centuries. In his hands it become the most powerful voice of the prevailing Zeitgeist. Living in an age and atmosphere of religious liberalism, when Hegelian pantheism pervaded the literature of the day, especially Goethe's fiction and poetry, he could not escape their befogging influence. His statement that "thoroughness and religion are non-debatable questions", indicates both the spirit of the times and his own attitude; it also explains his other saying that "music must strike fire out of the mind of man."

It has been pointed out that in most of his instrumental works no less than in his opera "Fidelio" and the Ninth Symphony, the latter ending with a choral finale on Schiller's "Ode to Joy", Beethoven reveals and depicts the inner struggle against and triumphant victory over doubt. His two Masses bear the same subjective character. They are great works of religious art, but they must be considered apart from liturgical service, to which they do not subordinate themselves. While the first and shorter one in C major, ordered by Prince Esterhazy, does not exceed in length and form what was customary in his day and contains passages of exceptional devotion and beauty, it is still, taken as a whole, too individual and too violent in expression to be admitted for liturgical use. This is true in a far greater degree of his "Missa Solemnis" in D major at the composition of which he laboured for almost two years. This monumental work has been designated as a St. Stephen's Cathedral in tones. Its extreme length and the extensive requirements needed for its adequate performance -- orchestra, organ, solo, quartet, and large chorus, together with almost superhuman endurance on the part of the sopranos and tenors -- are alone sufficient reasons for excluding it from liturgical service. Performed under proper conditions in the concert hall, it is a mighty profession of faith in a personal God by one of the greatest geniuses of all times, who composed it in the midst of the growing doubt and impending moral and spiritual disintegration of his age.

SCHINDLER and MOSCHELES, Life of Beethoven (London, 1841); WEGELER V. RIES, Biograph. Notizen über L. van Beethoven Leben u. Schaffen (Berlin, 1875); Beethovens Briefe (Vienna and Leipzig, 1911); THAYER-DEITERS-RIEMANN, Ludwig van Beethovens Leben (Leipzig, 1911); AMBOS, Cultur-histor. Bilder aus dem Musikleben der Gegenvart, Das etische u. religöse Moment in Beethoven (Leipzig, 1860).

JOSEPH OTTEN

Pierre-Joseph Van Beneden

Born at Mechlin, Belgium, 19 Dec., 1809; died at Louvain, 8 Jan., 1894. Educated for the medical profession, he was appointed curator of the natural history museum at the University of Louvain in 1831. Five years later he became professor of zoology and comparative anatomy in the Catholic University at Louvain. This chair he held until the time of his death. He was thus able to celebrate the jubilee of his appointment to his chair and the occasion was duly honoured both in his native and his university cities. Throughout his life he was a most diligent worker, and the list of his contributions to scientific periodicals amounts to over two hundred papers. In the earlier part of his career he directed his attention especially to invertebrates and particularly to marine invertebrates, which he studied during many vacations spent at Ostend. In 1843 he established at his own expense a marine laboratory and an aquarium for the further prosecution of these studies, and this institution is believed to have been one of the earliest if not actually the first example of a place of study of its kind in any part of the world. Associated with this part of his work were his classical studies in connection with parasitic worms, the development, transformation, and life-histories of which he very fully investigated; indeed, as early as 1858 a memoir of his on this subject was successful in gaining the "Grand prix des sciences physiques" of the Institute of France. It was issued in the "International Scientific Series" (1875), under the title "Les commensaux et les parasites dans le regne animal", and was translated into English and German.

The other direction in which van Beneden's activities found a vent was connected with the vertebrate division of the animal kingdom. During the excavations rendered necessary by the fortifying of Antwerp a number of bones of fossil whales were exposed to view. These attracted van Beneden's attention and led him to undertake a detailed study of the group, whose characteristics were at that time very imperfectly known. On the subject of the cetacea, living and extinct, he published a number of papers and several large works. The most important of these is his "Ostéographie des cétacés vivants et fossiles", which was written in collaboration with Paul Gervais and published between 1868 and 1880. His papers on the extinct species found near Antwerp were published in the "Annales du musée royal d'histoire naturelle de Brucelles", and with them was incorporated a description of the fossil seals which were discovered in the same neighbourhood. Van Beneden attended the celebration of the tercentenary of Edinburgh University, and was there made an honorary LL.D. He was a foreign member of the Royal Society and also of the Linnæan, Geological, and Zoological Societies of London. He was president of the Royal Belgian Academy in 1881, and was created Grand Officer of the order of Leopold on the occasion of his professorial jubilee. He was always a devout and convinced adherent of the Catholic Church, though, as the writer of his obituary for the Royal Society particularly states, always exhibiting "the widest toleration for the views of others".

Obituary Notice in Transactions of the Royal Society, LVII (1894-95), p. Xx; KEMNA, P.J. van Beneden, La vie et l'oeuvre d'un zoologiste (Antwerp, 1897).

B.C.A. WINDLE

William Home Van Buren

Distinguished American surgeon, b. at Philadelphia, 5 April, 1819; d. at New York, 25 March, 1883. His grandfather was Abraham Van Buren, a son of John Beuren, a pupil of Boerhaave who emigrated to New York from Beuren, near Amsterdam, in 17 00. Van Buren entered Yale College in 1834. Before graduation he left to take his medical education at the University of Pennsylvania, finishing his studies before the legal age at which a diploma could be awarded him. He spent some eighteen months in Paris and returned to receive his degree in medicine at the University of Pennsylvania in 1840, with a graduation thesis on "The Starch and Dextrin Bandage", the technic of which he had learned in Paris. He entered the army, passing the highest competitive examination. In 1842 he married the daughter of Dr. Valentine Mott, and in 1845 received the appointment as pro-sector to the medical department of the University of New York under Dr. Mott. In 1852 he became professor of anatomy and remained in that position until the burning of the college building in 1865. He attempted to reorganize the university medical school after the fire, insisting on the erection of a building near Bellevue Hospital. His plans, all adopted later, being rejected, Dr. Van Buren resigned. In 1868 he became professor of surgery in the Bellevue Hospital Medical College, a position which he retained until his death. In 1854 he translated from the French Morel's "Histology" and afterwards, Bernard and Huette's "Operative Surgery". This latter work was furnished by the United States Government to the army surgeons during the Civil War. President Lincoln offered to make Van Buren surgeon general at the time of the war, and on his refusal consulted him with regard to the appointment. In 1865 he published "Contributions to Practical Surgery", in 1870 "Lectures on Diseases of the Rectum", and in 1874 in conjunction with Dr. Edward L. Keyes, a text-book on genito- urinary surgery. His contributions to medical periodical literature were frequent. He became a Catholic early in his medical career and died in the profession of the Faith. He was consulting surgeon to many of the prominent New York City hospitals, and had been president of the Pathological Society, vice-president of the New York Academy of Medicine, and corresponding member of the Société de Chirurgie of Paris, an honour that had been conferred of only one American before him.

KEYES, New York Academy of Medicine Memorial Address in N. Y. Med. Journal, XXXVII (1883); SMITH, Surgery of New York, Mid-nineteenth century in N.Y. Med. Record (July 2, 1910).

JAMES J. WALSH

Vancouver

(VANCOUVERIENSIS).

Archdiocese; includes that part of the mainland of the Province of British Columbia south of 54 ° N. lat. and west of the Straits of Georgia, together with the Queen Charlotte Islands. It comprises about 150,000 square miles. The first resident of what is now British Columbia was a Catholic and so were the great explorers, Simon Fraser and his lieutenant, J.M. Quesnel. The numerous Catholics in the service of the Hudson Bay Company gave the natives their first idea of Christianity. Later on, Father De Smet visited the Kootenays. In 1843 Father Demers had made an extensive trip through the inland lakes, visiting in turn the Okanagans, the Shuswaps, and the Carriers. In 1843 this district was included in the Vicariate Apostolic of Columbia, under Rt. Rev. A. Blanchet, titulary. Three years later a Jesuit, Father Nobili, went as far north as Bahine Lake. In 1847 Rt. Rev. M. Demers, Bishop of Vancouver Island, called the Oblates of Mary Immaculate, already working in Oregon, to the mainland of British Columbia. These missionaries founded a mission in Okanagan in 1859. About this time, immediately after the discovery of gold in the Cariboo district, the city of New Westminster was founded on the estuary of the Fraser, and here the Oblates organized a central mission in 1860, followed by St. Mary's Mission, 60 miles inland, in 1863, from which they evangelized the lower Fraser Indians and the Sechelts and the Aquamish of the coast.

Father L.J. D'Herbomez, O.M.I., was consecrated Bishop of Melitopolis, 9 October, 1864, and appointed to the Vicariate Apostolic of British Columbia which included the mainland from 49 degrees to 60 degrees N. lat. In 1867 he established a mission 300 miles north of New Westminster at William's Lake, for twenty-two reserves of Shuswp, Chilcotin, and Carrier Indians, and in 1873 another mission, 600 miles north, at Stuart's Lake, for thirteen villages of Babines, Sekanais, Nahanais, and Skeenas. In 1876 the Kootenay mission at the foot of the Rockies was founded for thirteen bands of Kootenays and Okanagan, and in 1878, Kamloops Mission, 250 miles east of New Westminster, was established for twelve villages of Nicolas, Shuswaps, and Thompsons. To meet the needs of the influx of eastern Canadians, Americans, and British, a pro-cathedral was built in 181 at new Westminster, a college in 1866, a hospital in charge of the Sisters of Providence, and an academy for girls in charge of the Sisters of St. Ann. In twenty- five years Bishop D'Herbomez, assisted by pioneer Oblates, mostly from France, completed the conversion of all the tribes of the coast and interior, built chapels for each band, and established three industrial schools.

At the death of Bishop D'Herbomez, 3 June, 1890, Rt. Rev. Paul Durieu, O.M.I., who had been appointed Bishop of Marcopolis and coadjutor, 24 October, 1875, took charge. The vicariate was made the diocese of New Westminster by a Brief of Leo XIII, dated 2 September, 1890. The regime of Bishop Durieu was characterized by a rare insight and Apostolic gifts; his strict discipline enabled the Indian tribes to resist the contaminating influence of the invading logger and miner, to a degree that makes their annals reminiscent of the early ages of the Faith. In the nine years of his episcopate, churches were built in the mining districts at Fernie, Cranbrook, Greenwood, Nelson, Revelstoke, Sandon, Rossland, and also at Vernon, Lumby, and Kelowna. In 1887 he erected a church, a hospital in charge of the Sisters of Providence, and St. Ann's Academy, in the growing railroad-terminal city of Vancouver. Father Augustin Dontenwill, O.M.I, b. at Bishwiller, Strasbourg, 4 June, 1857, ordained 30 May, 1885, professor in the Faculty of Arts at the University of Ottawa, was appointed Bishop of Germanicopolis and coadjutor, 22 Aug., 1897, succeeding to the see, 1 June, 1899. He carried on the work of his predecessor, giving special attention to educational needs, and established a Catholic weekly, a Children's Aid Society, an orphanage in charge of the Sisters of Providence, an academy at Nelson, and hospitals at Greenwood and Rossland in charge of the sisters of St. Joseph of Peace. He also erected a monumental church at Vancouver and three parish churches in the suburbs.

On 25 June, 1903, a separate ecclesiastical province was formed in British Columbia, with Victoria as metropolitan see, and Most Rev. Bertram Orth was consecrated Archbishop of Victoria. By a Brief, dated 7 Sept., 1908, that part of the diocese north of 54 ° N. lat., exclusive of the Queen Charlotte Islands, was added to the Yukon Vicariate, and Bishop Dontenwill was appointed first Archbishop of Vancouver, Victoria reverting to the status of suffragan diocese. On 29 Sept., 1908, he was elected Superior General of the Oblate Congregation and resigned the archbishopric, 21 Sept., 1908, being appointed later titular Archbishop of Ptolemais, and since then resident at Rome. Rt. Rev. Neil McNeil, Bishop of St. George's, Newfoundland, was transferred to the See of Vancouver and raised to the archiepiscopal dignity, January, 1910. Since his arrival in Vancouver, six parochial churches and five mission chapels have been erected, and the Religious of the Sacred Heart placed in charge of the higher education of girls in Vancouver. Archbishop McNeil was born in Hillsborough, Nova Scotia, 23 Nov., 1851. He is a son of the late Malcolm McNeil and Ellen Meagher, was educated at St. Francis Xavier College, Antigonish, and in 1873 sent to the College of Propaganda, Rome. He was ordained priest in 1879, joined the teaching staff of St. Francis Xavier College in 1880, became rector of the college in 1884, and Bishop of Nilopolis and Vicar-Apostolic of St. George s Newfoundland, in 1891. He was consecrated at Antigonish, 20 October, 1895.

Statistics

The diocesan property is by Act of the Provincial Legislature, owned by a corporation-: Title, "The R.C. Archbishop of Vancouver". There are in the diocese: 15 secular, and 34 religious priests, 26 churches with resident priests; 50 missions with churches; 60 chapels where Mass is said; 1 college, 40 students; 8 industrial schools for Indians, 500 students; 3 academies for girls, and 8 parochial schools, with 800 pupils; 1570 young people under Catholic care; 5 hospitals; 1 orphanage; 1 House of Refuge; and about 35,000 Catholics.

MORICE, History of the Catholic Church in Western Canada (2 vols., Toronto, 1910); COOKE, Sketches of the life of Mgr. De Mazenod (2 vols., London, 18 79); Annales des Oblats; Catholic Directory (New York, 1912); Catholic Year Book for B.C. (1911).

WM. P. O'BOYLE

Albert Vandal

French writer, b. at Paris, 7 July, 1853; d. there, 30 Aug., 1910. His father was director general of the postal service under the second Empire. At first Albert Vandal entered the Council of State as auditor. Of moderate temperament and liberal opinions, the Government found that his family traditions prevented him from being devoted with sufficient warmth to Republican institutions and obliged him to resign. At this period Albert Sorel was professor of diplomatic history at the Ecole des Sciences Politiques. Vandal was his disciple and later his friend, prior to replacing him as chair. His first book is entitled "En Karriole à travers la Suède et la Norvège"(1876). It was followed by an important historical work, "Louis XV et Elisabeth de Russie" (1882). Vandal subsequently published "Pacha Bonneval" (1885), "Une ambassade francaise en orient sous Louis XV" (1887). But the work which permanently established his reputation was "Napoléon et Alexandre I". This splendid book twice won the Gobert grand prix and opened to Vandal the door of the French Academy, which he entered without competition (1897). He afterwards published "Les voyage du marquis de Naointel" (1901), and a very important book, "L'avènement de Bonaparte". He was a colleague and friend of Brunetière, and one of those Catholics who, after the passage of the law separating Church and State, wrote to the pope asking him to accept the associations cultuelles.

GEORGE BERTRIN

Vandals

A Germanic people belonging to the family of East Germans. According to Tacitus, they were originally settled between the Elbe and Vistula. At the time of the War of the Marcomanni (166-81) they lived in what is now Silesia, and in about 271 the Roman Emperor Aurelian was obliged to protect the middle course of the Danube against them. Constantine the Great (about 330) granted them lands in Pannonia on the right bank of the Danube. Through the Emperor Valens (364-78) they accepted Arian Christianity, yet there were also some scattered orthodox Vandals, among whom was Stilicho the minister of the Emperor Honorius. In 406 the Vandals advanced from Pannonia by way of Gaul, which they devastated terribly, into Spain, where they settled in 411. From 427 their king was Genseric (Gaiseric), who in 429 landed in North Africa with about 80,000 of his followers. It is a disputed point whether or not he was called to Africa by the Roman governor Boniface on account of the intrigues of Aetius. Peace was made between the Romans and Vandals in 435 but it was broken by Genseric in 439, who made Carthage his capital after he had thoroughly plundered it. During the next thirty-five years with a large fleet he ravaged the coasts of the Eastern and Western Empires. In 455 he plundered Rome itself during two weeks. It is asserted that the Empress Eudoxia had asked him to free her from her hated marriage with the Emperor Petronius Maximus, the murderer of her husband Valentinian III. This story, however, is probably a fable. It is said that on 2 June, 455, Leo the Great received Genseric and implored him to abstain from murder and destruction by fire, and to be satisfied with pillage. Whether the pope's influence saved Rome is, however, questioned; moreover, the Vandals had only booty in mind, nor was the plundering as extreme as later tradition and the expression "Vandalism" would imply. From 462 the Vandal kingdom included Africa and the islands of the Mediterranean, that is Sicily, Sardinia, Corsica, and the Balearic Islands, but like the other Germanic kingdoms on Roman soil the kingdom of the Vandals in Africa began to decay from the lack of unity of religion and of race among the two populations.

The Vandals treated the Catholics more harshly than other German peoples. Catholic bishops were punished by Genseric with deposition, exile, or death, and laymen were excluded from office and frequently suffered confiscation of their property. It is said of Genseric himself that he was originally a Catholic and had changed to Arianism about 428; this, however, is probably an invention. He protected his Catholic subjects when his relations with Rome and Constantinople were friendly, as during the years 454-57, when the Catholic community at Carthage, being without a head, elected Deogratias bishop. The same was also the case during the years 476-77 when Bishop Victor of Cartenna sent him, during a period of peace, a sharp refutation of Arianism and suffered no punishment. Genseric was one of the most powerful personalities of the era of the Migrations, and was the terror of the seas. He died at a great age on 25 January, 477. According to the law of succession which he had promulgated, not the son but the oldest male member of the royal house was to succeed to the throne (law of seniority). He was succeeded by his incompetent son Hunerich (477- 484), who at first protected the Catholics, owing to his fear of Constantinople, but from 482 he persecuted them in the most terrible manner. King Guntamund (484-96), his cousin and successor, protected them once more, and while Thrasamund (496- 523), owing to his religious fanaticism, was hostile to Catholics, still he contented himself with bloodless persecutions. Hilderich (523-30) favoured the Catholics and granted religious freedom; consequently Catholic synods were once more held in North Africa. Hilderich's policy was opposed by his cousin Gelimer, who raised the banner of national Arianism. Hilderich was deposed and murdered in 533. This was taken as an excuse for interference by the Byzantine Emperor Justinian. Gelimer was defeated in 533 and 534 by Belisarius, the commander of the armies of the Eastern Empire, and North Africa became a Roman province, from which the Vandals were expelled. Gelimer was honourably treated and received large estates in Galicia. He was also offered the rank of a patrician but had to refuse it because he was not willing to change his Arian faith.

PAPENCORDT, Gesch. der vandalischen Herrschaft in Afrika (Berlin, 1837); DAHN, Die Konige der Germanen, I (Munich, 1861), 140-260; HODGKIN, Italy and her Invaders, II (London, 1880); SCHMIDT, Gesch. der Vandalen (Leipzig, 1901); SCHWARZE, Untersuchungen uber die aussere Entwickelung der afrikanischen Kirche (Gottingen, 1892); GORRES, Kirche u. Staar im Vandalenreich Deutsche Zeitschrift fur Geschichtswissenschaft, X (Leipzig, 1893), 14-70; MARTROYE, Occident a epoque byzantine (Paris, 1904); IDEM, Genseric (Paris, 1907).

KLEMENS LOFFLER

Theodore J. Van den Broek

Priest and missionary, b. at Amsterdam, Holland, 5 Nov., 1783; d. at Little Chute, Wisconsin, 5 Nov., 1851. He made his studies in Holland, was ordained in Germany in 1809, and was received into the Dominican Order in 1817. In 1819 he as appointed to Alkmaar, where he published "Sermons for all Sundays and Holidays". On 15 Aug., 1832, with seven other missionaries, he arrived in Baltimore, and thence went to Cincinnati. The missionaries were sent to different places, and Father Van den Broek eventually went to the convent of St. Rose in Kentucky. After a short stay at St. Rose he was removed to Somerset, Ohio. Hearing of the sad condition of the Indians in Michigan (now Wisconsin), he obtained permission from Bishop Purcell of Cincinnati to go to them, and arrived at Green Bay, 4 July, 1834. He found there only ten Catholic families, but laboured zealously among the whites and Indians. He completed the church and priest's house begun by Father Mazzuchelli, and devoted himself to the Indians during an epidemic of cholera, aided by two self- sacrificing religious, Sisters Clara and Theresa Bourdalou. In 1836, at the request of the Indians of Little Chute, he took up his residence with them. He taught his Indian neophytes the alphabet, and they could soon read Bishop Baraga's prayer-books and catechisms. The following year he built a log church thirty by twenty-two feet and in 1839 he built an addition thereto of twenty feet. As the mission at Green Bay was for some time without a resident priest, Father Van den Broek frequently said Mass on Sundays at each place, walking the intervening distance of twenty- two miles even in the severest weather. He made arduous and dangerous journeys of two hundred miles, to minister to his Menominee and Winnebago Indians.

He had no income outside of his own resources; he built his first church himself, with the aid of his Indians. He was both priest and physician to the Indians at Buttes des Morts, Fort Winnebago, Fond du Lac, Prairie du Chien, Lake Poygan, Calumet, and even the Indian village on the Milwaukee River. He civilized the Indians, worked with them, showed them the use of tools, how to cultivate the land, and with their help he built a church seventy feet long, which he dedicated to St. John Nepomueene. Between 1836 and 1844 he converted and baptized over eight hundred Indians. In 1847 having obtained a priest to temporarily replace him, he sailed for Holland, arriving at Amsterdam, 13 August, 1847. In 1848 he returned with three shiploads of Dutch immigrants, whose descendants now form the population of north-eastern Wisconsin, and are distinguished by their zealous faith, industry, thrift, and good order. The influence of their missionary work has extended into Minnesota, Iowa, Michigan, Nebraska, South Dakota, Noth Dakota, Oregon, and other states.

J.H.M. WIGMAN

Maximilian Van der Sandt

(SANDAUS).

Born at Amsterdam, 17 April, 1578; d. at Cologne, 21 June, 1656. He entered the novitiate of the Society of Jesus, 21 Nov., 1597; taught philosophy at Würzburg, and Sacred Scripture at Mainz. He became superior of the episcopal seminary at Würzburg. He wrote many works on philosophy and theology, among others a notable controversial reply to the Batavian Calvinist Lawrence in defence of the moral teaching of the Jesuits, "Castigatio conscientiae Jesuiticae cauteriata. . .a Jacobo Laurentio", Würzburg, 1617. It was said of him that he left a book for every one of the seventy-eight years of his life, several devotional treatises on the Blessed Virgin, and many ascetical and mystical treatises.

SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliotheque de la Compagnie de Jesus, XII (Paris, 1896); POULAIN, Des Graces d'orasion (6th ed., Paris); The Graces of Interior Prayer, tr. SMITH (London, 1911).

GERTRUDE DANA STEELE

Rogier Van der Weyden

Painter, b. at Tournai, 1399 or 1400; d. at Brussels, 1464. His original name was De la Pasture, which was transformed in Flemish into Van der Weyden. His family, settled in Tournai since 1260, were people of means. He is believed to have commenced his artistic life as a goldsmith, and his figures show that he understood some kind of sculpture. He was apprenticed to Robert Campin in 1427, became a master painter, was admitted into the Guild of St. Luke in 1432, and three years later was painter in ordinary to the municipality of Brussels. He only had the appointment, however, for a year, when the office of town painter was abolished. He was said to have been a pupil of van Eyck, e.g. by Vasari and other writers, but the researches of Weale in Flemish documents proved this incorrect, and showed that Campin was Rogier's master. His work is far more religious than that of van Eyck, and the figures in his pictures much more dramatic, animated, and at times almost tragic. He was full of employment and obtained high prices. He lived at Brussels, and had four children, Cornelius, who became a Carthusian, Peter, who was a painter, John, who was a goldsmith, and one daughter, Margaret. He was a generous benefactor, especially to Carthusian houses. One of his important altar-pieces, now in Berlin, was painted for the Cartuja of Miraflores in Spain, another, now in the Escorial, for the Carthusian house at Scheut, a third, at Antwerp, for the Bishop of Tournai, who desired to give it to a Carthusian house, and a fourth for the Carthusian monastery of Herinnes, where Cornelius resided. The "Joys and Sorrows of our Lady of Pity", now at Berlin, the "Seven Sacraments", at Antwerp, the "Adoration of the Magi", at Berlin, and the marvellous triptych in the Prado, are his greatest works. There are also paintings by him at Frankfort and Munich, and others attributed to him elsewhere.

WEALE in Le Belfroi, passim.

GEORGE CHARLES WILLIAMSON

Peter van de Velde

(PEDRO CAMPAÑA).

Painter, b. at Brussels, 1503; d. in that city in 1580. This artist should really be grouped under the head of the Spanish School, and is more generally known by his Spanish name. His actual birth-name was Pieter de Kempeneer, translated into French as Champaigne. His early life appears to have been passed in Italy, where he carefully studied the paintings of Raphael, and declared himself as his pupil. In 1530 he was at work at some scene-painting, representing a triumphal arch to be erected on the occasion of the coronation of Charles V, and he then left for Spain, on the advice, it is said, of Cardinal Grimani, and passed the rest of his life in that country, only returning to Brussels about 1563 or 1565. Between 1537 and 1562 he was associated with Luis de Vargas and the Italian sculptor Torregiano in establishing a school of painting in Seville, which eventually became the academy of the place; amongst the pupils educated in it was the celebrated Morales. He painted for the monastery of St. Mary of Grace, Church of Santa Cruz, in the city, an altar-piece representing the "Descent from the Cross", which is now in the cathedral, having been removed there when the church fell into ruins. This is dated 1548, and is regarded as his masterpiece. There are other works by the same painter in Seville cathedral, especially two representing the "Purification of the Virgin" and the "Resurrection"; and the various churches of the city, S. Isidoro, S. Pedro, S. Catalina, and S. Juan, all possess paintings by this artist. One of his last works was the restoration and repainting of a chapel belonging to Hernando de Jaen, an important resident in Seville. Murillo requested that he buried near Campana's picture, and his burial took place in the Church of Santa Cruz, close underneath the "Descent from the Cross", but the whole building was burned to the ground during the French war, and the tomb perished.

PALOMINO DE CASTRO, Las Vidas de los Pintores Eminentes Espanoles (Madrid, 1715); HARTLEY, Spanish Painting (London, 1904); and the dictionaries of KUGLER, BENEZIT, SIRET, and BRYAN. See also BERMUDEZ, Diccionario historico. . .Bellas Artes en Espana (Madrid, 1800).

GEORGE CHARLES WILLIAMSON

Augustine Van De Vyver

Sixth Bishop of Richmond, Virginia; b. at Haesdonck, East Flanders, Belgium, 1 Dec., 1844; d. at Richmond, 16 Oct., 1911. His parents were John Ferdinand Van de Vyver and Sophia (De Schepper). He was educated in the city of St. Nicholas, Belgium, and at the American College, Louvain (1867-70). Ordained priest, 24 July, 1870, he served successively as assistant at St. Peter's Cathedral, Richmond, pastor of Harper's Ferry (1875-81), pastor of the cathedral, and vicar-general of the Diocese of Richmond (1881-89). Assigned with him at the cathedral for a time was the Rev. Dennis J. O'Connell, D.D., who was destined to be his successor in the See of Richmond. Father Van De Vyver's appointment by Rome to succeed Bishop Keane as Bishop of Richmond, 16 July, 1889, was furthered by a petition of the priests of the diocese. He was consecrated, 20 October, 1889, having as consecrating prelates his two predecessors, His Eminence James Cardinal Gibbons and Bishop J.J. Keane (afterwards archbishop), then rector of the Catholic University, Washington. During Bishop Van De Vyver's administration Mr. and Mrs. Thomas Fortune Ryan of New York donated the Sacred Heart Cathedral, the former the building, the latter the furnishings, at a cost of nearly a half million dollars. His Eminence, Cardinal (then Apostolic Delegate and Archbishop) Diomede Falconio, laid the corner stone of the new cathedral, 4 June, 1903, and consecrated the same, 29 November, 1906. In a quasi-synod held by the bishop, 12 November, 1907, new laws were enacted to meet the needs of the diocese. Guided by a spirit of deep humility, Bishop Van De Vyver made several ineffectual attempts to resign his see. The first, in 1903, and the second, in 1905, were frustrated by the Church authorities, priest and people being ignorant of his intention. The bishop's third and almost successful attempt to resign (1908) came to the knowledge of the people, who held a great mass meeting of protest, their cause being materially aided by the public Press. The efforts of clergy and laity caused the final withdrawal of his resignation.

In 1910 Bishop Van De Vyver acted as spiritual director of a pilgrimage to Rome. He had already made two "ad limina" visits to the Eternal City, one shortly after consecration, the other in 1905. Among the later works which he inaugurated may be mentioned the erection of the McGill Catholic Union and the Knights of Columbus home. At his suggestion Mrs. and Mrs. Thomas F. Ryan gave to the diocese large sums for charitable, educational, and other purposes of a religious nature. Mrs. Ryan has donated churches, schools, and convents in various parts of the state. After a farewell visit to his relatives in Belgium, followed by two weeks of illness on his return, and having calmly prepared himself by the reception of the last sacraments, Bishop Van De Vyver passed to his eternal reward. He was buried, 20 October, on the 22nd anniversary of his consecration. By his own request, the burial was in Mount Calvary Cemetery, Richmond, which he as vicar-general had purchased. With the exception of Bishop McGill, he was the only Bishop of Richmond who died as bishop there, the others having been transferred to other sees. He was revered as a kind father and sympathetic friend, having a wide acquaintance amongst people of all ranks and denominations. His private life was simple, humble, and democratic. During his regime, Catholicism made marked progress within the diocese. (See RICHMOND, DIOCESE OF; VIRGINIA.)

MAGRI, The Catholic Church in the City and Diocese of Richmond (Richmond, 1896); The Catholic Church in the United States of America (new York, 1909); SHEA, Our Faith and its Defenders (New York, 1894); The Catholic Directory (Milwaukee and New York, 1871-1911); Diocesan documents and newspaper files (Richmond, 1870-1911).

F. JOSEPH MAGRI

Thomas Vane

The place and time of his birth and death are not known; but he was educated at Christ's College, Cambridge, and took the degree of Doctor of Divinity in that university. Having taken Anglican orders, he was made chaplain extraordinary to King Charles I and rector of Crayford. On becoming a Catholic, he resigned these preferments, and went with his wife to Paris, where he practised as a physician, taking the degree of M.D. there or at some other foreign university. At Parish he wrote an account of his conversion, the preface being dated 4 August, 1642, which was published in 1643 under the title, "A Lost Sheep returned Home: or the Motives of the Conversion of Thomas Vane." This book ran through several editions and was answered by the Anglican writer Edward Chisenhall (1653). He also wrote "An answer to a libell written by D. Cosens against the great Generall Councell of Laterane under Pope Innocent III" (Paris, 1646), and "Wisdome and Innocence or Prudence and Simplicity in the examples of the Serpent and the Dove, propounded by our Lord" (s.l. 1652).

VANE, A Lost Sheep returned Home (Paris, 1643); DODD, Church Hist., III (Brussels vere Wolverhampton, 1742); GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., s.v.; COOPER in Dict. Nat. Biog., s.v.

EDWIN BURTON

Diocese of Vannes

(VENETENSIS).

Comprises the Department of Morbihan, and was re-established by the Concordat of 1802; it was formed: (1) from the former Diocese of Vannes, excluding the parishes situated east of the Oust River, which were annexed to the Archdiocese of Rennes; (2) from the District of Roce-Bernard, detached from the Diocese of Nantes; (3) from the southern part of the former Diocese of St. Malo; (4) from the District of Gourin, detached from the Diocese of Quimper. It was a suffragan of Tours until 1859 and, since that time, of Rennes. The Department of Morbihan is that part of France where the greatest number of monuments of the old Gallic worship are preserved; the long avenues of menhirs at Carnac are famous.

According to tradition, St. Clair, first Bishop of Nantes, died in the third century during the course of his preaching in the Diocese of Vannes. The synodical epistle of the Council of Angers, on 4 October, 453, gives the names of four Breton prelates, one of whom was certainly Bishop of Vannes. St. Paternus, whose origin is much discussed by hagiographers, and who became bishop between 461 and 490, is the chief patron of the diocese. No document previous to the Charter of Quimperlé, which dates from the twelfth century, gives as bishops of Vannes, the saints Doininius, Clemens, Amans, Saturninus, Guinninus (Guenin), Vigorocus, Budocus, Hinguethenus, Meriadocus, Meldrocus, Comeanus, and Justocus who probably, without episcopal character, were engaged in evangelizing the country. Bishop Susannus was expelled from his see by the Breton king Nominoe (8484) because the latter wished to reorganize ecclesiastical Brittany. Among the subsequent bishops are mentioned: Pierre de Foix (1476-90), cardinal in 1476; Cardinal Laurent Pucci (1514-31); Cardinal Antoine Pucci (1531-44); Charles de Marillac (150-60), ambassador of the King of France in Turkey and in England.

St. Gildas "the Wise", or "Badonicus", born in Great Britain in 494, left there about 527, went to the Island of Houat, then to the Peninsula of Rhuis, where he founded the monastery of St. Gildas, and wrote two treatises which are a valuable source for the ancient history of the Britons; he died in 570. In the tenth century, the Northmen destroyed the monastery, then under the Abbot Dave. Abbot Dave brought the bodies of Saints Patricius, Albon, and Paternus to Bourg Deols in Berri, and there erected a monastery under the name of St. Gildas. In 1008, Geoffrey I, Duke of Brittany, asked Gauzlin, Abbot of Saint Benoit on the Loire, for religious to re-establish the monastery of St. Gildas of Rhuis. It was re-established by Abbot Felix, who died in 1038. Abelard, Abbot of Rhuis in 125, soon left the abbey, but retained the title of abbot until his death. Eudes de Kerlivio d'Hennebond, disciple of St. Vincent de Paul, and Father Huby, S.J., contributed greatly to the religious revival of the Diocese of Vannes, by the foundation of the seminary (1681). In the fourteenth century, during the wars in which Venerable Charles of Blois supported by Charles V and Jean de Montfort, aided by the English, contested the sovereignty of Brittany, Vannes was several times besieged. The battle of Auray (29 September, 1364), in which Venerable Charles of Blois was killed, put an end to the struggle between the two families of Blois and of Montfort. An army of émigrés, commanded by Puisaye, Sombreuil, and d'Hervilly, landed, June, 1795, on the Peninsula of Quiberon, was there joined by 10,000 Chouans, and was attacked by Hoche, who completely annihilated it, 16 July, 1795. Hercé, Bishop of Dol, was shot at Vannes by the Republican troops, on 3 July, 1795; 900 émigrés, who had landed at Quiberon, were shot at Blech, near Auray; their bones are kept at the Carthusian monastery of Auray, the ancient collegiate church founded in the fourteenth century by Jean de Montfort.

Councils were held at Vannes in 461 or 465, 818, 846. The Viscountship of Rohan, in the diocese, was erected in 1603, by Henri IV, into a duchy-peerage for Henri de Rohan (1574-1638), who became one of the leaders of the Protestant party under Louis XIII. A certain number of saints are connected with the history of the diocese: St. Eguiner or Guyomard (Guignerus), martyr at Ploudery in 499; St. Albinus (Aubin), Bishop of Angers from 529 to 549, native of the Diocese of Vannes; St. Salomon, Duke or King of the Bretons, martyr (ninth century); St. Goustan (Sulstanus), lay brother of the monastery of St. Gildas, d. about 1009; St. Vincent Ferrer (1357-1419), who died at Vannes, where he is buried, is patron of the episcopal city; Blessed Francoise d'Amboise, Duchess of Brittany, who, having become a widow, refuse the brilliant marriage which Louis XI suggested to her, founded the Carmelites of Vannes, and died in 1485. The chief pilgrimages of the diocese are: Notre-Dame de Larmor; Notre-Dame de Queleven, at Guern; Notre-Dame du Roncier, at Josselin; Notre-Dame du Voeu, at Hennebont; and above all the pilgrimage of Saint Anne d'Auray. From the earliest centuries, Brittany had erected a chapel to Saint Anne; it was destroyed at the close of the eighth century, but popular tradition forbade the sowing of the field of Bocenno, where the chapel had been erected. In 1623 and 1624, after visions, the farmer Yves Nicolazic obtained from the bishop permission for a new chapel. The image of St. Anne, which was venerated there, was burned in 1793; but a new statute of Saint Anne was solemnly consecrated by order of Pius IX, 30 September, 1868.

Before the application of the Law of 1901 to the congregations, there were in the Diocese of Vannes, Capuchins, Jesuits, missionary priests of the Society of Mary, Eudists, Picpusiens, Fathers of the Holy Spirit and of the Sacred Heart of Mary, and lay Brothers of St. Francis Regis. The powerful society of the Brothers of Christian Instruction had its mother-house at Ploermel, in the diocese. Many communities of women were originally of the diocese: the Sisters of Charity of St. Louis, hospitallers and teachers, founded in 1803 by Mme de Malesherbes, widow of the defender of Louis XVI, and her daughter Mme Molé, with the mother-house at Vannes; the Daughters of Jesus, with the mother-house at Kermaria. At the end of the nineteenth century, the religious congregations conducted in the Diocese of Vannes: 2 infant asylums; 44 day nurseries; 1 school for deaf mutes; 3 orphan asylums for boys; 8 orphan asylums for girls; 4 industrial rooms; 1 home for unprotected young girls; 18 hospitals or refuges; more than 150 houses of religious for the care of the sick at their homes; 1 insane asylum. The Diocese of Vannes had in 1905 (at the end of the administration of the Concordat): 563,468 inhabitants; 38 livings; 238 parochial chapels; 279 vicariates, recompensed by the State.

Gallia christiana, XIV nova, (1856), 915-40, instr. 209-224; DUCHESNE, Fastes episcopaux, II (Paris, 1894-9); TRESVAUX, L'Eglise de Bretagne (Paris, 1839); LALLEMAND, Les origines historiques de Vannes (Vannes, 1904); LE MENE, Hist. archeologique, feodale et religieuse des provinces du diocese de Vannes (2 vols., Vannes, 1894); LUCO, Fouille historique de l'ancien diocese de Vannes (2nd ed., Vannes, 1908); ROSENZWEIG, La Chartreuse d'Auray (Vannes, 1863); NICOL, Sainte Anne d'Auray, hist. du pelerinage (Paris, 1878).

GEORGES GOYAU

Andrea Vanni

Painter and statesman, b. at Siena, 1320; d. 1414. He entered politics after the democratic overthrow of the government of the city. A letter written to him by St. Catherine, his countrywoman and friend, concerning the administration of the country, is still preserved. He was elected to the Grand Council and sent as Sienese ambassador to the pope at Avignon and Naples. As an artist he was a weak imitator of Simone Martini and of Lorenzetti. With his brother Lippo Vanni, Bartolo di Fredi, and Taddeo di Bartolo, he introduced early Sienese art into the fifteenth century. His chief authenticated work is a large polyptych in the Church of Santo Stefano at Siena. This painting depicts the Virgin enthroned between Sts. Stephen, James the Less, John the Baptist, and Bartholomew; in the niches above are the figures of the Evangelists, while several saints and an Annunciation are painted in five higher projecting compartments. The small heads and the gestures betray a certain stiffness. A very agreeable and carefully painted picture is a "Madonna and Child" in the Church of San Michele. A "Birth of the Virgin", representing James, Catherine, Bartholomew, and Elizabeth, in the gallery at Siena, is the joint work of Vanni and Bartolo di Fredi, who often worked together both in art and politics. A "Crucifixion" with two saints by Vanni is in the Academy at Siena, an "Annunciation" in two panels in the Palazzo Saraceni, and a "St. Sebastian" at the museum. Vanni celebrated St. Catherine in the frescoes of San Domenico at Siena. He also painted at Naples.

PERKINS in the Burlington Magazine, VI (1908), no. 2; MILANESE, Documenti per la storia dell'arte senese (Siena, 1854-56); DELLA VALLE, Lettere Senesi, I (Siena, 1782); CROWE and CAVALCASELLE, New History of Painting in Italy, II (London, 1864-); RICHTER, Siena (Leipzig, 1901).

G. GIETMANN

Francesco Vanni

Painter, b. at Siena, 1565; d. there, 1609. Vanni was one of the better class of artists of the Eclectic School of painting of his era. He shared, indeed, in the weaknesses of this school, yet many regard him as the restorer of Italian painting in the sixteenth century. The artistic value of his work does not always equal his fertility in production. However, by teaching and example he exerted a lasting influence, and trained capable pupils, among whom were his sons Michelangelo and Raffaello Vanni. His first teachers were Salimbene and Passarotti, and at an early age he studied the works of Raphael at Rome under the direction of de' Vecchi. But at Siena the style thus created did not prove popular. He then went to Parma and Bologna and adopted the style of Baroccio, the Umbrian leader in the Baroque style of painting. After this, on the recommendation of Baronius, he was called to Rome by Pope Clement VIII and commissioned to paint the great altar picture for St. Peter's, "Simon Magus rebuked by St. Peter". It is his best work; a remarkable fact is the good preservation of the colours in this very carefully painted picture. The pope rewarded him richly and made him a knight. He was less successful at Rome in the execution of some other pictures, as "The Assumption of the Virgin", two pictures of St. Cecilia, etc. A large number of Vanni's frescoes and panel paintings are to be found at Siena, among these are" "The Sienese on the Crusade", "The Council of Siena", "The Demoniac", "Calvary", "St. Galgano in the Wilderness", "St. Francis Xavier", "Baptism of Constantine", "Martyrdoms of Sts. Lucia and Catherine", etc. His works are also to be found at Pisa, Pistoja, Perugia, Genoa, Florence, and various cities outside Italy. Highly esteemed among his engravings are a "Madonna and Child", a "St. Francis in Ecstasy", and a "St. Catherine Receiving the Stigmata". Vanni had also a reputation as architect and mechanic, but of his architectural work nothing important remains.

MILANESI, Documenti per la Storia dell' arte senesa (Siena, 1854-56); see also the general histories of art.

G. GIETMANN

Luis de Vargas

Painter, b. at Seville, in 1502; d. there in 1568. He has two claims upon our attention; he was not only a great painter, but was also a man of strong devotional temperament, and known as a holy man. His great desire was to use his talent for the glory of God, and it was his habit before painting one of his great altar-pieces to go to confession and receive Holy Communion. It is also stated by one of his contemporaries that he kept a coffin in his room to remind him of the approach of death, and that one of his pictures, "Christ Bearing the Cross", a fresco, painted in a street in Seville (known as the Street of Bitterness, "La Calle de la Amargura"), was so notable in the city that condemned criminals were brought there on the way to the scene of execution in order to make their devotions before it and to receive the last offices of the Church. De Vargas lived a simple and almost hermit- like life; he was quiet, mild, benevolent, disliked by many of the people of his own rank, but worshipped by the poor, to whom he was extremely generous.

He was trained in Seville, and the works of Campana greatly influenced him. He first painted on the rough canvas curtains used to cover up the pictures on the altars in Holy Week, but owing to the generosity of a friend he was able to visit Italy. There, during his stay of twenty-eight years, mainly spent in Rome, he closely studied the works of Perino del Vaga, one of Raphael's favourite pupils, and came into contact with Vasari. The first picture he painted after his return is still in Seville Cathedral; it is dated 1555, and in the records of the chapter it is said to have been discovered by Bermudez. Of his fresco work very little remains. His two greatest pictures represent the "Purification of the Virgin" and the "Temporal Generation of Our Lord," the latter being an allegorical composition showing Adam and Eve adoring the Infant Christ, Who is in the arms of the Virgin. This is the picture generally known as "La Gamba" because of the wonderful foreshortening of the leg of Adam. The Italian artist Perez de Alesio, when painting (1548) the giant figure of St. Christopher on the southern portal of the cathedral, exclaimed, that the whole of his figure was of less merit than was the leg of Adam in the "Generation" by De Vargas. De Vargas was one of the few Spanish artists who were really eminent in draughtsmanship. He painted many portraits, but none of them is of any special merit.

See the writings of BERMUDEZ on the Spanish artists, notably the Carta Cadiz, 1806), the Cathedral Guide (Seville, 1804), and the Dictionary (6 vols., Madrid). MAXWELL, Annals of the Artists of Spain; MADRAZO in Espana (1878); HARTLEY, Spanish Painting (London, 1904), and various works on Murillo.

GEORGE CHARLES WILLIAMSON

Francisco de Vargas y Mexia

Spanish diplomat and ecclesiastical writer, b. at Madrid, date unknown; d. At the Hieronymite monastery of la Cisla in 1566. He belonged to an old family of the lower nobility and studied law at the University of Alcalá, receiving the degree of licentiate in law. He became a government official, and by his energy and education, especially by his excellent knowledge of law, rose to the position of fiscal of the Council of Castile (Fiscal del Consejos de Castilla), that is, attorney-general. In 1545 Charles V sent him to the Council of Trent. In January, 1548, he protested, as Charles's representative at the council, against its transfer to Bologna, and in 1551 he congratulated the council on its return to Trent. During the years 1552-59 he was the Spanish ambassador at Venice; in 1558 he negotiated at Rome with Paul IV regarding the recognition of Ferdinand I as emperor, and in references to the founding of new dioceses in the Netherlands. From 1559 he succeeded Gigueroa as the Spanish ambassador to the Curia. As such he took an important part in the election of Pius IV. When Pius IV brought suit against the relatives of Paul IV, Vargas exerted himself to save the Caraffa. For some time was not regarded favorably by the pope, who tried to have him recalled by spain; however, Vargas again obtained the confidence of Pius IV, and was commissioned by the latter in 1563 to prepare an opinion on the question of the papal jurisdiction, as to which the Council of Trent had become involved in a dispute. The document Vargas prepared was published at Rome in the same year under the title of "De episcoporum jurisdictione et de pontificis maximi auctoritate responsum". In this Vargas speaks as a strict supporter of the papacy. Another theological question that he took up was that of granting the cup to the laity; to this he was decidedly opposed. His reports and letters are important for the information they contain on the doings of the Council of Trent; still, he cannot be regarded as an entirely unprejudiced witness, because his interest was that of a diplomat in the service of his king. His keen powers of observation were also chiefly directed to the scrutiny of earthly motives, and of the evidence of human weaknesses and shortsightedness. He was prominent in the affairs of the council for the last time when, in conjunction with the Spanish ambassador at Trent, he tried to postpone the close of the council. After his return to spain he was made state councillor, but soon resigned all his offices and retired to the Hieronymite monastery of la Cisla near Toledo, in order to prepare himself for death. His contemporaries praise him as a highly educated man and a patron of learning. He as also a zealous, skilful, and conscientious servant of his king and a pious Christian.

LE VASSOR, Lettres et memoires de Francois de Vargas touchant le Concile de Trente (Amsterdam, 1700); WEISS, Papiers d'etat du Cardinal de Granvelle, VI (Paris, 1846); VILLANUEVA, Vida literaria, II (London, 1825); Coleccion de documentos ineditos para la hist. De Espana, IX (Madrid, 1846), 81-406; 518-551; LA FUENTE, Hist. Eclesiastic de Espana, V (2nd ed., Madrid, 1874), 276-281; DOLLINGER, Beitrage zur politischen, kirchlichen u. Kulturgesch., I (Ratisbon, 1862), 265-478; MULLER, Das Konklave Pius IV (Gotha, 1889), 41-43; SUSTA, Die romische Kurie u. das Konzil von Trient, I-III (Vienna, 1904-1911), passim.

KLEMENS LOFFLER

Giorgio Vasari

Painter, architect, and writer, b. at Arezzo, 1511; d. at Florence, 1574. Although an artist of considerable repute, Vasari depends for immortality on his remarkable work, "Vite de' più eccell. pitori, scultori et archit," on the lives of the most eminent painters, sculptors, and architects, a work of stupdendous industry and the most important record of the greatest epoch of the world's art. Inaccurate in places, owing to the writer's prejudice against certain painters, it is on the whole a marvel of good writing and accuracy, and, with all its defects, is the great treasure-house to which all writers have gone and must go for information respecting the early artists of Italy. Its first edition appeared in 1550 at Florence. It was succeeded by editions in 1567, 1568, 1760, 1811, etc. In 1864 Milanesi published his alphabetical list of the lives, and followed it in 1868 by his important annotated edition, additing considerable information to Vasari's original work. The book was translated into English by Mrs. Foster, and published in Bohn's Library in 1846, 1850, and 1852. In 1884 the sixth volume of the commentary by Richter was issued, and sections of the original work, comprising selected lives, were issued by Ellis in 1895, but notably by Blashfield and Hopkins in 1897, with very important notes and appendixes. A new and sumptuous edition of Vasari's work was projected in 1896, to be edited and annotated by Venturi, but only one volume, dealing with Gentile da Fabriano and Pisanello, was issued. A still more important edition, to be known as the Quattrocentenary edition in ten volumes, with a translation by Gaston de Vere, is (1912) being prepared. Vasari's lesser writings, his letters and "Ragionamenti", published in 1588 after his death, and the account of the decorations he prepared for the wedding of Francesco de' Medici, are contained in the Milanesi edition. During the last two years a large number of letters and documents by and relating to Vasari have been discovered; a summary of these private archives at Florence, belonging to Count Luciano Rasponi-Spinelli, was published in April, 1910. In 1912 Mr. Sidney J. A. Churchill, of Naples, has issued, for private circulation, his "Bibliografia Vasariana", the first serious attempt to make an accurate bibliography of the works of Vasari, and chronicling 197 separate editions, as well as references to his drawings, engravings, and manuscripts.

We now come to Vasari's paintings. Vasari was a kinsman of Luca Signorelli, and Luca's words, "Study well, little kinsman", were remembered by him all his life, although spoken when he was only a child, and when his father submitted to the old painter some drawings by the little boy. He was trained at Arezzo; he was an infant prodigy, exhibiting some of his drawings to Cardinal Passerini when only twelve years old, and reciting a great part of Virgil's Æneid. At Florence, young Vasari was placed under Michelangelo, and later became a great friend of Baccio Bandinelli. Afterwards he went to Rome with Cardinal de' Medici, worked there for some time, and then returned to Arezzo in poor health; eventually he went back to Florence in 1541. He met Cardinal Farnese at Rome, and he it was who urged the painter to write his famous book, which was dedicated to Cosimo de' Medici, the Duke of Florence, whose service Vasari entered in 1553, and whom he served faithfully to the end of his life. He was responsible for the greater part of the historical decoration of the Sala Regia at Rome, and commenced frescoes for the cupola of the cathedral at Florence, which he never completed. Several buildings at Pistoia were built after his designs, and his architectural work was intimately associated with the Church of Santa Maria Novella at Florence, with the Palace of the Uffizi and the celebrated corridor connecting it with the Pitti which he built across the Arno, and with some rather unsatisfactory work in the Church of Santa Croce. His pictures can best be studied at Florence, but there are fine examples also at Bologna, Lucca, Madrid, Rome, Vienna, Paris, and Dresden.

GEORGE CHARLES WILLIAMSON

Gabriel Vasquez

Theologian, b. at Villaescusa de Haro, near Belmonte, Cuenca, 1549 or 1551; d. at Alcalá, 23 Sept., 1604. He made his primary and grammar studies at Belmonte, and went to Alcalá for philosophy, where he entered the Society of Jesus on 9 April, 1569. Having completed his novitiate he continued his theological studies there, closing with a public defense of his thesis. At the Fifth Provincial Congregation at Toledo he also defended a thesis. Between these events he lectured to the Jesuit students on the "De Anima", and returned to Alcalá to study Hebrew. Following this he taught moral theology two years at the college of Ocana, two more at Madrid, and for some time at Alcalá. From there, although not yet thirty years of age, he was called to Rome to fill the same post at the Roman College. Before his departure he made his profession at Belmonte. He remained six years in Rome, then returned to Alcalá, where he taught theology until his death. In him, according to Haringer, virtue competed with doctrine, obedience with genius, and piety with learning. The Duke de Lerma, favourite of Philip III, frequently consulted him in the most important matters, and Benedict XIV called him the luminary of theology. He was noted for his exact knowledge of the opinions and theories of the different Schools and authors, and commendable for clearness of expression and a strict philosophical method. He made a complete study of the writings of St. Augustine, for whom he professed great devotion, as well as those of the other Fathers of the Church and St. Thomas.

In matters of opinion he sometimes differed from the general view of the Schools, defending private opinions, among which the following deserve to be mentioned: (1) The natural law consists in rational nature considered in itself and in the recognition that certain actions are necessarily in accord with it and others are repugnant to it. Nevertheless, he does not deny that the natural law might also have cognizance of what the Divine law enjoins, and that it might, therefore, be the principle of a Divine obligation. In this he is in opposition to Kant, who holds that all the binding force of the moral law should come from man and from man alone. (2) The Divine ideas are not the essence of God, in so far as that essence or nature is known as imitable or to be imitated, but only as they are the knowledge, the word, the species expressa of possible and future creatures. These ideas thereby concur remotely in the creation of beings; their proximate principle being the Divine active potency by which God actually and effectually creates. (3) In the section dedicated to the discussion of the existence of God he cites the ontological proof of St. Anselm, the legitimateness and demonstrative value of which he appears to accept absolutely. Eternity is, according to him, duratio permanens, uniformis, sine principio et fine, mensura carens, a definition that differs somewhat from that adopted by Boethius and followed in the Schools.

(4) Grace is necessary for performing all good actions and overcoming temptation. By grace he understands all good impulses which efficaciously urge to right action. It may proceed from natural causes, but as these are regulated by Divine Providence, if they are so regulated as to produce efficacious good impulses, it is grace, because man does not himself merit it, and to many it is denied. It is to be considered as a gift from God, since it is granted through the merits of Christ and for a supernatural end. Hence it is called grace. (5) Predestination, he maintains, is post praevisa merita, but children who die without its being in any way whatsoever possible for them to receive baptism were not, after original sin was foreseen, included in the salvific will of God. (6) In Christology he held the following opinions: that the Adoptionists are not Nestorians; that Christ cannot be called the servant of God; that Christ was under a command to die, but that He was free to choose the circumstances of his death; that the regular or formal dignity of the priesthood of Christ will last forever, because Christ is a priest according to His substance, and this remains immutable. (7) The ratio formalis of the Sacrifice of the Mass lies in the mystic separation of the Body and Blood of Christ effected by the words of consecration. (8) It is probable that in the new birth of baptism the guilt of sin is not pardoned ex opere operatio, but only the punishment. Since the death of Christ, baptism is for children the only means of salvation; for them martyrdom has the virtue of justification instar baptism; but in adults it justifies only on account of the act of charity. (9) Episcopal consecration does not imprint a new character, nor does it in reality extend or increase the sacerdotal character; a new and distinct power is thereby conferred, which is nothing else than the Divine appointment to a new ministry. (10) In the Sacrament of Matrimony the bodies of the contracting parties constitute the matter, and their consent, expressed verbally or by signs, the form. In treating the existence of God he notes the number of atheists who lived in his time, and attributes it to the influence of Protestantism. he also mentions the political atheists who consider God and religion only as governmental expedients to hold the people in check.

Vasquez was a rival of Suárez, whom he sometimes designates as one of the moderns. He established a School, and the disputes between his disciples and those of the Dominican Juan de Santo Tomas concerning there is in God between the Divine knowledge and the Divine idea were, according to Menéndez y Pelayo, curious. Luis de Torres and Diego de Alarcon were the most notable disciples of the School, and, although it was short-lived, all modern theologians hold Vasquez in high esteem and frequently quote him. Two principal charges are urged against him: his independent opinion and his discussion of useless questions. It cannot be denied that these censures have some foundation. His independence, as Hurter remarks, led him at times to defend less safe and even erroneous opinions. His first volume on the first part of St. Thomas was held back two years by the censors of the Society. Among the questions he discussed such as the following are to be found: "An Deus extra coelum, vel in vacuo intra coelum esse possit, aut ante mundi creationem alicubi fuerit". Nicolás Antonio, who thoroughly examined the questions and characteristics of those times when all theologians discussed questions which are to-day considered useless, says that some excuse can be made for this defect if one considers the energy and vigour of his genius, vir fuit acerrimo ingenio.

Works: (1) "De cultu adorationis libri tres et disputationes duae contra errores Felicis et Elipandi", Alcalá, 1594; Mainz, 1601, 1604; (2) "Commentariorum ac Disputationum in (partes) S. Thomae", Alcalá, 8 vols., 1598-1615. Later abridged editions were published at Alcalá, Ingolstadt, Vienna, and more complete ones at Lyons in 1620 and Antwerp in 1621. (3) "Paraphrases et compendiaria explicatio ad nonnullas Pauli Epistolas", Alcalá, 1612; Ingolstadt, 1613; Lyons, 1630. Vives undertook to print all his works, but only got as far as the first volume (Paris, 1905). "Metaphysicae disputationes" (Madrid, 1617; Antwerp, 1618) comprises the philosophical questions dispersed throughout his works, and is a rare and exceptionally valuable book. Some of his manuscripts are preserved in the National Library of Madrid.

NIEREMBERG, Varones ilustres, VIII (Bilbao, 1891), 355; GUILHERMY, Menologe de la C. de J., Assistence d'Espagne, III (Paris, 1902), 111; SOUTHWELL, Bibl. Script. (Rome, 1676), 271; GONZALEZ, Hist. de la Filosofta, III (Madrid, 1866), 140; MENENDEZ Y PELAYO, Hist. de las Ideas Esteticas, II (Madrid, 1884), 207; SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliotheque, VIII (Brussels, 1898), 513.

ANTONIO PEREZ GOYENA

François Vatable

(Or better WATEBLED, the name is also written GASTEBLED or OUATEBLE).

French Hellenist and Hebraist of the eighteenth century, b. at Gamaches (85 miles north-west of Paris), Picardy, probably in the latter years of the fifteenth century; d. in Paris, 16 March, 1547. He was for a time rector of Bramet in Valois, in 1530 or 1531. King Francis I appointed him to the chair of Hebrew in the newly-founded (1530) "College of the Three Languages", afterwards better known as "College de France". At a later date a royal grant conferred upon Vatable the title of Abbot of Bellozane, with the benefices attached thereto. Vatable is justly regarded as the restorer of Hebrew scholarship in France, and his lectures in Paris were largely attended, even by Jews. Yet he published nothing during his lifetime. He had, however, completed a Latin translation of Aristotle "Meterologica", which appeared at Lyons in 1548, and another of the same author's "Parva naturalia", which was published in Paris (1619). From the lecture notes taken by Vatable's pupils Robert Stephens drew the material for the scholia which he added to his edition of the new Latin translation of the Bible by Leo of Juda (4 vols., Paris, 1539-45); but it has been proven beyond doubt that these notes had been shamefully garbled by the Protestants of Zurich. The Sorbonne doctors sharply inveighed against the Lutheran tendencies of the notes of Stephen's Bible, and Vatable himself disowned them; yet, as they are a model of clear, concise. literary, and critical exegesis, the Salamanca theologians, with the authorization of the Spanish Inquisition, issued a new thoroughly-revised edition of them in their Latin Bible of 1584. From the edition of 1729 Migne republished, in his "Scripturae sacrae cursus completus" (XII, Paris, 1841), the scholia on the Books of Esdras and Nehemias. The (garbled) notes on the Psalms, re-edited in R. Stephens's "Liber Psalmorum Davidis" (1557), were printed again, together with remarks of H. Grotius, by Vogel under the misleading title: "Francisci Vatabli annotationes in Psalmos" (Halle, 1767).

SAINTE-MARTHE: Gallorum doctrina illustrium elogia (Paris, 1598); HURTER, Nomenclator literarius; CALMET, Bibliotheque sacree, IV (Paris, 1730); DUPIN, Table universele des auteurs ecclesiastiques, I (Paris, 1704); FELLER, Dictionnaire historique, VIII (Paris, 1822), 311; LICHTENBERGER, Encyclopedie des sciences religieuses, XII (Paris, 1877-82), 307; SIMON, Hist. crit. du Vieux Testament, III (Paris, 1680), 15; HANEBERG, Gesch. der bibl. Offenb. (4th ed., Ratisbon, 1876), 849.

CHARLES L. SOUVAY

The Vatican

This subject will be treated under the following heads:

I. Introduction;
II. Architectural History of the Vatican Palace;
III. Description of the Palace;
IV. Description of the Gardens;
V. The Chapels of the Vatican;
VI. The Palace as a Place of Residence;
VII. The Palace as a Treasury of Art;
VIII. The Palace as a Scientific Institute;
IX. The State-Halls of the Vatican;
X. The State Staircases of the Vatican;
XI. The Administrative Boards of the Vatican;
XII. The Juridical and Hygienic Boards of the Vatican;
XIII. The Policing of the Vatican;
XIV. The Vatican as a Business Centre;
XV. The Tipografia Poliglotta Vaticana;
XVI. The Legal Position of the Vatican.

Inasmuch as by this disposition of the subject analogous things may be treated together regardless of their various locations in the Palace, this has an advantage over others which follow a topographical and historical method.

I. INTRODUCTION

The territory on the right bank of the Tiber between Monte Mario and Gianicolo (Janiculum) was known to antiquity as the Ager Vaticanus, and, owing to its marshy character, the low-lying portion of this district enjoyed an ill repute. The origin of the name Vaticanus is uncertain; some claim that the name comes from a vanished Etruscan town called Vaticum. This district did not belong to ancient Rome, nor was it included within the city walls built by Emperor Aurelian. In the imperial gardens situated in this section was the Circus of Nero. At the foot of the Vatican Hill lay the ancient Basilica of St. Peter. By extensive purchases of land the medieval popes acquired possession of the whole hill, thus preparing the way for building activity. Communication with the city was established by the Pons Ælius, which led directly to the mausoleum of Hadrian. Between 848 and 852 Leo IV surrounded the whole settlement with a wall, which included it within the city boundaries. Until the pontificate of Sixtus V this section of Rome remained a private papal possession and was entrusted to a special administration. Sixtus, however, placed it under the jurisdiction of the urban authorities as the fourteenth region.

II. ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY OF THE VATICAN PALACE

It is certain that Pope Symmachus (498-514) built a residence to the right and left of St. Peter's and immediately contiguous to it. There was probably a former residence, since, from the very beginning, the popes must have found a house of accommodation necessary in the vicinity of so prominent a basilica as St. Peter's. By the end of the thirteenth century the building activity of Eugene III, Alexander III, and Innocent III had developed the residence of Symmachus into a palatium which lay between the portico of St. Peter's and the Vatican Hill. Nicholas III began building on the Vatican Hill a palace of extraordinary dimensions, which was completed by his immediate successors. He also secured land for the Vatican Gardens. The group of buildings then erected correspond more or less with the ancient portions of the present palace which extend around the Cortile del Maresciallo and the eastern, southern, and western sides of the Cortile del Papagallo. These buildings were scarcely finished or fitted when the popes moved to Avignon and from 1305 to 1377 no pope resided permanently in the Vatican Palace. Urban V spent a short time in Rome, and Gregory XI died there. When Urban V resolved to return to Rome, the Lateran Palace having been destroyed by fire, the ordinary papal residence was fixed at the Vatican. The apartments, roofs, gardens, and chapels of the Vatican Palace had to be entirely overhauled, so grievous had been the decay and ruin into which the buildings had fallen within sixty years (see Kirsch, "Die Rüchkehr der Päpste Urban V. u. Gregor. XI.", Paderborn, 1908). The funds devoted to the repairs of the Vatican during the residence at Avignon had been entirely inadequate.

Urban VI (1378) and his successors restored to the palace a degree of comfort as a place of residence, so that, when Martin V came from Constance to Rome (28 September, 1420), little remained to be undertaken except some rearrangement of the apartments. Nicholas V erected buildings on the east and north sides of the Cortile del Papagallo, on the spot where the Loggia of Raphael and the Appartamento Borgia and the Stanze stand to-day. Alexander added to the Palace of Nicholas V the Torre Borgia, which bears his name. Pius II and Paul II beautified the buildings of the south aide, and Innocent VIII effected such alterations in the old palace in the portico of St. Peter's at the foot of the hill that it was henceforth known as the Palazzo di Innocenzo VIII. Directly south, in the direction of Sant' Angelo, Nicholas V erected a mighty bastion (called the Torrione di Niccolò V), running down from the summit of the hill to Sant' Angelo. The space mounting the hill in a northerly direction was enclosed by a wall and served as a garden (viridarium, vigna). At a distance of about 700 metres from the palace, Innocent VIII erected a fairly large villa, which may be seen to-day, and which was remodelled by Clement XIV and Pius VI into one of the most stately portions of the museum of sculpture. Sixtus IV, who dwelt in the apartments of the Cortile del Papagallo, made important alterations in the rooms of the ground floor to accommodate there the Bibliotheca Palatina.

The wing to the south (Galleria delle inscrizioni and Museo Chiaramonti) was built by Julius II; the northern wing (picture-gallery and library), by Pius IV. A little later both wings were fully developed into their present form. The large Loggia (il gran nicchione) near the villa of Innocent VIII was erected by Pius IV. Pius V erected the apartments to the north of the Torre Borgia, and built the three chapels, situated one over the other, in the western portion of the northern wing. One of these chapels is attached to the library (that on the ground floor) and one to the picture-gallery on the second floor. Pius V and his successor Gregory XIII extended the palace by the construction of the wing running southwards to the Torrione. The present papal palace was begun by Sixtus V and completed by his successors, Urban VII, Innocent XI, and Clement VIII.

The buildings extending along the southern slope of the hill to Piazza S. Pietro, occupied to-day by the maestro di camera and the majordomo, were erected by Julius III, and completed under Pius IX with the construction of the magnificent Scala Pia. The buildings branching off from the northern wing toward the gardens, in the vicinity of the chapels of Pius V, were built by Paul V. Sixtus V established connection between the two longitudinal wings of the palace by erecting in the middle the Salone Sistino, in which he housed the library. A second transverse building, constructed by Pius VII in the eastern court, contains the Braccio Nuovo, one section of the museum of sculpture. All the other museum buildings at the eastern end of the palace were erected or remodelled by Pius VI and Pius VII. The casino constructed by Leo XIII on one of the towers of Leo IV in the gardens now serves as the Vatican Observatory. This broad sketch of the architectural history of the Vatican and the following description of the various edifices will afford a fairly exact idea of the gradual growth of this vast collection of buildings.

III. DESCRIPTION OF THE PALACE

The Vatican Palace is situated on the eastern sections of the Vatican Hill. Behind it rises the summit of the hill with the gardens; at the highest points may still be seen the only remains of the Leonine Wall with its two mighty towers. The palace is approached by the road leading around St. Peter's and by the Scala Pia, which extends from the Portone di Bronzo to the Court of St. Damasus. The covered way which leads from the Cortile di Belvedere to the Cortile della Sentinella and thence to the exit door situated at the back of the palace is used only for official purposes. From the Portone di Bronzo downwards run the powerful buttresses of the palace around the eastern and northern sides of the hill as far as the Galleria Lapidaria (Corridoio delle Iscrizioni). These buttresses are interrupted by the Torrione, which was formerly of great strategic importance and now serves as a magazine. At the rear of the Cortile del Forno is the entrance to the Nicchione and the museum buildings, which are the most elevated portions of the palace.

From the cupola of St. Peter's may be seen the whole collection of buildings included under the name of Vatican Palace, a long stretch of edifices with many courts, ending in a row of smaller connected buildings before which stands a great loggia, known as the Nicchione. To the right and left of the loggia and at right angles to it are two narrow buildings, which are connected transversely by the Braccio Nuovo at a distance of 328 feet from the loggia. These four buildings enclose the Giardino della Pigna, so called because in the loggia stands a gigantic pine-cone of bronze, preserved from old St. Peter's. Except the few unsightly buildings lying immediately to the left, all the buildings behind the loggia are given over to the museum -- especially to sculptures and to the Egyptian and Etruscan museums. In the longitudinal wing to the left are accommodated a portion of the library, the Galleria dei Candelabri, and Raphael's tapestries; the right wing forms the Museo Chiaramonti, while the transverse building, or Braccio Nuovo, also belongs to the museum of sculpture. After the Giardino della Pigna succeeds the Cortile della Stamperia, a narrow building deriving its name from the fact that it served as the seat of the Vatican Press (founded by Sixtus V) until 1909. At the back of this court stands the Braccio Nuovo; to the left lie the library, the Galleria delle Carte Geografiche, and the Torre dei Quattro Venti; to the right the library and the Galleria Lapidaria; and in the transverse building in front the Library. The third huge court, Cortile di Belvedere, lies on a much lower level in an exact line with the other two. At the rear and to the left is the library, to the right the Galleria Lapidaria, and in the transverse wing in front the Appartemento Borgia, the Stanze of Raphael, and the Museum of Modern Paintings.

Between these long stretches of the palaces with the three courts and the Basilica of St. Peter lie a large number of courts, surrounded in a somewhat irregular fashion by a group of buildings of which we shall mention the most important. The Sistine Chapel to the extreme left adjoins the Cortile della Sentinella, and the Cortile del Portoncino; opposite to this ends the left wing of the library. To the right from the chapel is the Sala, Regia, beyond which, extending towards St. Peter's, is the Cappella Paolina. Running somewhat obliquely from the Sala Regia is the Sala Ducale, which, with the Stanze di Raffaello and the Appartamento Borgia, encloses the Cortile del Papagallo on the north and south sides. The eastern side of this court is bordered by the group of buildings containing the Camere dei Paramenti (with the Loggie di Giovanni da Udine extending in front) and the Cappella di Niccolo V (one story higher), situated before which is the Loggie di Raffaello. The above-mentioned loggie form the western side of the Cortile di San Damaso; the northern side is also composed of loggie, behind which, on the second floor, is the Sala Matilde and on the third a portion of the old picture-gallery. The eastern side of the loggie stands in front of that portion of the palace occupied by the pope and the secretary of state. There are some lesser courts on the east side.

The exterior of the palace presents an imposing ensemble. Architectonic decorativeness is found nowhere. Extreme simplicity characterizes the exterior walls. According as necessity dictated, æsthetic effect being little considered, new buildings and annexes were erected, roofs raised, external passages laid out, lofty halls divided horizontally and pierced for the upper~half of windows which disfigure the lines of the buildings. Those who seek for uniformity find much to censure in the palace, but the general effect, viewed from an historical standpoint, is most pleasing. The Cortile di San Damaso, the view towards St. Peter's of graceful arcades opening out before the staircase leading to the Sala Regia by the Portal of Paul II, the lofty entrance door to the library of Sixtus IV, in the Cortile del Papagallo, the Cortili del Portoncino and della Sentinella are all magnificent. The Portone della Sentinella leads to the Cortile di Belvedere, decorated with a beautiful fountain. The view to the right from the windows and galleries of the Appartemento Borgia and the Stanze di Raffaello is admirable. An added story replaced the turret of the Palace of Nicholas V; the adjacent Torre Borgia has lost its ancient windows, its roof thereby losing the character of a tower. Above the transverse wing is the Torre dei Quattro Venti, where was the Specola Gregoriana, the observatory dating from the days of Gregory XIII, with its paintings by the Zuccari.

The Giardino della Pigna, lying to the north, is beautifully laid out. In the centre of the court has stood since 1886, mounted on a marble column, a bronze statue of St. Peter, in commemoration of the Vatican Council of 1870; numerous fragments of statues and reliefs are artistically placed standing or flat along the walls. The quarters of the Swiss Guards on the east side consist of two narrow parallel buildings, which, with the Sistine Palace and the Torrione di Niccolò V, form two courts. The inner court is adjacent to the palace, in the other is a gate leading directly to the city by the colonnades. Beyond this gate is the covered passage from the palace to Sant' Angelo, now walled up at the point where it leaves the Vatican territory. A tablet and Inscription and a large coat of arms give evidence that Alexander VI initiated here extensive works of improvement and decoration. In the immediate vicinity of the Torrione di Niccolò V earlier lay the Cavallerizza, the riding ground for the Noble Guard. Between this building and the quarters of the Swiss Guards is another gate leading to the town. The Cavallerizza was entirely reconstructed three years ago to accommodate the Stamperia Segreta (the private press of the Vatican) and the Tipografia Vaticana. On this occasion Pius X introduced extensive reforms in the printing, bringing it to the highest level attained by modern technic. North of the printing offices and parallel to the eastern longitudinal wing of the palace is the huge house which Pius X reconstructed for the married officials and the servants of the palace. It is solidly built, conveniently divided and fitted with the best sanitary requirements.

The palace forms a special parish, the administration of which is entrusted to the Monsignor Sagrista, sacristan of the pope, assisted by the sottosagrista, who has charge of all the vestments and vessels used In the five chapels of the palace. The chaplain of the Swiss Guards attends to the vestments of their chapel. The Cappella Paolina is regarded as the parish church, and is thus one of the churches of Rome where the Forty Hours' Adoration is inaugurated at the beginning of each ecclesiastical year. By the Bull, "Ad sacram ordinis", of 15 October, 1497, the ancient custom of selecting the Prefect of the Apostolic Chapel (the sagrista) from the Augustinian Order was given a legal foundation. The sagrista is Titular Bishop of Porphyreon, assistant at the throne, and domestic prelate, and before 1870 was pastor of the Vatican Palace, of the Quirinal, and of the Lateran. The Quirinal was provisionally attached in 1870 to the parish of SS. Vincenzo ed Anastasio, and in the Lateran the sagrista was represented in parochial affairs by the pastor of the basilica. In addition to other privileges the sagrista has the right of administering Extreme Unction to the dying pope. Since the reign of Pius IV he is an ex-officio member of the Conclave. Although, as a bishop, the sagrista enjoys the use of the rochet, he wears it only in very exceptional cases, always wearing the mozzetta over the manteletta. His appointment is for life, so that he is not affected by a change of pontificate.

IV. THE VATICAN GARDENS

Enclosed between the city walls, the zecca (the mint) with the adjacent houses, and the Viale del Museo, lie the Vatican Gardens, or Boscareccio, into which visitors are admitted only with the special permission of the sub-Prefect of the Vatican Palace. They are reached through the museum entrance on the western side of the palace. To the left of the entrance below is the English Garden, in which the palma grande (the tallest palm in Rome) and fine citron and orange trees grow under a protecting roof. At the end of the broad path to the right is a walk, bordered by boxwood trees fifteen to twenty feet high, which leads between oaks and ilex trees up the hill on which stands the Casino of Leo XIII, resting on one of the huge towers of the Leonine Wall (see VATICAN OBSERVATORY). The pavilion, to the right of the Casino, is on a level with the roof of St. Peter's. In this section of the garden vineries have been laid out, and vegetables are cultivated. Before the first Leonine tower a terrace affords a wide view across the Valle dell' Inferno, from whose ancient brick-works half of Rome has been built. To the left of the tower is an oak grove where wild flowers grow. Ancient fragments of marble are strewn everywhere, the paths are kept in entirely rural fashion, so that this small grove forms an especially enchanting portion of the gardens. One of the rough walks leads to the Fontana di Paolo Quinto, which is fed with water from the Lago di Bracciano. The arms of the Borghese proclaims it the work of Paul V. In the immediate vicinity are the barracks of the papal gendarmes entrusted with the guarding of the gardens. A few hundred feet below is the Fontana del Santissimo Sacramento, a fountain so called because in the centre stands a monstrance whose rays are formed by the water; on either side rise three vertical streams of water, which represent the candles. A path bordered by boxwood leads to the court of the Casino of Pius IV, a double building erected by Pirro Ligorio in 1560, with walls decorated with flint mosaic work. Women were there received in audience until they were allowed admission to the papal apartments by Pius IX. Thousands of artistic addresses received by Pius IX, Leo XIII, and Pius X have been transferred from the library to this Casino, where they are now preserved (cf. Bouchet, "La Villa Pia des Jardins du Vatican, architecture de Pirro Ligorio", Paris, 1837). The paintings in the Casino are by Baroccio, Federigo Zuccaro, and Santi di Titi. Immediately before the casino opens the subterranean passage which Pius X had constructed so that he might pass with as little inconvenience as possible from the palace to the gardens. The appearance of the surrounding park has been altered by excavations, but the trees have been untouched. The distribution of numerous species of trees and flowering shrubs makes this portion of the gardens very picturesque. The stretch of the gardens to the right of the entrance consists of a thick, magnificent alley of ilex trees, in which some cages may still be seen; these formerly sheltered ibexes and other animals. The view from here towards Monte Mario over the circular fountains, and to the right towards the Prati di Castello with Soracte in the background, is admirable. Scattered around the garden are four other cages for animals, which contained until a few years ago the lions presented to the pope by King Menelik, and also ostriches, gazelles, and a number of species of poultry. All these animals have died, have been given away, or sold, since their maintenance and care demanded too much attention. The Vatican Gardens are the only place in which the pope can take exercise in the open air. (Cf. Friedlander, "Das Kasino Pius des Vierten. Kunstgeschichtliche Forschungen", ed. Royal Prussian Historical Institute, III, Leipzig, 1912; Donovan, "Rome, Ancient and Modern, and its Environs", II, Rome, 1844.)

V. THE CHAPELS OF THE VATICAN

In the papal palace there are a large number of chapels which serve various purposes. By far the largest and the most famous of these is the Sistine Chapel.

A. The Sistine Chapel

The Sistine Chapel is the palatine and court chapel, where all papal ceremonies and functions and papal elections are held. It was built between 1473 and 1481 by Giovanni de' Dolci at the commission of Sixtus IV. In length 133 feet and in breadth 46, it has at each side six stained-glass windows, given by the Prince Regent Leopold of Bavaria in 1911. The lower third of the chapel is separated from the rest by beautiful marble barriers, which divide the space reserved for invited visitors on the occasion of great solemnities from that reserved for the pope, the cardinals, and the papal family. On the wall to the right is the box for the singers of the famous Sistine Choir. The marble barriers and the balustrade of the box are by Mino da Fiesole and his assistants.

The rear wall of the chapel is now without a window, being broken only by a small door on the right, which leads to the sacristy of the chapel. Almost the whole of this space is occupied by the painting of the Last Judgment (see MICHELANGELO BUONARROTTI). The frescoes on the side walls were executed between 1481 and 1483 by Florentine and Umbrian masters. On the left side are given, as the prototypes, scenes from the life of Moses, and on the right scenes from the life of Christ -- beginning in both cases from the high altar and meeting at the entrance door. Perugino, Pinturicchio, Botticelli, Pier di Cosimo, Rosselli, Signorelli, della Gatta, Ghirlandajo, and Salviati were the collaborators in the wonderful cycle of paintings. Fiammingo, Matteo da Lecce, and Diamante are also here immortalized. Some years ago the ceiling frescoes by Michelangelo were thoroughly cleansed by Ludwig Seitz, and all the plasterwork blisters which by falling away threatened to work irremediable damage to the paintings, were again skilfully fastened to the masonry. To lessen the effect on the paintings caused by any great change of temperature, Leo XIII installed in the chapel a system of central heating which prevents the walls from becoming icy cold in winter. (See Steinmann "Die Sixtinische Kapelle", 2 vols. and atlas, Munich, 1900-05.)

B. The Cappella Paolina

The Cappella Paolina, which serves as the parish church of the Vatican, is separated from the Sistine Chapel only by the Sala Regia. It received its name from Paul III, who had it erected in 1540 by Antonio da Sangallo the Younger. Before 1550 Michelangelo painted two frescoes here, the Conversion of Paul and the Crucifixion of Peter. Other paintings in the chapel are by Lorenzo Sabbatini and Federico Zuccaro. The statues in the background are by P. Bresciano. Before the opening of the conclave the Sacred College assembles in this chapel to attend a sermon in which the members are reminded of their obligation quickly to give to the Church her ablest son as ruler and guide. The cardinals then withdraw to the Sistine Chapel. In the Cappella Paolina are sung daily the conclave Solemn Masses "De Spiritu Sancto", at which all members of the conclave must be present.

C. The Chapel of Nicholas V

While the two above-named chapels are situated on the first floor of the palace, which bounds the Cortile di San Damaso, the Chapel of Nicholas V (chapel of San Lorenzo) lies on the second floor in the immediate vicinity of the Stanze and Loggie of Raphael. Built by Nicholas V, the chapel was adorned (1450-55) by Fra Angelico with frescoes, depicting chiefly scenes from the lives of Sts. Laurence and Stephen. This wonderful series of paintings is Angelico's greatest work.

D. The Pope's Private Chapel

In the reception rooms of the pope, between the Sala degli Arazzi and the Sala del Trono, lies a smaller room, from which a door leads to the private chapel of the pope, where the Blessed Sacrament is always reserved. Here the pope usually celebrates his Mass, and hither are invited those who are accorded the privilege of receiving Communion from his hand. The lay members of the papal family usually make their Easter Communion in this chapel on the Monday in Holy Week; the prelates of Rome make theirs on Holy Thursday. On both these occasions the pope celebrates. After Mass all are entertained at breakfast in the Sala dei Paramenti, the majordomo representing the pope as host.

E. Cappella della Sala Matilde

On days when a larger number of strangers are admitted to assist at the pope's Mass, the Holy Father uses the Cappella della Sala Matilde, a simple but tastefully decorated chapel which Pius X had erected in the Sala Matilde on the second floor in the middle building.

F. The Chapel of the Swiss Guards

The Chapel of the Swiss Guards lies at the foot of the papal residence in the immediate vicinity of the Portone di Bronzo and the quarters of the Swiss Guards, and in it the services for the Guards are celebrated by their special chaplain. This Chapel of Sts. Martin and Sebastian dates from the sixteenth century, and has a special charm.

The former Cappelle di San Pio V lay on the southern end of the present halls of the library, the chapels being situated under one another on three floors. The middle chapel on the first floor formerly contained the addresses recently transferred to the Casino of Pius IV. The paintings here are by Giorgio Vasari.

VI. THE PALACE AS A PLACE OF RESIDENCE

The Vatican Palace was not intended and built as a residence. Only a comparatively small portion of the palace is residential; all the remainder serves the purposes of art and science or is employed for the administration of the official business of the Church and for the management of the palace, The rooms formerly intended specially for residence are to-day utilized to accommodate collections or as halls of state. Hence, the Vatican can more properly be regarded as a huge museum and a centre of scientific investigation than as a residence. The residential portion of the palace is around the Cortile di San Damaso, and includes also the quarters of the Swiss Guards and of the gendarmes situated at the foot of this section. Of some 1000 rooms in the whole palace about 200 serve as residential apartments for the pope, the secretary of state, the highest court officials, the high officials in close attendance on the pope, and some scientific and administrative officials. This limited number could be increased only with the most costly and extensive alterations. When the temporal dominion of the pope came to an end in 1870, a large number of the minor officials and servants of the Quirinal Palace had to be sustained during the confusion of the time; these latter were temporarily assigned previously unused rooms of the Vatican. Pius X executed the plan of erecting in the immediate vicinity of the Vatican a special large residence for all these families, where they are now accommodated. This practical innovation affords them pleasant and commodious quarters.

In the eastern wing (facing towards Rome) of the residential section the pope occupies two floors. On the upper floor (the third) he resides with his two private secretaries and some servants; on the second floor he works and receives visitors. One suite of rooms receives the morning, and the other the midday and afternoon sun. The second floor includes the reception rooms, which the visitor enters through the wonderful Sala Clementina, where a division of the Swiss Guards keep watch at the entrance to the papal apartments. The next room is the Anticamera Bassa, in which the servants stand, and in which all summoned to an audience lay aside their wraps. An air-trap opens into the Sala dei Gendarmi, so called because two gendarmes in court uniform are there stationed. A covered way leads backwards through the court to the working-room of the pope. The next hall is known as the Sala del Cantone or Sala della Guardia Palatina, as it is a corner room where during the reception a division of the Palatine Guards are drawn up. The eastern suite of rooms begins with the Sala degli Arazzi, in which three huge Gobelin tapestries resented by Louis XV adorn the walls. Between this and the Sala del Trono is a smaller room which serves to accommodate the Noble Guard, and leads to the pope's private chapel. The floor of the throne room is covered with a specially manufactured and costly Spanish carpet presented to Leo XIII. The room is simply fitted, giving a very impressive and restful effect.

Behind the throne room stands the Anticamera Segreta, at the entrance of which a member of the Noble Guard stands. The old and very valuable Gobelin tapestry which covers the floor is practically indestructible, but is tended with great care. In this room wait the majordomo or the maestro di camera and one or more spiritual chamberlains, when audiences are to be given. Here also wait the cardinals and persons of rank and station until their turn comes, while the others summoned to the audience wait in the throne room or in the other above-named halls. Situated on a corner, this room offers a wonderful view of the city and the Campagna to the east, the Piazza S. Pietro and the Janiculum to the south. Two smaller rooms and the Sala del Tronetto lie between the Anticamera Segreta and the pope's library, which is both his working-room and his reception room for current private audiences. Not far from the entrance of the library stands the pope's unpretentious, large writing-desk, beside which are some seats for visitors. In the middle of this large room, which is splendidly lighted by three windows, stands a broad mahogany table several yards long. The library cases run along the four walls, and above them hang twelve exquisite paintings of animals. Other decorations and fittings of the room combine in perfect harmony; it is an ideal working-room.

Over the Anticamera Segreta, the Sala del Tronetto, and the two adjoining rooms is the pope's private chancellery, accessible only by a staircase from the inner vestibule of the library. Here, under the pope's direction, two secretaries with a staff of assistants transact all the unofficial affairs of the pontiff.

Immediately under these working and reception rooms of the pope is the suite of the secretary of state, who under Pius IX and Leo XIII occupied what are now the private rooms of the pope. Leo XIII assigned this suite temporarily to Cardinal Ledochowski, when he came to Rome from the prison of Ostrowo. These neglected rooms were recently renovated by a Spanish ecclesiastic of wealthy family. Here the secretary of state receives twice weekly the diplomats accredited to the Holy See and numerous other visitors. Along the Scala Pia, built and covered by Pius IX, which leads from the Portone di Bronzo to the Court of St. Damasus, lie the extensive apartments of the maestro di camera and the majordomo. The other residents of the palace are the four spiritual chamberlains in immediate attendance, the monsignor sagrista, the maestro del sacro palazzo (a Dominican, theological adviser of the pope and censor of the books printed in Rome), under-secretary of state, prefect of the Vatican Library, household administrator of the Apostolic Palace, other court and administrative officials, and a few servants.

VII. THE PALACE AS A TREASURY OF ART

The Vatican contains an abundance of works of art, which are now catalogued in every tourist's guide-book. On the one hand are museums and collections and on the other the interior decoration of the palace. The Vatican treasures of art also include much of scientific importance, which will be treated in the following section. Here belong especially the rich treasures exhibited in the library and various other objects. The Vatican works of art represent in their entirety an irreplaceable treasure, which is not actively at the disposal of the Curia, but passively in their possession, since the repair and maintenance of these objects make great claims on the resources of the Holy See. Those who proclaim the riches of the Curia should know that, though the works of art are worth many hundred millions, they have no market value. The Holy See, notwithstanding its difficult financial position, values too highly its civilizing mission to divest itself of these treasures, which are being constantly increased.

A. The Vatican Museums

Cosimo Stornaiolo says in one passage: "The attitude of the Church towards the statues of the false gods and similar works of art was proclaimed by the Christian poet Prudentius in the fourth century as follows (Contra Symmachum, 1, 502): 'Let the statues be retained merely as the works of great masters; as such they may constitute the greatest ornament of our native town [Rome] without the misuse of an art which serves the wicked contaminating these memorials.' In accordance with this spirit of the Church, the early Christian emperors issued repeatedly laws against the destroyers of ancient works of art, and medieval Rome saw on all sides -- in its public squares, in the ruins of the ancient palaces, and in the villas of the neighbourhood -- numberless statues of gods, emperors, and renowned men. It is true that, during a period of unrestrained barbarism when the popes transferred their residence from Rome to Avignon, works in marble found their way to the lime-kilns; but scarcely were these times past, during which Petrarch declares the Romans had degenerated to a nation of cowherds, than the popes, in accordance with their full conviction that the Church was the first-called protectress and patroness of art, devoted their attention to the preservation of the ancient objects of art. The papal palaces thus possess so great an abundance of masterpieces of all ages for the instruction and enjoyment of both the friends and the enemies of the papacy that, were all the other collections of the world destroyed by some catastrophe, the Vatican collection would suffice for the perpetuation of all æsthetic culture, both pagan and Christian. The popes were not alone the first to establish museums, but they have also by their example spurred all other governments of Europe to imitation, and thereby performed a great service in the refining of artistic taste among all modern nations. For the Vatican museums, in contrast to so many others, were instituted purely from æsthetic, and not from historical considerations." These important remarks apply not alone to the museums, but likewise to all the Vatican collections and scientific institutions. The Vatican museums are: (1) The Museo Pio-Clementino; (2) the Galleria Chiaramonti; (3) the Braccio Nuovo; (4) the Egyptian Museum; (5) the Etruscan Museum.

(1) The Museo Pio-Clementino

The first collection of antiquities in the world was made by Popes Julius II, Leo X, Clement VII, and Paul III in the Belvedere. Of the treasures there collected, most of which were a few decades later (especially by Pius V) given away or removed, only a few of the prominent objects maintain their place in the Vatican to-day. To these belong, for example, the Torso of Heracles, the Belvedere Apollo, and the Laocoon. Clement XIV's activity in collecting antiquities was continued by Pius VI with such great success that their combined collections, arranged by Ennio Quirino Visconti, were united in one large museum, named for these popes, the Museo Pio-Clementino. It contains eleven separate rooms, filled with celebrated antiquities.

(a) Sala a croce greca. -- At the expense of half a million lire ($100,000) Pius VI had the two gigantic porphyry sarcophagi of Sts. Helena and Constantia, the mother and daughter of Constantine the Great, repaired and transferred to this museum, built by Simonetti. Conspicuous among the statues is that of the youthful Octavian, one of the very few ancient statues of which the head was never separated from the trunk. Among the few mosaics is the Cnidian Venus, which is esteemed the most perfect copy of the masterpiece of Praxiteles.
(b) Sala della Biga. -- The masterly restoration of an ancient two-wheeled racing chariot, drawn by two horses, by the sculptor Franzoni has given its name to the beautiful circular room erected by Camporesi. The wheels and one of the horses are new, a fact which only the expert can discern. In this room are also a bearded Bacchus, two discus-throwers, a bearded athlete, sarcophagi, and other works of art.
(c) Galleria dei Candelabri. -- Under Pius VI the very long Hall of Bramante was closed on this side, and was divided into six compartments by arches resting on Dorian columns of vari-coloured marble. In addition to many vessels of costly marbles, eight magnificent candelabra of white marble, after which this hail is named, are especially conspicuous. The exquisitely fine tracings and arabesques are among the finest examples of this form of art. A Ganymede carried away by an eagle, a local goddess of a town in Antiochia, a Greek runner, and a fighting Persian are the most important among the numerous sculptures. Especially valuable is a sarcophagus with a representation in mezzo-rilievo of the tragedy of the daughters of Niobe. This hail was selected by Leo XIII to immortalize, through Ludwig Seitz, some of the most important acts of his pontificate. In a deeply thoughtful composition the artist represented St. Thomas Aquinas as the teacher of Christian philosophy, the agreement between religion and science, the union of ancient pagan and Christian art, the Rosary and the battle of Lepanto, and Divine grace in its various activities as working in Sts. Clara of Montefalco, Benedict Labre, Laurence of Brindisi, and John Baptist de Rossi, canonized in 1881. Seitz also painted a symbolic representation of four ideas taken from the Encyclicals of Leo XIII: Christian marriage, the praise of the Third Order of St. Francis, the condemnation of Freemasonry, and the agreement between secular and religious authority. This classical cycle of paintings is important (cf. Senes, "Galleria dei Candelabri, affreschi di Ludovico Seitz", Rome, 1891).
(d) Sala rotonda. -- Built after the model of the Pantheon by Simonetti, this hall contains as its most precious object the bust of the Zeus of Otricoli. Pius IX paid 268,000 lire ($53,600) for the colossal gilt bronze statue of Hercules. The Barberini Hera, as it is called, is an exquisite work of art. The great mosaic in the floor, in the centre of which is a monster porphyry shell, was discovered at Otricoli in 1780.
(e) Sala delle Muse. -- The eight-cornered hall, which Pius VI commissioned Simonetti to build, was intended to receive the nine Muses under the leadership of Apollo, as well as busts of all those who should have acquired renown in the service of the same. Pius VI here paid brilliant homage to art and science, representing truth with a noble magnanimity against the brutal caricatures of culture of the waning eighteenth century.
(f) Sala degli animali. -- This room contains the richest collection in the world of (about 150) representations of animals from classical antiquity, many of the works of art being of high importance.
(g) Galleria delle statue. -- Innocent VIII (1484-92) had a summer-house erected in the vicinity of the Belvedere, and had it adorned with frescoes by Mantegna and Pinturicchio. Clement XIV and Pius VI had this building altered, and transferred thither such important treasures as the Weeping Penelope, the Apollo Sauroktonos, the Amazon from the Villa Mattei, a Greek monumental stele, the Sleeping Ariadne, and the Barberini Candelabra.
(h) Sala dei Busti. -- In this second division of the former summer-house are over 100 busts of Romans, gods and goddesses, etc.
(i) Gabinetto delle Maschere. -- The floor mosaic with masques, found in the Villa Hadriana at Tivoli in 1780, gives this third division of the summer-house its name. Worthy of special mention is the renowned Satyr, of rosso antico, and the dancing woman of Pentelic marble from Naples.
(j) Cortile del Belvedere. -- The former square court belonging to the ancient Belvedere was adorned in 1775 with a pillared hall, and in 1803 the chamfered corner halls were converted into little temples. In the first of these stands the unrivalled and celebrated Laocoon group. It was discovered near Sette Sale in 1506, during the reign of Julius II, and was named by Michelangelo the miracle of art. In the second little temple is the admirable Belvedere Apollo, discovered near Grotta Ferrata about 1490. Canova was allowed to exhibit his Perseus and the Two Boxers in the third temple, where, however, they are not seen to advantage. In the fourth temple is the well-known Hermes dating from the fourth century before Christ; formerly this statue was thought to represent Antinous.
(k) Gabinetti del Belvedere. -- In the three cabinets, or atria, are conspicuous the statue of Meleager, the above-mentioned Torso of Belvedere, and the sarcophagi and inscriptions relating to the Scipio family.

(2) The Galleria Chiaramonti

Thirty-four pilasters indicate the thirty sections into which the Galleria Chiaramonti is divided in the corridor 492 feet long. More than 300 sculptures, mostly of smaller dimensions and of a variety of subjects, are here artistically exhibited. They are chiefly the work of Greek sculptors living in Rome, and are carved after Grecian models. Prominent among the original Greek works are the Daughters of Niobe, a relief in B otian limestone, and the head of Neptune.

(3) The Braccio Nuovo

Although many of the halls of the Museo Pio-Clementino, especially those built by Simonetti, viewed from the purely architectonic standpoint, make a very brilliant impression and justly command much admiration, still the Braccio Nuovo is incontestably the crown of the museum buildings. The general impression of absolute perfection and symmetry is effected by the harmonious proportions of the long hail, the method of lighting, and the arrangement of the masterpieces exhibited. This hall was erected by Raphael Stern at the commission of Pius VII, at a cost of 1,500,000 lire ($300,000). The magnificent barrel-vault is decorated with richly gilt cassettes; the cornices, the fourteen antique columns of giallo antico, cipollino, alabaster, and Egyptian granite, the transverse hall equally dividing the whole, the marble floor, all contribute an appropriate setting for the masterpieces. In this museum stand twenty-eight statues in as many niches, while in the transverse hall are fifteen more. Between the niches on marble consoles are twenty-eight busts; others rest on mural consoles; between these and the cornice beautiful bas-reliefs are set in the walls. At the rear of the hall stands the statue of the Athlete (of Apoxyomenus) cleaning himself of sweat and dust with a scraper. This statue, as well as that of the other Athlete (the Doryphorus, or spearsman), are antique copies of the Greek originals of Lysippus and Polycletus. The majestic statue of Augustus haranguing his soldiers bears evident traces of having once been painted. Among the abundance of treasures here exhibited is the colossal recumbent figure of the Nile, on whose body play sixteen children representing the sixteen cubits in the annual rise of the river. (Consult Amelung, "Die Skulpturen des vatikanischen Museum", 2 vols., with charts, Berlin, 1905-08.)

(4) The Egyptian Museum

The collection of Egyptian objects was begun by Pius VII, but the museum was not opened until 1838, during the pontificate of Gregory XVI. The Cavaliere de Fabris superintended the decorations in Egyptian characters, while the Barnabite Father Aloys Ungarelli arranged the objects for exhibition. The basis of the museum was supplied by the collections of Andrea Gaddi and Cardinal Borgia of Velletri, and by the objects of public property distributed throughout the Papal States. Other valuable objects were acquired by purchase. Most of the papyrus manuscripts were brought hither in 1818 by the Franciscan Angelo da Pofi. Although the ten halls full of statues, sarcophagi, mummies, sacred animals, and other things, do not attain the importance of the Egyptian museums in Berlin, Paris, London, Turin, and Hildesheim, the Roman is among the first Egyptian collections of second rank. Particularly notable are the sculptures of the modern period and the monuments (interesting for their style) which were prepared during the reign of Hadrian for his villa near Tivoli. (Consult Marucchi, "Il Museo Egizio Vaticano discritto ed illustrato", Rome, 1899; Idem, "Monumenta papyracea ægyptica", Rome, 1891.)

(5) The Etruscan Museum

This museum is situated over the Egyptian. To Gregory XVI it owes its foundation; to Pius IX, many of its treasures; to Leo XIII, its decoration and systematic arrangement. The excavations made in Western Etruria between 1828 and 1836 furnished the basis of the museum, which contains statues, sarcophagi, bowls, vessels of every kind and shape, mosaics, lamps, and numerous other objects of every description, giving a highly graphic picture of the art of ancient Italy and the customs of the Etruscans. This entirely unique collection is of prime interest. (Consult Nogara, "I Vasi antichi del Museo Etrusco e della Biblioteca dei Palazzo Vaticano", Rome, 1912; Nogara and Pinza, "La tomba Regolini Galassi e gli altri materiali coevi del Museo Gregoriano-Etrusco", Rome, 1912.)

B. The Vatican Pinacotheca

Among the valuable treasures of art, manuscripts, archives, and collections which Napoleon confiscated on his campaigns and conveyed to Paris, were the most prominent art treasures of the Vatican and the churches in the Papal States. When these treasures were brought back from Paris in 1815, Pius VII formed them into a collection, added other paintings, and formed them into a picture-gallery. This (the Vatican Pinacotheca) was first lodged in the Appartamento Borgia, then transferred to the third story of the palace, immediately adjacent to the former suite of the secretary of state. The disadvantages of this situation increased when Pius X entered into personal occupation of the suite of the secretary of State. The rooms were not architecturally fitted for a picture-gallery, and the constant stream of visitors caused annoyance. After long considerations as to convenience and safety from fire, Pius X decided to remove the collection to the rooms on the ground floor of the Vialone del Museo. These rest on stout arches, and in them the papal equipages of ancient and modern times had been kept. To these were added two rooms which were adjacent to the old library of Sixtus IV and had previously been used as a magazine. Louis Seitz, assisted by some other artists and in constant consultation with the sub-Prefect of the Apostolic Palaces, Mgr. Misciatelli, was intrusted with the gigantic task of transferring these priceless treasures and decorating the rooms. Seitz died before the work was finally completed. The artistic spirit shown in the whole plan and decoration of the new pinacotheca is worthy of admiration. The arrangement is perfect, and the effect of the whole will improve with time.

The few masters allowed to foregather in the old picture-gallery were Raphael, Leonardo da Vinci, Fra Angelico da Fiesole, Guercino, Caravaggio, Crivelli, Garofalo, Bartolomeo Mantegna, Murillo, Francesco Cossa, Perugino, Bonifazio, Domenichino, Titian, Ribera, Pinturicchio, Giulio Romano, Francesco Penni called il Fattore, lo Spagna, Sassoferrato, Niccolò da Foligno, Melozzo da Forli, Valentino Baroccio, Guido Reni, N. Poussin, A. Sacchi, Moretto, Paolo Veronese, and Correggio. Beside Leonardo da Vinci and Fra Angelico, the Venetian School is represented by Crivelli, Titian, and Paolo Veronese; the Bolognese by Domenichino's "Communion of St. Jerome" and Guide Reni's "Crucifixion of St. Peter"; the Lombardic by the "Pietà" of Amerighi da Caravaggio; the French by Pierre Valentin's "Martyrdom of Sts. Processus and Martianus"; and other Schools by various canvasses. Altogether 56 masterpieces had to be transferred from the old to the new gallery. In 1904, when the Greek abbey of Grottaferrata celebrated its ninth centenary with an exhibition of its forgotten treasures, 181 valuable Byzantine paintings were there acquired for the Vatican. To these were added 40 taken from the Lateran and other collections in the Apostolic palaces, making an addition of 221 besides the 56 from the old gallery. All the paintings which were not judged worthy to be exhibited side by side with the masterpieces of the earlier collection have been transferred to a magazine adjoining the gallery, where they may be examined by artists. A very simple opening celebration was held at the end of 1909. In the gallery itself is the marble bust of Pius X, by Seebock, which is the pope's favourite likeness of himself. The light, which enters hrough the lofty circular windows, is regulated hourly by shades, and the paintings are always excellently illuminated. The large rooms have been divided into sections, so that the distribution of the paintings into separate compartments renders the general effect harmonious. The collection of paintings in the Pinacotheca is priceless in value. (Concerning the origin of the Vatican Pinacotheca consult Platner-Bunsen, "Beschreibung den Stadt Rom", II, 2nd ed., 415; for works on the new Pinacotheca, see the official report, "La Nuova Pinacoteca Vaticana", with chants, Rome, 1909.)

C. The Gallery of Modern Paintings

Not so much artistic value, which is comparatively small, as the glory of the Church is seen in the majority of the pictures collected in the small Gallery of Modern Paintings. With few exceptions they are estimable achievements of Roman artists, and are devoted to the glorification of those saints who have been canonized in the second half of the past century. They hang in a single large hall, beside which is accommodated the colossal canvas of Matejko representing the saving of Vienna by John Sobieski in 1683. This unique painting was purchased for Leo XIII in 1884 with a subscription started by a wealthy Pole. In a third ball are exhibited the frescoes of Podesti, among which is conspicuous the great picture (the heads of all the personages are painted from portraits) depicting the promulgation of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception by Pius IX. Before this painting stands a magnificent shrine, in which the text of the Bull of Promulgation, translated into many languages is preserved. The shrine was presented to Pius IX by the French clergy in 1878.

D. The Appartamento Borgia

On the first floor of the palace, looking towards the north and the Cortile del Belvedere, one may enter from the Loggie of Giovanni da Udine these apartments which Alexander VI had erected in what is called the Old Palace (of Nicholas V). These rooms received their title from Alexander's family name, Borgia. Here on 18 January, 1495, Alexander received King Charles VIII of France and entered into long negotiations with him. Here also Charles V was accommodated, when, a few years after the sack of Rome, he returned victorious from Tunis and was received by the pope as the conqueror of the Turk. Succeeding popes did not occupy this suite, utilizing the Stanze di Raffaello, because there they had better light and air. From many sources it appears that, until the close of the seventeenth century, the Appartamento Borgia was occupied by the cardinal nephews, or, as they were later called, secretaries of state. After the Palace of Sixtus V had been completed under Clement VIII (cf. Colnabrini, "Ruolo degli appartamenti e delle stanze nel Palazzo Vaticano al tempo di Clemente VIII", Rome, 1895), the Stanze di Raffaelo and the apartments of Alexander VI were neglected, and during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries they were used only for conclave purposes. About the middle of the eighteenth century the Sale Borgia were used only as a refectory for the lower officials of the palace during Holy Week. During the French occupation of Rome, these rooms suffered much injury from the soldiery, so that immense sums had to be spent by Pius VII for architectural repair. When the Appartamento Borgia was used as the Pinacotheca, the marble cross-beams were removed from the windows, and replaced with iron grating, and everything was done to secure suitable lighting for the works of art. As every endeavour proved unsatisfactory, the paintings were removed in 1821 to the third story, and the pope then established here a museum of statues, known as the Museo Miscellaneo (for a detailed description see Platner-Bunsen, op. cit.; cf. the drawings of Craffonara and Guattani, and also Massi, "Indicazione antiquaria delle Sale Borgia", Rome, 1830).

As the Appartamento Borgia consisted of six rooms, and only the first four were employed for the museum, the remaining two were turned over to the Vatican Library, to which they are adjacent. In the winter of 1838-39 the museum was limited to the first two rooms, and the two which were then vacated were likewise transferred to the library. Finally, Pius IX added also the last two halls to the library, distributing the marble works between the Vatican and the Lateran museums. Having acquired the renowned library of Cardinal Angelo Mai on 8 September, 1854, the pope had this housed in the first two rooms of the Appartamento, closing them to the public. The artistic creations of Pinturicchio which adorn the walls were, however, restored to the admiration of the public when Leo XIII opened the Borgia suite, establishing there the consulting library of printed books by Decree of 20 April, 1889. The ceilings and lunettes, which preserve the paintings of the great Umbrian artist, had suffered little despite the vicissitudes of the Sale Borgia, but the walls and the floor had received serious damage. Louis Seitz maintained, however, that a thorough cleaning and the covering of the damaged places with colour would sufficiently restore the frescoes, so that Pinturicchio's original work remains.

General architectural restoration was successfully undertaken. The doors which had been broken through the walls were closed up, and the former doors reopened. After the removal of the white colouring which covered the walls, extensive traces of the old ornamentation were revealed, and the whole restored in the spirit of the Alexandrine epoch. Plaster blisters which had formed on the paintings were secured in place without the slightest damage to the frescoes. The floor required complete reconstruction. Remnants of the original majolica floor were discovered, and with the aid of these, and special technical studies, a new parquetry for the floor was elaborated in perfect harmony with the remaining fittings of the Borgia suite. The complete fitting of the rooms was not attempted; but the huge walls were beautifully furnished in exquisite taste. In 1897 Leo XIII solemnly opened the Appartamento Borgia, declaring it an integral portion of the Vatican collections which were accessible to the general visitor. Simultaneous with this manifestation of the pope's sympathy with art appeared the following work, dedicated to him: "Gil affreschi del Pinturicchio nell' appartamento Borgia del Palazzo Apostolico Vaticano, riprodotti in Fototipia e accompagnati da un Commentario di Francesco Ehrle, S.J. prefetto della Biblioteca Vaticana, e del Commendatore Enrico Stevenson, direttore del Museo Numismatico Vaticano" (Rome, 897). When Pius X occupied the former suite of the secretary of state, the Appartamento Borgia was temporarily devoted to the secretariate. The rooms were then beautifully furnished for residence, thus restoring the ensemble they presented in the time of Alexander VI and his successors (cf. Ehrle-Stevenson, pp. 26-27). When a special suite of rooms was later prepared for the secretary of state, the Appartamento Borgia was again opened to the public.

(1) The first of the six rooms, Sala dei Pontefici, was not part of the pope's private apartments, being a public hall in which audiences were given and consistories held. The beautiful stucco decorations harmonize well with the paintings of Giovanni da Udine and Perrin del Vaga, who painted the Zodiac and some representations of stars.
(2) In the second hall, Sala dei Misteri, the mysteries of the life of Christ are depicted. Here are the Annunciation, the Nativity, the Adoration of the Magi, the Resurrection and the Ascension of Christ, the Descent of the Holy Ghost, and the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin. Besides the general sketch for the pictures and other decorations in this hall, the lifelike figure of Alexander VI is from Pinturicchio's hand, as are also the figures of the prelates represented in the Assumption. All the rest was painted by his assistants; attempts have been made to prove that these belonged to one of the Italian Schools.
(3) Sala dei Santi is the name given to the third ball, which contains a series of scenes from the lives of Sts. Catherine of Siena, Barbara, Paul and Anthony, and Sebastian. All these glorious frescoes were executed by Pinturicchio himself, as was the beautiful circular picture of the Madonna and the scene of the Visitation.
(4) Grammar, dialectics, rhetoric, geometry, arithmetic, music, and astrology, that is the seven liberal arts, were represented by Pinturicchio, with the extensive aid of his assistants, in the fourth hall, Sala delle arti liberali. These paintings have suffered more from dampness than those in the other rooms.
(5-6) The last two rooms, del Credo and delle Sibille, are situated in the Torre Borgia. The decorations in these rooms are not by Pinturicchio and have been injured by overpainting. A Latin inscription records the munificence of Leo XIII, who "restored this dwelling . . . to its pristine dignity and dedicated it in the twentieth year of his pontificate". (Cf. Jesorone, "L'antico Pavimento delle Logge di Raffaello in Vaticano", Naples, 1891; Volpini, "L'appartamento Borgia", Rome, 1887.)

E. Stanze di Raffaello

The Stanze di Raffaello are an exact reproduction of the Appartamento, but are situated one floor higher. They thus include four rooms in the Palace of Nicholas V and two in the Torre Borgia, which serve for the Exhibition of Modern Paintings. As explained above, the popes, who once occupied the Appartamento Borgia, later removed one story bigher, into the rooms which are known to-day as the Stanze di Raffaello, because they were painted by Raphael. Julius II desired a comparatively simple pictorial decoration of his suite, and entrusted the task to the painters Piero della Francesco, Luca da Cortona, Bartolomeo della Gatta, Pietro Perugino, and Bramantino da Milano. During the progress of the work the architect Bramante Lazzari of Urbino persuaded the pope to summon his nephew Raphael Sanzio from Florence to assist the others. One of the walls of the third room, the Stanza della Segnatura, was assigned to the young Raphael, who between 1508 and 1511 painted there "Theology" and the "Disputa"; these works so delighted the pope that he entrusted to Raphael the decoration of the entire Stanze. All other paintings were removed with the exception of those in the vault of the fourth room, where Pietro Perugino, Raphael's teacher, had, in four parts, depicted: the adoration of the Blessed Trinity by the Twelve Apostles, the Saviour with Mercy and Justice at his side, the Father enthroned on the rainbow, and the Redeemer between Moses and Jacob. Raphael could not accomplish this task, with his other commissions, unaided. The sketches are all his, but many of the paintings were executed by his assistants and pupils, some after his death in 1520.

(1) The first hall is called the Sala di Costantino. The frescoes were executed after Raphael's death by Giulio Romano, Francesco Penni, and Raffaello dal Colle. The chief incident depicted on the longitudinal wall is the battle of Milvian Bridge, which Constantine the Great fought against Maxentius. The baptism of Constantine, the presentation of Rome to Sylvester I by the emperor, and the latter's address to his troops concerning his dream (In hoc signo vinces) are all important compositions. The smaller pictures and the socle paintings are of a simpler kind. The painting of the ceiling was not finished until the reign of Sixtus V.
(2) The paintings in the second hail, the Stanza d'Eliodoro, are almost exclusively by Raphael. His most important fresco is the "Mass of Bolsena", which represents how a priest, who did not believe in transubstantiation was converted when the Blood ran from the Host after the Consecration. "The Retreat of Attila" represents Leo I (beside whom stand the Apostles Peter and Paul), with the features of Leo X, and the pope's attendants are to some extent contemporary portraits. This is an extremely effective and superbly coloured painting. The light effects in the third fresco "The Deliverance of St. Peter", are wonderful. From the fourth picture, "Expulsion of Heliodorus from the Temple at Jerusalem" (II Mach., iii), the hall has taken its name. The brilliant painting, strength of expression, and harmonious colour effects form the basis of the fame of this masterpiece. The paintings on the ceiling are poorly preserved.
(3) In the Stanza della Segnatura (the supreme court of justice, which sat here under the presidency of the pope) Raphael began his works. On the ceiling are "Theology", "Poetry", "Philosophy", and "Justice". On the walls, under "Theology", is the "Disputa", the fundamental ideas for which were taken, according to the latest theories of Wilpert, from the "Last Judgment" of Pietro Cavallini, at Santa Cecilia in Rome. Wilpert has established doubtful identities of the saints. The name "Disputa", though inappropriate, has clung to the painting. The difficulties presented by the conditions of the hall were splendidly overcome by Raphael in the second picture, "Parnassus". Apollo and the Muses, with Homer, Dante, Virgil, Sappho, Pindar, Horace, and many other personages, are here united in one composition, which breathes forth the gladness and poetic strivings of the Renaissance. In the "School of Athens" all branches of knowledge are represented and powerfully characterized. Plato and Aristotle are the centres of the organically arranged groups; Socrates, Diogenes, Ptolemy, and Zoroaster are also easily recognizable. Other forms are not clearly distinguishable except the portraits of some contemporaries. To the extreme right Raphael has painted himself beside Sodoma. On the wall containing the windows are some smaller paintings and the glorification of canon and civil law. Here again are portraits of contemporaries, especially those of Julius II and Leo X.
(4) In the fourth hall, the Stanza dell' Incendio, Perin del Vaga has painted Leo III taking the oath of purgation before Charlemagne; Giulio Romano, the victory of Leo III over the Saracens at Ostia; Francesco Penni, the fire in the Borgo, a painting from which the room has taken its name. The crowning of Charlemagne at old St. Peter's is more conventional and superficial in conception. Raphael's sketches for this hall reveal the summit of his artistic development (1517). The ceiling paintings are by Perugino. Numerous smaller works are painted beside and under the chief paintings in the Stanze. The majority of the frescoes still remain in an almost perfect condition, due to the zealous solicitude with which the works are cared for.

F. Loggie di Raffaello

Immediately adjacent to the Stanze of Raphael, which begin on the second story of the Loggie of the Court of St. Damasus, lie the well-known Loggie named after the Umbrian master. They were unprotected from all inclemencies of the weather until 1813, when Pius VII erected large windows. The wonderful frescoes were painted in accordance with the sketches of Raphael and under his constant personal supervision, by Giulio Romano, Giovanni da Udine, and other artists in 1517-19. The whole plasterwork is by Giovanni da Udine, who also painted all the ornaments. The long passage is divided by thirteen vaults into as many sections. The frescoes of the ceiling in the vaults, twelve of which contain scenes from the Old Testament, and one from the New Testament, are the chief attraction of the Loggie. These quadrilateral, framed paintings, four in each vault, display rich imagination and marvellous beauty of composition, and are among the most characteristic creations of the master. The graceful and charming reliefs, the delicate ornaments, the sitting, standing, hopping, and dancing figures, and the numerous other admirable details make the Loggie an inexhaustible source of the richest inspiration for every artist.

G. The Loggie di Giovanni da Udine

Immediately under the Loggie of Raphael, on the first floor, are the Loggie of Giovanni da Udine. The general scheme for this suite is likewise due to Raphael, but the execution was the independent task of Giovanni. The caps of the vaults are beautifully decorated with leaf and tendril-work, enlivened by animals of all kinds. In the rear of the Loggie, under a magnificent Renaissance portal of great delicacy, dating from the time of Leo X, the marble bust of Giovanni is exhibited. The other portions of the Loggie of the first and second floors were painted in entirely unpretentious fashion under Clement VIII and Alexander VII by Lanfranco, Marco da Faenza, Paul Schor, Consoni, and Mantovani. These are not accessible to the general public.

H. Galleria degli Arazzi

In a modestly decorated hall, immediately adjacent to the Galleria dei Candelabri, hang the famous twenty-seven pieces of tapestry -- called arazzi. Woven of silk, wool, and gold thread by van Orlay and van Coxis in Brussels at a cost of $3400 each (present value, $12,000), these tapestries have always been the subject of great admiration, and numerous copies may be found in Berlin, Loreto, Dresden, Paris, and other places. Raphael made cartoons for ten of the Galleria tapestries; his pupils Penni and Perin del Vaga executed twelve others in accordance with smaller sketches of the master; five are works of more recent date. The first series formerly adorned the unpainted lower portion of the walls of the Sistine Chapel; the second series were intended for the Consistorial Hall. Seven of the original cartoons of Raphael were purchased in France by Charles I of England, and they may now be seen in the South Kensington Museum. During the sack of Rome in 1527 the tapestries were stolen, but Julius III succeeded in having them restored. When Rome was occupied by the French in 1798, they were again seized and bartered to a Genoese Jew, from whom Pius VII acquired them in 1808. This rough handling damaged the tapestries, weakening and blurring the colours, but they are now carefully preserved. (Consult Farabulini, "L'arte degli Arazzi e la nuova Galleria dei Gobelins at Vaticano", Rome, 1884.)

I. Studio del Musaico

The Vatican possesses an extensive studio for mosaic painting. The number of different coloured glass-pastes used exceeds 11,000. Almost all the altars in St. Peter's furnish evidence of the perfection to which this art has been carried in the imitation of renowned paintings. In the studio, which is at once an exhibition and salesroom for the mosaics manufactured, the visitor can see how the various artists work. Even smaller works demand the patient labour of many years. The pope is wont to choose a specially beautiful example of mosaic work as a present for royalty.

At the conclusion of this section it may be said that there is a vast number of other works of art distributed here and there throughout the Vatican Palace, but not accessible to the general public. To these belong the paintings of the Zuccari in the Torre dei Quattro Venti, the Bathroom of Cardinal Bibiena, the chiaroscuri in a hall on the second floor, etc.

VIII. THE PALACE AS A SCIENTIFIC INSTITUTE

This topic -- with an emphasis on the Vatican Archives and the Vatican Library -- will be treated in a separate article.

IX. THE STATE HALLS OF THE VATICAN

State halls for the celebration of various solemnities in the Vatican Palace came into existence gradually as their need became apparent; they reflect in their general decoration the taste prevailing at the periods of their construction. Although not so numerous as those in many royal palaces, the halls of the Vatican stand first in historical importance. Great events of interest for both profane and ecclesiastical history have taken place within them during the past centuries. As regards situation, there are two groups of rooms -- the first in the immediate vicinity of the Sistine Chapel and the second before and in the papal suite. The former group includes the Sala Regia, Sala Ducale, and Sala dei Paramenti; in the second are the Sala Clementina, Sala Concistoriale, Sala degli Arazzi, and Sala dei Trono.

A. The Sala Regia

Although not intended as such, this broad room is really an antechamber to the Sistine Chapel, reached by the Scala Regia. To the left of the entrance formerly stood the papal throne, which is now at the opposite side before the door leading to the Cappella Paolina. The hall was begun under Paul III by Antonio da Sangallo the Younger and was completed in 1573. The elegant barrelvault is provided with the highly graceful and very impressive plaster decorations of Pierin del Vaga. The stucco ornaments over the doors are by Daniele da Volterra. The longitudinal walls are broken on the one side by two, and on the other by three, large doors, between which Giorgio Vasari and Taddeo Zuccaro have introduced very powerful frescoes, whose effect is more than ornamental. They depict momentous turning-points in the life of the Church, among others the return of Gregory XI from Avignon to Rome, the battle of Lepanto, the raising of the ban from Henry IV, and the reconciliation of Alexander III with Frederick Barbarossa. This hall served originally for the reception of princes and royal ambassadors. To-day the consistories are held in it, and an occasional musical recital in the presence of the pope; during a conclave it is a favourite promenade for the cardinals.

B. The Sala Ducale

The Sala Ducale lies between the Sala Regia and the Loggie of Giovanni da Udine. Formerly there were here two separate halls, which were converted into one by Bernini by the removal of the separating wall (the position of which is still clearly perceptible). The decorative paintings, which are of a purely ornamental nature, are by Raffaellino da Reggio, Sabbatini, and Matthæus Brill. In this impressive hall were formerly held the public consistories for the reception of ruling princes. It now serves occasionally for the reception of pilgrims, the consecration of bishops, when (as rarely happens) this is undertaken by the pope, or is used for the accommodation of specified divisions of the papal household, when the pope holds a consistory in the Sala Regia, proceeds to the Sistine Chapel, or sets out with great solemnity for St. Peter's.

C. The Sala dei Paramenti

The Sala dei Paramenti lies a little to the left of the Sala Ducale, and adjoins immediately the Loggie of Giovanni da Udine. It receives its name from the fact that the pope assumes the pontifical vestments in one room of this suite before attending Divine service in the Cappella Sistina. The Sacred College assembles in another room to accompany the pope. Both rooms, which are not accessible to the public, are decorated with tapestries of beautiful colour, the walls are overarched with red damask, and the ceiling richly gilt. Here the members of the papal court assemble for breakfast after receiving their Easter Communion from the pope.

D. The Sala Clementina

The Sala Clementina is a gigantic hall, two stories high, situated on the second floor, at the entrance to the papal apartments, and reached by the Scala Nobile. At the rear of this hall a division of the Swiss Guard is posted. The doors to the right lead to the apartments of the pope, those on the left to the Loggie, and those in the rear immediately to the Consistorial Hall. The magnificent marble wainscoting is over six feet; above it rise bold ornamental frescoes of splendid perspective, extending along the rounded ceiling. From the middle of the ceiling hangs a colossal chandelier, whose green patina combines wonderfully with the whole harmony of colours. Frequent repetitions of the coat of arms of Clement VIII, the builder of the hall, have been arranged by the artist with excellent taste. This great hall serves to-day as a waiting-room, as a vesting-room in the case of great receptions in the Consistorial Hall, and on rare occasions for the reception of pilgrimages or large deputations.

E. The Sala Concistoriale

The long but rather narrow Consistorial Hall lies behind the Sala Clementina, and behind the Antecamera bassa to the right of that Sala. Erected by Clement XIII, it is employed for secret consistories, for official sessions under the presidency of the pope (postulations and the like), as well as for solemn receptions. The poor light afforded by the northern exposure of the room is still further reduced by dark red hangings on the walls. Some large oil paintings, representing religious subjects give life to the walls, and the coffered ceiling is richly gilt. Between the ceiling and the oil paintings are, besides rich ornamental painting, a number of landscape frescoes of delicate tone. At the rear of the hall stands a more elaborate than beautiful throne, which dates from the Vatican Exhibition; simple, but monumental, wooden stalls extend along the walls.

F. The Sala degli Arazzi

The Sala degli Arazzi receives its name from the vast framed Flemish tapestries which decorate every wall. As these magnificent pieces hang very low, the visitor can closely examine the fineness of the workmanship. Above the tapestries have been painted, since the time of Paul V, landscape frescoes, which alternate with the arms of this pope. A beautifully carved cornice supports the richly gilt coffered ceiling, which looks down on a mosaic marble floor. Curtains of white silk, with outside curtains of ungathered green silk, exclude too glaring a light. Perfect taste and harmony of colour exist throughout this immense hall.

G. The Sala del Trono

Reference has been already made to the Throne Room. It may be added that to the right and left of the throne on two great marble tables stand two very valuable ancient clocks. Between the two windows, exactly opposite the throne, is an ivory crucifix of extraordinary dimensions and artistic value.

X. THE STATE STAIRCASES OF THE VATICAN

There are three state staircases in the Vatican. The first and best-known is the Scala Regia, which leads up to the Sala Regia. It was built under Alexander VII by Bernini, who, by the skilful arrangement of the columns supporting the curves, has entirely concealed the narrowing of the staircase towards the top. The second staircase, erected by Pius IX, leads from the Portone di Bronzo, the chief entrance to the Vatican, directly up to the Cortile di San Damaso. Constructed of granite steps several yards wide, the staircase has on the outer side a marble balustrade of corresponding bulk; the base is of Breccia marble, and above it as far as the ceiling extends artificial marble. A large painted window adorns the side looking towards the Piazza S. Pietro. Half-way up is the apartment of the sub-prefect of the Apostolic Palaces, while above, on the same floor as the Cortile di San Damaso, is the apartment occupied by the maestro di camera. This staircase is called after the name of its builder, Scala Pia. The third state staircase is the Scala Nobile, which leads from the Cortile di San Damaso to the third story, to the suite of the secretary of state, and runs past the papal apartments to the private suite of the pope. Light is admitted on the ground floor by the painted windows renovated by the Prince Regent of Bavaria after the powder explosion of 1882, and on the second floor by those donated by the Collegium Germanicum at the same period. The steps are of white marble; yellow artificial marble covers the walls, while the base is of pure marble. Rich plaster decorations cover the barrel-vault. The whole well of the staircase is simple, but of rare impressiveness and pleasing colour.

XI. THE ADMINISTRATIVE BOARDS OF THE VATICAN

The supreme board of administration within the palace is the Prefettura dei Sacri Palazzi Apostolici, at the head of which stands as prefect the secretary of state. He is assisted by the sub-prefect, who, as executive and supervising official, possesses extensive authority. All artistic and scientific undertakings are subject in so far as their economic aspect is concerned, to the decision of the prefect. The departments of building, furnishing, administration of the magazine, household management, fire brigade, accountancy, the stables, printing works, gardening, and some other divisions are administered, under the supervision of the prefect, by more or less independent boards, whose directors -- e.g. the foriere maggiore and the cavallerizzo maggiore -- in some cases hold a high rank at Court (cf. Die kathol. Kirche unserer Zeit, I, pp. 286-88). Both the household and magazine authorities have so completed their tasks since 1903 that it is no longer necessary to make special plans for the fitting of rooms etc. on the occasion of great solemnities such as conclaves. Pius X has everything arranged in a permanent fashion and preserved in the store-rooms, and in this manner has introduced considerable savings. The department of building, which under Leo XIII was rather neglected, is now busy with perfecting the architectural condition of the palace. The sub-prefect is restoring to their former condition a large number of magnificent halls, which during the course of the last century were subdivided vertically and horizontally to make smaller rooms. In the execution of these works some important discoveries have been made. Very important and thorough repairs were made throughout the palace. The floor of the Galleria Lapidaria was laid with bricks, the windows closed very badly, and the general condition of this magnificent corridor left very much to be desired. Repairs being thus urgently needed, a mere rectification of the damages would not be sufficient. Moreover such a proceeding would be contrary to the traditions of the Curia, which executes in monumental fashion whatever it undertakes. When the floor, windows, arches, and masonry were all overhauled in the Appartamento Borgia, the Collections of ancient pagan carvings, which were exhibited along the walls under the inscriptions, received an unusual increase. The reduction of the stud was begun under Leo XIII and completed under Pius X, so that the pope now possesses comparatively few horses. The extremely strict discipline which Pius X has introduced into all branches of the Vatican administration, has met with splendid success.

XII. THE JURIDICAL AND HYGIENIC BOARDS OF THE VATICAN

Experience has proved it necessary that the Curia should maintain a tribunal before which all legal disputes relating in any way to the Vatican administration might be decided. The Italian courts are in such cases powerless and inefficacious, because their jurisdiction ceases at the palace gates. As there must ever be recriminations wherever there are numerous relations with the commercial world, where there are crowds of clerks and great circulation of money, two "Commissioni Prelatizie per decretare intorno alle controversie e contestazioni con le amministrazioni palatine" were created by Decree of 20 February 1882, to decide all claims made against the Curial administration. The title possesses a juristic interest: the official bodies are called commissioni, not tribunali; decretare, and not giudicare or decidere, is used; and the processes are termed controversie and contestazioni. Although the Decree manifestly avoids giving the name of court of justice to the new institution, it is such de facto. The two commissions then created are each composed of three prelates, who have the decision of processes both in first and also in second instance. The court of third instance is formed by the union of the other two under the presidency of the general auditor of the Apostolic Chamber. All the prelates have a legal training, and in each of the first two courts are a president and two colleagues. Each court has a prelate as petitioner and a secretary. It is a notable feature that, for the execution of all judgments which are legally given against the Vatican administration, nothing is provided.

The procedure of these courts is as follows: The process is begun by written documents placed in the hands of the president. The defendant lodges a written answer within a certain interval, after which further pleas and counterpleas may continue. On the conclusion of the written explanations or after the expiration of a certain interval, during which no further counterpleas are forthcoming, the decision is given and published by exhibition in the Secretariate. The interval for appeal is six months, dating from the day of the publication of judgment. These courts employ every means to establish the facts as they actually are: the examination of witnesses, the administration of oaths, decisive or supplementary oaths, the examination of experts, etc. The costs of court are regulated on the basis of the provisions of the Papal States. The tribunal of the prefecture, of which the competence cannot be exactly established, has an inquisitor and a secretary. Before this court are heard criminal charges.

The sanitary service and the hygienic department were reorganized on 14 November, 1893. In accordance with modern requirements, exhaustive measures were taken in all matters connected with these departments. In particular the water service was thoroughly renovated. The sanitary corps is under the direction of the physician in ordinary to the pope, under whom also stand five other physicians and some assistants. Two of the physicians are appointed for day duty, and two for night; the fifth attends the Swiss Guards. The assistants represent the physicians, when these are unable to attend, but on all solemn occasions, when an unusually great number of persons assemble, they must (like the physicians) be always in attendance. The sanitary service and hygienic department are subordinate to the Prefecture of the Apostolic Palaces. The Vatican dispensary, which was formerly in the Cortile di San Damaso, was recently transferred to the quarters of the Swiss Guards, and lies at the door of the Torrione di Nicolò V which leads to the city. Consequently it is easily accessible to the inhabitants of the Borgo, who avail themselves very freely of it. It is entrusted to three Brothers of Mercy, and delivers all medicines at the rates appointed by the urban council of Rome in favour of the poor. A list hanging up in the dispensary shows to what residents and servants of the palace medicines are to be given gratis.

XIII. THE POLICING OF THE VATICAN

There is within the Vatican a well-organized service of police and guards. Military and police bodies protect persons and property, and the fire department prevents damage from fire. The special military guardians of the palace are the Swiss Guards; entrusted with the specifically police duties are the gendarmes. The Palatine Guards are rather a guard of honour, and the Noble Guard a mounted bodyguard with very limited service. The fire brigade is formed by the Guardie del Fuoco. In view of the peculiar political position of the pope in Rome, the careful guarding of the Vatican presents special difficulties; but, despite the objectionable attitude of the Italian police commissioners in the Borgo, few contretemps are to be complained of. For among the great throngs to the papal assemblages there are always some ready to seize the opportunity to create a disturbance, if the slightest pretext offers itself.

A. The Swiss Guards

The commander of the Swiss has the rank of a colonel of the regular troops and is addressed with this title. The other officers, therefore, have a rank three grades higher than their name indicates, and all the guards without exception possess the rank of sergeant in the regular troops. The quartermaster acts also as secretary of the commanding officer and as ordnance officer. The corps has its special chaplain and chapel, SS. Martino e Sebastiano, built by Pius V in 1568. Every candidate for the Guards must be a native Swiss, a Catholic, of legitimate birth, unmarried, under twenty-five years of age, at least five feet and eight inches in height, healthy, and free from bodily disfigurements. Whoever is not eligible for military service in Switzerland, is likewise refused admission into the Guards. The following papers are required: a certificate from his home (or a pass), baptismal certificate, and testimonial as to character, all signed by the authorities of his parish. After a year of good conduct the cost of the journey to Rome is refunded; this refund may, however, be paid in instalments after a period of seven months. Applications for admission are to be addressed directly to the commanding officer. Those who wish to retire from the Guards may freely do so after giving three months' notice. After eighteen years' service each member of the Guards is entitled to a pension for life amounting to one-half of his pay, after twenty years to a pension amounting to two-thirds of his pay, after twenty-five years to five-sixths of his pay, and after thirty years to his full pay.

The duties of the Guards are as follows: They are responsible for the guarding of the sacred person of the pope and the protection of the Apostolic Palaces, all exits from the palace to the city and the entrance doors to the papal apartments being entrusted to their charge. They have also to take up their position in all pontifical functions in the papal chapels and in all other religious functions both within and without the Apostolic Palaces (the latter are now confined to St. Peter's) at which the pope assists. They have also other duties regulated by ancient traditions or more recent decrees. In addition, they have to appear for service at the order of the prefect of the Apostolic Palaces (the majordomo) and the maestro di camera. The religious privileges of the guards are very extensive. In all public processions the Swiss Guards take their place immediately behind the Noble Guard. As guards they are subject to the prefect of the Apostolic Palaces and were not in earlier times subject, like the regular troops, to the Ministry of War. When the pope occupies the sedia gestatoria, he is surrounded by six of the Swiss Guards, who carry the large swords known as "double-handed". The commander (colonel) of the Guards is an ex-officio privy chamberlain, and has the entrée into the Anticamera Segreta; the lieutenant (major) and the sublieutenant (captain of the first class) are ex officio honorary chamberlains, and have the entrée only to the Throne Room, which lies before the Anticamera Segreta. The Swiss Guards are fully armed, and have to submit to a strict course of exercises and gymnastics. Football is zealously cultivated by them in the Cortile del Belvedere, and their trumpet corps is splendidly organized. On solemn occasions, such as special functions in the German Cemetery near St. Peter's (Campo Santo Teutonico), which is also the burial-place for the Guards, the trumpet corps appears in public.

Even in the fifteenth century the popes possessed a body-guard of the Catholic Swiss. In 1505, at the instance of the Swiss Cardinal Schinner, a treaty was made by Julius II with the two cantons of Zurich and Lucerne, in accordance with which these cantons had to supply constantly 250 men as a body-guard to the pope. Since this date there has always been about the pope a corps of Swiss Guards (cf. Baumgarten, "Katholische Kirche unserer Zeit", I 297 sqq.; "Kirchliche Handlexikon", s.v. "Schweizergarde"). At present the Guards possess a strength of exactly 100 men (including the six officers), who suffice not alone for the complete discharge of the various duties of the corps but also for the maintenance of a watch (formerly essentially more strict and extensive) over the pope during the night. Their old picturesque uniform of black, red, and yellow, in sixteenth-century style, is still retained. A black hat with red strings has recently replaced the very ugly helmet. While exercising, on night watch, or in barracks, the men wear a steel-blue undress uniform, consisting of wider tunic, knee-breeches, dark-blue stockings, and laced boots, but while on guard duty they wear dark-yellow stockings and buckled shoes. On especially solemn occasions both men and officers appear in military uniform with weapons and helmets. The barracks of the Guards lies at the foot of the Palace of Sixtus V. A portion of the building was erected in 1492 during the reign of Alexander VI. The canteen of the Guards furnishes them with their board. The religious privileges of the Guards are very extensive and their regulation pertains to their chaplain who consults the Holy Father in this regard. The care of their other privileges appertains to their commander.

B. The Papal Gendarmes

The corps of Gendarmes of the Apostolic Palaces consists of Italians, who must measure at least five feet nine inches, have completed an entirely unobjectionable period of service in the Italian army, and have secured good certificates of character from both the secular and religious authorities. Upon them devolves the policing of the palace and the gardens, and they are also employed in the honorary service of the Anticamera. They have a barracks in the gardens and another near the quarters of the Swiss Guards. Like the Swiss Guards, they also have a music corps, which gives a concert on feasts in the Cortile di S. Damaso. The gendarmes are subject to the Prefect of the Apostolic Palaces; their commander has the court rank of honorary chamberlain and bears the official title of "Delegato per i servizi di Sicurezza e Polizia". The corps musters 62 men.

C. The Guardia d'Onore

The Palatine Guard, as it exists to-day, extends back to Pius IX. In the Regolamento of 14 December, 1850, he decreed that the two bodies of militia, the civici scelti and the capotori, should be united into one body under the new name of the Guardia Palatina d'Onore. In 1860 this guard was increased and placed on the footing of a regiment of 748 men with 2 battalions and 8 companies. Before 1870 the services of this regiment were not confined to the palace, watch-duties in the city and military operations in war being assigned them. After 1870 the regimental band of 63 men was disbanded, and the corps greatly diminished. The lieutenant-colonel in command has the rank of colonel. As distinguished from the Swiss Guards, who are appointed for the guarding of the pope's person, the Palatine Guard perform such duties in the papal service as are detailed in the directions of the majordomo and the maestro di camera. All the members of the corps are Roman citizens; they perform their few duties gratis, but receive 80 lire annually for their uniforms. During the conclave a company of the Palatine Guard is stationed in the Cortile del Maresciallo under the command of the hereditary Marshal of the Conclave, Prince Chigi.

D. The Guardia Nobile

This most distinguished corps of the papal military service has an interesting history. The mounted guard of the popes was formerly formed of the corps of cavalleggieri (light cavalry). By Motu Proprio of 1744 Benedict XIV gave these mounted guards a new organization, fixing their number at 90. After the disbanding of these troops during the confusion of the French Revolution, Pius VII formed a new body-guard composed of the remainder of the cavalleggieri and the old cavaliers delle lancie spezzate. A Decree of 11 May, 1801, ordered the institution of the Noble Guard (guardie nobili di corpo), the Spanish noble guards being taken as the model. The political revolutions under Napoleon I prevented the proper formation of the new corps, so that the reorganization effected by warrant of the Cardinal-Secretary of State, Ercole Consalvi, of 8 November, 1815, was found necessary. The petition of Count Giovanni Mastai Ferretti (afterwards Pius IX) for admission into the Guards (26 June, 1814), which was rejected on account of his weak health, is still preserved in the archives of the Noble Guard. Leo XIII amalgamated the existing two companies and in accordance with the changed conditions of the time, gave them new regulations, and declared that the corps should consist of 1 captain, 1 lieutenant, 1 sublieutenant, 8 lance-corporals, I lance-corporal as corps adjutant, 8 cadets, 1 cadet as adjutant, 48 guards, 1 quarter-master, 1 equerry, 1 armourer, 1 master of ordnance, and 4 trumpeters. The whole corps thus numbered 77 men. The captain ranks as a lieutenant-general of regulars, and the other grades accordingly. One-third of the simple members of the corps enjoy the rank of captain, one-third that of lieutenant, and the remaining third that of sublieutenant.

In place of the earlier cabinet couriers, the Noble Guards have the exclusive right of conveying the tidings of their elevation to the "crown cardinals" in Catholic lands, as well as to nuncios of the first class when raised to the cardinalate, and also of bringing to their residences the red hat. Conditions for reception into the corps are as follows: age, 21-25; testimonial as to good character from the parish-priest, bishop, or other ecclesiastical authorities; 60 years line of a nobility recognized in the Papal States, with the same tests as in the Order of Malta; height, at least five feet and seven inches; and perfect bodily health. The post of commander lies at the free disposal of the pope, and is always entrusted to a Roman prince. Otherwise promotion is regulated exclusively by length of service. The Noble Guard makes its appearance in public only when the pope takes part in a public function; when the pope withdraws, he is followed by the Noble Guard. During a vacancy of the Holy See, the corps stands at the service of the College of Cardinals. The Gonfaloniere, or standard-bearer, of the Holy Roman Church, with the rank of lieutenant general, has the right of wearing the uniform of the Noble Guard. (Cf. Baumgarten, "Kathol. Kirche unserer Zeit", I, 290-93.)

E. The Guardie dei Fuoco

The Vatican fire-brigade, which is organized according to the most modern methods, is employed also for other duties, since they are rarely needed on their main duty. The brigade possesses no special features.

XIV. THE VATICAN AS A BUSINESS CENTRE

The Vatican must be regarded as the administrative centre of the Catholic Church, since it is the residence of the supreme head of that Church, and from it the whole Church is governed. From here the pope issues a Decree or Motu Proprio, advises the prefects or managing cardinals of the congregations, and in all important matters his personal business activity is always clearly indicated. From this standpoint the Vatican is a business centre of the first rank. Other extensive business transacted in the palace is less well known. Since the seizure of the Papal States by the Piedmontese makes it impossible to hold the conclave for the election of a new pope (notwithstanding the assurances of the Law of Guarantees -- see below, section XVI) outside the Vatican, this important business must be transacted there. Conclaves were held at the Vatican in 1878 and 1903. On each occasion such exact particulars of their distinctive features were given to the newspapers and other periodicals, that there is no need of giving any details here (cf. CONCLAVE, PIUS X).

The most important of the numerous bodies which have their general offices in the palace is the Secretariate of State. All the offices of this department (in so far as it deals with political and ecciesiastico-political matters) are situated on the third floor of those portions of the old Apostolic Palace which were built by Nicholas V, Callistus III, Pius II, and Julius II, and surround the Cortile del Papagallo and the Cortile del Maresciallo. They lie above the Sala dei Chiaroscuri, the Chapel of Nicholas V, and the adjoining rooms. Before 1870 the Secretariate of State had its seat in the Quirinal, but was on 20 September of that year changed provisionally to the sections of the Vatican Palace erected by Gregory XIII, Sixtus V, and Clement VIII, and situated under the Sala Concistoriale, the Sala degli Arazzi, and the Throne Room and some adjacent rooms. Meanwhile, by raising the walls and the roof, Cardinal Antonelli had a number of new apartments created, and thereby found at his disposal twenty-one rooms, in which are now found not alone the offices of the Secretariate of State, but also those (7) of the earlier independent Congregation for Extraordinary Ecclesiastical Affairs (see THE ROMAN CONGREGATIONS). Here are transacted all the numerous affairs which, according to the existing regulations, fall within the jurisdiction of these two congregations. When recently the Secretariate of Briefs was placed under the direction of the secretary of state, the offices of this great department were transferred to the Vatican Palace and established in the unoccupied halls of the old picture-gallery. All the bureaux of the Secretariate of State are now on the same floor. The extent of business transacted here is evidenced by the archives. In the archives for "Ordinary" affairs (the first section of the Secretariate), all the "positions" -- as the huge fascicles are called -- from the year 1860 are preserved. Every ten years the then oldest decade here preserved is removed to the secret archives. The inventories (called rubricelle), which are added to the collections from day to day, render it possible to discover immediately any particular document. The exceedingly difficult and tedious task of making these inventories, is persevered in only on account of their proved utility. Regarding the work and organization of the above-named, formerly independent congregations (now treated as the Second Section of the Secretariate of State) see THE ROMAN CONGREGATIONS.

A whole series of Roman Congregations hold either regularly or on special occasions their sessions in the Vatican. When not held in the council-room in the suite of the Secretariate of State, special rooms are provided for them. Every Tuesday and Friday morning the secretary of state receives the ambassadors and envoys accredited to the Holy See, so that all diplomatic affairs not transacted by correspondence are conducted in the Vatican. The secret, semipublic and public consistories are held either in the Sala Concistoriale or in the Sala Regia. Only in exceptional cases is a consistory held outside the palace -- in the Aula situated above the porch of St. Peter's. Accessible only from the Sala Regia (except by the small staircase for servants), this enormous and lengthy hall forms no organic portion of the palace. The last of the consistories was held there on 30 November, 1911. The offices of the Secretariates of Latin Briefs and of Briefs to Princes, which form distinct departments, are also found in the palace (cf. Baumgarten, "Die kathol. Kirche unserer Zeit", I, 491-94). A place of great activity is the Secret Chancery of the Holy Father; here are discharged all affairs pertaining to the pope in so far as they do not belong to any of the special departments. Within the sphere of this department, besides the purely private affairs of the pope, are numberless petitions which were formerly referred to the now abolished Secretariate of Memorials.

The Alms, to be distributed according to certain principles, are entrusted to the Secret Almoner of the pope, who is always a titular archbishop. His offices lie near the quarters of the Swiss Guards. All donations accruing in the form of Peterspence are administered separately by the "Commissione Cardinalizia amministratrice dei Beni della Santa Sede". The offices lie in the loggie of the third story in the eastern wing of the palace. To ensure in so far as feasible the possessions of a number of small chapters from possible seizure by the Italians, the pope has directed that all titles to annuities from these should be preserved in the Vatican. For the administration of this property a "Commissione per le opere di religione" has been instituted, which pays over to the proper parties the accruing interests and assists the corporations both with advice and actively, when they are meditating some financial transaction, whether the purchase of a new title or the exchange of old titles for others. The "Commissione Cardinalizia per gli studi storici", whenever they hold their meetings, also assemble in the Vatican. In conclusion must still be mentioned the numerous offices of the palatine administration, which is naturally very extensive. This collection of heterogeneous departments for the transaction of business is inevitable, since the Holy See is compelled to concentrate everything in the Vatican as far as possible.

XV. THE TIPOGRAFIA POLIGLOTTA VATICANA

By the Bull, "Eam semper ex" of 27 April, 1587, Sixtus V established a printing-office for the printing of the official edition of the Latin Vulgate which he had undertaken (cf. Baumgarten, "Die Vulgata Sixtina von 1590 u. ihre Einführungsbulle", Münster, 1911, pp. 1-12). Since that time there has existed a Typographia Vaticana, in the rooms on the ground floor in the middle of the southern wing of the palace, and thus under the old reading-room of the Vatican Library. Shortly after its foundation in 1626, the Congregation of the Propaganda also established a printing-office, which, in accordance with the needs of the missions, soon developed into a Typographia Polyglotta (cf. Prior, "Die kathol. Kirche unserer Zeit", I, 406-07). After enjoying an epoch of international repute, this institution had in recent years fallen to a low level owing to the absence of expert management and sufficient funds. Pius X therefore resolved to unite it with the Vatican Press. This amalgamation was effected when the Vatican Press, whose printing machines were to a great extent out-of-date and whose quarters were inadequate, was thoroughly reorganized and transferred to new quarters (1910).

The old riding-school of the Noble Guard, known as the Cavallerizza, lying on the Torrione di Niccolo V, was completely reconstructed in 1909 and fitted for the reception of a great first-class printing-office. The latest and best machines were procured, the lighting splendidly regulated, and the arrangement of the offices made in the most practical way. Hither was transferred the Typographia Vaticana with all the valuable type of the Polyglotta of the Propaganda, and given the new name of "Tipografia Poliglotta Vaticana". At the same time there was inaugurated an improvement of methods, which guaranteed substantial savings and greater capacity as compared with former arrangements. The general department of the new printing-offices was established in the high basement and ground-floor; the secret department on the first floor of the new building. The staffs of the two departments are completely separate, both departments have different entrances, which are closed during working hours. The printing-office serves in the first place for the various official purposes of the Curia. Then, according to its capacity, it undertakes printing commissions entrusted to it by outsiders. Thus, for example, a portion of the monumental work of the Görresgesellschaft on the Council of Trent was printed here. The "Acta Apostolicæ Sedis", the circulation of which amounts almost to 10,000 copies, the "Gerarchia Cattolica", the new choral editions, and similar works are the best known of the official productions of the Vatican Press.

XVI. THE LEGAL POSITION OF THE VATICAN

In the Law of Guarantees of the Italian State, which came into force on 13 May 1871, it was explicitly declared that all residences of the pope on Italian soil should enjoy immunity and should be extraterritorial. It follows that the Vatican Palace must be immune and extraterritorial in the eyes of the Italian authorities. Consequently, all action of the Italian authorities must stop at the gates of the Vatican; the inhabitants of the palace cannot be taxed, subp naed, or summoned to defend themselves. All consignments directed expressly to the administration of the palace are duty-free, and all letters addressed to the pope from Italy require no stamps. The official telegrams of the Vatican authorities are sent gratis to all parts of the world. These and other exceptions from the ordinary laws of Italy are the consequences of the Law of Guarantees, in so far as they are not expressly mentioned therein. The Radicals and the Freemasons have already frequently demanded the abrogation of the Law of Guarantees, urging that it is a purely Italian law, and may therefore be abrogated by the same agents as made it. This statement is false. The Vatican is exterritorial, not according to Italian, but according to international law, as is clearly shown in the negotiations preceding its adoption. Both the Lower Chamber and the Senate voted on the law with the clear intention of bringing it to pass through international law that the Catholics of the whole world should to a certain extent be set at ease as to the position of their supreme head. The Italian legislative agents freely assumed obligations towards the Powers and all Catholics, as was an absolute necessity of the politics of the day. These obligations can under no circumstances be set aside at the wishes of one party. The plea that the pope did not recognize the law is entirely beside the question; his refusal was foreseen by the legislators, and notwithstanding it, as the premier then declared, Italy as under an obligation to pass the law. It thus follows incontestably that it is not in the power of the Italian legislative agents to alter in any way the present legal position of the Vatican Palace. The pope is, however, personally indifferent as to whether the Italian Government may in the future perpetrate further injustices in addition to those of the past. One who has had to endure so much, will not remain without consolation should another cross be added to those he already bears.

There is, however, no obstacle to the cultivation of certain relations between the Vatican and Italian authorities, such indeed being rendered indispensable by the social intercourse of the present day. For example, since the pope refuses to exercise de facto the right of punishment theoretically vested in him, malefactors (should any crime be committed) are turned over to the Italian authorities for the thorough investigation of their cases. Warnings on various points are sent from the Italian to the Vatican authorities, so that the latter may be on their guard. Communications of a confidential nature may be exchanged, but in such a manner that neither of the parties enters into any obligation nor prejudices its position; when necessary it is effected through recognized channels unofficially. When the pope attends a solemnity in St. Peter's, the basilica is then and then only regarded as belonging to the Vatican; on other occasions it is regarded as a monumento nazionale. By tacit agreement the whole policing during these services lies in the hands of the Vatican authorities. But there are also a great number of Italian detectives in civilian dress, who, assisted by the Vatican authorities, bar objectionable persons from the edifice and quietly remove those who by any means may have obtained entrance. The ambulance stations in St. Peter's, rendered necessary by the assemblage of from thirty to forty thousand persons, are established by the sanitary board of the Vatican.

The above information makes sufficiently clear both the theoretical juristic and the practical position of the relations between the Vatican and the Italian authorities. In the article LAW OF GUARANTEES will be found a more explicit statement of the relations between the Holy See and the Italian Government. Pius IX at the time of the violent occupation in 1870 by the troops of Victor Emmanuel refused to recognize the right of the Italian Government, and his successors, Leo XIII and Pius X, constantly maintained the same attitude. Both pontiffs have, on various occasions, declared themselves as unalterably opposed to the recognition of the claim of the Italian Government to temporal sovereignty in Rome.

In addition to works given at the end of certain sections, an abundance of literature on the Vatican Palace will be found in comprehensive works on the history of the popes, such as those by RANKE, PASTOR, VON REUMONT, GREGOROVIUS; treatises on art by CROWE AND CAVALCASELLE, VERMIGLIOLI, SCHMARSOW, VASARI; chronicles, by BURKHARD and INFESSURA; Annales ecclesiastici of BARONIUS, RINALDUS, and their continuators; Bullarium Romanum and other collections of documents; and BLANI, Bibliographie italico-française, ou Catalogue méthodique de tous les imprimés en langue française sur l'Italie ancienne et moderne (1475-1835) (2 vols., Paris, 1886-87). Numerous guides for travellers and pilgrims contain a great quantity of more or less reliable information. Among the best comprehensive and accurate works may be mentioned: CHATTARD, Nuova descrizione del Vaticano e della Sacrosanta Basilica di San Pietro (Rome, 1762-67); TAJA, Descrizione del Palazza Apostolico Vaticano (Rome, 1750); PISTOLESI, Il Vaticano descritto ed illustrato (8 vols., Rome, 1819-38), with numerous plates and illustrations; DONOVAN, Rome Ancient and Modern and Its Environs (Rome, 1844).

PAUL MARIA BAUMGARTEN

The Vatican Palace, as a Scientific Institute

Regarded from the point of view of scientific productivity, the Vatican is the busiest scientific workshop in Rome. Scientific materials of the highest order and in astonishing abundance are stored up in the palace, access to them is easily obtained, and the conditions for work are most favourable. Apart from the most modern scientific theories, for which of course the Vatican treasures offer no materials, information on all branches of human knowledge may be found there. The sources which the Vatican affords for the history of the sciences have heretofore suffered from a great, and to some extent absolute, neglect. This remark applies with special force to philosophy, theology, history, literature, philology in all its branches, jurisprudence, geography, ethnology, and art, for all of which categories the most important materials are to be found here. (Concerning the manner of handling these sources, see INSTITUTES, ROMAN HISTORICAL.) Despite the depressed financial position of the Curia, the pope annually increases his appropriations for the cultivation of science within the walls of the Vatican; this offers clear testimony as to the attitude of the Church towards scientific pursuits. Over this research she exercises only remote supervision; the investigator is at perfect liberty to pursue his studies, all facilities and guidance being given him. One need only recall the names of Bethmann, Munch, Mommsen, Duchesne, Kehr, Lämmer, Sickel, Pastor, and dozens of others, turn to their works, and learn their views, to be convinced of the scientific liberality of the Vatican; (Cf; Walsh, "The Popes and Science. The History of the Papal Relations to Science during the Middle Ages and Down to our Time", New York, 1911.)

A. THE VATICAN ARCHIVES

(1) The Contents of the Archives

It was only natural that the Church from the first centuries of her existence should devote great care to the collection of all important documents and to preserving them in the manner then customary. There is very little information to be found concerning the manner and extent of these archival collections, since the documentary treasures of early Christianity have been lost. Extensive remains of documents antedating the thirteenth century no longer exist, and of the papal registers of the preceding period we retain only scanty, though valuable, remnants [cf. the interesting and comprehensive work of Wilhelm Peitz, "Das Original-register Gregors VII im Vatikanischen Archiv (Reg. Vat. 2) nebst Beiträgen zur Kenntnis der Original-register Innocenz' III. und Honorius' III. (Reg. Vat. 4-11)", Vienna, 1911 (Sitzungsberichte)].

The existence of the Vatican secret archives really began with Innocent III (1198), so that it possesses the documents of seven centuries. The abundance of the materials requires, in view of the prime importance of the institutions, a special, though quite summary treatment. A fairly reliable estimate of the arranged documents -- an appraisal of their value can be only provisionally attempted as yet -- has established the fact that there are in round numbers 60,000 volumes, cassettes, and bundles. In the cassettes are frequently many dozens of separate documents; in the bundles of Acts from 100 to 200 letters with their enclosures are occasionally found; while the huge folio volumes of the registers of the fourteenth century contain as many as 2000 documents and even more. It is thus impossible to furnish even an approximately accurate estimate of the number of letters, reports, documents, protocols, minutes, etc. in every stage of preparation, which are contained in the secret archives. Were there not every guidance to this vast collection of valuable materials scholars would find their task of research almost impossible. However, in the working-room of the assistant archivist is a whole library of Indices (681 in number), which have been compiled during the last 300 years for the convenience of the administration and, in individual cases, for the use of scholars. In 1901 a guide to this labyrinth of Indexes was issued under the title, "Inventarium indicum in secretiori Archivo Vaticano unica serie existentium". Gisbert Brom (Guide aux Archives du Vatican, 2nd ed., revised and augmented, Rome, 1911) also gives excellent notes on the contents of the various divisions of the Indices. Besides many others, Johannes de Pretis (1712-27), his brother Petrus Donninus de Pretis (1727-40), and Josephus Garampi (1749-72) did especially important work on the Indices. Garampi and his assistants wrote out 1,500,000 labels, which (pasted into 124 huge folio volumes) form an inexhaustible mine. Felix Contelori (1626-44), in addition to work on the Indices, arranged and copied the most imperilled documents of the archives. By the recent publication of his "Manuductio ad Vaticani Archivi Regesta", Gregorio Palmieri, O.S.B., has supplied a very useful help to the study of the "Regesta". The Indices are alphabetical or chronological repertories, which must be regarded exclusively as pure administrative helps, not as aids to scholarly investigation (see Brom, op. cit., 7-14).

Passing over the Guardaroba and Biblioteca Segreta, "which have none other than a nominal existence", and the still uninvestigated portions of the Archivi dei Memoriali, del Buon Governo, and dell' Uditore SSmo., the following are the chief groups of the archival materials:

(a) Archivio Segreto;
(b) Archive of Avignon;
(c) Archive of the Apostolic Chamber;
(d) Archive of Sant' Angelo;
(e) Archive of the Dataria;
(f) Consistorial Archive;
(g) Archive of the Secretariate of State;
(h) Various Collections.

(a) Archivio Segreto

The whole archive is called Archivio Segreto, from the name of its oldest portion, which, however, retains its specific name. It contains seventy-four armari, or presses, in which are:

• the volumes of the Vatican Registers (Armar. 1-28);
• the "Diversa Cameralia" (29-30) and "Collectoria cameræ apostolicæ" (57);
• the Registers of Transcripts (31-37, 46-49, 52-54, 59-61);
• the Register of Briefs (38-45);
• the Indices (50-51, 56, 58);
• the "Tridentina et Diversa Germaniæ" (62-64);
• the "Introitus et Exitus Cameræ" (65-74);
• the "Instrumenta Miscellanea".

The archival materials, collected by the Avignon obedience during the Avignon exile (1305-76) and the time of the Schism, together with the administrative acts of the County of Venaissin, form the Archive of Avignon, which was gradually (the last portion in 1783) transferred to Rome. The series of the "Introitus et Exitus" found in this section, of the "Obligationes et Solutiones" and of the "Collectoriæ Cameræ", together with the "Diversa Cameralia" and the "Introitus et Exitus" of the Archivo Segreto form to-day the Archive of the Apostolic Chamber.

(c) Archive of the Apostolic Chamber

The four chief portions of this archive have just been mentioned. These are by no means four complete series of volumes; on the contrary, very important and extensive portions of this archive are bound up with the volumes of the Avignon Registers, while other documents must be sought in other places. Consequently, the making of an exact inventory of all cameral acts is urgently called for. In the section "Obligationes et Solutiones" some of the volumes belong to the Apostolic Chamber and some to the Chamber of the College of Cardinals.

(d) Archive of Sant'Angelo

Sixtus IV, Leo X, and Clement VIII are the founders of this archive, since it was their opinion that the most important documents and titles of possession of the Roman Curia would be best preserved in Sant'Angelo, as the strongest bulwark of Rome. In 1798 the contents of the archive were transferred to the Vatican, where they received special quarters under the name of "Archivio di Castello", and are still kept separate. In the capsul and fasces of this archive a great variety of things are treated.

(e) Archive of the Dataria

The three great sections of this archive contain:

(i) the Register of Petitions (Register Supplicationum), which begin with 1342;
(ii) the Lateran Register of Bulls, which contains the Bulls sent out by the Dataria between 1389 and 1823;
(iii) the Briefs the Datania, a name which is not quite exact. These Briefs, as distinguished from those mentioned above (a, 4), were issued in answer to petitions.

(f) Consistorial Archive

Such of the archival materials as are found in the secret archives (the other portions are in the archives of the Consistorial Congregation in the library) consist of the "Acta Camerarii" (1489-1600), "Acta Cancellarii" (1517-64), "Acta Miscellanea" (1409-1692), and "Acta Consistorialia" (1592-1668; 1746-49).

(g) Archive of the Secretariate of State

Despite the great gaps to be found in this section, this archive possesses the greatest importance for the political and ecclesiastico-civil history of modern times. It includes the following subdivisions:

(i) Nunciatures and Legations -- Germania (1515-1809), -- Francia (1517-1809), -- Spagna (1563-1796), -- Polonia (1567-1783), -- Portogallo (1535-1809), -- Inghilterra (1565-1689; 1702-04), -- Genova (1572-84; 1593-1604), -- Venezia (1532-34; 1561, 1562, 1566-1798), -- Napoli (1570-1809), -- Colonia (1575-1799), -- Monaco di Baviera (1786-1808), -- Paci, that is negotiations for various treaties (1628-1715), -- Svizzera (1532-1803), -- Firenze (1572-1809), -- Savoia (1586-1796), -- Avignone (1564-1789), -- Fiandra (1553-1796; to which section also belong five bundles of letters embracing the years 1800-09 and 1814 and 1815), -- Malta (1572-1792), -- Bologna (1553-1791), -- Ferrara (1597-1740), -- Romagna (1597-1740), -- Urbino (1664-1740), -- Diversi, that is copies of letters and other things, all of which refer to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. From this list one may see both the richness and the great importance of this division.
(ii) Letters of Cardinals. -- This contains the correspondence between the Secretariate of State and the various cardinals for the period from 1523 to 1803. Here are thus contained both the minutes of the letters dispatched and the originals of letters received from the cardinals. There are, besides, in this collection numerous letters from princes, legates, bishops, etc.
(iii) Letters of bishops and prelates. -- The letters of the bishops and prelates contain not only ecclesiastico-political but also purely political information, so that they possess a high value for profane history. The original letters and the minutes of the answers dispatched extend from 1515 to 1797.
(iv) Letters of princes and titled persons. -- Many distinguished personages (including bishops and prelates) are found among the writers of this collection of letters, which contains a large series of volumes with answers. The division extends over the years 1513-1815, and has been as yet little availed of.
(v) Letters of private individuals. -- Most of the documents of this collection emante from the pens of those who, while in communication with the Curia, do not belong to the above-named categories. To a great extent the writers are private people. There are, however, some letters from bishops, prelates, and nobles, which should have been included elsewhere. The letters extend from 1519 to 1803.
(vi) Letters of military men. -- Here are collected all the documents connected with the history of the Curial wars between 1572 and 1713.
(vii) Varia Miscellanea (not to be confounded with other Vatican Miscellanea). -- Besides numerous volumes containing transcripts of Acts of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, there are here collected all those documents which could not well be included in the other divisions: instructions, travelling experiences, concordats, tractates of all kinds, diaries of conclaves, etc. The whole collection is of great importance.

(h) Various Collections

The "Varia Miscellanea" have absorbed the Biblioteca Ceva as well as the chief portion of the Biblioteca Ciampini. The Biblioteca Spada, in so far as it is yet in the archives, was embodied in the nunciature of France. The following, however, remain independent collections:

• Biblioteca Pio, manuscripts of Cardinal Pio Carlo di Savoia, purchased by Benedict XIV in 1753. They should consist of 428 volumes, but many are missing.
• Biblioteca Carpegna the library of manuscripts of Cardinal Gaspare Carpegna, which originally consisted of 229 volumes. The scientific interest of these volumes is not very great.
• Biblioteca Bolognetti, consisting mainly of copies of documents of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. This belonged to the Bolognetti-Cenci family, which assigned it to the Vatican archives in 1810.
• Biblioteca Ronconi, a small collection of twenty manuscripts, which belonged to a former official of the archives.
• Papers of Cardinal Garampi, the 251 bundles of Acts belonging to the effects of Cardinal Garampi and containing partly originals and partly copies of documents pertaining to his diplomatic activity in Poland and Germany.
• Manuscripts of G. B. Gonfalonieri, eighty-nine volumes which belonged to the former custodians of the Archive of Sant'Angelo, and, while relating mainly to Spain and Portugal, have also some importance for the nunciature of Cologne.
• "Registro Dandini", the diplomatic correspondence of Cardinal Dandini for the years 1541-59 in six volumes.
  (viii) "De caritate S. Sedis Apostolicæ erga Gallos", forty-two volumes and eighteen bundles detailing the help given by the Holy See to the French emigrants during the Revolution.
• Buon Governo, a huge archive of the old Congregation del Buon Governo, which was entrusted with the economic administration of the Papal States from 1592. The archive was transferred to the Vatican in 1870, fills sixteen rooms, and has a special custodian.
• "Avvisi" a series of 124 volumes, extending over the period 1605-1707 and composed of the manuscript journals and newspapers of the seventeenth century.
• Farnesiane papers, twenty bundles of documents which disappeared in some unknown manner from the Neapolitan Carte Farnesiane, and were purchased and placed in this archive by Leo XIII in 1890. They do not contain any politically important papers.
• Borghese Archive. -- The huge Borghese Archive may be termed "an integral portion of the Segretaria di Stato during the pontificates of Clement VIII, Leo XI, and Paul V". Leo XIII acquired this great archive in 1892. With the aid of the inventories of the Vatican Archives and the Vatican Library some guidance as to the 2000 volumes may be obtained.
• "Bolle e Bandi". -- In addition to the two other series of this kind which stand in the "Varia Miscellanea" there is this third, which extends from 1525 to 1854. The printing on the title pages possesses a high value for the history of culture.
• "Varia Diplomata" includes all the archives of orders and monasteries to be found in the Secret Archives. Some are of exceptional interest and prime importance. As many of the archives are not yet arranged, they are not yet generally accessible.

(2) Statistics

The estimate of 60,000 volumes, cassettes, and bundles of Acts, contained in the archives, does not include such huge collections as that of the Buon Governo and other smaller collections. The following list, giving the number of volumes arranged according to the collections, conveys an idea of the extent of the archives:

• Volumes of Vatican Registers. . . . . . . . . . . . 2,048
• Transcripts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968
• Briefs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,654
• Tridentinum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
• Diversa Germaniæ. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
• Volumes of Avignon Registers. . . . . . . . . . . . 394
• Introitus et Exitus Cameræ. . . . . . . . . . . . . 608
• Obligationes et Solutiones. . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
• Collectoriæ Cameræ. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 509
• Diversa Cameralia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253
• Supplicationes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,011
• Lateran Volumes of Registers. . . . . . . . . . . . 2,161
• Dataria Briefs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850
• Acta Consistorialia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
• Nunciatures:
  • Germania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 709
  • Francia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 615
  • Spagna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 439
  • Polonia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382
  • Portogallo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
  • Inghilterra. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
  • Genova . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
  • Venezia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 360
  • Napoli . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 411
  • Colonia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297
  • Monaco di Baviera. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
  • Paci . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
  • Svizzera . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322
  • Firenze. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
  • Savoia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
  • Avignone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344
  • Fiandra. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
  • Malta. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
  • Bologna. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317
  • Ferrara. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
  • Romagna. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
  • Urbino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
• Letters of cardinals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
• Letters of bishops and prelates . . . . . . . . . . 380
• Letters of princes and titled persons . . . . . . . 277
• Letters of private individuals. . . . . . . . . . . 315
• Letters of military men . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
• Varia Miscellanea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,051
• Biblioteca Pio. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300
• Biblioteca Carpegna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
• Biblioteca Bolognetti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340
• Biblioteca Ronconi. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
• Garampi papers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251
• Gonfalonieri manuscripts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
• Registro Dandini. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
• De caritate S. Sedis erga Gallos. . . . . . . . . . 60
• Avvisi. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
• Farnesiane papers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
• Borghese archive. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,000
• Bolle e Bandi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

The above-named collections thus include in the aggregate 35,000 volumes in round numbers. Of loose parchment and paper documents, letters, and similar papers there are 120,000 -- a fairly trustworthy estimate. Consequently, although the collections already accessible by no means reach the expectations which have been entertained regarding the extent of the archives, it is yet evident that the supply of materials is extraordinarily great. A great proportion of the volumes are in the largest folio form and of unusual thickness. The contents of the volumes are of great importance, inasmuch as the questions treated are of vast interest. All these considerations render the Secret Archives of the Curia by far the most important archives in the world. Other collections not mentioned by Brom have been acquired in recent times. From the Santini effects 200 volumes of Acts of the Datania were purchased in 1909. On 13 April, 1910, a number of parchment documents were acquired from a family in Terni. The historically famous scheme of Curial reform from the pen of Cardinal Sala (under Pius VII) came into the possession of the archives on 18 June, 1910. On 15 December, 1910, the Holy Father presented three volumes which are registered under Malta 124 A, 124 B, and Arm. II, vol. 178. On the same date a certain Santarelli donated five volumes treating of the College of Writers of Briefs, and on 25 February, 1911, all the papers of Cardinal Mattei passed into the possession of the archives. In conclusion, it must be remarked that the Registers of Briefs, mentioned above (a, iv), have not passed definitively into the possession of the archives, but have only been deposited there; while the Indices, without which the use of the former is scarcely possible, have been again withdrawn. Those engaged in research must, therefore, apply to the archivist of Briefs, one of the officials in the Secretariate of State.

(3) The Administration of the Archives

The scientific management of the archives is entrusted to a cardinal with the title of archivist of the Vatican Secret Archives. All economical questions, such as the salaries of the officials and the expenditure necessary from time to time, are referred to the Prefecture of the Apostolic Palaces. The archives have, therefore, no regular budget for expenditure. The practical administration is entrusted to the assistant archivist, who issues all instructions to the other officials. He is assisted by a secretary, who, besides fulfilling other duties, supplies information concerning research work and other scientific qu sita. Five writers (scriptores) are engaged on the making of inventories and the superintendence of all transcripts to be dispatched to scholars dwelling outside Rome. To these officials is also entrusted the administration of certain important sections of the archives. The work-room is placed under the charge of two custodians (custodes), of whom one is the director of the Scuola Paleografica of the archives. Of the five bidelli, or servants, one is capo sala, that is, it is his special task to register the number of the manuscript required, to deliver it to the student, and to receive it back at the conclusion of the period of study. For the repair and rebinding of injured volumes and the restoration of documents two ristauratori have been appointed. A special clerk is employed exclusively with the pasting on of the number labels and with the pagination of all the codices which previously were without page or folio numbers. Finally, there is a porter who watches over the entrance door in the Torre dei Quattro Venti.

Besides the work-room, the office of the assistant archivist, and the old work-room, fifty rooms (including a large number of very extensive halls) are under the charge of the administration. The sixty places (usually all occupied) in the work-room can be increased to eighty to accommodate an unusually large body of investigators. In exceptional cases, women are permitted to study in the archives. The working year extends from 1 October to 27 June. During the working year 1909-10, 6018 application forms for volumes were received; during the year 1910-11 only 4800. The difference is due to the fact that since October, 1910, it has been allowed to apply for two or even three successive manuscripts on the same form -- a privilege which was not previously allowed. The last inventory was made in July, 1910.

(4) History

Concerning the earliest attempts to create archives in the Vatican, the reader is referred to the work of the present writer on the Camera Collegii Cardinalium (1898), which treats also of the creation of an archive of the Sacred College. In the years 1611-13 Paul V had the present archive buildings constructed by the cardinal librarian, Bartolomeo Cesi; these are situated at the western narrow side of the Salone Sistino, the hall of state built by Sixtus for the library. The same pontiff devoted large sums to the perfecting and repair of the materials. This Secret Archive of the Vatican was from the very beginning regarded as an administrative institution for the facilitation of Curial affairs. Consequently, it was so planned as to answer the needs it was intended to fill. When subsequently, during the heated literary warfare against the Protestant innovations, it became necessary to make the collected treasures accessible to the great historians of that age, it lost nothing of its original character. In his work, "Costituzione deli' archivio Vaticano e suo primo indice sotto il Pontificato di Paolo V, manoscritto inedito di Michele Lonigo" (Rome, 1887), Gasparolo gives an accurate description of the collections deposited in the archives at its foundation. Since that time the following important collections have been added: the Archive of the Secretary of State in 1660; Archive of Avignon, of which the last portion was added in 1783; Archive of Sant' Angelo, 1798; Archive of the Congregazione del Buon Governo, 1870; Archive of the Dataria, 1892; Borghese Archive, 1893; Archive of Memorials 1905; Archive "dell' Uditore Santissimo", 1906; Consistorial Archive, 1907; and the Archive of Briefs, 1909 (cf. Marini, "Memorie istoriche degli Archivi della Santa Sede', 1825). (Concerning the opening of the secret archives see INSTITUTES, ROMAN HISTORICAL.)

By Motu Proprio of 1 May, 1894 (Fin dal principio), Leo XIII founded in the Vatican Archives an institute for palæography and diplomatics, his Decree being published on 15 May in a letter to Cardinal Hergenrother, the learned archivist of the Church ("Leonis papæ XIII allocutiones, epistolæ, etc.", Bruges, 1887, 76). In the "Studi e documenti di storia e di diritto", VI (1885), 106-08, the text of the "Ordinamenti per la Scuola di paleografia presso l'archivio Pontificio Vaticano" may be found. The first professor was Isidoro Carini, whose successor is (1912) Angelo Melampo. Lectures are delvered thrice weekly from November to June, and students who successfully compete in the written and oral examinations receive a diploma in archival research and diplomatics (cf. Carini, "Prolusione al corso di paleografia e critica storica, inaugurato nella pontificia scuola Vaticana il 16 Marzo, 1885", Rome, 1885; "Argomenti di Paleografia e Critica Storica trattati nella Pontificia Scuola Vaticana ne' tre corsi del 1885, 1886, 1887", Rome, 1888). For the extensive works of organization, the activity of the leading archivists in the preparation of the Indices, the nature and contents of the many hundreds of Indices, the reader is referred to Brom, op. cit.

(5) Apart from the secret archives

There are in the Vatican Palace other archives, which may be divided into ecclesiastical, juridical, ecelesiastico-political, and purely administrative archives, according to the bodies to which they belong. Most important historically is that of the Apostolic penitentiary; the older collections, of which until recently scholars knew nothing, are kept in the Vatican. The large archive of the Sacra Rota Romana, which is of fundamental importance for juridical questions and the history of jurisprudence, is accommodated in a small annex in the Vatican Gardens, adjacent to the entrance to the museum. All the collections of the archive of the Secretariate of State antedating 1860 are included in the secret archives; later papers are preserved in a special archive on the third story of the palace, where is also the archive of the Congregation for Extraordinary Ecclesiastical Affairs. This archive admits no investigator, and questions on particular points addressed to it by scholars have failed to receive pertinent answers. As may be deduced from the already published earlier Acts of the archive of the Papal Ceremoniare, the volumes of this archive contain very interesting information. The extremely valuable archive of the Cappella Sistina, the papal choir, is deposited in the Vatican Library, though only in the character of a loan. Special archives are possessed by the administrations of the majordomo, the maestro di camera, the master of the sacred palace, the administrations of the Peterspence, the Elemosineria, the Computesteria, the Floreria, the maestro di casa, the three corps of guards, and the gendarmes. Other archives are too unimportant for mention here. There is at present some thought of gradually uniting with the secret archives the most important of the above collections and other ecclesiastical archives existing in Rome outside the Vatican.

B. THE VATICAN LIBRARY

The Vatican Library is the first among the great libraries of the world in the importance of its materials, but in the number of its manuscripts a few libraries surpass it, and in the number of printed books it is surpassed by many. This condition but accords with its historical development: the Vatican was founded as a manuscript library, has always been regarded as such, and is to-day administered as such by those in charge. The printed books which have been acquired, either through inheritance, or gift or by purchase, are intended solely to facilitate and promote the study of the manuscripts. This fact must be borne in mind to understand the attitude of the administration of the library. (Consult Barbier de Montault, "La Bibliothèque Vaticane et ses annexes", Rome, 1867. A number of essays on the library are contained in: "Al Sommo Pontefice Leone XIII. Omaggio giubilare della Biblioteca Vaticana", Rome, 1889; "Nel Giubileo Episcopate di Leone XIII. Omaggio della Biblioteca Vaticana", Rome, 1893. The former contains the pertinent literature.)

(1) The Manuscripts

The whole fund of manuscripts may be divided into closed (historical) and open collections. The former are collections which came to the library complete, and are administered as one entity. As no additional manuscripts from the same sources can henceforth be obtained, these collections form a unit with a numerus clausus. The open collections are those to which are added new acquisitions made by the library (either separately or a few together), which do not form a complete collection in themselves. Separated according to the languages of the manuscripts, there are sixteen open, and thirty-six closed, divisions; the open all bear the name of "Codices Vaticani", while the closed are known according to their origin. Scientific access to these treasures is facilitated by the Indices, concerning which we shall speak below. The following details, based on information supplied by Father Ehrle, S.J., prefect of the library, are the most accurate that have ever been given of the Vatican collections. The figures for the open collections represent the state of the library on 1 December, 1911; owing to the acquisition of new manuscripts, these figures are gradually increasing, especially those for the first two categories-Latini and Græci.

• Vaticani Latini. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,150
• Vaticani Græci . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,330
• Vaticani Hebraici. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 599
• Vaticani Syraici . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 472
• Vaticani Arabici . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935
• Vaticani Turcici . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
• Vaticani Persiani. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
• Vaticani Coptici . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
• Vaticani Æthiopici . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
• Vaticani Slavi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
• Vaticani Rumanici. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
• Vaticani Georgiani . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
• Vaticani Armeni. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
• Vaticani Indiani . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
• Vaticani Sinici. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
• Vaticani Samaritani. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
• Burghesiani. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381
• Notai d'Orange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377
• Palatini Latini. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,017
• Palatini Græci . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 432
• Urbinates Latini . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,767
• Urbinates Græci . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
• Urbinates Hebraici. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
• Reginæ Latini. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,103
• Reginæ Græci . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
• Reginæ Pii II Græci. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
• Ottoboniani Latini . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,394
• Ottoboniani Græci . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 472
• Capponiani . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288
• Barberini Latini . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,000
• Barberini Græci . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 590
• Barberini Orientales. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
• Borgiani Latini. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 760
• Borgiani Græci . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
• Borgiani Syriaci . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
• Borgiani Coptici . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
• Borgiani Hebraici. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
• Borgiani Arabici . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276
• Borgiani Persiani. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
• Borgiani Turcici . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
• Borgiani Armeni. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
• Borgiani Indiani . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
• Borgiani Tonsinici . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
• Borgiani Sinici. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 521
• Borgiani Illyrici. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
• Borgiani Æthiopici . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
• Borgiani Georgiani . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
• Borgiani Hibernici . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
• Borgiani Islandici . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
• Borgiani Slavi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

The total of the collections reaches 40,658 manuscripts, to which must be added between 8000 and 10,000 manuscripts in the two Barberini archives, and still awaiting detailed examination and arrangement. There are, therefore in the Vatican Library some 50,000 manuscripts; the first sixteen sections are the above-mentioned open collections; the others are all closed. The collection of Manuscripta Zeladiana was given to Toledo, while the printed books of the same collection remained in the Vatican Library. The Codices Vaticani in various languages are traceable to the old collections of the library of the fifteenth century or to the growth of the library; to this collection new departments have been gradually added.

(2) Printed Books

No exact calculation of the number of printed books has been yet undertaken. Estimates conscientiously made yield the following figures:

• Bibliotheca Leonina (consultation library) . . . 60-70,000
• Bibliotheca Barberini (closed department). . . . 25-30,000
• Bibliotheca Palatina (closed department) . . . . 10-12,000
• Bibliotheca Zeladiana (closed department). . . . 4-5,000
• Bibliotheca Mai (closed department). . . . . . . 25-30,000
• Prima Raccolta (closed department) . . . . . . . 10-11,000
• Raccolta Generale. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200,000

The total of printed books is thus in round numbers 350,000, which may be said to constitute a very considerable library. The Consultation Library is, as its name suggests, composed of works which immediately promote or facilitate the study of the manuscripts. The Prima Raccolta is the collection of books which was formed in the Vatican between 1620 and 1630; in the Raccolta Generale are gathered all the works (arranged according to the various branches of knowledge) which have been secured by the Vatican at any period or will hereafter be secured, provided that they do not specially pertain to the Consultation Library. The name of the other collections are quickly explained: Barberini, because it emanated from the princely house of that name; Palatina, because it came to Rome from the Heidelberg library of the Elector Palatine (Palatinus elector); Zeladiana, because it belonged to the effects of Cardinal Zelada; Mai, part of the effects of Cardinal Mai. Among all these books are found a larger percentage of rarities than is usual in comprehensive libraries.

(3) The Accommodation of the Manuscripts and Books

The manuscripts are accommodated in their old, low-sized, painted wooden cases, which are distributed along the walls of the halls of the library. When removed from the cases the greatest care is necessary lest anything should be lost. As there are various ways in which damage might be done to the manuscripts, the library administration has prevailed on the Prefect of the Apostolic Palaces to establish eight fire-proof magazines into which they may be transferred. For these magazines have been utilized a portion of the old reading room, the room of the cardinal librarian, and two other rooms. This alteration was made possible only by the removal of the Vatican Printing Office into new quarters. As the halls of the printing office lay below the old reading-room, and right beside the rooms in which the Bibliotheca Barberini has been accommodated, these halls were easily annexed to the library. The new reading-room was then established on the ground floor, and fitted with a water-power elevator for the transferring of manuscripts from the magazines situated immediately overhead; this afforded greater security and convenience, the manuscripts being more promptly procured. All these innovations were of great importance for the promotion of studies. The reading-room is convenient to the Consultation Library, and contains almost twice as many desks as the old reading-room.

All the work in the new magazines was completed at the beginning of 1912, and the transference of the manuscripts begun. The two Barberini Archives now stand on the third floor of the new magazines. In consequence of this reconstruction work, the printed books will be arranged as follows: Among the smaller rooms of the former printing office is a cabinet for the Prefect of the Library, a hall for the Bibliotheca Mai and other rooms in which the Heidelberg books (Palatini) and portions of the Raccolta Generale are to be accommodated. Two halls will be devoted to the Biblioteca Barberini, a book collection of very high value. In the hall of the Consultation Library with its two antechambers will be placed, in addition to the Consultation Library proper, the Autori Classici and the two departments of biography and history (the Collezioni Generali). To the old presses for the manuscripts in the state-halls of the library, now vacated, will be transferred the collections on canon and civil law, the works on art and its history, and the remainder of the Raccolta Generale, in so far as it is not accommodated in the old printing offices.

(4) Inventories and Catalogues

Inventories and Catalogues which are essential for the guidance of the reader, are available for both manuscripts and printed books. They are either in manuscript or printed. Those for the manuscripts consist of 170 volumes of manuscript and 17 volumes of printed inventories. The preparation of the Latin inventories was begun in 1594. All the inventories are in the reading-room; catalogues for the printed books are to be found partly in the reading-room, and partly in the Consultation Library.

The preparation of manuscript catalogues for special divisions of the manuscripts was begun at an early date. All of these are still retained in their manuscript form; their printing was commenced as early as the seventeenth century. For example, Anastasius Kirscher published a catalogue of the Coptica Vaticana in his "Prodromo Coptico" (1636); in the years 1675-93 appeared a detailed catalogue of the Hebraica by Giulio Bartolocci, in 1747 the catalogue of the Capponiana, and in 1821 that of the Cicognara collection. Apart from these and similar publications, there are in the reading-room fifteen volumes of printed inventories of manuscripts: (1) Mai, "Catalogus codicum Bibliothecæ Vaticanæ (Orientalia)" (1831). (2-4) Assemani S.E. and J.S., "Bibliothecæ apostolicæ Vaticanæ Codicum Manuscriptorum Catalogus": I, "Codices Ebraici et Samaritani" (1756); II, III, "Codices chaldaici sive syriaci" (1758, 1759). (5) Stevenson (sen.), "Codices Palatini græci" (1885). (Cf. Syllburgius, "Catalogus librorum manuscriptorum græcorum in Bibliotheca Palatina Electorali" in "Monumenta pietatis et literaria virorum . . . illustrium selecta", Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1702.) "Codices græci Reginæ Sueciæ et Pii II" (1888). (6) Feron and Battaglini, "Codices Ottoboniani græci" (1893). (7) Stornajolo, "Codices Urbinates græci" (1895). (8) Stevenson (jun.), "Codices Palatini latini", I (1886). (9) Salvo-Cozzo, "Codici Capponiani" (1897). (10) Vatasso and Franchi de' Cavalieri, "Codices Vaticani latini", I (codd. 1-678), 1902. (11-12) Stornajolo, "Codices Urbinates latini", I (1902), codd. 1-500; II (1912), 500-1000. (13-15) Marucchi, "Monumenta papyracea ægyptia" (1891). "Monumenta papyracea latina" (1895). "Il grande papiro egicio della Biblioteca Vaticana" (1889).

There are in addition six special catalogues, not compiled by the officials of the library: (1) Poncelet "Catalogus Codicum hagiographicorum latinorum" (1910). (2) "Hagiographi Bollandiani et Franchi de' Cavalieri, Pius. Catalogus codicum hagiographicorum græcorum" (1899). (3) Ehreneberger, "Libri liturgici manuscripti" (1897). (4) Forcella, "Catalogo dei manoscritti riguardanti la storia di Roma, che si conservano nella Biblioteca Vaticana" (4 vols., Rome, 1879-85). (5) Bertini, "Codici Vaticani riguardanti la Storia Nobiliare" (Rome, 1906). (6) Crispo-Moncada, "I Codici Arabi, nuovo fondo della Biblioteca Vaticana" (Palermo, 1900).

The volumes by Stevenson on the Codices Palatini have been revised by de Rossi, who prefixed his renowned treatise: "De Origine, Historia, Indicibus Scrinii et Bibliothecæ Sedis Apostolicæ Commentatio", pp. cxxxii (cf. also de Rossi, "La Biblioteca della Santa Sede Apostolica ed i Cataloghi dei suoi manoscritti", 1884). Four other inventories on the Codices latini, Urbinates græci, and Vaticani græci are in the press. A further volume on the Vaticani latini and one on the Borgiani arabici are also in preparation. For the books of the consultation library there is an exhaustive card catalogue according to the system of Staderini. For the collections of the Prima Raccolta there are seven folio volumes of Indices, and for these two volumes of inventories. A manuscript catalogue of the incunabula ("Editiones Sæculi XV Bibliothecæ Vaticanæ", in large folio), in three volumes with appendix, also stands in the consultation library. Of the exceedingly valuable Miscellanea bequeathed by de Rossi there is a bulky manuscript inventory of 1898 and an alphabetical index. The Biblioteca Barberini has its old excellent catalogue in imperial folio, ten of the volumes being accessible to the public. For the other departments there are also catalogues, e.g. twenty volumes for the Raccolta Generale, a catalogue of the Zeladiana in Cod. Vat. Lat. 9198, etc., which upon request is placed at the disposal of scholars in exceptional cases. Among the printed catalogues of books is that of Enrico Stevenson, Jun., "Inventario dei libri stampati Palatino-Vaticani" (1886-91). The authorities of the Vatican Library are preparing (1912) a "Catalogo dei cataloghi mss. della Biblioteca Vaticana", which will be of high scientific and practical interest. It will show that as early as the sixteenth century the Vatican Library possessed catalogues of such perfection that we admire them even to-day.

All readers who wish to use only printed literature are carefully excluded from the library. In view of the exclusively manuscript character of the Vatican as a scientific institution, this is readily comprehensible. The accommodations of the Vatican Library are entirely inadequate to meet the demands of the general public in search of printed books. Should the Vatican Library thus lose its unique position, the other large libraries of Rome instituted for the consultation of printed books, would suffer. Furthermore, the present conditions have been sanctioned by the past, and have been fully tested by experience. (Consult Ehrle, "Zur Gesch. der Katalogisierung der Vaticana" in "Historisches Jahrbuch der Görres-Gesellschaft", 1890, 718-27.)

(5) Manuscript-repairing and Bookbinding Department

The Vatican has always possessed a bookbinding department, and also a department for renovating manuscripts as well as the skill of the period allowed. In the last decades special chemico-scientific attention has been devoted to the preservation and freshening of faded parchment manuscripts as well as to the preservation of paper manuscripts whose existence is wholly or partially threatened by a corroding ink. One of the most successful library boards in these investigations is that of the Vatican, which has since 1896 extensively employed every discovery that contributed to the preservation of its manuscript treasures. At the proposal of the prefect of the Vaticana an international conference to consider the question of the preservation of manuscripts assembled at St. Gall in the summer of 1898, and its consultations were attended with the greatest success (cf. Posee, "Handschriften-Konservierung. nach den Verhandlungen der St. Gallener Internationalen Konferenz zur Erhaltung und Ausbesserung alter Handschriften von 1898, sowie der Dresdener Konferenz deutscher Archivare von 1899", Dresden, 1899). A series of model restorations were made in the Vatican repair-shop, not only of its own valuable manuscripts, but also those of ecclesiastical possession elsewhere. In his "Note upon the Present State of the Vercelli Gospel" in the "Second Report of the Revision of the Vulgate" (Rome, 1911, pp. 20 sqq.), Abbot Gasquet describes a particularly difficult work of this kind. Besides these works, which are performed by specially trained and careful workers, the binding of the manuscripts is also undertaken, the arms of the reigning pope and of the present cardinal librarian being placed on the binding. The coats of arms are omitted from the covers of printed books. A fire, which broke out in this shop some years ago, caused little damage, but it led to the introduction throughout the whole library of mechanical appliances against fire. In this respect the Vatican surpasses every other library.

(6) The Publications of the Vatican Library

The administration of the Vatican Library makes it its aim, since the fundamental reorganization of the whole institution by the prefect, Father Ehrle, S.J. (who resigned his place voluntarily to Father Ratti of Milan in 1912), to employ officials with a view to their own literary productions. This policy, which in a comparatively short time has produced splendid results, has made possible six great undertakings of fundamental importance for science. The first collection bears the title: "Codices e Vaticanis selecti, phototypice expressi, jussu Pii Papæ X, consilio et opera procuratorum Bibliothecæ Vaticanæ. Series major". This work deals with the most important and beautiful manuscripts of the Vatican; by phototype reproduction, these become accessible to persons unable to visit Rome. Eleven volumes of this collection have appeared: (1) "Fragmenta et Picturæ Vergilianæ codicis Vaticani 3225" (60 francs; edition exhausted); (2) "Picturæ, Ornamenta, complura scripturæ Specimina codicis Vaticani 3867, qui codex Vergilii Romanus audit" (100 francs; edition exhausted); (3) "Miniature del Pontificale Ottoboniano: codex Vat. Ottobon. 501" (25 francs); (4) "Bibliorum SS. Græcorum codex Vaticanus 1209 (codex B) Pars prima: Vetus Testamentum", I, 1-394 (230 francs); II, 395-944 (320 francs); III, 945-1234 (150 francs); "Pars altera: Novum Testamentum" (170 francs); the scientific introduction to this work will appear in 1912; (5) "Il Rotulo di Giosue, codex Vatic. Palat. graecus 431" (160 francs); (6) "L'originale del Canzoniere di F. Petrarca, codex Vatic. 3195" (100 francs); (7) "Frontonis aliorumque fragmenta, quæ codice vaticano 5750 rescripto comprehenduntur" (300 francs); (8) "Il menologio greco dell' imperatore Basilio II (976-1025), cod. Vatic. græcus 1613" (400 francs); (9) "Cassii Dionis Cocceiani Historiarum Romanorum lib. LXXIX, LXXX, quæ supersunt, cod. Vatic. græc. 1288. Præfatus est Pius Franchi de' Cavaliere" (50 francs); (10) "Le Miniature della Topografia Cristiana di Cosma Indicopleuste, cod. Vatic. græc. 699. Con introduzione di Msgr. Cosimo Stornajolo" (120 francs); (11) "I disegni di Giuliano da Sangallo: Codex Vatic. Barber. lat. 4424. Con introduzione del Prof. Dott. C. Hulsen" (400 francs). Three volumes are already in the press and to be issued during 1912: (1) "Paleo-grafia Musicale Vaticana. Con introduzione di M. Bannister M.A."; (2) "Ciceronis Liber 'De Republica' rescriptus. Cod. Vatic. 5757"; (3) "Terentii Com diæ picturis illustratæ. Cod. Vatic. 3868".

With this Series major is associated as a second undertaking the Series minor, of which the following two volumes have appeared: (1) "Miniature delle Omilie di Giacomo Monaco (cod. Vatic. Urbin. græc. 1162) e dell' Evangelario Greco urbinate (cod. Vatic. Urbin. græc. 2). Con breve prefazione e sommaria descrizione di Msgr. Cosimo Stornajolo" (40 francs); (2) "Pagine scelte di due codici appartenenti alla Badia di S. Maria di Coupar-Angus in Scozia. Con una breve descrizione di H.M. Bannister M.A. Contributo alla storia della scrittura insulare" (5 francs). Of the third undertaking, the "Collezione Paleografica Vaticana", a single fascicle has appeared: "Le Miniature della Bibbia: Codex Vatic. Regin. græc. 1 e del Saltario: Codex Vatic. Palat. graec. 381" (55 francs). The fourth collection is called "Collezioni Archeologiche, Artistiche e Numismatiche dei Palazzi Apostolici, pubblicate per ordine di Sua Santità, a cura della Biblioteca Vaticana, dei Musei e delle Gallerie Pontificie". For this work the collaboration of the officials not alone of the library, but also of the museums and galleries, has been requisitioned. Four volumes have already appeared: (1) "Gli avori dei Musei Profano e Sacro della Biblioteca Vaticana, pubblicati per cura della medesima, con introduzione del Barone Rodolfo Kanzler" (edition exhausted); (2) "Le Nozze Aldobrandine, i paesaggi con scene dell' Odissea e le altre pitture murali antiche conservate nella Biblioteca Vaticana e nèi Musei Pontifici. Con introduzione del Comm. B. Nogara" (250 francs); (3) "Le Monete e le Bolle Plumbee Pontificale del Medagliere Vaticano, descritte ed illustrate dal Cav. C. Serafini. Tome I (615-1572)" (80 francs), with introduction by Le Grelle, "Saggio di storia delle collezioni numismatiche Vaticane"; (4) "I Mosaici antiehi conservati nei Palazzi Pontifici del Vaticano e del Laterno. Con introduzione del Comm. B. Nogara" (200 francs). In the press are (1) Nogara and Pinza, "La Tomba Regolini Galassi e gli altri materiali coevi dei Museo Gregoriano-Etrusco. Voll. 4 (3 di testo ed. 1 di tavole)"; (2) Nogara, "I vasi antichi del Museo Etrusco e della Biblioteca Vaticana".

The fifth collection, "Le Piante Maggiori di Roma nel Secolo XVI e XVII, riprodotte in fototipia a cura della Biblioteca Vaticana. Con introduzione di Francesco Ehrle, S.J.", is the result of the personal research of the prefect of the Vatican. It embraces six numbers and two supplements: (1) "Roma al tempo di Giulio III. La Lianta di Roma di Leonardo Bufalini del 1551, riprodotta per la prima volta dalla stampa originale" (20 francs); (2) "Roma prima di Sisto V. La Lianta di Roma Du Pérac-Lafréry del 1577. Contributo alla storia del commercio delle stampe a Roma nel secolo XVI e XVlI" (15 francs); (3) "Roma al tempo di Urbano VIII (1623-1644). La Pianta di Roma Maggi-Maupin-Losi, di quaranta fogli, riprodotta da uno dei tre esemplari completi, fin adesso conosciuti" (in the press); (4) "Roma al tempo di Paolo V (1605-1621). La Pianta di Antonio Tempesta del 1606" (in preparation); (5) "Roma al tempo di Urbano VIII (1632-1644). La Pianta di Roma pubblicata da Goert van Schayck (Gottifredo Scaichi) nel 1630" (in preparation); (6) "Roma al tempo di Innocenzo XI (1676-1689). La Pianta di Roma di Giovanni Battista Falda del 1676" (in preparation). Supplements: (1) "La grande Veduta Maggi-Mascardi (1615) dei Tempio e del Palazzo Vaticano, stampata coi nomi originali. Con introduzione di Francesco Ehrle" (to appear shortly); (2) "La Pianta della Campagna Romana del 1547, in sei fogli, riprodotta in fototipia della copia Vaticana, unica finora. Con introduzione di Tommaso Ashby" (in preparation).

As the last and most comprehensive, and furthermore, on account of the smaller expense in preparation, the most accessible, collection is the "Studi e Testi". The twenty-three fascicles which have already appeared contain either the results of systematic research among the Vatican manuscripts with a definite purpose, or shavings and parings which fall from the work-table while more important works are being accomplished. From the following arrangement of the works according to authors this twofold distinction becomes apparent. Marco Vatasso has published fascicles 1, 2, 4, 10, 14, 16, 17, 18, and 20: (1) "Antonio Flaminio e le principali poesie dell' autografo Vaticano 2870"; (2) "Le due Bibbie di Bovino, ora codici Vaticani latini 10510, 10511, e le loro note storiche"; (3) "Aneddoti in dialet to romanesco del secolo XIV, tratti dal codice Vatic. 7654"; (4) "Per la storia del dramma sacro in Italia"; (5) "Del Petrarca e di alcuni suoi amici"; (6) "Initia Patrum aliorumque scriptorum ecclesiasticorum ex Mignei Patrologia et ex compluribus aliis libris conlecta" (2 vols.); (7) "Frammenti d'un Livio del quinto secolo recentemente scoperti: Codice Vaticano latino 10696"; (8) "I codici Petrarchesehi della Biblioteca Vaticana". Pio Franchi de' Cavalieri published fascicles 3, 6, 8, 9, 19, and 22: (1) "La Passio SS. Mariani et Jacobi"; (2) "I Martiri di S. Teodoto di Ancisa e di S. Ariadne di Prinnesso con un' appendice sul testo originale del Martirio di S. Eleutherio"; (3) "Note agiografiche: a. Ancora del martirio di S. Ariadne; b. Gli Atti di S. Giustino"; (4) "Nuove Note agiografiche: c. Il testo originale del martirio di Agape, Irene e Chione; d. Gli Atti di S. Crispina. e. I Martiri della Massa Candida. f. Di una probabile fonte della leggenda dei SS. Giovanni e Paolo"; (5) "Hagiographica: a. Osservazioni sulle leggende dei SS. Martiri Mena e Trifone. b. Della legenda di S. Pancrazio Romano. c. Intorno ad alcune reminiscenze classiche nelle leggende agiografiche del secolo IV"; (6) "Note agiografiche, fascicolo terzo".

Giovanni Mercati published the fascicles 5, 7, 11, 12, and 15: (1) "Note di letteratura biblica e cristiana antica"; (2) "Antiche reliquie ambrosiano-romane, con un excursus sui frammenti dogmatici ariani del Mai"; (3) "Varia Sacra: Fasc. 1. a. Anonymi Chiliastæ in Matthæum Fragmenta. b. Alcuni supplementi agli scritti dei Dottori Cappadoci e di S. Cirillo Alessandrino"; (4) a. "Un frammento delle ipotiposi di Clemente Alessandrino. b. Paralipomena Ambrosiana con alcuni appunti sulle benedizioni del Cereo pasquale"; (5) "Opuscoli inediti del Beato Cardinal Giuseppe Tommasi tratti in luce". Enrico Carusi published fascicle 21: "Dispacci e lettere di Giacomo Gherardi, nunzio Pontificio a Firenze e Milano 1487-1490". Eugene Tisserant published fascicle 23: "Codex Zugninensis rescriptus Veteris Testamenti. Texte grec des manuscrits Vatican Syriaque 162 et. Mus. Brit." Additionel 14665, édité avec introduction et notes. Of the published fascicles there still remains: "Catalogo sommario della Esposizione Gregoriana aperta nella Biblioteca Vaticana dal 7 all' 11 Aprile, 1904, a cura della Direzione della medesima Biblioteca. Ediz. seconda." In the press is: Mercati and Ferrini, "Basilicorum paratitla". The following are in preparation: (1) Mercati, "Psalmorum hexaplorum reliquiæ e codice rescripto Ambrosiano"; (2) Vatasso, "Cronache Forlivesi di Maestro Giovanni de Pedrino (1411-1464). Una versione in dialetto del secolo XIV delle Armonie evangeliche d'Ammonio"; (3) Carusi, "Diario di Fiorenza dall'anno 1482, di Giusto d'Anghiari"; (4) Nogara, "Il libro XXXII della Storia d'Italia di Flavio Biondo dai codici Vatic. 1940-1946". All these collections may advantageously be used as works of reference on the Vatican Libary. The Vatican stands at the head of the world's libraries in its number of scientific publications, despite its comparatively small staff and insufficient funds.

(7) The Administration of the Vatican Library

Since the time of Marcello Cervini, the first cardinal who was named (1548) librarian of the Apostolic Library, this official has borne the honorary title of Protettore della Biblioteca Vaticana. In him is vested in general the supreme direction of the library, which he represents in all questions and under all circumstances relating to the library as a whole or to the administration in general. Under him there is, for the technical and scientific management of the library, a prefect -- formerly there were two -- who has to decide all questions referring to the ordinary administration and to issue such instructions as these questions may demand. The position of assistant librarian, revived by Leo XIII, is at present vacant. For the chief language or groups of languages represented in the Vatican manuscripts there are six ordinary and five honorary scriptores, to whom is entrusted the scientific cultivation of the departments committed to them. Thus, including the prefect, there are twelve scientific general officials. For the collections connected with the library, e.g. the Cabinet of Coins and Medals (Il Medagliere) and the Christian Museum (Museo Sacro), there are four directors, whose duty is the scientific supervision of their collections. Under the supervision of one of the scriptores, six assistants discharge all the duties connected with the printed books, besides superintending special portions of the library. The prefect is assisted by a secretary, who has in addition the duty of keeping the accounts. Seven bidelli (library attendants) bring the manuscripts and books to the readers, transfer the departments to their new quarters when a change has been determined on, and keep everything in order in the Consultation Library. In the repair-shop and book-bindery four men are permanently employed.

The salaries of the officials are exceedingly modest. No official, not even the prefect, receives more than fifty dollars a month. The title of "Scriptor of the Vatican Library" has been held by such men as Giovanni de Rossi, Mariano Rampolla del Tindaro, Stevenson, and many others, and is to-day borne by such world-famous scholars as Mercati, Franchi de' Cavalieri, Vatasso, etc. The annual budget of the library is the ridiculously small sum of 6000 dollars. On extraordinary occasions great loans have been secured -- e.g., $100,000 when the Barberini Library was purchased. During his term of office, Father Ehrle raised the budget to about 7000 dollars by obtaining contributions from his friends and acquaintances. In all financial questions the library is subordinate to the Prefecture of the Apostolic Palaces. The archives of the library contain no acts extending back beyond the time of the first cardinal librarian; more recent administrative acts are, however, complete. In earlier times all manuscripts whose publication was adjudged untimely, dangerous, likely to cause misunderstandings etc., were marked on the back with a small black cross. When such a codex was asked for, the prefect decided whether or not it should be delivered to the particular scholar. This custom led to distinctions not always of a very agreeable kind, and was entirely discontinued by Father Ehrle, so that any scholar can procure without further ceremony any manuscript which he desires. In the case of the exceptionally valuable codices or those which have to be handled with special care, the readers must observe all the directions which the prefect has found it necessary to impose.

The administration shows the greatest complaisance in its dealings with scholars, and admits outside the regular four-hour period of study those whose time is very limited. The same rule applies to Thursday, which is a free day, and to the holidays proper. The library is open from 1 October to 27 June -- in winter from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m., and in summer from 8 a.m. to 12 noon. On all Thursdays, feasts, certain memorial days, the holidays of Christmas, the Carnival, and Easter, and on some other occasions, it is closed. The library ordinances issued by Sixtus V are carved in marble at the entrance. These have received timely alterations in the "Chirographa" of Clement XII, Benedict XIV, and Clement XIII, as well as in the Decree "Ex audientia Sanctissimi" of Pius IX; in particular, a number of the holidays which proved especially burdensome to strangers have been abolished. By Motu Proprio of 9 September, 1878, Leo XIII made further alterations, among others the revival of the office of assistant librarian. Finally, on 21 March, 1885, the same pontiff issued a new "Regolamento della Biblioteca Vaticana" together with a "Calendario per l'apertura e per lo studio e servizio della B. Vaticana". After these regulations had remained in force for a three years' trial, they were revised and raised to a permanent law by Motu Proprio of 1 October, 1888, which is still binding.

(8) The Collections connected with the Library

The exhibition in the library halls of the costly presents received by the popes in the course of the last hundred years from emperors, kings, princes, and rich private persons, has converted some of these halls into a museum, which, while possessing great attraction for strangers and decorating the rooms, is without any real scientific value. Countless other objects, however, have been collected for scientific reasons. A beginning was made by Benedict XIV (1740-58), when in 1744 he bought the magnificent collection of old Christian glasses belonging to Cardinal Gaspare Carpegna and transferred them to the library. This collection forms the basis of the celebrated Museo Cristiano. Next comes the Vettori collection of gems, the second great acquisition of the same pontiff. During the nineteenth century this museum grew to such an extent, owing to the excavations in the catacombs, that the largest pieces (such as the sarcophagi, the inscriptions, mosaics etc.) had to be transferred to the Lateran, where a second Museo Cristiano of greater importance has been established.

The remaining most valuable objects of the lesser arts of gold, silver, bronze, enamel, glass, bone, ivory, lead, etc., form an unrivalled collection of its kind. The well-known medallion with the heads of Sts. Peter and Paul, the golden pectoral cross found on the Campo Verano (to which de Rossi has devoted a special monograph), the triptych of Penicaud of Limoges, and many other objects belong to the chief glories of this museum. Baron Kanzler has published an édition de luxe on the collection of ivory carvings. The above-named Vettori was the first custodian of this collection, which was later placed immediately under the prefect of the library. Under Leo XIII Giovanni Battista de Rossi was named prefect of the museum, an honour intended only for him. To-day the directors of this division are again subordinate to the prefect of the library.

The Medagliere or numismatic collection was opened in 1555 under Marcellus II. Clement XII (1730-40) added many objects to the collection, but Benedict XIV (1740-48) became its great benefactor, by acquiring the incomparable Albani collection. This glorious cabinet of coins is described by Venuti in his "Antiqua Numismata maximi moduli ex Museo Cardinalis Albani in Vaticanam Bibliothecam translata" (2 vols., Rome, 1739-44). The acquisition of the Carpegna and Scilla collections also falls into this period. Many of the objects were sold by the French or -- a fact which could not be detected in individual cases -- were secretly incorporated in the Paris collection, so that the Medagliere returned to Rome greatly diminished. Pius VII resumed the task of collecting, and the department was continually increased, the Ranchi collection being recently added (1901) at the expense of 64,000 lire ($12,800). After the discarding of valuable duplicates, for which 32,000 lire was obtained, the Medagliere stands again at the grand total of 70,000 pieces. Among its most celebrated exhibits are the uninjured s grave and the oldest papal coins. The custodian Serafini has recently issued the first volume of the scientific description of this collection.

The objects of pagan art in gold, silver, amber, etc., which came to the Holy See with the Museo Carpegna, the carved stones, enamels, glasses, carved ivories, figurines, etc., and the small bronze busts and tablets were accommodated by Pius VI in magnificent cases at the end of the long manuscript gallery at the entrance to the museum. Such was the foundation of the Pagan Museum, which to-day stands under the direction of Commendatore Nogara, and to which other Cimelia were later added. The department is subordinate to the prefecture of the library. Connected with this department (although not in the same hall) is the collection of ancient pagan frescoes begun by Pius VII when he purchased the Aldobrandini "Marriage". Under Gregory XVI and Pius IX further frescoes, obtained from the walls of the old Roman houses, were added. The hall in which these pieces are exhibited was painted by Guido Reni. Beside them are the brick stamps (classified and bequeathed by Marini), a kind of factory mark impressed by the ancients on the bricks, which is of the highest importance for the chronology of classical buildings. Here were also the 33 majolica plates which Leo XIII had conveyed from Castel Gandolfo to Rome, but which are now in the Appartamento Borgia. Concerning the Aldobrandini "Marriage" and analogous objects Nogara has published an édition de luxe.

The hall for the Latin papyrus documents, richly fitted with costly marbles, was magnificently painted by Raphael Mengs. Here are collected more documents belonging to the period 444 to 854 than are contained in any other collection in the world. The collection was begun by Paul V, continued by Clement XII and Benedict XIV, while the costly decorations were completed by Pius VII. In each of the twenty-four receptacles in the walls are from one to three papyrus fragments. Besides the monumental work of Gaetano Marinis, "Papyri diplomatici", Marucchi has recently treated the "Monumenta papyracea latina." The Cabinet of Drawings and Engravings contains originals by Sandro Botticelli, Raphael, Mantegna, and many other woodcuts and steel engravings, extending back to the time of Albrecht Dürer. This is a small but excellent collection. In the former Chapel of Pius V were once preserved the addresses received by Pius IX, Leo XIII, and Pius X from all the countries of the world. Begun in 1867, the collection was recently transferred to the Casino di Pio IV in the Vatican Gardens when this hall had to be used for the special purposes of the library, but still remains under the direction of the prefect of the library. In similar manner the pre-Raphaelite paintings of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries and a number of Byzantine tablets, which were accommodated in special halls of the library, have been transferred to the picture-gallery.

(9) History of the Library

Like every great church, that of Rome found it necessary from the beginning to form a collection of archival materials and books. This was of the greatest importance for the transaction of business, for the scientific pursuit of theology, for reference etc. Owing to the frequent change of the Curial headquarters, the wars and sieges of Rome, and numerous other vicissitudes, the collections of this kind have suffered great damage. The fate of the old papal library has been the subject of many inquiries, of which the most scholarly is that of de Rossi (referred to above) and the most extensive that of Ehrle ("Die Frangipani und der Untergang des Archivs und der Bibliothek der Päpste am Anfang des 13. Jahrhunderts" in "Mélanges offerts a M. Emile Chatelain . . . par ses élèves et ses amis 15 avril 1910", Paris, 1910). The following may be also consulted: Zanelli, "La Biblioteca Vaticana della sua origine fino al presente" (Rome, 1857), and Faucon, "La Librairie des Papes d'Avignon, sa formation, sa composition, ses catalogues (1316-1420)" (Paris, 1887). For the new acquisitions made down to the present day the only reliable source is Carini, "La Biblioteca Vaticana proprietà della Santa Sede Memoria Storica" (Rome, 1892). (Cf. Crispo Moncada, "La Biblioteca Vaticana e Monsignor Isidoro Carini", Palermo, 1895.) What were the book treasures of the Holy See at the end of the thirteenth century, whence they came, how a new library was formed at Avignon, and how this library attained its greatest extent under Clement VI, may be learned from the above works, as may also the fate of these collections.

Martin V restored the seat of the Curia to Rome, and, both by exercising the right of spoil (see JUS SPOLI) and also by purchases, laid the foundation of a library, which was extended and enriched by Eugene IV. Under the latter pontiff the library contained 340 manuscripts, of which traces are still found in the "Fondo antico Vaticano". But the great humanist pope, Nicholas V (1447-55), was the true founder of the Vaticana, which may be regarded as the fourth papal library. This pontiff acquired the remains of the imperial library of Constantinople which had been scattered by the Turks, and was able to bequeath at this death 824 codices, of which a large number can be pointed out in the Vaticana to-day. The succeeding popes added smaller collections, and Sixtus IV gave a permanent basis to the library by the construction of its glorious halls. On the ground floor of the palace in the Cortile del Papagallo and under the Appartamento Borgia he had four halls painted by Melozzo da Forli and his pupil Ghirlandajo, with coloured windows by Hermannus Teutonicus. In three of these halls stood work tables, to which (as was then customary) the manuscripts were fastened with chains, while in the fourth were twelve chest-like receptacles and five presses filled with codices; the furniture of inlaid wood adorns to-day the Appartamento Borgia. The pope purchased the library of Gaspare da Sant'Angelo in 1482, employed numerous copyists, and encouraged his librarian Platina (appointed in 1475) to restore the Vaticana to its former position of renown. The library had a public division for the Latin and Greek languages, and a private section (afterwards transferred to Sant' Angelo), in which the documentary treasures of the Roman Church were preserved. Under Sixtus the collection grew to 2527 codices, of which 770 were Greek and 1757 Latin. (Cf. Fabre, "La Vaticana de Sixte IV" in "Mélanges d'archéol. et d'hist.", XV.)

The great growth of the Libreria Palatina, as it was called, continued, and under Innocent VIII it included 3650 manuscripts and printed works. Besides other acquisitions, Alexander VI secured forty Bobbio codices from Tommaso Inghirami; Julius II added new rooms to the four halls to provide sufficient space for the collection. Leo X donated to the library his own Greek codices (cf. Heiberg, "Les premiers manuscrits grecs de la Bibliothèque Papale", Copenhagen, 1892), so that under him the library contained 4070 books and manuscripts -- a number unexampled at that time. The first cardinal librarian and protector of the library, which office had previously been managed only by prelates, was Marcello Cervini, who was appointed in 1548. Cardinal Cervini (afterwards Marcellus II) presented to the library more than 240 codices and many books; about 250 others were added before the reign of Gregory XIII (1572-85), who conceived the plan of a new library building. This plan was realized by Sixtus V (1585-90) in 1588, through the instrumentality of Fontagna. The new building divided the huge court of the Belvedere into two parts, and thus originated the famous Salone Sistino della Libreria Vaticana -- giving to the library the name by which it was henceforth known. Cesare Nebbia and Giovanni Guerra painted the hall, which accommodated in elegant cases the treasures of the Vaticana. (Cf. Pansa, "Della Libreria Vaticana Ragionamenti", Rome, 1592; Roccha a Camerino, "Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana a Sixto V P. M. . . . translata", Rome, 1591; Müntz, "La Bibliothèque du Vatican au XVI siècle", Paris, 1886; Idem, "La Bibliothèque du Vatican au XV, siècle", Paris, 1887; Stevenson, "Topografia e Monumenti di Roma nelle pitture di Sisto V della Biblioteca Vaticana", Rome, 1898.)

Sixtus V had a work-room erected beside the Salone, and this was decorated with the paintings of the sibyls by Marco da Faenza and the landscapes of Paul Brill. Hither were transferred the wooden panelling and furnishings of the Palatina, carved by Giovannino dei Dolci. The brothers Guglielmo and Tommaso Sirleto, Antonio Carafa, and Marcantonio Colonna transferred their entire collections of manuscripts and prints to the Vaticana. The renowned scholar Orsini, who possessed the greatest private collection of the sixteenth century, was corrector (= scriptor) gr cus of the Vaticana, and in 1600 bequeathed to it 413 manuscripts (30 Italian, 270 Latin, and 113 Greek) with many printed works (cf. De Nolhac, "La Bibliothèque de Fulvio Orsini", Paris, 1887). The number of the Greek Codices Vaticani thus mounted from 1287 to 1400. Paul V transferred to the library 212 Greek and Latin Codices, 30 Bobbienses (presented by Silvarezza), and 100 manuscripts from the Biblioteca Altemps. He also purchased for 1974 scudi ($2000) 83 manuscripts from the effects of Prospero Podiani (1616), 25 Coptic from the effects of Raimondo (1614), the whole library of Cardinal Pole, and many other collections (see Batiffol, "La Vaticane de Paul III et Paul V", Paris, 1890; Idem, "L'abbaye de Rossano. Contribution à l'histoire de la Vaticane", Paris, 1891). Under Urban VIII the Latin codices grew to 6026 in 1627, and to 6458 in 1640; the number of Greek in 1630 was 1566. This pontiff added a room to the Salone Sistino, and in 1630 separated the office of prefect of the Archives from that of custodian of the library. He made great purchases of books, and, owing to the pressure brought upon him by the Ethiopian Hospice behind St. Peter's, donated his thirty-nine parchment manuscripts and some printed works to the Vaticana. In 1622 the Vaticana was presented with the Heidelberg Library (called the Palatina) by Elector Maximilian of Bavaria. This was accommodated in a newly-erected side wing of the palace, to the left of, and adjacent to, the Salone Sistino. To-day this collection contains 1996 Latin and 432 Greek codices, besides numerous printed works. (Cf. the inventories mentioned above; Theiner, "Schenkung der Heidelberger Bibliothek durch Maximilian I. an Gregor XV. und ihre Versendung nach Rom; mit Originalschriften", Munich 1844; Mazzi, "Leone Alacci e la Palatina di Heidelberg", Bologna, 1893; Wilke, "Gesch. der Heidelberger Buchersammlungen", 1817; Bahr, "Die Entführung der Heidelberger Bibliothek nach Rom", 1845; Wille, "Aus alter und neuer Zeit der Heidelberger Bibliothek", 1906; "Kirchl. Handlex.", s.v. "Heidelberg".)

Less than forty years after this great acquisition followed a second, when Alexander VII added to the Vaticana the manuscripts of the valuable library of the dukes of Urbino; the printed works were used as the nucleus for the library of the university founded by the popes (Sapienza), which consequently is even to-day known as the Alessandrina. The codices of the Urbino collection included 1767 latini et vulgares, 165 gr ci, and 128 hebraici et arabici. For the polemics concerning this amalgamation and an estimate of the value of the Bibliotheca urbinas consult Raffaelli, "La imparziale e veritiera Istoria della Unione della Biblioteca di Urbino alla Vaticana", Fermo, 1877; Valenti, "Trasferimento della Biblioteca Ducale d'Urbino a Roma", 1878. The valuable library of Christina Alexandra (q.v.) of Sweden, which passed from her heir Cardinal Decio Azzolini to his nephew Pompeo Azzolini, was purchased from the latter by Alexander VIII (1689-91) and added to the Vaticana. The duplicates were donated to the pope's nephew Cardinal Ottoboni, and the codices transferred to the Vatican archives. To the Vaticana then accrued 2102 Latin and 190 Greek manuscripts, which were placed in the gallery to the right of the Salone Sistino. In the same collection are still found 45 "Codices græci Pii Papæ II", added in 1754. (Cf. Manteyer, "Les manuscrits de la Reine Christine aux archives du Vatican" in "Mélanges d'archéol. et d'hist.", XVII, 1897.)

Although a number of Orientalia were formerly to be found in the Vaticana, Clement XI (1700-21) may be regarded as the real founder of the very extensive Oriental section of the library. He procured for it several hundred of these manuscripts, which he had purchased throughout the entire East through Oriental scholars specially commissioned for this task (see Carini, op. cit. sup.). Clement XIII added the whole collection of manuscripts belonging to the brothers Assemani and consisting of 202 Syro-Chaldean, 180 Arabian, and 6 Turkish manuscripts. Numerous smaller acquisitions were made, amounting in all to about 500 manuscripts. On 7 Dec., 1746, Benedict XIV purchased the "Fondo Capponiano" (288). For 5500 gold scudi he later purchased the whole collection of Cardinal Pietro Ottoboni (d. 1748), who possessed 3300 manuscripts, obtained partly from the Altemps and Sforza collections, and partly from the inheritance of Queen Christina. Including some later additions, there are now in the Ottoboniana 3394 Latin and 472 Greek codices. In this, as in the other above-mentioned closed collections, there are manuscripts of the highest value. (Cf. Ruggieri-Marini, "Memorie istoriche degli Archivi della Santa Sede e della Biblioteca Ottoboniana ora riunita alla Vaticana", Rome, 1825.) Under Clement XIV and Pius VI the Vaticana and collections associated with it underwent many vicissitudes. In 1797, 500 manuscripts were confiscated jure belli by the French Directory (cf. "Recensio Manuscriptorum, qui ex universa Bibliotheca Vaticana selecti procuratoribus Galliarum traditi fuere", Leipzig, 1803-very rare). Of these manuscripts all except 36 were restored to the Vaticana.

In the nineteenth century the Vaticana acquired, besides several hundred manuscripts, the papers of Angelo Mai, Gaetano Marini, Visconti, Mazzucchelli, and de Rossi, and a portion of the Maurinist correspondence through Cardinal Fesch. Through the purchase, by Leo XIII, of the manuscripts belonging to the Borghese family, almost 300 codices from the old Avignon library, which had found their way via Avignon-Aldobrandini to the Borghese, were thus restored to the Vaticana; furthermore, 100 real Burghesiani, purchased by the Borghese, were found in the collection. These acquisitions, with the archival materials which are found in the secret archives, cost 225,000 francs. A still more extensive library was purchased by Leo XIII for 525,000 francs in 1902, the Barberini Archive being then added to the Vaticana. The transference of the Codices Borgiani from the Propaganda to the Vaticana brought a very notable addition to the collection of Orientalia, besides adding to the Latin and Greek sections (see BORGIA, STEFFANO). These fnal and important additions of Leo XIII, together with the acquisition of the Codices Reginæ, Capponiani, Urbinates, and Ottoboniani, combine with the great Vaticani collection to form the Apostolic Library of the Vatican. (Cf. Carini, "Di alcuni lavori ed acquisiti della Biblioteca Vaticana nel pontificato di Leone XIII", Rome, 1892.)

(10) The Legal Status of the Library

The assertions that the Vatican Library was the property not of the Church or of the Holy See, but of the late Papal States, were meant to prepare the way for the eventual seizure of the library, or at least its withdrawal from the operation of the Law of Guarantees. These assertions called forth answers which made clear the baseless ignorance in historical matters of the inventors and propagators of this theory. Isidoro Carini (op. cit.), then prefect of the Vatican Library, by disclosing its general, and especially its financial, history, furnished the most convincing proof that it derived its income from ecclesiastical properties or the private chattels of the popes, that the library officials derived their salaries not from the state treasurer, but from the majordomo (a papal court official), and that in fine no sound argument could be brought forward to dislodge the Vaticana from its position among the private possessions of the Apostolic See. This demonstration was successful at every point.

C. THE SPECOLA VATICANA

A third centre of zealous scientific work at the Vatican is the observatory (see VATICAN OBSERVATORY).

D. THE GALLERIA LAPIDARIA (CORRIDOIO DELLE ISCRIZIONI)

Stimuli to scientific study arc offered in abundance by the Gallery of Inscriptions, which connects the Museo Chiaramonti with the Appartamento Borgia. No less than 6000 inscriptions in stone, as well as numberless cippi, sarcophagi, capitals, statues, architectonic fragments, and other remains, are here collected, and have recently been greatly increased. Gaetano Marini, the second founder of Latin epigraphy, systematically inserted in the walls on one side the Christian, and on the other the pagan, inscriptions. Begun under Clement XIV, and continued under Pius VI, the work was completed under Pius VII. Here took place the first memorable meeting between the young de Rossi and Cardinal Angelo Mai.

E. THE LOGGIE AND THE GALLERIA DELLA CARTE GEOGRAFICHE

The Loggie of Geographical Charts is situated on the third floor in the Cortile di San Damaso over the Loggie of Raphael. The gallery is adjacent to the Galleria degli Arazzi. The material offered in both places for the history of cartography has been as yet only incompletely utilized. The charts undoubtedly represent highly important achievements. The paintings date from the end of the sixteenth century, being executed by Antonio Dante according to the sketches of his brother Ignazio.

EUBEL, The Secret Vatican Archives in American Eccles. Review (January, 1896); HASKINS, The Vatican Archives in American Historical Review (October, 1896); IDEM in Catholic University Bulletin (April, 1897); SLADEN, The Secret of the Vatican (London, 1907); BERTZ, Italienische Reise l82l-23 in Archiv der Gesellschaft für altere deutsche Geschichtskunde, V (1824); cf. LÄMMER, Monumenta Vaticana historiam ecclesiasticam s c. XVI illustrantia (1861); DUDIK, Iter Romanum, II (Vienna, 1855); GACHARD, Les Archives du Vatican (Brussels, 1874); MUNCH, Aufschlüsse über das päpstliche Archiv, German tr. LÖWENFELD (Berlin 1880); GOTTLOB, Das vatikanische Archiv in Historisches Jahrbuch der Görres-Gesellschaft (1885); LÖWENFELD, Zur Gesch. des päpstlichen Archivs im Mittelalter in Zeitschr. für Kirchengesch, (1878); IDEM, Gesch. des päpstlichen Archivs bis zum Jahre 1817, ibid. (1886); IDEM, Zur neuesten Gesch. des päpstl. Archivs in Histor. Taschenbuch von Raumer (1887); EHRLE, Historia Bibliothec Romanorum Pontificum Bonifation tum Avenionensis, I (Rome, 1890); LANGLOIS AND STEIN, Les archives de l'histoire de France (Paris, 1893); HINOJOSA, Los dispachos de la diplomacia pontificia en España (Madrid, 1896); CAUCHIE, De la création d'une école belge à Rome (Tournai, 1896); BACHA, Les collections histor. du Vatican in Compte-rendu de la Commission royale d'histoire, XVI (Brussels, 1889); EHSES, Das vatikanische Geheimarchiv in Die kathol. Kirche u. ihre Diener in Wort und Bild, I (Berlin, 1899); ARNOLD, Repertorium Germanicum (Berlin, 1897); WIRZ, Bullen u. Breven aus italienischen Archiven (Basle, 1902); BERLIÈRE, Aux archives du Vatican (Bruges, 1903); BROM, Geschiedvorsching in de pauselijke archieven in De Katholiek, CXXIII (1903); HORVAT, Vatikanskom archivu in U Zagebru (1906); SCHMOURLO, Rossija i Italia (St. Petersburg, 1908); OTTO, Das avignoneser Inventar des päpstl. Archivs vam Jahre 1366 in Quellen u. Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven, XII (Rome, 1909); GLASSCHRÖDER in BUCHBERGER, Kirchl. Handlexikon, s.v. Archiv, Vatikanisches; GUÉRARD, Peitite introduction aux inventaires des archives du Vatikan (Rome and Paris, 1901); PALMIERI in Prolegomena to the Regestum Clementis Pap V. I (Rome, 1885), 13-68, reprinted in Journal des Savants (July-August, 1892); MANTEYER, Les manuscrits de la Reine Christine aux archives du Vatican in Mélanges d'archéologie et d'histoire, XVII (1897); FABRE, Notes sur les archives du Château Saint-Ange, ibid., XIII (1893); BAUMGARTEN, Die Verhältnisse am vatikanischen geheimen Archiv in Supplement to A llgemeine Zeitung (Munich, 1891), 94, 108, 120, 301.

PAUL MARIA BAUMGARTEN

Vatican Council

The Vatican Council, the twentieth and up to now [1912] the last ecumenical council, opened on 8 December, 1869, and adjourned on 20 October, 1870. It met three hundred years after the Council of Trent.

I. INTRODUCTORY HISTORY

A. Previous to the Official Convocation

On 6 December, 1864, two days before the publication of the Syllabus, Pius IX announced, at a session of the Congregation of Rites, his intention to call a general council. He commissioned the cardinals residing at Rome to express in writing their views as to the opportuneness of the scheme, and also to name the subjects which, in their opinion, should be laid before the council for discussion. Of the twenty-one reports sent in, only one, that of Cardinal Pentini, expressed the opinion that there was no occasion for the holding of an ecumenical council. The others affirmed the relative necessity of such an assembly, although five did not consider the time suitable. Nearly all sent lists of questions that seemed to need conciliar discussion. Early in March, 1865, the pope appointed a commission of five cardinals to discuss preliminary questions in regard to the council. This was the important "Congregazione speziale direttrice per gli affari del futuro concilio generale", generally called the directing preparatory commission, or the central commission. Four more cardinals were added to the number of its members, and besides a secretary it was given eight consultors. It held numerous meetings in the interval between 9 March, 1865, and Dec., 1869. Its first motion was that bishops of various countries should also be called upon for suggestions as to matters for discussion, and on 27 March, 1865, the pope commanded thirty-six bishops of the Latin Rite designated by him to express their views under pledge of silence. Early in 1866 he also designated several bishops of the Oriental Rite under the same conditions. It was now necessary to form commissions for the more thorough discussion of the subjects to be debated at the council. Accordingly, theologians and canonists, belonging to the secular and regular clergy, were summoned to Rome from the various countries to co-operate in the work. As early as 1865 the nuncios were asked to suggest names of suitable people for these preliminary commissions. The war between Austria and Italy in 1866 and the withdrawal of the French troops from Rome on 11 Dec. of the same year caused an unwelcome interruption of the preparatory labours. They also made the original plan, which was to open the council on the eighteenth centenary festiva of the martyrdom of the two great Apostles, 29 June, 1867, impossible. However, the pope made use of the presence at Rome of nearly five hundred bishops, who had come to attend the centennial celebration, to make the first public announcement of the council at a consistory held on 26 June, 1867. The bishops expressed their agreement with joy in an address dated 1 July. After the return of the French army of protection on 30 Oct., 1867, the continuance of the preparations and the holding of the council itself seemed again possible. The preparatory commission now debated exhaustively the question who should be invited to attend the council. That the cardinals and diocesan bishops should be summoned was self-evident. It was also decided that the titular bishops had the right to be called, and that of the heads of the orders an invitation should be given to the abbots nullius, the abbots general of congregations formed from several monasteries, and lastly, to the generals of the religious orders. It was considered wiser, on account of the state of affairs at the time, not to send an actual invitation to Catholic princes, yet it was intended to grant admission to them or their representatives on demand. In this sense, therefore, the Bull of Convocation, "Æterni Patris", was promulgated, 29 June, 1868; it appointed 8 Dec., 1869, as the date for the opening of the council. The objects of the council were to be the correction of modern errors and a seasonable revision of the legislation of the Church. A special Brief, "Arcano divinæ providentiæ", of 8 Sept., 1868 invited non-Uniate Orientals to appear. A third Brief, "Jam vos omnes", of 13 Sept., 1868, notified Protestants also of the convoking of the council, and exhorted them to use the occasion to reflect on the return to the one household of faith.

B. Reception of the Promulgation

Although the Bull convoking the council was received with joy by the bulk of the Catholic masses, it aroused much discontent in many places, especially in Germany, France, and England. In these countries it was feared that the council would promulgate an exact determination of the primatial prerogatives of the papacy and the definition of papal infallibility. The dean of the theological faculty of Paris, Bishop Maret, wrote in opposition to these doctrines the work "Du concile générale et de la paix religieuse" (2 vols., Paris 1869). Bishop Dupanloup of Orléans published the work "Observations sur la controverse soulevée relativement à la définition de l infaillibilité au prochain concile" (Paris, Nov., 1869). Maret's work was answered by several French bishops and by Archbishop Manning. Archbishop Dechamps of Mechlin, Belgium, who had written a work in favour of the definition entitled "L infaillibilité et le concile générale" (Paris, 1869), became involved in a controversy with Dupanloup. In England a book entitled "The Condemnation of Pope Honorius" (London, 1868), written by the convert, Le Page Renouf, aroused animated discussions in newspapers and periodicals. Renouf's publication was refuted by Father Botalla, S.J., in "Honorius Reconsidered with Reference to Recent Apologies" (London, 1869). Letters from French correspondents in the first number for Feb., 1869, of the "Civiltà Cattolica", which stated that the majority of French Catholics desired the declaration of infallibility, added fresh fuel to the flames. In particular, it led to the appearance in the discussion of Ignaz Döllinger, provost of St. Cajetan and professor of church history at Munich. From now onwards Döllinger was the leading spirit of the movement in Germany hostile to the council. He disputed most passionately the Syllabus and the doctrine of papal infallibility in five anonymous articles that were published in March, 1869, in the "Allgemeine Zeitung" of Augsburg. A large number of Catholic scholars opposed him vigorously, especially after he published his articles in book form under the pseudonym of "Janus", "Der Papst und das Konzil" (Leipzig, 1869). Among these was Professor Joseph Hergenröther of Würzburg, who issued in reply "Anti-Janus" (Freiburg, 1870). Still the excitement over the matter grew in such measure that fourteen of the twenty-two German bishops who met at Fulda early in Sept., 1869, felt themselves constrained to call the attention of the Holy Father to it in a special address, stating that on account of the excitement the time was not opportune for defining papal infallibility. The papal notifications addressed to the schismatic Orientals and the Protestants did not produce the desired effect. The European Governments received from Prince Hohenlohe, president of the Bavarian ministry, a circular letter drawn up by Döllinger, designed to prejudice the different Courts against the coming council; but they decided to remain neutral for the time being. Russia alone forbade its Catholic bishops to attend the council.

C. Preparatory Details

In the meantime zealous work had been done at Rome in preparation for the council. Besides the general direction that it exercised, the preparatory commission had to draw up an exhaustive order of procedure for the debates of the council. Five special committees, each presided over by a cardinal and having together eighty-eight consultors, prepared the plan (schemata) to be laid before the council. These committees were appointed to consider respectively:

• dogma;
• church discipline;
• orders;
• Oriental Churches and missions;
• ecclesiastico-political questions.

It may justly be doubted whether the preliminary preparations for any council had ever been made more thoroughly, or more clearly directed to the aim to be attained. As the day of its opening approached, the following drafts were ready for discussion:

• three great dogmatic drafts, (a) on the Catholic doctrine in opposition to the errors which frequently spring from Rationalism, (b) on the Church of Christ and, (c) on Christian marriage;
• twenty-eight drafts treating matters of church discipline. They had reference to bishops, episcopal sees, the different grades of the other clergy seminaries, the arrangement of philosophical and theological studies, sermons, the catechism, rituals, impediments to marriage, civil marriage, mixed marriages, improvement of Christian morals, feast days, fasts and abstinences, duelling, magnetism, spiritualism, secret societies, etc.;
• eighteen drafts of decrees had reference to the religious orders;
• two were on the Oriental Rites and missions; these subjects had also been considered in the other drafts of decrees.

In addition a large number of subjects for discussion had been sent by the bishops of various countries. Thus, for instance, the bishops of the church provinces of Quebec and Halifax demanded the lessening of the impediments to marriage, revision of the Breviary, and, above all, the reform and codification of the entire canon law. The petition of Archbishop Spalding of Baltimore treated, among other things, the relations between Church and State religious indifference, secret societies, and the infallibility of the pope. The definition of this last was demanded by various bishops. Others desired a revision of the index of forbidden books. No less than nine petitions bearing nearly two hundred signatures demanded the definition of the bodily Assumption of the Blessed Virgin. Over three hundred fathers of the council requested the elevation of St. Joseph as patron saint of the Universal Church.

II. PROCEEDINGS OF THE COUNCIL

A. Presiding Officers, Order of Procedure, Number of Members

On 2 Dec., 1869, the pope held a preliminary session in the Sistine Chapel, which was attended by about five hundred bishops. At this assembly the officials of the council were announced and the conciliar procedure was made known. The council received five presidents. The Chief presiding officer was to have been Cardinal Reisach, but as he died on 22 Dec., Cardinal Filippo de Angelis took his place, 3 Jan., 1870. The other presiding officers were Cardinals Antonio de Luca, Andrea Bizarri, Aloisio Bilio, and Annibale Capalti. Bishop Joseph Fessler of Sankt Pölten, Lower Austria, was secretary to the council, and Monsignor Luigi Jacobi under-secretary. The Constitution "Multiplices inter" announcing the conciliar procedure contained ten paragraphs. According to this the sessions of the council were to be of two kinds: private sessions for discussing the drafts and motions, under the presidency of a cardinal president, and public sessions, presided over by the pope himself for the promulgation of the decrees of the council. The first drafts of decrees debated were to be the dogmatic and disciplinary ones laid before the assembly by the pope. Proposals offered by members of the council were to be sent to a congregation of petitions; these petitions or postulates were to be examined by the committee and then recommended to the pope for admission or not. If the draft of a decree was found by the general congregation to need amendments, it was sent with the proposed amendments to the respective sub-committee or deputatio, either to the one for dogmas or for discipline, or religious orders, or for Oriental Rites. Each of these four sub-committees or deputations was to consist of twenty-four persons selected from the members of the council, and a cardinal president appointed by the pope. The deputation examined the proposed amendments, altered the draft as seemed best, and presented to the general congregation a printed report on its work that was to be orally explained by a member of the deputation. This procedure was to continue until the draft met with the approval of the majority.

The voting in the congregation was by placet, placet juxta modum (with the corresponding amendments), and non placet. Secrecy was to be observed in regard to the proceedings of the council. In the public sessions the voting could only be by placet or non placet. The Decrees promulgated by the pope were to bear the title, "Pius Episcopus, servus servorum Dei: sacro approbante Concilio ad perpetuam rei memoriam". The northern right transept of St. Peter's was arranged as the hall of sessions. Between 8 Dec., 1869, and 1 Sept., 1870, four public sessions and eighty-nine general congregations were held here. There were in the entire world approximately one thousand and fifty prelates entitled to take part in the council, and of these no less than seven hundred and seventy-four appeared during the course of the proceedings. In attendance at the first public session were 47 cardinals, 9 patriarchs, 7 primates, 117 archbishops, 479 bishops, 5 abbots nullius, 9 abbots general, and 25 generals of orders, making a total of 698. At the third public session votes were cast by 47 cardinals, 9 patriarchs, 8 primates, 107 archbishops, 456 bishops, 1 administrator Apostolic, 20 abbots, and 20 generals of orders, a total of 667. There was an attendance at the council from the United States of America of all of the 7 archbishops of that time, 37 of the 47 bishops, and in addition 2 vicars Apostolic. The oldest member of the council was Archbishop MacHale, of Tuam, Ireland; the youngest, Bishop (now Cardinal) Gibbons.

B. From the Formal Opening to the Definition of the Constitution on the Catholic Faith in the Third Public Session

(1) The First Debates

After the formal opening of the council by the pope at the first public session on 8 Dec., 1869, the meetings of the general congregation began on 10 Dec. Their sessions were generally held between the hours of nine and one. The afternoons were reserved for the sessions of the deputations or sub-committees. First, the names of the members of the congregation of petitions were communicated; this was followed by the elections to the four deputations. The first matter brought up for debate was the dogmatic draft of Catholic doctrine against the manifold errors due to Rationalism, "De doctrina catholica contra multiplices errores ex rationalismo derivatos". The discussion of it was taken up on 28 Dec. in the fourth general congregation. After a debate lasting seven days, during which thirty-five members spoke, it was sent by the tenth general congregation held on 10 Jan., 1870, to the deputation on faith for revision. There had been held in the meantime on 6 Jan. the second public session. This had been previously determined upon, on 26 Oct., 1869, by the central commission for the making of the confession of faith by the members of the council. The subjects discussed from the tenth to the twenty-ninth meeting of the general congregation (on 22 Feb.) were the drafts of four disciplinary decrees, namely, on bishops, on vacant episcopal sees, on the morals of ecclesiastics, and on the smaller Catechism. Finally they were all sent for further revision to the deputation on discipline.

(2) The Parties

Such slow progress of the work had probably not been expected. The reason of the disagreeable delay was to be found in the question of infallibility, which had called forth much excitement even before the council. Directly after the opening of the session its influence was evident in the election of the deputations. It divided the fathers of the council into two, it might almost be said hostile camps; on all occasions the decisions and modes of action of each of these parties were determined by its attitude to this question. On account of the violent disputes which had been carried on everywhere for the past year over the question of papal infallibility the overwhelming majority considered the conciliar discussion and decision of the question to be imperatively necessary. On the other hand the minority, comprising about one-fifth of the total number, feared the worst from the definition, the apostasy of many wavering Catholics, an increased estrangement of those separated from the Church, and interference with the affairs of the Church by the Governments of the different countries. The minority, therefore, allowed itself to be guided by opportunist considerations. Only a few bishops appear to have had doubts as to the dogma itself. Both parties sought to gain the victory for their opinions. As however the minority was soon obliged to recognize its powerlessness, it endeavoured by protracting the discussions of the council at least to delay, or even to prevent, a decision as long as possible. Most of the German and Austro-Hungarian members of the council were against the definition, as well as nearly half of the American and about one-third of the French fathers. About 7 of the Italian bishops, 2 each of the English and Irish bishops, 3 bishops from British North America, and 1 Swiss bishop, Greith, belonged to the minority. While only a few Armenian bishops opposed the definition, most of the Chaldean and Greek Melchites sided with the minority. It had no opponents among the bishops from Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Holland, and Central and South America. The most prominent members of the minority from the United States were Archbishops Kenrick of St. Louis and Purcell of Cincinnati, and Bishop Vérot of St. Augustine; these were joined by Archbishop Connolly of Halifax, Nova Scotia. Prominent members of the majority were Archbishop Spalding of Baltimore, Bishops Williams of Boston, Wood of Philadelphia, and Conroy of Albany.

Conspicuous members of the council from other countries were: France: among the minority, Archbishops Darboy of Paris, Ginoulhiac of Lyons, Bishops Dupanloup of Orléans, and David of Saint-Brieuc; among the majority, Archbishop Guibert of Tours, Bishops Pie of Poitiers, Freppel of Angers, Plantier of Nîmes, Raess of Strasburg. Germany: minority Bishops Hefele of Rottenburg, Ketteler of Mainz, Dinkel of Augsburg; majority, Bishops Martin of Paderborn, Senestréy of Ratisbon, Stahl of Würzburg. Austria Hungary: minority, Archbishops Cardinal Rauscher of Vienna, Cardinal Schwarzenberg of Prague, Haynald of Kalocsa, and Bishop Strossmayer of Diakovar; majority, Bishops Gasser of Brixen, Fessler of Sankt Pölten, Riccabona of Trent, Zwerger of Seckau. Italy: minority, Archbishop Nazari di Calabiana of Milan, Bishops Moreno of Ivrea, Losanna of Biella; majority, Valerga, Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, Bishops Gastaldi of Saluzzo, Gandolfi of Loreto. England: minority, Bishop Clifford of Clifton; majority, Archbishop Manning of Westminster. Ireland: minority, Archbishop MacHale of Tuam; majority, Archbishops Cullen of Dublin and Leahy of Cashel. The East: minority, Jussef, Greek-Melchite Patriarch of Antioch; majority, Hassun, Patriarch of the Armenians. Switzerland: minority, Bishop Greith of St-Gall; majority, Bishop Mermillod of Geneva. Important champions of the definition from the countries which sent no members of the minority were Archbishop Dechamps of Mechlin, Belgium, and Bishop Payà y Rico of Cuenca, Spain.

(3) Change of Procedure: the Hall of Assembly Reduced in Size

Various memorials were now sent the Holy Father petitioning for new rules of debate for the sake of a corresponding progress in the proceedings of the council. Consequently, the conciliar procedure was more exactly defined by the Decree "Apostolicis litteris", issued on 20 Feb., 1870. According to this Decree, any member of the council who wished to raise an objection to the draft under discussion was to send in his proposed amendments in writing, in order that they might be thoroughly considered by the respective deputation. In the general congregation the discussion of a draft as a whole was always to precede the discussion of the individual parts of the draft of a decree. The members of a deputation received the right to speak in explanation or correction when not on the list of speakers. Speakers who wandered from the subject were to be called back to it. If a subject had been sufficiently debated the president, on the motion of at least ten members of the council, could put the question whether the council desired to continue the discussion or not, and then close the debate at the wish of the majority. Although these rules made for an evident improvement, still the minority was not satisfied with them, especially in so far as they contemplated a possible shortening of the debates. They expressed their dissatisfaction in several petitions which, however, had no success. On the other hand, every effort was made to satisfy another complaint which had reference to the bad acoustics of the council hail. Between 22 Feb. and 18 March, that is between the twenty-ninth and thirtieth sessions of the general congregation, the council hall was reduced about one-third in size for the use of the general congregations, so that the fathers who were thus brought closer together could understand the speakers better. The hall was restored to its original size for each of the public sessions.

(4) Completion of the First Constitution

The interruption thus caused was used by the deputation on Faith to revise the draft of the Decree "De doctrina catholica" in accordance with the wishes of the general congregation. On 1 March, Bishop Martin of Paderborn laid before the deputation the first part of the revision, the work of Father Joseph Kleutgen, S.J. It consisted of an introduction and four chapters with the corresponding canons. After an exhaustive discussion in the deputation, it was ready to be distributed to the fathers of the council on 14 March as the actual "Constitutio de fide catholica". A report in writing was also added by the deputation. Archbishop Simor of Gran gave the oral report on 18 March in the thirtieth general congregation. The debate began on the same day, and was closed after seventeen sessions on 19 April, in the forty-sixth general congregation. Over three hundred proposed amendments were brought up and discussed. Although many objections were made by both sides, yet the new rules of procedure made possible a relatively smooth course to the debates. The only disturbing incident was the passionate speech of Bishop Strossmayer of Diakovár on 22 March in the thirty-first general congregation; it called forth a storm of indignation from the majority, which finally forced the speaker to leave the tribune. On 24 April, the first Constitution, "De fide catholica", was unanimously adopted in the third public session by the 667 fathers present, and was formally confirmed and promulgated by the pope.

C. The Question of Papal Infallibility

(1) Motions calling for and opposing Definition

The opponents of infallibility constantly assert that the pope convoked the council of the Vatican solely to have papal infallibility proclaimed. Everything else was merely an excuse and for the sake of appearances. This assertion contradicts the actual facts. Not a single one of the numerous drafts drawn up by the preparatory commission bore on papal infallibility. Only two of the twenty-one opinions sent in by the Roman cardinals mentioned it. It is true that a large number of the episcopal memorials recommended the definition, but these were not taken into consideration in the preparations for the council. It was not until the contest over papal infallibility outside of the council grew constantly more violent that various groups of members of the council began to urge conciliar discussion of the question of infallibility. The first motion for the definition was made on Christmas, 1869, by Archbishop Dechamps of Mechlin. He was supported by all the other Belgian bishops, who presented a formal opinion of the University of Louvain, which culminated in a petition for the definition. The actual petition for the definition was first circulated among the fathers of the council on New Year's Day, 1870. Several petitions from smaller groups also appeared, and the petitions soon received altogether five hundred signatures, although quite a number of the friends of the definition were not among the number of subscribers. Five opposing memorials circulated by the minority finally obtained 136 names. Upon this, early in Feb., the congregation for petitions unanimously, with exception of Cardinal Rauscher, requested the pope to consider the petition for definition. Pius IX was also in favour of the definition. Therefore on 6 March, the draft of the Decree on the Church of Christ, which had been distributed among the fathers on 21 Jan., was given a new twelfth chapter entitled "Romanum Pontificem in rebus fidei et morum definiendis errare non posse" (The Roman Pontiff cannot err in defining matters of faith and morals). With this the matter dropped again in the council.

(2) The Agitation Outside the Council

The petitions concerning infallibility called forth once more outside the council a large number of pamphlets and innumerable articles in the daily papers and periodicals. About this time the French Oratorian Gratry and Archbishop Dechamps of Mechlin opposed each other in controversial pamphlets. A letter published by Count Montalembert on 27 Feb., 1870, in which he spoke of an idol which had been erected in the Vatican, attracted much attention. In England, Newman gave anxious expression of his fears as to the bad results of the declaration of infallibility in a letter written in March, 1870, to his bishop, Ullathorne of Birmingham. The most extreme opponent was Professor Döllinger of Bavaria. In his "Römische Briefe vom Konzil", published in the "Allgemeine Zeitung" and issued in book form (Munich, 1870), under the pseudonym of "Quirinus", he used information sent him from Rome by his pupils, Johann Friedrich and Lord Acton. In these letters he did everything he could by distorting and casting doubts upon facts, by scorn and ridicule, to turn the public against the council. This was especially so in an article of 19 Jan., 1870, in which he attacked so severely the address on infallibility, which had just become known, that even Bishop Ketteler of Mainz, an old pupil of Döllinger's and a member of the minority, protested publicly against it. The Governments of the different countries also took measures on the subject of infallibility. As soon as the original draft of the decree "De ecclesia" with its canons was published in the "Allgemeine Zeitung", Count von Beust, Chancellor of Austria, sent a protest against it to Rome on 10 Feb., 1870, which said that the Austrian Government would forbid and punish the publication of all decrees that were contrary to the laws of the State. The French minister of foreign affairs, Daru, also sent a threatening memorandum on 20 Feb. He demanded the admission of an envoy to the council, and notified the other Governments of his steps in Rome. Austria, Bavaria, England, Spain and Portugal declared their agreement with the memorandum. The president of the Prussian ministry, Bismarck, would not change his attitude of reserve, notwithstanding the urgency of von Arnim, the ambassador at Rome. On 18 April, the leader of the agitation, Count Daru, retired from his post in the ministry. The president of the French ministry, Ollivier, assumed charge of foreign affairs; he was determined to leave the council free.

(3) The Debates in the Council

In the meantime the bishops of the minority in the council had constantly sought to block the matter, and especially to exert influence to this end on Cardinal Bilio, the president of the deputation on faith. If the members of the majority had not urged the fulfilment with the same perseverance, papal infallibility would never have reached debate. Finally, on 29 April, during the forty-seventh general congregation, the president interrupted the second debate on the smaller Catechism by the announcement that as soon as possible the fathers should receive for examination the draft of a Constitution, "De Romano Pontifice" which would contain the dogma of the primacy and of the infallibility of the pope. For this purpose the deputation on faith had altered the eleventh and twelfth chapters of the old draft of the Constitution "De ecclesia". On 9 May it was distributed among the fathers in printed form as the "Constitutio prima de ecclesia", consisting of 4 chapters and 3 canons. For a full month (13 May 13 June) the general debate over the draft as a whole was carried on in fourteen general congregations, and sixty-four, mostly very long, speeches were delivered. The following special debates over the separate chapters and canons lasted more than a month. Not less than a hundred speakers took part in the discussions, which were carried on from 6 June to 13 July, in 22 congregations. Most of the speeches were on the fourth chapter, which treated papal infallibility. The most prominent speakers of the minority were: French; Darboy, Ginoulhiac, Maret; German; Hefele, Ketteler, Dinkel; Austrian; Raucher, Schwarzenberg, Strossmayer; United States of America and Canada; Vérot and Connolly. Archbishop Kenrick of St. Louis, who lost his opportunity to speak by the closing of the general debate, published in pamphlet form his "Concio in concilio habenda, at non habita". On the other hand the conciliar speech published under the name of Bishop Strossmayer is a forgery perpetrated by an apostate Augustinian monk from Mexico, José Agostino de Escudero, who was then in Italy (cf. Granderath- Kirch III, 189). The majority were chiefly represented by the French members of the council; Pie and Freppel; the Belgian member, Dechamps; the English member, Manning; the Irish, Cullen; the Italian members, Gastaldi and Valerga; the Spanish member, Paya y Rico; the Austrian, Gasser; the German members, Martin and Senestrey; the American member, Spalding. Several members of the minority as Kenrick, Bauseher, Hefele, Schwarzenberg, and Ketteler, discussed the question of infallibility in pamphlets that they individually issued, to which naturally the majority were not slow to reply. The most important of these answers was the "Animadversiones of the conciliar theologian, W. Wilmers, S.J., in which the writings of the last four of the antagonists just mentioned were, in succession, thoroughly confuted. Scarcely in any parliament have important matters ever been subjected to as much discussion as was the question of papal infallibility in the Vatican Council in the course of two months all the reasons pro and con had been again and again discussed, and only what had been already often said could now be repeated. Consequently in the eighty-second general congregation held on 4 July, most of those who still had the right to speak, not only of the majority, but also of the minority, renounced the privilege, and the cardinal president was able, amid general applause, to close the debates.

(4) Final Voting and Definition

The time of the eighty-third, eighty-fourth, and eighty-fifth general congregations was almost entirely occupied with the reports of the deputation on faith concerning the last two chapters. The report of Prince Bishop Gasser on the fourth chapter was a very notable one. In the eighty-fifth general congregation held on 13 July a general vote was taken on the entire draft. There were present 601 fathers. Of these 451 voted placet, 62 placet juxta modum (conditional affirmative), 88 non placet. Of the North American bishops only 7 voted non placet; these were Kenrick, Vérot, Domenec, Fitzgerald, MacQuaid, MacCloskey, and Mrac. Bishop Fitzgerald still voted non placet in the fourth public session, while on this occasion Bishop Domenec voted placet. The other five did not attend this session. In the eighty-sixth general congregation the fathers condemned, on the motion of the president, two anonymous pamphlets which calumniated the council in the coarsest manner. One, entitled "Ce qui se passe au Concile", culminated in the assertion that there was no freedom of discussion at the council. The other, "La dernière heure du Concile", repeated all the accusations that the enemies of the council had raised against it, and exhorted the bishops of the minority to stand firm and courageously vote non placet in the public session. On account of the war which threatened to break out between Germany and France, a number of fathers of both opinions had returned home. Shortly before the fourth public session a large number of the bishops of the minority left Rome with the permission of the directing officers of the council. They did not oppose the dogma of papal infallibility itself, but were against its definition as inopportune. On Monday, 18 July, 1870, one day before the outbreak of the Franco-German War, 435 fathers of the council assembled at St. Peter's under the presidency of Pope Pius IX. The last vote was now taken; 433 fathers voted placet, and only two, Bishop Aloisio Riccio of Cajazzo, Italy, and Bishop Edward Fitzgerald of Little Rock, Arkansas, voted non placet. During the proceedings a thunderstorm broke over the Vatican, and amid thunder and lightning the pope promulgated the new dogma, like a Moses promulgating the law on Mount Sinai.

D. The Council from the Fourth Public Session until the Prorogation

At the close of the eighty-fifth general congregation a "Monitum" was read which announced that the council would be continued without interruption after the fourth public session. Still, the members received a general permission to leave Rome for some months. They had only to notify the secretary in writing of their departure. By 11 Nov., St. Martin's day, all were to be back again. So many of the fathers made use of this permission that only a few more than 100 remained at Rome. Naturally these could not take up any new questions. Consequently the draft of the decree on vacant episcopal sees, which had been amended in the meantime by the deputation of discipline, was again brought forward, and debated in three further general congregations. The eighty- ninth, which was also to be the last, was held on 1 Sept. On 8 Sept. the Piedmontese troops entered the States of the Church at several points; on Tuesday, 20 Sept., a little before eight o clock in the morning,, the enemy entered Rome through the Porta Pia. The pope was a prisoner in the Vatican. He waited a month longer. He then issued on 20 Oct. the Bull, "Postquam Dei munere", which prorogued the council indefinitely. This day was the day after a Piedmontese decree had been issued organizing the Patrimony of Peter as a Roman province. A circular letter issued by the Italian minister, Visconti Venosta, on 22 Oct., to assure the council of the freedom of meeting, naturally met with no credence. A very remarkable letter was sent from London on the same day by Archbishop Spalding to Cardinal Barnabo, prefect of the Propaganda at Rome. In this letter he made the proposition, which met the approval of Cardinal Cullen, Archbishop Manning, and Archbishop Dechamps, to continue the council in the Belgian city of Mechlin, and gave ten reasons why this city seemed suitable for such sessions. Unfortunately the general condition of affairs was such that a continuation of the council even at the most suitable place could not be thought of.

III. ACCEPTANCE OF THE DECREES OF THE COUNCIL

After the council had made its decision everyone naturally looked with interest to those members of the minority who had maintained their opposition to the definition of infallibility up to the last moment. Would they recognize the decision of the council, or, as the enemies of the council desired would they persist in their opposition? As a matter of fact, not a single one of them was disloyal to his sacred duties. As long as the discussions lasted they expressed their views freely and without molestation, and sought to carry them into effect. After the decision, without exception, they came over to it, The two bishops who on 18 July had voted non placet advanced to the papal throne at the same session and acknowledged their acceptance of the truth thus defined. The Bishop of Little Rock said simply and with true greatness, "Holy Father, now I believe." It is not possible in this brief space to mention the accession of each member of the minority. As concerns the members from North America who are of special interest here, Bishop Vérot of St. Augustine gave his adhesion to the dogma while still at Rome in a letter addressed on 25 July to the secretary of the council. Bishop Mrac of Sault-Saint-Marie sent his declaration of adherence at the latest by Jan., 1872. A year later Bishop Domenec of Pittsburgh did the same. In 1875 Bishop MacQuaid of Rochester, if not earlier, announced his adherence to the dogma by its formal and public promulgation. When Archbishop Kenrick of St. Louis returned to his diocese on 30 Dec., 1870, he made an address at the reception given him, in which he first gave the reasons that had decided his position at the council as long, as the question was open to discussion, and then closed with the declaration that, now the council had decided, he submitted unconditionally to its decree. He expressed himself similarly in a letter of 13 Jan., 1871, to the prefect of the Propaganda. When Lord Acton questioned the archbishop in regard to his submission, the latter replied by a long letter dated 29 March, 1871, which shows, it may be, a certain discontent, but which clearly confirmed his belief in the infallibility of the pope. In the same way the distinguished Frenchmen and Englishmen who, outside of the council, had expressed opinions antagonistic to the promulgation of infallibility, e.g. Gratry, Newman, Montalembert, and finally, as it appears, Acton, also submitted after the decision had been made. On the other hand, in Germany a number of Professor Döllinger's adherents apostatised from the Church and formed the sect of Old Catholics. Döllinger also apostatized, without, however, connecting himself with any other denomination. In Switzerland the opponents of the council united in a sect called Christian Catholics. Outside of these, however the Catholics of the entire world, both clergy and laity, accepted the decision of the council with great joy and readiness. After the close of the Franco-German War the German Government made the dogma of infallibility the excuse for what is called the Kulturkampf. Yet the bishops and priests were ready to bear loss of property, imprisonment, and exile rather than be disloyal to any part of their ecclesiastical duties. The Austrian Government took the opportunity offered by the definition to relieve itself from uncomfortable obligations, and declared that, as the other contracting party had changed, the Concordat with the Roman See was annulled. Excepting in a few Swiss cantons, the promulgation of the decision of the council did not encounter any actual difficulties elsewhere.

IV. THE RESULTS

In comparison with the large scope of the preparations for the council, and with the great amount of material laid before it for discussion in the numerous drafts and proposals, the immediate result of its labours must be called small. But the council was only in its beginnings when the outbreak of war brought it to a sudden close. It is also true as is known, that reasons within the council prevented a larger result from its sessions. Thus it was that in the end only two not very large Constitutions could be promulgated. If, however, the contents of these two constitutions be examined their great importance is unmistakable. The contents meet in a striking manner the needs of the times.

A. The dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith defends the fundamental principles of Christianity against the errors of modern Rationalism, Materialism, and atheism. In the first chapter it maintains the doctrine of the existence of a personal God, Who of His own free volition for the revelation of His perfection, has created all things out of nothing, Who foresees all things, even the future free actions of reasonable creatures, and Who through His Providence leads all things to the intended end. The second chapter treats the natural and supernatural knowledge of God. It then declares that God, the beginning and end of all things can also be known with certainty by the natural light of reason. It then treats the actuality and necessity of a supernatural revelation, of the two sources of Revelation, Scripture and tradition, of the inspiration and interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. The third chapter treats the supernatural virtue of faith, its reasonableness supernaturalness, and necessity, the possibility and actuality of miracles as a confirmation of Divine Revelation; and lastly, the founding of the Catholic Church by Jesus Christ as the Guardian and Herald of revealed truth. The fourth chapter contains the doctrine, especially important to-day, on the connection between faith and reason. The mysteries of faith cannot, indeed, be fully grasped by natural reason, but revealed truth can never contradict the positive results of the investigation of reason. Contrariwise, however, every assertion is false that contradicts the truth of enlightened faith. Faith and true learning are not in hostile opposition; they rather support each other in many ways. Yet faith is not the same as a philosophical system of teaching that has been worked out and then turned over to the human mind to be further developed, but it has been entrusted as a Divine deposit to the Church for protection and infallible interpretation. When, therefore, the Church explains the meaning of a dogma this interpretation is to be maintained in all future time, and it can never be deviated from under pretence of a more profound investigation. At the close of the Constitution the opposing heresies are rejected in eighteen canons.

B. The other dogmatic Constitution is of equal, if not greater, importance; it is the first on the Church of Christ, or, as it is also called in reference to its contents, on the Pope of Rome. "The introduction to the Constitution says that the primacy of the Roman pontiff, on which the unity, strength, and stability of the entire Church rests, has always been, and is especially now, the object of violent attacks by the enemies of the Church. Therefore the doctrine of its origin, constant permanence, and nature must be clearly set forth and established, above all on account of the opposing errors. Thus the first chapter treats of the establishment of the Apostolic primacy in the popes of Rome. Each chapter closes with a canon against the opposing dogmatic opinion. The most important matter of the Constitution is the last two chapters. In the third chapter the meaning and nature of the primacy are set forth in clear words. The primacy of the Pope of Rome is no mere precedence of honour. On the contrary, the pope possesses the primacy of regularly constituted power over all other Churches, and the true, direct, episcopal power of jurisdiction, in respect to which the clergy and faithful of every rite and rank are bound to true obedience. The immediate power of jurisdiction of the individual bishops in their dioceses, therefore, is not impaired by the primacy, but only strengthened and defended. By virtue of his primacy the pope has the right to have direct and free relations with the clergy and laity of the entire Church. No one is permitted to interfere with this intercourse. It is false and to be rejected to say that the decrees issued by the pope for the guidance of the Church are not valid unless confirmed by the placet of the secular power. The pope is also the supreme judge of all the faithful, to whose decision all matters under examination by the Church can be appealed. On the other hand, no further appeal, not even to an ecumenical council, can be made from the supreme decision of the pope. Consequently the canon appended to the third chapter says: "When, therefore, anyone says that the Pope of Rome has only the office of supervision or of guidance, and not the complete and highest power of jurisdiction over the entire Church, not merely in matters of faith and morals, but also in matters which concern the discipline and administration of the Church throughout the entire world, or that the pope has only the chief share, but not the entire fullness of this highest power, or that this his power is not actual and immediate either over all and individual Churches, or over all and individual clergy and faithful, let him be anathema."

The fourth chapter, lastly, contains the definition of papal infallibility. First, all the corresponding decrees of the Fourth Council of Constantinople, 680 (Sixth Ecumenical), of the Second Council of Lyons, 1274 (Fourteenth Ecumenical) and of the Council of Florence, 1439 (Seventeenth Ecumenical), are repeated and confirmed. It is pointed out, further, that at all times the popes, in the consciousness of their infallibility in matters of faith for the preservation of the purity of the Apostolic tradition, have acted as the court of last instance and have been called upon as such. Then follows the important tenet that the successors of St. Peter have been promised the Holy Ghost, not for the promulgation of new doctrines, but only for the preservation and interpretation of the Revelation delivered by the Apostles. The Constitution closes with the following words: "Faithfully adhering, therefore, to the tradition inherited from the beginning of the Christian Faith, we, with the approbation of the sacred council, for the glory of God our Saviour, for the exaltation of the Catholic religion, and the salvation of Christian peoples, teach and define, as a Divinely revealed dogma, that the Roman pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra, that is, when he, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, decides that a doctrine concerning faith or morals is to be held by the entire Church, he possesses, in consequence of the Divine aid promised him in St. Peter, that infallibility with which the Divine Saviour wished to have His Church furnished for the definition of doctrine concerning faith or morals; and that such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves, and not in consequence of the Church's consent, irreformable."

What is given above is essentially the contents of the two Constitutions of the Vatican Council. Their import may be briefly expressed thus: in opposition to the Rationalism and Free-thinking of the present day the first Constitution gives authoritative and clear expression of the fundamental principles of natural and supernatural understanding of right and true faith, their possibility, necessity, their sources, and of their relations to each other. Thus it offers to all of honest intention a guide and a firm foothold, both in solving the great question of life and in all the investigations of learning. The second Constitution settles finally a question which had kept the minds of men disturbed from the time of the Great Schism, and the Council of Constance, and more especially from the appearance of the four Gallican articles of 1682, the question of the relation between the pope and the Church. According to the dogmatic decision of the Vatican Council, the papacy founded by Christ is the crown and centre of the entire constitution of the Catholic Church. The papacy includes in itself the entire fullness of the power of administration and teaching bestowed by Christ upon His Church. Thus ecclesiastical particularism and the theory of national Churches are forever overthrown. On the other hand, it is extravagant and unjust to say that by the definition of the primacy of jurisdiction and of the infallibility of the pope the ecumenical councils have lost their essential importance. The ecumenical councils have never been absolutely necessary. Even before the Vatican Council their decrees obtained general currency only through the approval of the pope. The increasing difficulty of their convocation as time went on is shown by the interval of three hundred years between the nineteenth and twentieth ecumenical councils. The definitions of the last council have, therefore, brought about the alleviation that was desirable and the necessary legal certainty. Apart from this, however, the hierarchy united with the pope in a general council is, now as formerly, the most complete representation of the Catholic Church.

Lastly, as regards the drafts and proposition which were left unsettled by the Vatican Council, a number of these were revived and brought to completion by Pius IX and his two successors. To mention a few: Pius IX made St. Joseph the patron saint of the Universal Church on 8 Dec., 1870, the same year as the council. Moral and religious problems, which it was intended to lay before the council for discussion, are treated in the encyclicals of Leo XIII on the origin of the civil power (1881), on freemasonry (1884), on human freedom (1888), on Christian marriage (1880), etc. Leo XIII also issued in 1900 new regulations regarding the index of forbidden books. From the beginning of his administration Pius X seems to have had in view in his legislative labours the completion of the great tasks left by the Vatican Council. The most striking proofs of this are: the reform of the Italian diocesan seminaries, the regulation of the philosophical and theological studies of candidates for the priesthood, the introduction of one catechism for the Roman church province, the laws concerning the form of ritual for betrothal and marriage, the revision of the prayers of the Breviary, and, above all, the codification of the whole of modern canon law.

(1) Archives of the Vatican Council: All official papers relating to the preparations for the Vatican Council, its proceedings, and the acceptance of its decrees, have been preserved in the Vatican Palace, in two rooms which were set apart for them. The speeches made at the general congregations exist in shorthand notes and handwriting; in addition, Pius IX also arranged to have them printed, The first four folio volumes were issued by the Vatican Press in 1875-8, the fifth and final volume appeared in 1884. About a dozen copies of each volume are in the archives.
(2) Collections of Official Documents: CECCONI, Storia del Concilio ecumenico Vaticano scritta sui documenti originali. Antecedenti, I (Rome, 1873), II, in III pts. (Rome, 1879); FRIEDRICH, Documenta ad illustrandum Concilium Vaticanum (II pts., Nördlingen, i871). FRIEDBERG, Sammlung der Aktenstücke zum ersten vatikanischen Konzil mit einem Grundriss der Geschichte desselben (Tübingen, 1872); MARTIN, Omnium Concilii Vaticani quae ad doctrinam et disciplinam pertinent documentorum collectio (Paderborn, 1873); the most complete collection is Acta et decreta sacrosancti oecumenici Concilii Vaticani, ed. SCHNEEMAN AND GRANDERATH (Freiburg, 1892); this collection is in the Collectio Lacensis vol VII. The decrees of the eouncii have often been published as at Rome by the Propaganda, at Freiburg. and Ratisbon.
(3) Historical Accounts: (a) Catholic: by the secretary of the council, FESSLER, Das vatikanische Concilium, dessen äusere Bedeutung und innere Verlauf (Vienna, 1871); MANNING, The True Story of the Vatican Council (London, 1877); OLLIVIER. L'église et l'état au concile du Vatican (2 vols., Paris, 1879); GRANDERATH AND KIRCH, Geschichte des vatikanischen Konzils von seiner ersten Ankündigung bis zu seiner Vertagung, nach den authentischen Dokumenten (3 vols., Freiburg, 1903 and 1906); FROND, Actes et histoire du concile oecuménique de Rome (8 vols., Paris, 1869), numerous illustrations; GRANDERATH in WETZER AND WELTE, Kirchenlexikon, s. v. Vatican. Concil. (b) Non-Catholic: FRIEDRICH, Tagebuch während des vatikanischen Konzils geführt (2nd ed., Nördlingen, 1873); IDEM, Geschichte des vatikanischen Konzils (3 vols., Bonn, 1877 87); MOZLEY, Letters from Rome on the Occasion of the Ecumenical Council 1869-1870 (2 vols., London, 1891); MIRBT in Realencyklopädie für protest. Theol., s. v. Vatican. Concil. In addition, consult the biographies of the most distinguished members of the council. The most important works and pamphlets that appeared during the council are mentioned in the course of the article.
(4) Explanations of the Decrees of the Council: GRANDERATH, Constitutiones dogmaticoe s. oecumen. Concilii Vaticani, explicat (Freiburg. 1892); VACANT, Etudes théologiques sur les constitutions du concile du Vatican (2 vols., Paris, 1895).

K. KIRCH

Vatican Observatory

The Vatican Observatory now bears the official title, "Specola Astronomica Vaticana". To understand its history it is necessary to remark that the designations osservatorio or specola are not restricted to astronomy, but may mean any elevated locality from which aerial phenomena are observed. From this point of view the history of the Specola Vaticana has passed through four successive stages.

(1) The first period of the Vatican Observatory is thus described in the Motu Proprio of 1891 by Leo XIII:

Gregory XIII ordered a tower to be erected in a convenient part of the Vatican buildings, and to be fitted out with the greatest and best instruments of the time. There he held the meetings of the learned men to whom the reform of the calendar had been entrusted. The tower stands to this day, a witness to the munificence of its author. It contains a meridian line by Ignazio Danti of Perugia, with a round marble plate in the centre adorned with scientific designs. When touched by the rays of the sun that are allowed to enter from above, the designs demonstrate the error of the old reckoning and the correctness of the reform.

The first half of this narration is based upon a tradition supported by Gilii and Calandrelli (see LILIUS); it is connected with the Vatican Observatory, at least as far as the locality is concerned. The tower is 73 metres above sea level and stands over the museum and library, between the courtyards Belvedere and della Pigna. It is often called the "Tower of the Winds"

(2) The second period of the Vatican Observatory deals mainly with the person of Mgr. Filippo Luigi Gilii, whose life has been written by Lais. Gilii was born in Corneto in 1756, and died in Rome, in 1821, a beneficed clergyman of St. Peter's Basilica. He was a universal genius, well versed in physics and in biology, in archeology and in the Hebrew language . The Gregorian Tower was then in charge of the Vatican librarian, to which office Cardinal Zelada had been appointed in 1780. Zelada wished to honour the traditions of the tower by devoting its upper part to an observatory. In 1797 he obtained the sanction of Pius VI, and placed over the entrance to the tower the Latin inscription Specula Vaticana. The upper story was fitted up with meteorological and magnetic instruments, with a seismograph, a Dolland telescope, a small transit and pendulum clock, and the observatory was given in charge of Mgr. Gilii. From 1800 to 1821 Gilii made an uninterrupted series of meteorological observations, reading the instruments twice a day (after 6 a. m. and 2 p, m.), according to the programme of the Mannheim Meteorological Society. The observations of about seven years of the long series are published, while the rest are in great part preserved as manuscripts in the Vatican Library. There are also deposited astronomical observations of eclipses, comets, Jupiter's satellites, and of a transit of Mercury. Gilii's scientific activity extended beyond the Vatican Observatory and beyond Rome. The meridian line in front of St. Peter's, with the obelisk as gnomon and the readings of the seasons by the length of the shadow, is due to him; so are also the signs on the floor of St. Peter's Basilica, indicating the lengths of the greatest churches of the world, likewise the two old clocks of French and Italian style, in the front of the basilica, and finally the first lightning rod on St. Peter's cupola. Similar memories of him exist in various churches and cities of Italy. The tombstone in Ara Co li calls him a man "mitissimi ingenii, modestiæ singularis, pius". At the death of Gilii the Vatican Observatory was discontinued, for the following reason: Pius VII and Leo XII raised the standard of studies in the papal states. The latter pope, in his Apostolic letter, "Quod divina sapientia", gave instructions about observatories, publications, and intercourse with foreign scientists. In 1787 the observatory at the Roman College had been founded, under Calandrelli, and was declared preferable to the Vatican, as more accessible to students in the city, and not obstructed by the great cupola of St. Peter's (Giornale Arcadico, II, p. 407). On the advice of Father Boscovich the instruments were then transferred from the Gregorian Tower to the Roman College.

(3) The revival of the Vatican Observatory in its third period was occasioned, on the one hand, by the loss to the Church of the Roman College and its observatory in 1870, and on the other, by the exposition of instruments presented to Leo XIII by the Italian clergy for the celebration of his golden jubilee of priesthood, in 1888. The Barnabite Father Denza, well-known as founder of the Italian Meteorological Society, then proposed to Leo XIII to preserve the instruments in the Gregorian Tower, and to restore that locality to its former purposes. The plan was accepted and a series of the best instruments was procured, partly from donations by Hicks in London, partly by purchase of self-registering apparatus from Richard in Paris. From the observatory of the late Marquis of Montecuccoli in Modena, of which Denza had been director, a four-inch equatorial, a three-inch transit instrument, and four pendulum clocks with two chronometers, were acquired. Father Denza had still broader plans. The year before in 1887, Mouchez had organized the cooperation of a number of observatories for continuing Argelander's observations to fainter magnitudes by means of photography. At the second meeting of the committee in Paris, in 1889, Denza declared his intention to join in the work. For this purpose, Leo XIII ceded to the Vatican Observatory a second tower, more than 400 metres distant from the Gregorian. It is the western of the two towers remaining from the Leonine Fortress, which had been built for defence against the Saracens in 848-53. With a diameter of 17 metres and a thickness of 4.5 metres in the lower walls, it seemed large and strong enough to support the thirteen-inch photographic refractor which was ordered from Gauthier in Paris. During the four years following, the observatory remained in charge of the vice-director, Father Lais, of the Oratory who has conducted the photographic work from the beginning, all at his own expense. From 1898 until 1905 the directorship was in the hands of the Augustinian Father Rodriguez, a specialist in meteorology. Seven volumes were published during the third period of the observatory, four under Denza, the fifth under Lais, and the last two under Rodriguez.

(4) The fourth and present period of the Vatican Observatory began with the appointment in November, 1904, by Pius X of Archbishop (now Cardinal) Maffi as President of the Specola. His first step was to remedy the great difficulty caused by the separation of the two towers. According to his plans, the Gregorian Tower was to be abandoned to historical archives, and the second round tower of the old Leonine Fortress, with the adjoining summer residence of Leo XIII, was to be given over to astronomy. The two old towers were to be connected with each other by a passage over the fortification wall, with an iron bridge spanning a gap of 85 metres in length. For carrying out these plans, the author of the present article was designated in the audience given to Cardinal Maffi on 14 March, 1906, and officially appointed on 26 April. The fortification wall, a thousand years old, which extends about 400 metres, is now crowned with four rotary domes, covering the astrographic refractor in the Leonine Tower, and a new sixteen-inch visual telescope in the second tower, called Torre Pio X. A four-inch equatorial stands on a half round bastion, at the west end of the bridge, and a photoheliograph at the east end of the old wall, over the barracks of the gendarmes. The old transit instrument is mounted on a vault over the main walls of the new residence. After the material restoration of the observatory, the main problems were a library and the measuring of the astrographic plates. The rich meteorological library was consigned to the Pontifical Academy Lincei, and the old meteorological and seismic instruments were mainly sent to the observatory in Valle di Pompei, An astronomical library is now filling two rooms of the new residence; old treasures were secured to it by the loan of the scientific collection from the Vatican Library, the latter confining itself to historical and literary branches. The astrographic plates are being measured with two new Repsold machines, which are placed in a neighbouring convent, in charge of three Sisters. For nearly four years the director enjoyed the cooperation of Father Stein, S.J., by which it was possible to publish the first three numbers of the new series, besides minor essays, and the last two series of the atlas of variable stars. At the reunion of the Astrographic Congress at Paris in 1909, P. Lais presented thirty charts reproduced by himself on silver-bromide paper.

DENZA, La Nuova Specola Vaticana in Atti, Acad. Pont. N. Lincei XLIII (1889); ZAHM, The Observatory of the Vatican in The Cosmopolitan (1895), well illustrated but not exact in all details; STEIN, Restauri della Specola Vaticana in Rivista di Fisica etc., IX (Pavia, 1908); HAGEN, Vaticanische Sternwarte in V. J. S. Astron. Ges., XLV (1910); MAFFI, Specula Vaticana, Inaugurazione (Rome, 1910); PARR, The Vatican Observatory of Today in Knowledge (1911), correct, except the additions by the editors.

J.G. HAGEN

Vaudreuil

Philippe de Rigaud, Marquis de Vaudreuil

Governor of Canada, born in Languedoc, France, in the first half of the seventeenth century, of Louis R. de Vaudreuil and Marie de Chateau-Verdun; died at Quebec, 10 October, 1725. In the king's musketeers, in which he served (1659-76), he ranked as brigadier and finally as colonel. He went to Canada (1687) in command of a marine detachment. After the massacre of Lachine he prevented the Iroquois from assailing Montreal (1689). In 1690 he shared in the defense of Quebec against Phips. In 1698 he received the Cross of St. Louis, and replaced, as Governor of Montreal, Callières, who was promoted Governor-General of Canada. In 1702 the fief still bearing his name was given him. He again succeeded Callières (1703), his prudence and experience fitting him to govern the colony at that trying period. He was loved by the people and feared by the Indians with whom he strove to strengthen an alliance, while the English colonies sought to shake their fidelity. He adopted one of the captives of the Abenaki raids, Esther Wheelwright, who entered the Ursuline cloister in Quebec, and was later appointed first superior after the conquest. In 1710 he fortified Quebec against he threatened attack of Admiral Walker, whose fleet was shipwrecked off Egg Island (1711). Peace being restored, Vaudreuil encouraged agriculture, commerce, and education. The Country was divided into 82 parishes, Montreal was fortified by a wall, and a census taken, giving an entire population of 25,000 souls, of which 7000 were in Quebec and 3000 in Montreal. He received the Grand Cross of St. Louis (1721), and ordered the construction of Fort Niagara. His wife, Louise Elizabeth Joybert, who bore him twelve children, had been appointed (1708) under-governess to the royal children.

Louis Philippe, Count de Vaudreuil

Second son of preceding, b. at Montreal, 1691; d. 27 Nov., 1763. Entering the army at the age of seven he ranked as captain in 1738, and received the Grand Cross of St. Louis (1745). Transferred to the navy as chief of a squadron, he took part (1747) in a combat off Cape Finistère between the fleets of M. de l'Estenduère and Admiral Hawke, one of the most terrible engagements on record. After eight hours, the French admiral was about to yield, when Vaudreuil, commanding the Intrépide, hastened to the front, and, bearing the brunt of the enemy's broadsides, forced them to cease firing. In reward he was appointed lieutenant-general of the naval forces.

François-Pierre, Marquis de Vaudreuil

Brother of preceding, b. 3 Feb., 1703. He was appointed lieutenant (1724), Knight of St. Louis (1738), king's lieutenant (1748), and Governor of Three- Rivers (1749). He fought with Montcalm at Chouagen (Oswego), contributing to the victory by crossing the river with the vanguard. He was Governor of Montreal from 1755 until the conquest forced him to emigrate to France.

Pierre, Marquis de Vaudreuil-Cavagnal

Second governor of that name and the last under the French rule, fifth son of the former governor, b. at Quebec, 22 Nv., 1698; d. in France about 1767. He successively ranked as major of the troops (1726), Knight of St. Louis (1730), Governor of Three-Rivers (1733), of Louisiana (1742), Governor-General of Canada (1755) during the period of the Seven Years War. To his demand of reinforcements, France responded by sending Montcalm, Lévis, Bourlamaque, Bougainville, who, though unable to save New France, covered her with glory. The merit of the victories, Oswego, William-Henry, Carillon, has heretofore been too largely attributed to Vaudreuil, who never appeared in battle and merely issued orders that were often a hindrance instead of a help to the experienced and clear-sighted commander-in-chief, thereby rendering his exploits doubly heroic. Vaudreuil even tried in his correspondence to belittle Montcalm's merit, and was too easily influenced by Bigot and his unscrupulous clique who dilapidated the public treasure to the detriment of the army and of the nation. This apparently rigorous judgment is supported by the latest historical researches. After the fatal battle of the Plains of Abraham, Vaudreuil withdrew to Montreal; when, despite the victory of Lévis over Murray at St. Foy (1760), the French lost all hope, he signed the capitulation of Canada, and retired to France.

Louis Philippe de Rigaud, Comte de Vaudreuil

Eldest son of preceding, b. at Quebec, 1723; d. in France, 1802; entered the navy in 1741. When the American revolutionary war began he refused the governorship of San Domingo to remain at sea. He commanded the Fendant at the conquest of Grenada by d'Estaing, captured 6 million livres of booty in his cruises, conquered Senegal (1779), took part in five other engagements, one of which, off the Chesapeake, resulted in the surrender of Cornwallis. At the disaster of Dominica he saved 12 ships and retreated successfully. Louis XVI thanked him personally and gave him the Grand Cross of St. Louis (1789). During the French Revolution he was elected to the States General; he defended the Tuileries (1792), and emigrated, returning to France under the Consulate.

BIBAUD, Le Pantheon canadien (Montreal, 1891); GARNEAU, Histoire du Canada (Montreal, 1882); Hist. des grandes families francaises du Canada (Montreal, 1867); CHAPAIS, Le Marquis de Montcalm (Quebec, 1911).

LIONEL LINDSAY

Herbert Vaughan

Cardinal, and third Archbishop of Westminster; b. at Gloucester, 15 April, 1832; d. at St. Joseph's College, Mill Hill, Middlesex, 19 June, 1903; he came of a family which had been true to the Catholic Faith all through the ages of the persecution. Its members had suffered for their faith in fines and imprisonment and double land taxes. Sometimes, too, they suffered for their politics. In the Civil War they sided with Charles I and were nearly ruined. After the Stuart rising in 1715, John Vaughan of Courtfield refused to take the oath of allegiance to the House of Hanover, and two years later his name appears in a list of "Popish Recusants Convict". When "Prince Charlie" in 1745 raided south to Derby, two of the Vaughans rode back with him to Scotland, and fought by his side at Culloden. Driven into exile, both took service under the Spanish king, and the younger rose to the rank of field-marshal. The son of the elder brother, the great-great-grandfather of the cardinal, was allowed to come back to England and to resume possession of the family estates at Courtfield, in Herefordshire.

Colonel John Vaughan, the cardinal's father, married, in 1830, Eliza, daughter of Mr. John Rolls, of the Hendre, Monmouthshire, and an aunt of the first Lord Llangattock. Mrs. Vaughan became a convert to the Catholic Faith shortly before her marriage and was, in many ways, a remarkable woman. It was her habit to spend an hour every day in prayer before the Blessed Sacrament, begging of God that He would call her children to serve Him in the choir or in the sanctuary. In the event all her five convents, and of her eight sons six became priests, three of them bishops. Herbert, the eldest born, went to the Jesuit College at Stonyhurst in the spring of 1841, and remained until the summer of 1847. From Stonyhurst he went to the Jesuit College at Brugelette, in Belgium, for three years. From an early age his thoughts had been turned to the priesthood. His mother, writing when he was only fourteen, said she was confident that he would be a priest. His father's dearest wish was to see him win distinction as an English soldier, but when he was only sixteen he had made up his mind to give himself to the Church. On leaving Brugelette he went to the Benedictines at Downside Abbey for twelve months as an ecclesiastical student. In the autumn of 1851 he arrived in Rome to attend the lectures at the Collegio Romano, and there for a time he shared lodgings with the poet, Aubrey de Vere. The student years in Rome were a time of trial and difficulty. Wretched and incapacitating health made the labour of study a constant strain. In the intimate diary which he kept at this time he constantly reproaches himself for his excessive impetuosity in speech and action. He was ordained, at the age of twenty-two, on 28 October, 1854, at Lucca, and sid his first Mass in Florence at the Church of the Annunziata on the following day.

During all his student years he had hoped to be a missioner in Wales, but at Cardinal Wiseman's call he now accepted the position of vice-president at St. Edmund's College, Ware, the principal ecclesiastical seminary for the south of England. He went there in the autumn of 1855, after spending some months in a voyage of discovery among the seminaries of Italy, France, and Germany. Though not yet at the canonical age for the priesthood, and younger than some of the students, he was already vice-president at St. Edmund's. The position, a difficult one in any case, was made impossible when it became known that the had recently become an Oblate of St. Charles and therefore was a disciple of Manning. At once he was involved in the controversy between Wiseman and his chapter which darkened and embittered the last years of the cardinal's life. Wiseman was the friend and protector of Manning, and Vaughan was regarded as the representative of a man suspected of a wish to bring all the ecclesiastical education of Southern England under the control of the Oblates. Litigation followed in Rome, and the Oblates eventually withdrew from St. Edmund's. Vaughan looked back upon his work at St. Edmund's with a sad sense of frustration. The disappointment worked in two ways. He began to look for external work in the immediate present and, for the future, he dreamed dreams. He collected money and built a church in the county town, Hertford, and founded a mission at Enfield. But he wanted to do something great for God. Since he was a boy his constant prayer had been that whatever else was withheld he might live an intense life. He resolved to consecrate himself to the service of the Foreign Missions. Blessed [now St.-tr. note] Peter Claver was his ideal hero and saint, and his first purpose was to go himself to Africa or Japan.

But, gradually, after many months of indecision, he came to want something which should be more permanent than anything dependent on the life of an individual. A great college which should send out an unending stream of missioners to all the heathen lands seemed a worthier object of effort. He had no money but he had a sublime faith, a perfect courage, and he determined to go abroad and beg, and to begin with the Americas. With the approval of Wiseman and the blessing of the pope he set sail for the Caribbean Sea in December, 1863. Landing at Colon, he crossed the Isthmus of Panama, then part of New Granada. The Government was at war with the Church, and the clergy were forbidden to say mass or to administer the sacraments until they had taken an oath to accept the Constitution, which required what was regarded as an acknowledgement of the supremacy of the civil power in spiritual matters. The churches were all closed and, though hundreds of people were dying of small-pox, they were left to die without the help of a priest. That was enough for Vaughan. he threw himself into the work, said Mass, heard confessions, and gave extreme unction without the least regard for the government prohibition. He was summoned before the president and told to desist. He had promised to say Mass the next morning in the house of a dying woman and to give her Viaticum. He kept his promise, but was taken before the prefect of the town. His offence being admitted he was required to give bail, and instructions were given that he should not be allowed to leave the port. It was clear that he could do no more good in Panama, so, forfeiting his bail, he at once went on board a United States steamer and sailed for San Francisco. Here, in spite of the limitations but to his appeals for money, during a stay of five months he succeeded in collecting $25,000. From California he went back to Panama, intending to beg his way through Peru and Chili, then ride across the Andes into Brazil and thence to sail for home or for Australia. In Peru he collected $15,000, and nearly twice as much in Chili. In March, 1865, he left the cities of the Pacific but, instead of crossing the Cordilleras, he sailed round the Horn in "H.M.S. Charybdis". In Rio he had an interview with the emperor and money came in fast. In June his campaign was brought to an abrupt close by a letter of recall from Manning, who had just been appointed Archbishop of Westminster, and Vaughan sailed for England in June, 1865.

In the following March the College for Foreign Missions was started in a hired house at Mill Hill, some eight miles from London. It began in a very humble way. Vaughan determined to keep the money he had collected in America as a permanent endowment for the college, as a fund for the maintenance of the students; and when the growing numbers of the students made it necessary to build there was nothing for it but to beg again. Happily friends came to his aid, as they did in a wonderful way all his life, and in March, 1871, a new college, built on a freehold site, was opened with a community of thirty-four. In the autumn of the same year St. Joseph's Missionary Society had assigned to it its first sphere of work among the coloured population of the United States. To make himself familiar with the conditions of the problem on the spot Vaughan went back to America, and travelled all through the southern states. He was away seven months, and in that time he visited St. Louis, New Orleans, Mobile, Savannah, Memphis, Natchez, and Charleston, making careful investigation in each place as to the spiritual provision for the negro race. Shortly after his return to England his direct supervision of St. Joseph's College was brought to an end by his appointment as Bishop of Salford. But though St. Joseph's now had its local superior, Vaughan, to the end of his life, was the head of the Missionary Society. He may have done more conspicuous and important work in his life, but there was none that was dearer to his heart than the founding of this great college, which is still doing the things he planned. His missioners are at work in the Philippines, in Uganda, in Madras, in New Zealand, in Borneo, in Labuan, in the Basin of the Congo, in Kashmir, and in Kafiristan. In 19190 they gave baptism to more than 10,000 pagans.

Among the results of Vaughan's first visit to the United States must be reckoned a new appreciation of the power of the Press. He came back resolved to own a paper of his own, and eventually bought "The Tablet". It proved a fortunate investment from every point of view. During the time of the great controversy which preceded the definition of papal infallibility, under the direct editorship of Herbert Vaughan "The Tablet", for services to the Catholic cause, received the special thanks of the Holy See.

Vaughan was consecrated Bishop of Salford on 22 October, 1872. His first concern was for ecclesiastical education and the proper supply of priests for the diocese. The seminarians were scattered about in different colleges, some in England and some abroad. When they had completed their theological studies at Ushaw, or in Rome, Paris, Valladolid, or Lisbon, they returned to the diocese almost as strangers to each other and to their bishop. Bishop Vaughan planned what he called a pastoral seminary. It was to be attached to his own house, and when clerical students came from Ushaw or seminaries abroad, they were to live with him for a year and, while continuing their ecclesiastical studies, were to be trained by experienced priests in the practical work of a parish. The bishop explained that he had no money for building, but 18,000 was collected and the seminary was built as he desired. He next considered how best to secure a regular supply of candidates for Holy orders. He knew that among the poorer classes there were always boys who, having all re required dispositions for the clerical state, lacked the funds necessary for their education. To meet the difficulty, the bishop endeavoured to secure the foundation of a number of burses for the education of ecclesiastical students. In the case of students whose parents were in easy circumstances the difficulty seemed to take another form. With the principal Catholic secondary schools in Lancashire in the hands of the religious orders, an undue proportion of those youths who had vocations for the priesthood would join the regulars and so lessen the ranks of the secular clergy. The bishop thought this difficulty was incidentally met when he had made up his mind to open a commercial college in Manchester. Soon after opening St. Bede's he acquired the Manchester Aquarium, and converted it into a central hall and museum for the college. Four years after this purchase the south wing of the college was opened, and the central block was completed in 1884. St. Bede's has long since taken its place as one of the recognized and permanent centres of Catholic life in England, and at the time of the cardinal's death 2000 boys already had been educated within its walls.

Meanwhile litigation in Rome had begun between the English hierarchy and the representatives of the religious orders on a number of important points of jurisdiction and discipline that had been agitated since the restoration of the hierarchy in 1850; such as the exemption of regulars from episcopal jurisdiction; the right of bishops to divide parishes or missions cared for by regulars, and to give the newly-divided parish to secular priests; the obligations of regulars engaged in parish work to attend diocesan conferences or synods; their right to found new houses or schools, or to convert existing institutions to other purposes; the right of bishops to visit canonically institutions in charge of regulars, to inspect accounts, etc. Though Cardinal Manning was the principal in this litigation, the hierarchy deputed Bishop Clifford and Clifton and Bishop Vaughan to represent them in Rome, the latter being intimately concerned in the matter, as a test case had been a claim of the Society of Jesus to reopen in Manchester a college which they had once closed. After a year and a half spent in this mater at rome, the Bull "Romanos Pontifices" (q.v.) was issued to govern the relations between the religious orders and the bishops in all missionary countries. When Bishop Vaughan first went to Salford he found the diocese comparatively well equipped in regard to its elementary schools, but in most other respects without any sufficient diocesan organization. Long before he left the whole administration was placed on a thorough business footing. Strenuous efforts were made to reduce the burden of debt which weighed upon the diocese. The people were very poor, but they gave generously out of their poverty, and before he left for Westminster the bishop had the satisfaction of knowing that the general debt had been reduced by more than 64,000. The diocesan synods, which formerly had been held every seven years, were made annual. The system of administering the affairs of the diocese through the establishment of deaneries was greatly extended, the dean being made responsible for the proper administration of the missions within the limits of his deanery. A Board of Temporal Administration was formed to advise the bishop on all matters connected with finance. Vaughan was always eager to identify himself in every possible way with the public life of the people of Manchester, with every movement for social reform, and every crusade in behalf of temperance, or sanitation, or the improvement of the houses of the working-classes. Lancashire soon came to recognize in him a large-hearted citizen to whom the interests of no class or creed were alien. When he went to Westminster, the proposal to commemorate a great episcopate by placing a marble bust of him in the Manchester Town Hall, at the public cost, was carried without a dissentient voice.

In the autumn of 1884 "a horrible suspicion forced itself on his mind" that every year a multitude of children were being lost to Catholicism, through the neglect of parents, from the operation of the workhouse system, and through the efforts of proselytizing societies. A house-to-house census of the whole Catholic population of Manchester and Salford was at once undertaken, and every child in every family had to be traced and accounted for, in whatever part of the country it might have migrated. The bishop instructed his clergy to throw aside all other occupations that were not imperative, for the sake of this work, "let them have fewer services in the churches if these were a hindrance in hunting out the souls that were astray". By May, 1886, the census was complete. Out of an estimated Catholic population of 100,000 in Manchester and Salford, 74,000 persons were individually registered. Of the children under sixteen no less than 8445 were reported as in danger of losing their faith, and of these 2653 were described as being in extreme danger. Then the Rescue and Protection Society was started. The bishop gave 1000 to its funds on the spot, and the episcopal income for the same object, during the time he remained in Salford. His example was contagious and the people gave generously in money and service. At the outset the bishop issued a public challenge to the Protestant philanthropic societies of the city. Their plea for accepting and detaining Catholic children in their institutions was that the children were destitute. Bishop Vaughan himself boldly undertook to maintain every destitute Catholic child in Manchester and Salford. Public opinion instantly sided with the bishop. In some cases, however, the societies were obdurate, and time after time the law courts had to vindicate the right of poor Catholic parents to recover the guardianship of their own children. One by one the Protestant institutions were emptied of their Catholic inmates.

A greater task remained. The whole workhouse system of Lancashire had to be changed. In the year 1886 it was found that there were over 1000 catholic children in the fourteen workhouses of Manchester and the neighborhood and that, on the average, 103 Catholic children left the workhouse schools every year. The bishop's report showed that 80 per cent of these were lost to the Catholic church. It was no part of the duty of the Lancashire guardians when they placed these children out in service to take care that they were placed in Catholic families. The bishop did not blame the guardians. The faith of a workhouse child, always part of a timid minority, was generally weak and was easily lost amid new Protestant surroundings. At that time London was far ahead of Lancashire in the fairness of its treatment of Catholic Poor Law children. In Middlesex it was already the custom to hand over Catholic children to Catholic Certified Homes with an agreed sum for their maintenance. In Lancashire there were no Catholic Certified Homes for the children. To create such homes the bishop knew would require a vast sum, but his faith in the inexhaustible charity of his people was once more justified. Two great homes were quickly provided and in each case the certificate of the Local Government Board was obtained. There remained the task of persuading the Boards of Guardians to utilize the opportunity now brought to their doors. It was a strong card in the bishop's hand that he could promise that every child handed over to a Catholic Home should cost the guardians considerably less than if it stayed in the workhouse. The more economical working of the Catholic Homes was, of course, due to the fact that the members of the religious orders who managed them gave their services without payment. Finally, homes were provided for Catholic waifs and strays of whatever sort, whether they came within the reach of the Poor Law or not. Before the bishop left Salford the Rescue and Protection Society had caught up with its work and was fairly abreast with the evil. It is possible even for one who writes under the shadow of Westminster Cathedral, and remembers St. Bede's and the missionary College at Mill Hill, to think that it was then Cardinal Vaughan achieved the greatest work of his life.

Cardinal Manning died on 14 January, 1892. There never was any doubt in the public mind as to who would succeed him. Vaughan faced the prospect with something like dismay. He thought the day of his strength was nearly done, and that at sixty he was too old to be transplanted to the new world of Westminster. He wrote privately to the pope protesting that the was better fitted to be a Lancashire bishop than the English metropolitan. Rome gave no heed to the letter, and Vaughan was appointed Archbishop of Westminster on 29 March, 1892. In May he was enthroned, in August he received the sacred pallium, and in December he knew that he was to be made a cardinal. He received the red hat from the hands of Leo XIII on 9 January, 1893, with the presbyterial title of Sts. Andrew and Gregory on the Caelian. One of the first works to which the archbishop set his hand was to try to improve the education of the clergy by uniting all the resources in men and money of several dioceses for the support of a central seminary at Oscott. In the autumn of 1894 he took steps to reverse the policy which had sought to prevent Catholic parents from sending their sons to the universities of Oxford and Cambridge. The bishop's prohibition was being disregarded and evaded, and he thought it better that it should be withdrawn, and steps taken to secure for the Catholic undergraduates such safeguards for their faith in the way of chaplains and special courses of lectures as the circumstances would allow. He lived long enough to be assured that the change for which he was responsible had been completely successful.

During the next few years a great deal of the cardinal's time and attention was taken up by a controversy which arose out of the movement in favour of corporate reunion associated with the name of Lord Halifax. Representing a small fraction of the Anglican body, Lord Halifax and his friends, warmly encouraged by certain French ecclesiastics, thought the way to reconciliation would be made easier if what they called "a point of contact" could be found which might serve to bring the parties together. It was thought, for instance, that a consideration of the question of Anglican orders might lead to discussion and then to friendly explanations on both sides. If an understanding could be arrived at in regard to the validity of the orders of the English Church, other conferences might be arranged dealing with more difficult points. The cardinal felt that the subject chosen for discussion was unhappily selected. the validity of Anglican orders was mainly a question of fact, and was not one which admitted of any sort of compromise. Moreover even if the orders of the Anglican Church were admitted to be valid, that body would still be as much outside the unity of the Church as the Arians and Nestorians of the past or the Greeks of to-day. However, he was quite willing that all the facts of the case should be investigated anew—all he insisted on was that the investigation should be as thorough as possible and made by a body of historical experts. A strong commission was appointed consisting of Father de Augustinis, S.J., M. l'Abbe Duchesne, Mgr. Gasparri, Abbot Gasquet, O.S.B., Rev. David Fleming, O.S.F., Canon Moyes, Rev. Dr. T. Scannell, and Rev. Jose de Llevaneras. The commission held its first conference on 24 March, 1896. When after a series of meetings the process of investigation was finished, the collected evidence was laid before the cardinals of the Holy Office, who delivered judgment on 16 July, 1896, and declared the orders of the Anglican Church to be certainly null and void. This decision was confirmed by the Bull, "Apostolicae Sedis", published on the thirteenth of the following September.

When the cardinal came to Westminster he came resolved to build a great cathedral. His predecessor had secured a site, but the site was mortgaged for 20,000, and there was no money for building. Few men ever collected more money than Cardinal Vaughan, though to him it was always "hateful work". In July, 1894, he made his first public appeal for the cathedral. In June of the following year the foundation stone was laid and the cardinal had 75,000 in the bank. It was a cathedral of no mean proportions that he meant to build. The design of Bentley (q.v.) combined the idea of a Roman basilica with the constructive improvements introduced by the Byzantine architects. A little later the sale of a city church which the shifting of the population had made superfluous enabled the cardinal, after setting aside 20,000 for a new church, to add 48,000 to the credit of the cathedral building fund. In June, 1902, he made his last appeal. He asked for another 16,000, and it came. The cathedral was opened for public worship a year later, and Cardinal Vaughan was there before the high altar in his coffin. During he last years of his life the cardinal suffered from almost continuous ill-health. He laboured strenuously to the last, especially in the cause of the denominational schools. He had fought their fight for a quarter of a century and had the satisfaction of seeing the great Act of 1902 safely on the statute books. On 15 March, 1903, he left Archbishop's House for ever. St. Joseph's College, Mill Hill, had been his first love and it was his last; he went there to die and he chose it for his place of burial. He lingered on until the nineteenth of June, when the end came a few hours after he had made his public profession of faith in the presence of the Westminster Chapter. When the body was laid out for burial an iron circlet was found driven into the flesh of the left arm. Cardinal Vaughan was a man of strong vitality, and his energies were devoted, with rare singleness of purpose, to one end—the salvation of souls. He loved directness in thought and speech, and had little taste for speculation or analysis. He knew how to win and to hold the allegiance of men, and the touching extracts from his intimate diary which were published after his death showed him to have been a man of exceptional and unsuspected humility.

SNEAD-COX, The Life of Herbert, Cardinal Vaughan (2 vols., London, 1910).

J.G. SNEAD COX

Roger William Vaughan

(Bede).

Second Archbishop of Sydney, b. at Courtfield, Herefordshire, 9 January, 1834; d. at Ince-Blundell Hall, Lancashire, 17 August, 1883. He was the second son of Colonel John Vaughan and Eliza his first wife, and was thus the younger brother of Cardinal Vaughan, Archbishop of Westminster. Being delicate he was educated at home under the influence of his saintly mother till he was seventeen, when he went to Downside. There he decided to become a Benedictine, and, in 1855, having finished his novitiate, he was sent to Rome, where he studied at the Benedictine house of St. Paul-Outside-the-Walls. A year after his ordination (1859) he returned to Downside, where he took charge of the mission. In November, 1861, he became professor of philosophy, and, a year later, cathedral prior at St. Michael's Priory, Belmont, a post which he held till 1872. While at Belmont he wrote his great work, "The Life and Labours of St. Thomas Aquinas" (London, 1871-2; 2nd ed., 1890). In 1872 he was chosen as coadjutor to Archbishop Polding of Sydney, an event which justified the premonition he always had that he was destined to work in Australia. He was consecrated as titular Archbishop of Nazianzus by Archbishop Manning at Liverpool, on 19 March, 1872, and during the summer sailed for Australia. Five years later, on Dr. Polding's death (16 March, 1877), he succeeded him as Archbishop of Sydney. The remaining six years were devoted to apostolic work, especially preaching, in which he was indefatigable in spite of the strain on a constitution never strong. He proved a capable administrator, fighting energetically for Catholic interests, especially those of primary education, which he provided for by the foundation of Catholic schools. He also took great interest in the completion of his cathedral which he lived to open. He was a man of great holiness, and so far as possible continued even when archbishop to lead the life of a simple monk. While visiting England for the sake of his health he died suddenly at his uncle's house.

HEDLEY, Memoir of the Most Rev. Roger Bede Vaughan (London, 1884); GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., s. v. (which gives a list of his minor works); SNEAD-COX, Life of Cardinal Vaughan (London, 1910). See II, 282-86, for the lamentable differences which arose with regard to his burial; BIRT, Benedictine Pioneers in Australia (London, 1911).

EDWIN BURTON

Louis-Nicolas Vauquelin

Born at Saint-André d'Hebertot, Normandy, 16 May, 1763; died 14 Nov., 1829. In youth as apprentice to an apothecary of Rouen he developed a liking for chemistry. Later he went to Paris and met Foureroy, who had been influenced by Lavoisier and the latter's insistence upon the importance of quantitative measurements. Later he became even more accomplished than his master in the field of analytical chemistry. In fact he did nothing in any other branch of clinical work, and although he wrote voluminously, as many as three hundred and seventy-eight papers being published by him, none of his work had any other direction than that of giving descriptions of analytical operations and results. It made no difference whether it was in vegetable or mineral chemistry, or whether physiological or pathological, his work was only analytical, but of course it led to large advances in the field of the constitution of substances he studied. In 1812 he published a manual of assaying. He was one of the first to instruct students by means of practical laboratory teaching. The most illustrious of these followers was Thenard. In 1798 Vauquelin discovered oxide of beryllium in beryl. He also isolated chromium from lead ores. With Berzelius he ascertained correctly the composition of carbon bisulphide, which had been first made by Lampadius in 1796. He discovered quinic acid, asparagin, camphoric acid, and other organic substances. His death, which was very edifying, occurred while he was on a visit to his birthplace.

CHARLES F. MCKENNA

Laurence Vaux

(Vose).

Canon regular, author of a catechism, martyr in prison, b. at Blackrod, Lancashire, 1519; d. in the Clink, 1585.

Educated at Manchester and Oxford, he was ordained in 1542, and took the degree of B. D. at Oxford in 1556. He was first a fellow, and then, 1558, warden of Manchester College, a parish church which had been endowed as a collegiate by Thomas, fifth Baron la Warr, 1421, and re-established by Queen Mary, 1557. In 159 Elizabeth's ecclesiastical commissioners held a visitation in Manchester College, and summoned the warden and fellows before them. However, knowing what to expect, Vaux had removed himself and the college deeds and church place to a place of safe hiding. He was now a marked man, and after a time he took refuge in Louvain, 1561. Here he seems to have kept a school for the children of the English exiles, then comparatively numerous, for whom in fact he compiled his catechism. Meanwhile in England there was considerable uncertainty among the faithful as to how far it was lawful to conform outwardly with the State religion. Pius V commissioned two of the exiles at Louvain, Doctors Sanders and Harding, to publish his decision, informing the Catholics that to frequent the Established services was a mortal sin. Vaux was in Rome in 1566; in a private audience the pope instructed him more fully as to the scope of his decision, and finally the task of making known the papal sentence in England was delegated to him. He returned therefore and conducted a vigorous and successful campaign against the schismatical practice, especially in his native Lancashire. This activity drew down the anger of the Government on his head, and in February, 1568, a queen's writ was issued for his arrest; this document mentions also Allen, though he was not in the country at the time. Vaux again escaped and returned to Louvain.

Here, now at the age of fifty-four, he sought and obtained admission among the canons regular in the Priory of St. Martin's. He was clothed in the habit on St. Lawrence's Day, 10 August, 1572, and made his profession the following May. Before taking the vows he drew up a legal document to provide for the safe custody of the deeds and valuables which he had saved from the commissioners at Manchester, "until such time as the college should be restored to the Catholic Faith, or until Catholics should live in it". So great was the esteem in which Father Lawrence was held by the canons that shortly after his profession he was appointed sub-prior; and when the prior resigned in 1577, to pass over to the Carthusians, there was a strong movement to elect Vaux in his stead. Some, however, apparently feared that he would use his position to introduce a large number of his fellow-countrymen with a view to training them for the English Mission; a marginal note in the "Priory Chronicle" records, "Caenobium nostrum in seminarium pene erectum Anglorum." Three years later at the instance of Allen, he was summoned to Reims by papal authority to take up once more the perilous missionary work in England; the Chronicle notes his departure "with the blessing and leave of his Prior", 24 June, 1580. Vaux left Reims on 1 Aug., and Boulogne on the 12th, arriving that day at Dover in company with a Catholic soldier named Tichborne and a Frenchman, who turned traitor. Escaping detection at Dover, the two Englishmen passed on to Canterbury, and thence to Rochester, where they were arrested on information lodged by the spy. After several examinations Vaux was finally committed by the Bishop of London to the Gatehouse Prison, Westminster. According to an account of the arrest in the "Douay Diaries", Bishop Aylmer demanded: "What relation are you to that Vaux who wrote a popish catechism in English?" The aged priest admitted his authorship and that confession settled his fate.

For the first three years of his imprisonment, owing chiefly to the wealth and influence of noble friends, Vaux was treated with comparative mildness. In a letter which he sent to the Prior of St. Martin's a few months after his arrest he speaks quite cheerfully of his condition and surroundings. But later another letter addressed to John Coppage, Aug., 1583, was intercepted and the following sentence underlined by some member of the Council: My friends here be many and of much worship, especially since my Catechism came forth. This communication also mentioned the disposal of as many as 300 copies in the Manchester district alone. Thereupon the aged confessor was transferred to the Clink. According to Strype, he was brought up again before the relentless Aylmer, in 1585, and found guilty "and so in danger of death". What happened further we do not know; if actually sentenced, he must have been reprieved. In all probability he was abandoned to a lingering death in prison. The common tradition is represented by this contemporary item from St. Martin's Chronicle: "The venerable Father Lawrence Vaux, martyr. . .for the confession of the Catholic Faith thrown into prison, where he was starved to death, and so gained the crown of martyrdom, 1585." Vaux's catechism, to which we may fairly attribute his imprisonment and death, was first published in Louvain, in 1567. Six further editions in rapid succession, emanating from Antwerp and Liège, testified to its widespread popularity and effectiveness. The Liège, 1583, issue was reprinted with an excellent biographical introduction for the Chetham Society by Thomas Graves Law, in 1885. This edition contains also Vaux's paper on "The Use and Meaning of Ceremonies", and a few further pages of instruction added by the Liège publisher. The catechism is practically formed on the same liens as its successor of today, explaining in sequence the Apostles' Creed, the Pater and Ave (but the latter has not the second half, Holy Mary), the Commandments (these at considerable length), the sacraments, and the offices of Christian justice. The treatise on the ceremonies discusses the use of holy water, candles, incense, vestments, etc. The style is old-fashioned, but the matter in both is as useful and edifying today as it was four centuries ago.

Catholic Record Society's Miscellanea, II; DODD, Ch. Hist. of Engl.; Douay Diaries; GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. of Engl. Cath., s.v.; LAW in his Introduction to Vaux's Catechism (Chetham Society, 1885); PITTS, De Angliae Scriptoribus (1619); The Rambler (London, 1857).

VINCENT SCULLY

Vaux-de-Cernay

A celebrated Cistercian abbey situated in the Diocese of Versailles, Seine-et-Oise, in what was called the "Isle-de-France". In 1118 Simon de Neauffle and his wife Eve donated the land for this foundation to the monks of Savigny, in order to have a monastery built there in honour of the Mother of God and St. John Baptist. Blessed Vital, Abbot of Savigny, accepted their offer, and sent a band of monks under the direction of Arnaud, who became their first abbot. Besides their first benefactors, numerous others of the nobility came to the aid of the new community. As soon as they were well established, many postulants presented themselves for admission, rendering possible the foundation of Breuil-Benoit (1137) in the Diocese of Evreu. In 1148 vaux-de-Cernay, with the entire Congregation of Savigny, entered the Order of Citeaux and became a filiation of Clairvaux. Up to this period their substance was only enough for them to live on, but from this time they became prosperous, built a church in the simple Cistercian style, and little by little, constructed the other regular places. Many of its abbots became well known. Andrew, the fourth, died Bishop of Arras; Guy, the sixth, was the most celebrated, having been delegated by the General Chapter to accompany the Fifth Crusade in 1203. Three years later he was one of the principal figures in the crusade against the Albigenses, in recognition of which service he was made Bishop of Carcasone (1211) and is commemorated in the Cistercian Menology. His nephew Peter, also a monk of Vaux-de-Cernay, accompanied him on this crusade, and left a history of both the heresy and the war. It was under his successor, Abbot Thoas, that Porrois, a monastery of Cistercian nuns (later on the famous Abbey of Port-Royal), was founded and placed under the direction of the abbots of Vaux-de-Cernay. The ninth abbot, Thibault de Marley (1235-47), was canonized and worked many miracles both before and after death. Towards the end of the fourteenth century the monastery began losing its fervour, both on account of too great wealth and because of the disturbed state of the times. But after the introduction of commendatory abbots (1542) there was little left besides the name of monks. In the seventeenth century it was restored in spirit by embracing the Reform of the Strict Observance of Denis Largentier. It was during this time that its commendatory abbot was John Casimir, King of Poland. The monastery was suppressed at the revolution (1791) and its members (twelve priests) dispersed. The buildings, after passing through various hands, are now partly restored and are much admired both by artists and archaeologists.

Gallia Christiana, VII; JONGELINUS, Notitia Abbatiarum, O. Cisterciensis (Cologne, 1640); TISSIER, Bibliotheca Patrum Cisterciensium, VII (Paris, 1669); MERLET and MOUTIER, Cartulaire de l'Abbaye de N. D., des Vaux-de-Cernay, I-III (Paris, 1857-58); MORIZE, Etude archeologique sur l'Abbaye des Vaux-de-Cernay with introduction by DE DION (Tours, 1889); DE DION, Cartulaire de Porrois plus connue sous le nom mystique de Port-Royal (Paris, 1903); BEAUNIER, Recueil historique des archeveches, eveches, abbayes et prieures de France, province ecclesiastique de Paris (Paris, 1905); MANRIQUE, Annales Cistercienses (Lyons, 1642-59); MARTENE and DURAND, Veterum Scriptorum et Monumentorum amplissima collectio, II (Paris, 1724); PETRUS, Historia Albigensium (Troyes, 1615); JANAUSCHEK, Originum Cisterciensium, I (Vienna, 1877).

EDMOND M. OBRECHT

Thomas Vavasour

English Catholic physician, pensioner of St. John's College, Cambridge, b. about 1536-7; d. at Hull, 2 May, 1585. On 25 June, 1549, at the disputations held before the king's commissioners at Cambridge, Vavasour was one of the disputants in favour of Transubstantiation and the Sacrifice of the Mass. He subsequently went to Venice where he took the degree of M.D., and on 20 Nov., 1556, he received a licence from the College of Physicians of London to practise for two years. His house was "by the common school house" in the city of York; there Mass was said in 1570. In 1572 he was accused of having entertained Blessed Edmund Campion. In Nov., 1574, after he had been confined to his own house in the city of York for nearly nine months, he was sent into solitary confinement in the Hull Castle. Grindal describes him as "sophistical, disdainful, and illuding arguments with irrision, when he was not able to solute the same by learning", and adds that "his great anchor-hold was in urging the literal sense of hoc est corpus meum, thereby to prove transubstantiation". By June, 1579, he was back again in his house, where Mass was again said. Later on he was in the Gatehouse, Westminster, from which he was released on submitting to acknowledge the royal supremacy in religious matter; but he was again imprisoned as a recusant in Hull Castle, York where he died. His wife, Dorothy, died in the New Counter, Ousebridge, York, 26 Oct., 1587.

STRYPE, Crammer, I (Oxford, 1840), 290; IDEM, Parker, II (Oxford, 1821), 167; IDEM, Grindal (Oxford, 1821), 273, 535; Cath. Rec. Soc. Publ. (London, 1905), II, 219; V, 193; FOLEY, Rec. Eng. Prov. S. J., III (London, 1877), 245-9, 809; DASENT, Acts of the Privy Council, XII (London, 1890-1907), 108; Calendar S. P. Dom. 1581-90 (London, 1865), 145; Calendar S. P. Dom. Add. 1566-79 (London, 1871), 224, 369; MUNK, Royal College of Physicians, I (London, 1878), 56.

JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT

François Vavasseur

Humanist and controversialist, b. at Paray-le-Monial, 8 Dec., 1605; d. at Paris, 16 Dec., 1681. He entered the Society of Jesus, 25 Oct., 1621, taught humanities and rhetoric for seven years, then positive theology and Scripture at Bourges, and later at Paris. His first work was a paraphrase of the Book of Job in Latin hexameters (1637), resumed and accompanied by a commentary in 1679. He published also "Theurgicon" (1644), on the miracles of Christ, "Elegiarum liber" (1656), "De ludicra dictione" (1656); took an active part in the Jansenistic controversy ("Cornelius Jansenius Iprensis suspectus", Paris, 1650), and defended himself against the charge of having written pamphlets concerning the Calaghan affair (De libello supposititio dissertatio, 1653). In this last writing he defined accurately the style of the Port-Royal writers before the "Provinciales", a monotonous, colourless, unrelieved style, burdened with complicated periods. He wrote a sharp and learned criticism of the "Epigrammatum delectus" of Port-Royal (1659), "De epigrammate liber et epigrammatum libri tres" (1669), showing delicate and solid knowledge of Catullus, Martial, and the Greek anthology. He was sensitive on this subject and took issue with his confere Rapin, who had practically declared that no modern had written a good epigram (Remarques sur les nouvelles réflexions du R.P. Rapin Jésuite, touchant la poétique, 1675). De Lamoignon, Rapin's protector, had Vavasseur's pamphlet suppressed. "Pere Vavasseur was a learned man, one of those critical and severe minds which find something to bite even in good works, and which let nothing pass" (Sainte Beuve, "Port-Royal", III, 528). His other works include sermons, a commentary on Osee, and a dissertation on the beauty of Christ. All his writings were collected by Jean le Clerc (Amsterdam, 1709). His Latin writings had appeared previously in Paris (1683).

SOMMERVOGEL, Bibl. de la compagnie de Jesus, VIII (Paris, 1898), 499; SAINTE-BEUVE, Port Royal, III, 49, 28, 625.

PAUL LEJAY

Blessed Joseph Vaz

A Goanese priest, Apostle of Ceylon [Sri Lanka], b. at Goa, 21 April, 1651; d. at Kandy, 16 Jan., 1711. His parents were Christians of the Konkani Brahmin caste. He learned Portuguese in Sancoale, his father's village, and Latin in Baulim, his mother's village, studied rhetoric at the Jesuit college and philosophy and theology at the College of St. Thomas Aquinas, Goa, was ordained in 1676, and became a favourite preacher and confessor. Hearing of the oppressed state of the Catholics of Ceylon under the Dutch, Father Vaz desired to go to their rescue, but was for the time being appointed Superior of the Kanara Mission, a post which he occupied for three years. On his return to Goa in 1684 he spent his time preaching in the villages, and joined the Oratorians then recently established in Goa, of which congregation he was soon made superior. In 1686 he obtained permission to give up this office and to proceed to Ceylon. On landing at Jaffna he found a strong Calvinistic propaganda going on in the island, and the Catholic religion proscribed and under persecution. He was therefore forced to wear disguise, and to do his work in secret. Afterwards, taking up his residence in a village called Sillale where the Catholics were numerous and resolute, he succeeded in reviving the spirit of the faithful. But this aroused afresh the vigilance of the Dutch, and he was forced to change his quarters for Putlam, where he worked with great success for a whole year. He then fixed on Kandy, the capital of a native independent state, as his centre of operations. Being on his arrival denounced as a Portuguese spy, he was quickly put into prison, where, however, the Catholics gained access to him, thus enabling him to continue his good work. In the end he won the favour of the king, regained his liberty, and began to extend his operations to other parts of the island.

About 1699 several Oratorians and other priests were sent to help him in his labours. The news of his success having reached Rome, Mgr de Tournon, the papal legate, was directed to enter into communication with him. The legate conceived the idea of erecting Ceylon into a diocese with Father Vaz as first bishop, but the latter dissuaded him from this. In his later years Father Vaz had much to suffer from declining health, and in 1710 was unable to leave Kandy. The subject of his beatification was first urged upon the consideration of the Holy See about 1737 by Dom Francisco de Vasconcellos, S.J., Bishop of Cochin, who also claimed jurisdiction over Ceylon. The process was begun in Goa, and a number of miracles were registered. But the non-fulfilment of certain essential formalities led Benedict XIV to cancel the proceedings, with an order, however, that they should be re-instituted. In South Kanara, he is generally known as Venerable Father Joseph Vaz. Mgr Zaleski, Delegate Apostolic of the East Indies, wrote of him in 1894, that he has "unfortunately been almost entirely forgotten. In Europe and even in India, there are still some who remember his name, and in Ceylon, the theatre of his Apostolic labours, his name is still mentioned by the older generation; but the rising generation hardly know what they owe to him. And yet, his is a name that ought to endure for ever".

[Note: In 1995, Joseph Vaz was beatified by Pope John Paul II in Colombo, Sri Lanka.]

DO REGO, L'Apostolo di Ceylan -- P. Giuseppe Vaz della Congregazione dell' Oratorio di S. Filippo Neri (Venice, 1753), tr. ZALESKI, Life of Fr. Joseph Vaz (Calcutta, 1896); Mangalore Magazine (1905-09). Two pamphlets on the life of Father Vaz have been recently printed with the object of reviving his memory among his countrymen.

ERNEST R. HULL

Lorenzo di Pietro Vecchietta

Painter, sculptor, goldsmith, and architect, b. at Castiglione di Val d'Orcia, 1412; d. there, 1480. He is said to have been the pupil of Taddeo Bartoli and Giacomo della Quercia. In sculpture he was influenced largely by Donatello, with whom he came into personal contact; in painting he adhered to the traditions of Siena. His noblest work is at the Hospital of Santa Maria della Scala, Siena, to which he gave a chapel dedicated to Our Lady and decorated with painting and sculpture by his own hand. The frescoes include an Annunciation, a Nativity, a Last Judgment, all badly damaged, and an allegory of the Ladder with children ascending to heaven, which records the tradition of a local foundation and gives its name to the institution. Over the high altar is the striking bronze figure of the Risen Christ keyed to Donatello's harsher manner, also two angels bearing candles. The fine bronze tabernacle was removed by Pandelfo Petrucci and is upon the high altar of the cathedral. A series of frescoes in the Baptistery of S. Giovanni were executed with the assistance of pupils, but much is identified as Vecchietta's own; the Evangelists, the Four Articles of the Creed, the Assumption, containing some lovely angels' heads, and symbolical figures of Virtues. In the Galleria di belle Arti are a Madonna and some minor works; a St. Martin in the Palazzo Saracini; two panels in the Palazzo Publico, a sermon and miracle of St. Bernardino (sometime attributed to di Giorgio), and a beautiful Our Lady of Pity. The ascetic and rather formal figures of Sts. Peter and Paul in the old Mercanzia, Loggie de' Nobili, date about 1458 to 1460. A silver bust or statute of St. Catherine of Siena, known to have been made by Vecchietta at the time of the saint's canonization, disappeared after the siege of Siena (1555). Outside Siena the artist's chief painting, an Assumption, of (1451), is in the church at Pienza; in Florence a Madonna panel and the bronze tomb statute of Marianus Soccinus the Elder (removed from S. Domenico, Siena), a noted Sienese jurisconsult, are in the Uffizi. Vecchietta was the master of Francesco di Giorgio and Neroccio.

PERKINS, Tuscan Sculptors (London, 1864); LUBKE, History of Sculpture, tr. BUNNETT (London, 1872); DOUGLAS, History of Siena (London, 1902); HEYWOOD and OLCOTT, Guide to Siena (Siena, 1904); SEYMOUR, Siena and her Artists (Philadelphia, 1907).

M.L. HANDLEY

Vedas

The sacred books of ancient India. The Sanskrit word veda means "knowledge", more particularly "sacred book". In its widest sense the term designates not only the sacred texts, but also the voluminous theological and philosophical literature attached thereto, the Brahmanas, Aranyakas, Upanishads, and Sutras (see BRAHMINISM). But usually the term veda applies only to the four collections (Samhitas) of hymns and prayers composed for different ritualistic purposes: the Rig-Veda, Sama-Veda, Yajur-Veda, and Atharva-Veda. Of these only the first three were originally regarded as canonical; the fourth attained to this position after a long struggle. The language of the Vedas is an artificial literary language fully perfected, and is not a mere popular dialect. In this respect it resembles the later classical Sanskrit, from which it differs considerably in phonology and inflections. Though differences exist in the language of the four Vedas, still there is such agreement on cardinal points as against later Sanskrit that the term Vedic, which is in common use for the oldest form of the language of India, is amply justified.

I. THE RIG-VEDA

("Veda of verses"; from ric, or before sonants rig, "laudatory stanza") is the oldest and most important of these collections. In its present form it contains 1028 hymns (including eleven supplementary ones in the eighth book), arranged in ten mandalas (cycles), or books, which vary in extent, only the first and tenth being approximately equal. The poems themselves are of different authorship and date from widely different periods. According to the generally accepted view the oldest of them dates back to 1500 B.C., when the Aryan conquerors spread over the Punjab in Northern India and occupied the land on both sides of the Indus. The texts themselves show that the collection is the result of the work of generations of poets, extending over many centuries. Books II to VII inclusive are each the work of a single poet, or rishi (seer), and his descendants; hence they are aptly called "family books". Book III is attributed to the family of Vishvamitra, IV to that of Vamadeva, V to that of Vasishtha. The hymns in books I and X are all composed by different families. The ninth consists exclusively of hymns addressed to Soma, the deified plant, the juice of which was used for the Soma sacrifice. Books II to VII are the oldest, and book X the most recent, in point of origin.

The monotony of the Rig-Veda is due not only to the nature of its mythological content, but also to the fact that hymns to the same deity are usually grouped together. Thus, approximately 500 hymns are addressed to two gods alone: Indra, the god of lightning and storms, and Agni, the god of fire. The element of nature- worship is a marked feature in most of the hymns, with are invocations of different deities. The value of the great collection as presenting the earliest record of the mythology of an Indo- European people is apparent. Several of the gods go back to the time of Indo-Iranian unity, e.g. Yama (the Avestan Yima), Soma (haoma), Mitra (the later Persian Mithra). Some of the divinities, especially the higher ones, still exhibit the attributes which enable us to trace their origin to the personification of natural phenomena. Thus Indra personified thunder, Agni fire, Varuna the sea, Surya the sun, Ushas the dawn, the Maruts the storm, and others were of a somewhat similar character. Indra was the favourite god of the Vedic Aryans; almost one fourth of all the hymns in the Rig-Veda are addressed to him and they are among the best in the collection. Next to Indra stands Agni. The hymns in his praise are often obscure in thought and turgid in phraseology and abound in allusions to a complicated ritual. Many hymns are in honour of Soma. Other gods invoked are the two Ashins, somewhat resembling the Diocsuri of ancient Greece, the terrible Rudra, Parjanya the rain-god, Vayu the wind-god, Surya the sun-god, Pushan the protector of roads and stray kine. Prayers are also addressed to groups of divinities like the Adityas and the Vishve Devas (all the gods). Only a few hymns sing the praise of Vishnu and of shiva in his earlier form as Rudra, though these two deities became later the chief gods of the Hindu pantheon. Goddesses play a small part, only Ushas, the goddess of dawn, has some twenty hymns in her honour; these poems are of exceptional literary merit.

The number of secular hymns are small, but many of them are of particular interest. They are of various content. In one (book X, 34) a gambler laments his ill luck at dice and deplores the evil passion that holds him in his grasp. In the same book (X, 18) there occurs a funeral hymn, from which important information may be gained concerning the funeral rites of the Vedic age. Evidently cremation was most in vogue, though burial was also resorted to. There are also some riddles and incantations or prayers exactly like those in the Atharva-Veda. Historical references are occasionally found in the so-called danastutis (praises of gifts), which in most cases are not independent poems, but laudatory stanzas appended to some ordinary hymn, and in which the poet gives thanks for generosity shown to him by some prince. Some six or seven hymns deal with cosmogonic speculations. It is significant that some of the hymns, chiefly in book X, are cast in the form of a dialogue. Here we may possibly discern the beginnings of the Sanskrit drama. The poetry of the Rig-Veda is neither popular nor primitive, as it has been erroneously considered, but is the production of a refined sacerdotal class and the result of a long period of cultural development. It was intended primarily for use in connection with the Soma sacrifice, and to accompany a ritual, which, though not so complicated as at the time of the Brahmanas, was far from simple. The Rig-Veda has come down to us in only one recension, that of the Shakala school. Originally there were several schools: The "Mahabhashya" (great commentary), about the second century B.C., knows of twenty-one, while some later writings know of two only. In these schools the transmission of the hymns was most carefully attended to; a most elaborate mnemonic system was devised to guard against any changes in the sacred text, which has thus come down to us practically without variants.

Editions of the Rig-Veda were published by Max Muller, "Rig- Veda-Samhita with the Commentary of Sayancharya" (6 vols., London, 1849-74; 2nd ed., 4 vols., 1890-95); "The Hymns of the Rig-Veda in the Samhita and Pada Texts" (2nd ed., 2 vols., London, 1877); Aufrecht, "Samhita Text", in Roman characters (2nd ed., Bonn, 1877); selections in Lanman's "Sanskrit Reader" (Boston, 1884); Bothlingk, "Sanskrit-Chrestomathie" (3rd ed., Leipzig, 1897); Windisch, "Zwolf Hymnen des Rig-Veda", with Sayana's commentary (Leipzig, 1883). Translations were made into: English verse by Griffith (2 vols., Benares, 1896-97); selections in prose by Max Muller in "Sacred Books of the East", XXXII (Oxford, 1891); continued by Oldenburg, ibidem, XLVI (1897); German verse by Grassmann (2 vols., Leipzig, 1876-77); German prose by Ludwig (6 vols., Prague, 1876-88). On the Rig-Veda in general see: Kaegi, "The Rig-Veda", tr. Arrowsmith (Boston, 1886); Odenberg, "Rig- Veda", books I-Vi in "Göttinger Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften", new series, XI (Berlin, 1909).

II. THE SAMA-VEDA

("Veda of chants") consists of 1549 stanzas, taken entirely (except 75) from the Rig-Veda, chiefly from books VIII and IX. Its purpose was purely practical, to serve as a text- book for the udgatar or priest who attended the Soma sacrifice. The arrangement of the verses is determined solely by their relation to the rites attending this function. The hymns were to be sung according to certain fixed melodies; hence the name of the collection. Though only two recensions are known, the number of schools for the veda is known to have been very large. The Sama- Veda was edited: (with German tr.) by Benfey (Leipzig, 1848); by Satyavrata Samashrami in Bibl. Ind. (Calcutta, 1873); Engl. tr. by Griffith (Benares, 1893).

III. THE YAJUR-VEDA

("Veda of sacrificial prayers") consists also largely of verses borrowed from the Rig-Veda. Its purpose was also practical, but, unlike the Sama-Veda, it was compiled to apply to the entire sacrificial rite, not merely the Soma offering. There are two recensions of this Veda known as the "Black" and "White" Yajur-Veda. The origin and meaning of these designations are not clear. The White Yajur=3DVeda contains only the verses and sayings necessary for the sacrifice, while explanations exist in a separate work; the Black incorporates explanations and directions in the work itself, often immediately following the verses. Of the black there are again four recensions, all showing the same arrangement, but differing in many other respects, notably in matters of phonology and accent. By the Hindus the Yajur-Veda was regarded as the most important of all the Vedas for the practice of the sacrificial rites. The four recensions of the Yajur-Veda have been separately edited: (1) "Vajasaneyi Samhita" by Weber (London and Berlin, 1852), tr. Griffith (Benares, 1899); (2) "Taittiriya S." by Weber in "Indische Studien", XI, XII (Berlin, 1871-72); (3) "Maitrayani S." by von Schroeder (Leipzig, 1881-86); "Kathaka S." by von Schroeder (Leipzig, 1900-09).

IV. THE ATHARVA-VEDA

("Veda of the atharvans or fire priests") differs widely from the other Vedas in that it is not essentially religious in character and not connected with the ritual of the Soma sacrifice. It consists chiefly of a variety of spells and incantations, intended to curse as well as to bless. There are charms against enemies, demons, wizards, harmful animals like snakes, against sickness of man or beast, against the oppressors of Brahmans. But there are also charms of a positive character to obtain benefits, to insure love, happy family-life, health and longevity, protection on journeys, even luck in gambling. Superstitions from primitive ages were evidently current among the masses. To some of the spells remarkably close parallels can be adduced from Germanic and Slavic antiquity. The Atharva-Veda is preserved in two recensions, which, though differing in content and arrangement, are of equal extent, comprising 730 hymns and about 6000 stanzas, distributed in twenty books. Many of the verses are taken from the Rig-Veda without change; a considerable part of the sayings is in prose. The books are of different age; the first thirteen are the oldest, the last two are late additions. Book XX, consisting entirely of hymns in praise of Indra, all taken from the Rig-Veda, was undoubtedly added to give the Atharva's connection with the sacrificial ceremonial and thus to insure its recognition as a canonical book. But this recognition was attained only after a considerable lapse of time, and after the period of the Rig-Veda. In the "Mahabharata" the canonical character of the Atharva is distinctly recognized, references to the four Vedas being frequent. Though as a whole this collection must have come into existence later than the Rig-Veda, much of its material is fully as old and perhaps older. For the history of religion and civilization it is a document of priceless value. The Atharva-Veda has been edited by Roth and Whitney (berlin, 1856); Engl. tr. in verse by Griffith (2 vols., Benares, 1897); prose by Bloomfield in "Sacred Books of the East", XLII; by Whitney, revised by Lanman (2 vols., Cambridge, Mass, 1905). Consult Bloomfield, "The Atharaveda" in "Grundriss der Indoarischen Philologie", II (Strasburg, 1899).

On the Vedas in general consult: MACDONNELL, History of Sanskrit Literature (New York, 1900), 29-201, bibl. 439-42; BAUMGARTNER, Gesch. der Weltliteratur, II (Freiburg, 1902); WINTERNITZ, Gesch. der indischen Literatur, I Der Veda (Leipzig, 19050; PISCHEL, Die indische Literatur in Kultur der Gegenwart I, VII (Berlin and Leipzig, 1906), 164-174, bibl. 212.

ARTHUR F.J. REMY

Andreas de Vega

Theologian and Franciscan Observantine, b. at Segovia in Old Castile, Spain, at unknown date; d. at Salamanca probably in 1560. He studied at the University of Salamanca, and was a professor there when he became an Observantine of the Franciscan Order. He continued his work as a teacher in the monastery of the Observantines where the learned Alphonso de Castro also taught. Both were distinguished in speculative theology. Vega was a moderate Scotist who at the same time held to St. Bonaventure. The Emperor Charles V sent Vega as theologian together with other scholars to the Council of Trent. At Trent he came into connection with Cardinal Petrus Pacheco, Bishop of Jaen (consequently called "Giennensis"), who was a patron of the Franciscan Order. Vega was conspicuous in the preliminary discussions of the canon of the Scriptures and on the Vulgate, which were treated in the Decree promulgated in the fourth session of the council, 8 April, 1546. He also took a prominent part in the preliminary discussions on the dogma of justification, and drew attention to himself at the same time by his debates with Dominicus de Soto, the Dominican who defended the dogmas of rigid Thomism. The Decree was promulgated in the sixth session on 13 January, 1547. Previous to the council Vega had written to defend the Catholic doctrine of justification against the Protestants, "De justificatione, gratia fide, operibus et meritis quaestiones quindecim" (Venice, 1546). The dedication to Cardinal Pacheco is dated Trent, 1 January, 1546. After the promulgation of the Decree he wrote in its defence at Trent and Venice, "Tridentini decreti de justificatione exposition et defensio lib. XV distincta" (Venice, 1548). In the last two books he confutes Calvin's "Acta synodi tridentinae cum antidoto" (Geneva, 1547). This was Vega's most important work and it was so highly esteemed by Peter Canisius that he had it reprinted at Cologne (1572) in one volume with Vega's previous work, "De justificatione". Reprints were issued at Cologne (1585) and at Aschaffenburg (1621). A posthumous work by Vega was also published, his "Commentaria in Psalmos" (Alaclà de Henares, 1599).

WADDING, Scriptores ordinis minorum (Rome, 1650), 14 sq.; (ibid., 1806), 1829; (ibid., 1906), 17 sq.; SBARALEA, Supplementum ad scriptores ord. min. (Rome, 1806), 37 sq.; (2nd ed., ibid, 1908), I, 40; WADDING-LUCAS DE VENETIA, Annales minorum, XVIII (Rome, 1740), 17-18, 122-23, 145-147; XIX (ibid., 1754), 208; HURTER, Nomenclator, IV (Innsbruck, 1899), 1179 sqq.; II (3rd ed., ibid., 1906), 1390-92; Concilium Tridentinum issued by the GURRES SOCIETY, I-V (Freiburg, 1901-1911); HEFNER, Die Entstehungsgeschichte des Trienter Rechtfertigungsdekretes (Paderborn, 1909), 58-59; 102 sqq.

MICHAEL BIHL

Johannes Veghe

German preacher and religious writer, b. at Münster in Westphalia about 1435; d. there, 21 September, 1504. His father seems to have been a physician. In 1450 he matriculated at the University of Cologne; in the register of students he is called "Johannes ten Loc alias Veghe clericus Monasteriensis". In 1451 he entered the house of the Brethren of the Common Life of Münster, in 1469 became first rector of the house of the Brethren at Rostock, returned to Münster in 1471, and was made rector there in 1475. On account of ill health he resigned in 1481 and became confessor to the Sisters of Niesink at Münster; this position which he retained until his death, gave him time to gratify his literary tastes. He lived to see the victory of Humanism (q.v.) in Münster and Westphalia; the Humanists Murmellius and Hermann von dem Busche in their poems praise his pious life and his study of religious books. His earliest work is his "Geistliche Jagd", dedicated to Duke Magnus II of Mecklenburg. This is a description of a spiritual chase, whose object is God; all the details of an actual hunt are applied to the sphere of spiritual things. This work was followed by the : "Marientrost", in which Veghe wishes to show how and why we should appeal to the Blessed Virgin; "Geistliches Blumenbett" (Lectulus Floridus), dedicated to the Sisters of Niesink; and "Weingarten der Seele", which treats in three books of the progress of man from the beginning of Christian life to perfection. Veghe's main work consists of sermons delivered in Low German before the Sisters of Niesink 1492. They are splendid examples of pulpit oratory, notable for the keen observation of nature and knowledge of the human heart; the mode of expression is vigorous and racy. His absolute mastery of the language, and the simple, natural style, will, in the opinion of Triloff, perpetuate the fame of Veghe in the history of Low German literature. His sermons were edited by Professor Franz Jostes in 1883. In dogma Veghe held rigidly to the teachings of the Church, but he would not accept the gaining of indulgences for the dead, who he believed were entirely under the hand and judgment of God. He was genuinely religious, not hypocritical, and at the same time cheerful and kindly.

JOSTES, Johannes Veghe, ein deutscher Prediges des X V Jahrhunderts (Halle, 1883); TRILOFF, Die Traktate u. Predigten Veghes untersucht (Halle, 1904); BOMER, Das literarische Leben in Münster (Münster, 1906), 55-63.

KLEMENS LOFFLER

Maffeo Vegio

(MAPHEUS VEGIUS.)

Churchman, humanist, poet, and educator, b. at Lodi, Italy, 1406; d. at Rome, 1458. The details of his life are gathered chiefly from his writings. Born of distinguished parents, his mother being of the house of Lauteria, Vegio passed his early youth at Lodi and Milan, where he completed his elementary studies under capable teachers. One of them, a great admirer of St. Bernardine of Siena, often took his pupils to hear the sermons of the saint of whom Vegio was later to be the biographer. At his father's direction Vegio undertook the study of philosophy in the University of Pavia, changing later to jurisprudence, and, finally, to letters, to which his tastes had always inclined him. He was passionately devoted to the ancient Latin poets and especially to Virgil. He produced his first volume of poems when sixteen years of age. For about ten years Vegio taught poetry and jurisprudence at the University of Pavia. He became an enthusiastic promoter of the revival of letters. Pope Eugenius IV appointed him Secretary of Papal Briefs, and later Apostolic Datary and a canon of St. Peter's. Vespasiano speaks of him at this time as a secular priest, but the date of his ordination is not known. In the service of the Church, Vegio's studies turned more to the Fathers and sacred sciences than to the classics, to St. Augustine instead of Virgil. Chiefly through his devotion to Augustine, Vegio was attracted to the Augustinians, and joined the order. He was buried in the Chapel of St. Monica, which he had caused to be erected in the Church of St. Augustine, Rome.

Vegio's poetical works are as follows: "Poemata et epigrammata", written about 1422; "De morte Astyanactis", on the death of Hector's son and the grief of Andromache (Cagli, 1475); "Velleris aurei", six books on the quest of the Golden Fleece (Cologne, 1589); "In supplementum Æneidos", which Vegio added to Virgil's "Æneid" to describe the destiny of Æneas, and which became the basis of his fame among later humanists (Paris, 1507); "Antoniados, sive de vita et laudibus S. Antonii" (Deventer, 1490). His prose works are: "De perseverantia religionis" (Paris, 1511); "De quattuor hominis novissimis, morte, judicio, inferno et paradiso meditationes" (Paris, 1511); "Vita Sancti Bernardi Senensis" in "Acta SS.", May, V, 117; "Sanctae Monicae translationis ordo. Item de S. Monicae vita et ejus officium proprium", unedited: "Declamatio seu disputatio inter solem, terram, et aurum, audiente Deo et homine assistente", allegorical dialogue (Milan, 1497); "Philalethes, seu veritas invisa exulans", allegorical dialogue addressed to his brother Eustachius (Brescia, 1496); "De felicitate et miseria" (Milan, 1497); "Liber de significatione verborum in jure civili" (Vicenza, 1477), not extant; "de rebus antiquis memorabilibus Basilicae S. Petri Romae", valuable archaeological study, in four books, of St. Peter's Rome, in "Acta SS.", June, VII, 52; "De educatione liberorum et eorum claris moribus", a treatise, in six books, on the education of children and their moral foundation. The first three treat of the duties of parents and teachers in education; the last three of the duties of the young to God, to their fellow-men, and themselves, of the several virtues, good manners, the use of time, etc. It is his most important work, and was for a long time attributed to Filelfo. It has the distinction of being the most Christian in spirit of all the humanistic educational treatises. It approves the study of pagan literature only in conjunction with sacred learning, the study of the Scriptures and the Fathers, makes provision for the education of girls, and considers the formation of a sound moral and Christian character to be the supreme end of education. Many editions of the work have appeared, the latest at Tournai, 1854 (Fr. tr., 1513; Ger. tr. 1856).

KOPP, Maffeus Vegius Erziehungslehre in Bib. kat. Pad., II (Freiburg, 1889); KOHLER, Padagogik des Marpheus Vegius (Gmund, 1856); TIRABOSCHI, Storia della letteratura italiana, VI; VESPASIANO DA BISTICCI, Vite. . . (Bologna, 1893).

PATRICK J. MCCORMICK

Diocese of Veglia

(VEGIENSIS ET ARBENSIS).

In Austria, suffragan of Görz-Gradisca. Parallel to the Dinaric Alps are a number of rocky islands, separated from the mainland by a deep, though narrow, strait. The largest of them is Veglia, which in the year 1000 had a bishop, Vitalis, who was preset at a synod in Spoleto. Eugene III made it a suffragan of Zara, but since 1828 it has been under Görz. Bartholomaus Bozarich was present at the assembly of bishops in 1849 and his successor was a member of the Vatican Council. Still more ancient is the See of Ossero (Lusin, Absor, Auxerensis), to whose bishop Pope John VIII wrote in 870. The fifty-fifth bishop, Raccamarich, was transferred to Cattaro in 1818, and Ossero and Veglia were united. The See of Arbe (Scardona) is even more ancient. Its first known bishop attended a council at Salona in 530. The fifty-eight bishop, Galzigna (d. in 1823), was also the last, as his diocese was merged in that of Veglia. Although Veglia is a triple see, it contains only 809,000 Catholics, 95 secular priests, 64 regulars, and 68 nuns.

FARLATI, Illyrici sacri, V (Venice, 1775); Veglia, 294-316, 639-47; Ossero, 182-223; Arbe, 223-294; THEINER, Monumenta Slavorum meridionalium, hist. illustr. (Rome, 1863), 46, 79 sq., 107 sq., 112, 122, 163, 323, 422 sq., 432 sq., 519 sq., 575, 581, 613 sq.; Mon. Hung. Rom., I (1859): Veglia, 425, 110, 112, 195, 220 sq., 323, 539 sq., Absor, 573, Arbe, 247, 281 sq.

COLESTIN WOLFSGRUBER

Michael Vehe

Born at Bieberach near Wimpfen; died at Halle, April, 1559. He joined the Dominicans at Wimpfen, and was sent to Heidelberg in 1506, where he taught in 1512 and received the doctorate in theology in 1513. In 1515 he was appointed regent of the Dominican house of studies at Heidelberg; later Cardinal Albert of Mainz chose him as theologian and put him in charge of the Church of Halle, Saxony. He was summoned to Augsburg (1530) to refute the Lutheran Confession of Faith and took a prominent part in a debate against the Lutherans in 1534, at Leipzig. He wrote: "Von dem Gesatz der Niessung des h. hochw. Sacraments" (Leipzig, 1531), and "Errettung der beschuldigten kelchdieb" (Leipzig, 1535) on Communion under one species; "Wie unterschieldlicher wiess Gott und seine heiligen sollen geehret werden" (Leipzig, 1532), a treatise on the veneration of the saints; "Assertio sacrorum quorumdam axiomatum" (Leipzig, 1537), on the point controverted by the Reformers; these writings are the best apologetical treatises that appeared in Germany during the sixteenth century. Vehe also published "Ein neue Gesangbuchlein" (Leipzig, 1537; Hanover, 1853), a collection of hymns. He was called to the bishopric of Halberstadt, 21 Feb., 1559.

HURTER, Nomenclator, II, 1249 sqq.; Script. ord. praed., II, 95; Bull. ord. praed., IV, 678; VEESENMEYER, Kleine Beitrage zur Gesch. des Reichstags in Augsburg, 1530 (Nurnberg, 1830), 115; Gaumker, Das kath. deutsche Kirchenlied, I (Freiburg, 1886), 124 sqq.

IGNATIUS SMITH

Religious Veil

In ancient Rome a red veil, or a veil with red stripes, distinguished newly-married women from the unmarried. From the earliest times Christ was represented to the Christian virgin as a husband, the only One, according to St. Paul (I Cor., vii, 34), she had to please. It was natural that the bride of Christ should, as the vestal virgins had done, adopt the veil, which thus symbolized not so much the purity as the inviolable fidelity to Christ which was to be reverenced in her. "There is here", said St. Optatus, "a sort of spiritual marriage" ("De schismate Donatistarum", VI; P. L., XI, 1074).

The taking of the veil then suggested an obligation of constancy, which forbade, first, illicit sexual intercourse, and afterwards marriage itself. Virgins took this veil themselves, or received it from the hands of their parents. It was worn also by widows, who made a profession of continence, and was called velum, velamen, maforte, flammeus (flammeum), flammeus virginalis, flammeus Christi (Wilpert, "Die gottgeweihten Jungfrauen in den ersten Jahrhunderten der Kirche", p. 17). In addition to this private taking of the veil, there was early instituted another solemn clothing, which was performed by the bishop on feast days during the Holy Sacrifice (see St. Jerome, "Ad Demetriadem", ii; P.L., XXII, 1108; and St. Ambrose, "De lapsu virginis consecratae", v; P.L., XVI, 3726). Sometimes the bishop deputed a priest for this purpose (Fulgentius Ferrandus, "Breviarum canonum", can. xci; P.L., LXVII, 957). After a short time, the solemn consecration of virgins was reserved to the bishop, while priests gave the veil to widows. These virgins and widows were not all cloistered; those who entered a monastery received from the abbess a veil which symbolized their religious profession, and the virgins at twenty-five years of age received solemnly from the bishop the veil, which was the mark of a special consecration.

The veil thus became in convents of women the distinctive sign of the different conditions. Suarez (De religione, tr. VI, t. I, col. 11, n. 5) mentions the following as in use, or as having been in use: the veil of probation, generally white, given to novices; the veil of profession; the veil of virginal consecration, given only to virgins at the age of twenty-five years; the veil of ordination, which the nun received at the age of forty years, on becoming a deaconess, with the privilege of intoning the office and reading the homilies in choir (cap. Diaconissam, 23, c. xxvii, q. 1); the veil of prelature, which abbesses obtained as a reward at the age of sixty years (cap. Iuvenculas, 12, c. xx, q. 1); the veil of continence, which with widows took the place of the veil of the virgins (cap. Vidua, 34, c. xxvii, q. 1). Tamburinus (De iure abbatissarum, d. 27, q. 2) mentions also a veil of penitence, given to penitent sisters. Several of these veils fell into disuse; at present, we know only the veil which forms part of the religious habit. Even that has disappeared in some newly founded congregations, e.g. the Little Sisters of the Poor. Where it still exists it is customary that the veil of novices should be white. The nuns of the mendicant orders did not receive the veil of the virgins, the imposition of which was still customary in the fifteenth century and did not disappear till the end of the sixteenth century. In the eighth and ninth centuries it was found necessary to issue ecclesiastical decrees to restrain abbesses from usurping the function of the bishop and solemnly conferring the veil themselves. See the capitularies of Aachen of 789, c. lxxvi (Mon. Germ. Hist.: Capit. Reg. Franc., t. I, n. 22, can. lxxvi, p. 60); Charlemagne, can. xiv, promulgated at the Sixth Council of Paris (829), l. I, c. xliii (Hardouin, "Conc.", t. IV, col. 1321; Abelard, Ep. viii, in P.L., CLXXVIII, 318 B). In the twelfth century Abelard made a rule that a white cross on the head should distinguish the veil given to virgins by the bishop from that of the other nuns (Ep. viii, P.L., CLXXVIII, 301).

The Roman Pontifical contains the imposing ceremony of the consecration of virgins. The gift of the veil is accompanied by these words: "Receive the sacred veil, that thou mayst be known to have despised the world, and to be truly, humbly, and with all thy heart subject to Christ as His bride; and may He defend thee from all evil, and bring thee to life eternal." Wilpert quotes a very ancient form, which is common to the different liturgies: "Receive, O virgin, this holy veil, and wear it without stain until thou shalt appear before the judgment seat of Our Lord Jesus Christ, before Whom every knee shall bow, of those that are in heaven, on earth, and under the earth, for all eternity, Amen."

See VIRGINITY; also the Pontificale Romanum: De benedictione et consecratione virginum; MUJIK AND PERSCHINKA, Kunst und Leben in Alterthum (Vienna and Leipzig, 1909); DARENBERG, SAGLIO, AND POTTIER, Dictionnaire des antiquites grecques et romaines (Paris, 1904), s. v. Matrimonium.

A. VERMEERSCH

Philipp Veit

Painter, b. at Berlin, 13 Feb., 1793; d. at Mainz, 18 Dec., 1877. Veit was a grandson of the philosopher Mendelssohn. In 1815 he went to Rome, where he studied under Overbeck and Cornelius as their best pupil. In 1830 he settled at Frankfort, and in 1854 at Mainz. In 1808 his mother Dorothea and her second husband Friedrich Schlegel had become Catholics, and he followed them in to the Church in 1810. About the same time also he decided to become a painter. He studied drawing under Matthai at Dresden, but by 1811 he went to Vienna where he first tried to paint portraits, producing several, but the blending of the colours, to which he gave special attention, caused him much trouble. In 1813 he took an honourable part in the War of Liberation. After this he went to Italy, but first he painted a beautiful "Madonna with the Child and John the Baptist", which he left at Heiligenstadt near Vienna. He joined in the work of the colony of German painters at Rome, and his share of the frescoes for the villa called Casa Zuccari was the "Temptation of Joseph", and also the fresco of "The Seven Years of Plenty", which is unusually well done. The colouring in this last mentioned fresco was fresher than that of his artist friends; this is even more evident in the cartoon which is at Frankfort.

He painted in place of Cornelius in the Villa Massimi the "Paradise" of Dante, not in the grand style, but in a poetic manner that was full of feeling. He also painted here the lowest eight divisions of Dante's "Heaven". A fresco painted by him in the Museo Chiaramonti treats the re-dedication of the Colosseum as a place of worship. In Sta Trinita de' Monti there is a Crowning of the Virgin which is much admired. At Frankfort, Veit was the director of the Stadel Institute, and he made it one of the chief centres of German Romantic art. He drew a large number of pupils around him, among them Settegast who was later his son-in-law, and Rethel, who always acknowledged that he had been greatly aided by Veit.

Besides a few portraits, Veit painted the well-known pictures of the Emperors Charlemagne, Frederick II, Otto I, and Henry VII, in the Hall of the Emperors at Frankfort. Taken together, these portraits convey the ecclesiastical conception of the medieval empire as it appeared to the mind of this painter, who was so strongly imbued with the ideas of Christian Romanticism. The "Two Marys at the Grave" has much greater artistic value. This pen-and- ink sketch of the women sorrowing on the still closed grave is harmonious throughout, and full of fine feeling; it was intended for the religious foundation at Neuburg. A contrast to this last is the "Presentation in the Temple", in which a certain majesty is happily expressed. Veit painted an "Assumption of the Virgin" for the cathedral. During his residence at Frankfort he worked with restless energy to perfect the technic of drawing and colour, and to justify the demands of a moderate realism, and of popular art as typified by Schadow at Dusseldorf. If, in so doing, he turned aside from the style of Overbeck and Cornelius, nevertheless he gained a more vigourous manner for himself by these efforts. His greatest work, "Christianity bringing the Fine Arts into Germany", was painted in the years 1833-36; it was transferred to canvas in 1877. In the centre stands Religion full of gentle graciousness; to the right Boniface, the Apostle of Germany, preaches Christianity in her name to the attentively listening youth; an old bard and a priestess turn away, although the sacred oak has just been cut down at the command of the apostle. Religion turns towards this side, holding in her hand the palm-branch, the promise of peace. With the right hand she points to the Gospel as the source of truth. Christian life flourishes about her, and on the left side of the picture there are seen representations of Christian poetry, of medieval knighthood, of music, and farther in the background the symbolical figures of other arts, the monk dead to the world, but devoted to learning; finally a Gothic building and a civilized city. As a painting belonging to the realm of imagination the work belongs to the best of its class. When Lessing's "Huss before the Council" was placed opposite his own painting by way of contrast, Veit, wounded in his religious convictions, went to Sachsenhausen and later accepted a call to Mainz. As director of the picture gallery of Mainz he painted in the cathedral pictures from sacred history under the windows of the main nave, a task for which his graceful but not vigorous brush had hardly sufficient dramatic force. One of his latest works is a portrait of himself, a masterpiece of delineation of character and of colour. A skilful writer, he left, among other productions, ten lectures on art, which have been edited by L. Kaufmann (Cologne, 1891).

SPAHN, Philipp Veit (Leipzig, 1901).

G. GIETMANN

Johann Emanuel Veith

Preacher, b. of Jewish parents at Kuttenplan, Bohemia, 1787; d. at Vienna, 6 Nov., 1876. In 1801 he took the philosophical course at the University of Prague and later studied medicine. In 1808 he obtained a degree in medicine at Vienna; in a short time he was professor and then director of the school of veterinary medicine. He wrote poetry, and a play of his was acted in one of the theatres of Vienna. He also published a valuable compendium in two volumes of veterinary surgery, and an outline of botanical medicine. In 1816 he became a Christian, and in 1817 began the study of theology. He also became a personal friend of Father Hofbauer, was his physician, and was urged by him to devote himself to preaching after ordination. Veith was ordained, 26 Aug., 1821, and the next month joined the Redemptorists at Maria Stiegen. He was a Redemptorist preacher at Maria Stiegen, 1821-30; preacher at the Cathedral of St. Stephen, 1831-45; retired cathedral preacher, until his total blindness, 1845-63; finally, a writer of ascetic devotional works until his death. His sermons exist in manuscript up to 1825; their publication began with "Die Leidenswerkzeuge Christi" (1826); "Die Worte der Feinde Christi" (1827); "Das Friedensopfer" (1828); "Lebensbilder aus der Passionsgeschichte" (1829); "Das Vater Unser" (1830); "Die heiligen Berge" (1821); "Der verlorne Sohn" (1832); "Die Samaritin" (1833); "Die Erweckung des Lazarus" (1842); "Mater dolorosa" (1843); "Die Heilung des Blindgeborenen" (1844); "Eucharistia" (1846); "Die Säulen der Kirche" (1847); "Misericordia" (1848); "Politische Passionspredigten" (1849); "Weitleben und Christentum" (1850); "Charitas" (1851); "Der Weg, die Wahrheit, und das Leben" (1854); "Prophetie und Glaube" (1855); "Die sechs Fastensonntage nach ihren Kalendernamen" (1857); "Die Perikopen-Reihen der sechs Fastwochen" (1858); "Die Mächten des Unheils" (1859); "Die zwölf Stufenpsalmen" (1862); "Die Anfange der Menschenweit" (1863). Among his homilies are: "Homiletische Vorträge für die Sonn-und Festtage" (7 vols.); "Homilienkranz für das katholische Kirchenjahr" (5 vols); "Vorträge über die sonntäglischen Perikopen von Advent bis Pfingsten". Among his collections of homilies are to be found sermons on the feast days of the ecclesiastical year; he also published sermons of this class in two vols.: "Festpredigten, zumeist in einer Doppelreihe". Of the sermons on special occasions may be named: "Die Cholerapredigt" (1831); and "Austrias Trauer, Drei Reden bei den Exequien für Kaiser Franz I" (1835).

Veith took pains to give his sermons an attractive and tasteful form; their language is classic. In the third part of his "Erzählungen und Humoresken" he gives the delightful "Aphorismen für Diener der Kirche von einem Kirchendiener". He never made use of the arts of secular orators to create a sensation; least of all did he wish to be a fashionable preacher. Veith's pulpit was always surrounded by those classes of society which usually do not attend such services. Priests, scholars, literary men, artists, and students came with eagerness to hear him proclaim the Word of God. In the summer of 1869 Veith received an English translation of his "Leidenswerkzeuge" from Theodore Noethen, parish priest at Albany, U.S.A., the work itself being published at Boston. He published three prayer-books: "Jesus meine Liebe", "Erkenntnis und Liebe"; "Christus gestern, heute, und ewig". From 1863 Veith was both blind and deaf. He could not preach any longer but he succeeded in writing lectures on spiritual exercises for publication, and supplemented and completed his books of meditations: "Denkbüchlein von Leiden Christi"; "Erklärender Text zu Führichs 15 Mysterien des Rosenkranzes"; "Meditationen über den 118. Psalm"; "Hundert Psalmen"; "Der Leidensweg des Herrn"; "Die Epistelreihe des Kirchenjahres in ihrem Verhaltnisse zu den Evangelien"; also the posthumous work "Koheleth und Hoheslied". Veith was buried in the Matzleinsdorfer cemetery of Vienna.

LOWE, Johann Emanuel Veith (Vienna, 1879), with portrait; IDEM, Der hundertste Jahrestag der Geburt Johann Emanuel Veiths in HELFERT's Oesterr. Jahrbuch, XI (Vienna, 1887), 171-84; WOLFSGRUBER, Veith als Homiletiker; SWOBODA, Erster homiletischer Kurs (Vienna, 1911); Vortrage und Verhandlungen (Vienna, 1911), 129-48.

CÖLESTIN WOLFSGRUBER

Diego Rodriguez de Silva y Velazquez

Spanish painter, b. at Seville 5 June, 1599 (the certificate of baptism is dated 6 June); d. at Madrid, 7 August, 1660. His father, Juan Rodriguez, belonged to the Portuguese family of Silva; the child took the name of his mother, Gerónima Velazquez. He entered the studio of the aged Herrera, but could not stand his temper, and soon left for the studio of Pacheco, whose school at Seville was the most frequented. Although one of the most tiresome of romanticizing painters, Pacheco was a cultured mind, appreciative of a genius opposed to his own. As a critic, poet, and man of the world, Pacheco was the centre of the first literary salon in the city, and from this society young Velazquez received an education through contact and conversation with superior men. Before he was twenty he had married Pacheco's daughter Dona Juana. Two daughters were born to him before 1622, when the young painter decided to seek his fortune at Madrid.

Here, through Canon Fonseca, a friend of his, who held a post at Court, he was enabled to visit the royal collections at the Alcazar, Prado, and especially the Escorial, with its matchless collection of Tintorettos and Titians. This was the sole benefit of his visit, and after some several months Velazquez returned to Seville. When Philip IV raised the Sevilian Olivarez to power, Fonseca summoned Velazquez back to Madrid, and he obtained permission to paint the king's portrait in the court of the riding school. This portrait, now lost, was an event. Thenceforth Velazquez had the exclusive right to paint the person of the king. By a patent of 31 October, 1623, he was appointed painter of the chamber, with a salary of twenty ducats payable out of the appropriation for court surgeons and barbers.

For thirty-seven years Velazquez's fortune lasted; even the fall of Olivarez, in 1643, did not lessen the royal favour towards Velazquez, who rose one degree in official functions with each year, becoming in turn gentleman of the bed-chamber, master of the wardrobe, and finally (1652) aposentador, or quartermaster of the royal migrations. His life was now that of a functionary occupied with multifarious duties in a Court noted for the oddities of its protocol, and the strictness of its etiquette. This monotonous and somewhat empty existence was varied by sojourns at Aranjuez and gala excursions which entailed upon Velazquez serious cares and unpleasant tasks; only two journeys to Italy, twenty years apart (1629, 1649), brought him a breath of fresh air, freedom, and relaxation. The artist, however, did not suffer in consequence of these conditions. He had solicited all these offices, and they brought him consideration and honour. At the end of a corridor at the Alcazar, in a world of ministries and bureaux, he lived his own life, which he has shown us in a picture by his son-in-law, Mazao, in a vast, bare Arabian apartment, with a rose in a glass shedding its petals before a bust of the king. Philip, indeed, always carried about with him a key to the studio of Velazquez, and went daily to spend an hour there--to find a brief distraction from the sense of weariness which is expressed in his melancholy countenance. This intimacy was Velazquez' romance; it lends a peculiar charm to the long series of portraits the painter made of his royal friend.

This peculiar situation makes Velazquez a figure somewhat apart in the Spanish School. In an art almost exclusively religious he alone is a lay painter; he alone scarcely ever painted for convents and churches; he alone had occasion to paint historical pictures, mythological scenes, and nudes; he was almost alone in avoiding the scenes of martyrdoms and scenes of torture so characteristic of Spanish painting. These facts, however, point to no conclusion concerning Velazquez' sentiments; for instance, it does not follow that he was not a good Catholic, though it may well be that he was not a mystic.

Compare the Olympian, majestic serenity of his splendid "Crucifixion" of the Prado, with the distorted, pale Christs of Theotocopuli; the evident difference is that between simple respect and religious passion. At bottom no one is less unrestrained in his art than Velazquez, no one gives us fewer confidences nor fewer opportunities to read the secret of his heart. He felt no compulsion to produce something; he was not tormented by any thirst for glory or for self-expression. About 200 canvases constitute his entire output, three-quarters of them portraits, and the facility exhibited borders on the marvellous. Velazquez seems to have had no imagination; his work is perhaps the most remarkable existing example of exclusively naturalistic and realistic art. He never invented anything; he never showed any desire to seem original; he only sought more and more rapid and artistic ways of expressing facts without any intermingling of personality, painting with the same indifference still life or an historical scene, a king or a buffoon, the body of a young girl or a monstrous dwarf; sweeping the universe with his imperturbable gaze and embracing without love or repugnance all forms of life, whether beautiful or hideous, like an impassive mirror of nature. His whole art, his whole ideal, all the interior life and the progress of this incomparable painter, lay in a more and more perfect reproduction of things. It may be said that, starting from a pure realism, Velazquez reaches in his last works a sort of impressionism or phenomenalism, and it is this which for forty years has constituted him the foremost master of modern painting.

His first works were those executed at Seville before his journey to Madrid and his first contact with the Italian masters. These belong to the class of bodegones, or pictures of still life, and are exclusively mere studies. The young painter sought to express simple objects, fruits and vegetables, kitchen utensils, jars, and alcarazas; he was studying, and he learned to translate things directly, constructed his vocabulary without troubling masters, and consulted only nature itself. This was the method of Rembrandt's early work, as also of Chardin's and, in more recent times, of Cézanne's. Most of the important pictures of this early period are now outside of Spain. Such are "The Water-Carrier of Seville" (c. 1618) (Apsley House); the "Two at Breakfast" (same collection); the "Three at Breakfast" (the Hermitage); the "Blind Woman" in the possession of Sir Francis Cook; "Christ in the House of Martha and Mary" (National Gallery, London), which, despite its title, is a scene at an inn with two coarse women; lastly the "St. Peter" of the Beruete collection and the "Nativity" of the Prado (1619), which is the author's largest picture of this date and likewise the best of all.

During the seven years (1623-29) which preceded the first journey to Italy we know that he painted, besides various portraits mentioned below, a large composition called the "Expulsion of the Moriscoes" (1677) which unfortunately perished in the burning of the Alcazar and not even an engraving of it remains. But to the same period belongs an important picture, the "Bacchus", or "The Drunkards", dating doubtless from 1628, and permitting us to judge of his progress. This, also, despite its mythological title, is a very real subject; each face is a portrait, one of those portraits of rustics and beggars, a company recruited from a picturesque rabble, which became fashionable about the beginning of the eighteenth century through the reaction against the idealist system, and which in Spain furnished the material for the picaresque romance. Otherwise the work is magnificent: each head, with its brick-dust tint and sunburnt skin, is superbly forceful and brilliant; the bodies of the two half-clad lads are splendid bits. But, as a whole, the picture is cloudy, lifeless, heavy, and characterized by a crass sensuality.

At this juncture Velazquez made the acquaintance of Rubens, who had come to Madrid on a mission to the King of Spain. Rubens' prodigious activity stirred the apathy of the Andalusian artist; animated by curiosity and a new insight, the young man set out for Italy shortly after the departure of the Fleming. He stayed there a year, visited Venice and Rome, and returned by way of Naples, bringing back from the journey the fruit of contact with Italy and the antique, a new conception of the meaning of art. This was soon made manifest in two large pictures which Velazquez painted after his return, but had perhaps begun in Italy, "Joseph's Coat" (Escorial) and the "Forge of Vulcan" (Prado) (c. 1631). As in "The Drunkards", the idea and characters, the subject and types, were, despite the title, of a popular nature; the "Forge" especially is a genre picture taken from life and but little altered. He here begins to employ that silvery and exquisitely limpid tone which he constantly made more delicate and fluid, and which was thenceforth the great resource of his poetry and the chief agent of his transformations.

This progress of art in Velazquez is shown chiefly in the work of this period, "Christ at the Column" (National Gallery, London) and the "Crucifixion" of the Prado, which Théophile Gautier has compared to a beautiful ivory crucifix on a background of dark velvet. But Velazquez' genius reached its grandest expression at this time in the famous and magnificent picture of "The Lances" (see SPAIN, full-page illustration). The subject is well known: the surrender of Breda, the meeting of the two approaching forces, Nassau followed by his Dutch gunners, Spinola at the head of the picket of lances which gives its name to the work, and the charming gesture of military comradeship, whereby the victor welcomes the vanquished. Two races face each other in a living contrast of faces and costumes, an abundance of portraits, picturesqueness, and colour, a charm and brilliancy of expressions which perhaps have never been equalled in any school. The beauty of the horse, the spirit of the arrangement, the apparent facility, the grandeur of the landscape, the quantity of ambient air, the breadth of the colour scheme, the particular sonorousness of tone, the style, at once natural and joyfully heroic, constitute this immense canvas a unique triumph at this period of Velazquez' work. The central group impersonates Spanish courtesy in its noblest and most chivalrous aspect. The importance of the subject, the dimensions of the work, the incomparable success of plastic expression, picturesque and natural interest with a significance for Spain which some years later "The Night Watch" was to have for Holland, while for clearness of expression, value of colours and physiognomies, Velazquez had the advantage. We may seek in vain in the seventeenth century for anything comparable to this historic canvas. Yet it may be asked is this Velazquez' masterpiece? Has it the immense virtuosity presumed for such a canvas as properly its own? Is not this decorative grandeur borrowed from Veronese or Titian? The very popularity of the work shows that it was according to a received formula, and if Velazquez had died immediately after "The Lances", he still would have been one of the foremost painters of the world, one of the most wonderful artists of the Venetian family, but we should not have known the most intimate and original side of his genius.

For twenty years his portraits formed the chief part of his work. "He only knows how to paint heads", his enemies said of him. "They pay me a great compliment", replied the phlegmatic artist, "for I know of no one else who can do as much." The royal family, Philip IV, his brother the cardinal infante, his two wives, his young son Don Balthazar Carlos, the infanta Margaret, constitute nearly all the contributions to his incomparable gallery; from 1624 to 1660 there are more than twenty portraits of the king himself, and it is doubtful if there exists elsewhere a similar artistic monograph or biography of the same individual; but taken together with those of his circle--his brother, his wives, and his children--these portraits assume a new value and constitute a human document of the first order; they form the reconstruction of a vanished circle, the natural history of the agony f a race. There is to be found nowhere a collection of portraits of such powerful and pathetic interest.

The portraits of Velazquez are distinguished for their absolute truth and the total absence of striving for effect. No royal personage, especially in the seventeenth century, was ever surrounded with less pomp; compared with these portraits Rigaud's "Louis XIV" seems theatrical and bombastic; Van Dyck's "Charles I" foppish, beruffled, and flippant. The black dress, black cloak, black shoes and stockings, the puritanical-looking golilla or Spanish collar, give to Velazquez' portraits a strange severity; we feel the supreme dignity and distinction of a grandeur which is not indebted to costumes or accessories; the prince shows himself and wins our recognition by his presence alone: Yo el Rey. A new stage is marked by the portraits of the king, the cardinal infante, and Balthazar Carlos in hunting costume, made about 1635 for the decoration of a pavilion of the Torre del Pareja; between these three figures treated in a tone of bistre bordering on monochrome the artist has sought new relations and a sort of harmony expressed in the motif, the landscape, the atmosphere, and above all the choice of the tone. An exercise of the same kind, with immense progress in the orchestration, consists of the portraits of the king, Olivarez, and the infante, on horseback, made to adorn a hall of the Prado. After so many masterpieces, it is still a question whether Velazquez ever produced anything happier or more complete than the splendid Infante Balthazar Carlos astride his little chestnut horse, galloping briskly on an April morning on the bare and joyous slopes of the sierras.

Besides these royal series mention must be made of some separate portraits, such as the "Lady in Black" of the Museum of Berlin, the full-length portrait of Admiral Pulido Pareja (1639, Longford Castle), and especially the face of the sculptor Martinez Montanez (Madrid, c. 1645), one of the master's simplest and most extraordinary works. To this period (from 1640) belong two new series in which Velazquez' formula becomes elaborated into his latest manner and the qualities of observer, artist, and harmonist are blended to produce the unparalleled masterpieces of 1655. These are the two series of "Dwarfs" and "Infantes". The seven or eight pictures of dwarfs--the "Niño de Valecas" or the "Boho de Coria" possessed by the Museum of Madrid--afford a glimpse of the familiar life of the Spanish Court in the seventeenth century which nothing can replace; without them we could not imagine the hardness of this world of feasting and luxury which, to enhance its joy by contrast, suffered all the miseries of life to creep in its shadow. The unconscious cruelty which takes such pictures for granted is what Velazquez has in common with the ferocious side of his race and, for example, with the sanguinary art of Ribera. This collection of frightful studies, these pictures of cripples, goblins, abortions, might serve to illustrate a treatise on teratology. The painter shows neither affection nor disgust; he was no repugnance to painting what nature is not ashamed of creating and what the sun shines upon. This gallery of monsters is, after all, one of his most fascinating creations.

In the parallel series of portraits--the infantas at Vienna, Madrid, and in the Louvre--the great painter's otherwise far from tender work is endowed with the peculiar characteristic derived from the presence of women. And yet a strange picture, indeed, of the eternal feminine is presented by these young figures, paralyzed by etiquette, deformed by ridiculous and extravagant fashions. The artist, thenceforth the finished master of his technic, and possessed of the language which was to be the element of his last works, confined himself to playing like a virtuoso with details of reality which took his fancy. He no longer sought to imitate nature itself, to paint slavishly the substance of things, but was content to barely evoke the appearance and arrange on his canvas just what would suggest the whole impression. He ceased to paint facts or, rather, the only facts which he depicted were his intimate sensations. For him, reality henceforth consisted only in the reflexion of things perceived in his consciousness, and this abbreviated reflexion, this new and inner reality, was what he threw into his picture. Thus proceeding slowly and from experience to experience, the painter passed from the mere copying of material facts to the most individual and original expression known in painting. In this period (1649-50) occurred the painter's second journey to Italy, commemorated by three or four masterpieces, the two landscapes of the Villa Medici, preserved at Madrid, which possess all the grace of the most delightful Corots, and the portrait of Velazquez' mulatto slave Juan de Pareja (Castle Howard), with which the artist preluded the magnificent portrait of Pope Innocent X (Palazzo Doria), the finest portrait of a pope save Raphael's Julius II.

On his return to Madrid the painter, now definitely freed from all shackles, and strong enough to handle all ideas as he pleased, produced one after another the most decided, and most precious of his works. Such, for example, were the two famous philosophers, the "Æsop", and the "Menippus" of the Prado, the most beautiful example of this class of Spanish mendicancy akin to the "Drunkards" of thirty years earlier. Such, likewise, were the two companion pictures, the only existing fragments of an entire decoration-the "Mercury and Argus" of the Prado and the "Venus with the Mirror" of the National Gallery. The "Mars" and the "Coronation of the Virgin", at the Prado, are less pleasing, and original works. For a long time, owing to the nature of his ideas and the constant development of his researches, Velazquez devoted himself to the solution of a more important problem. We have seen how in "The Lances" he had attempted historical painting, and what prevented him from succeeding therein. Thenceforth he devoted himself to a new idea through a whole series of works, to express directly, in the fashion of a portrait, not merely an historical scene nor a single figure but a complete action of daily life. Thus, small pictures such as the "Boar Hunt" (Callace Collection, c. 1636), "Balthazar Carlos in the Riding School" (Wallace Collection, c. 1640), and the "View of Saragossa" lead us up to Velazquez' grandest works, those which contain all his genius and present the highest expression of his art, such as "The Spinners" and "The Maids of Honour" (Las Meninas) (c. 1655-56). In subject they are both genre pictures, but of hitherto unknown dimensions and treated in the "historical" size. The former shows a workshop which is being visited by two ladies; the latter, an inner chamber of the Alcazar in which Velazquez is shown painting the young infanta, who is surrounded by her ladies in waiting, her dueñas, her dwarfs, and her dog. Into these everyday scenes is introduced an element of selection, of fantasy, caprice, genius--a something subjective and purely individual, without which such pictures could never have been conceived. Such groups as these were formed again and again in the noisy and overheated work-rooms or the coolness of dark palaces, but they demanded a supreme artist.

To translate these wholly intellectual facts of a quite peculiar order of existence, the artist did not make use of known lines or colours; he employed splashes, vague coloured splashes without parallel in form and with no more relation to the world of real facts than the colourless dust on the butterfly's wing bears to the rich diapering which the eye perceives. Everything becomes more elliptical, more uncertain and unreal, and assumed an appearance of a special nature, no longer that of visible and material phenomena, but of their reflexion in the artist's soul, on a rarely sensitive surface; the operations of the hand become imperceptible and mysterious, and show an agility and caprice bordering on the miraculous; the complete whole takes form before our eyes with a verisimilitude which seems fantastic, and we have no longer a meaningless scene, but a real vision. These two works, writes Raphael Mengs, are the theology or the "Summa" of painting. They seem to exist outside of all the expedients of art and as by a mysterious fiat. Through them an entirely new path was opened to the painting of things. Every other scene of life has the same claim to be depicted, provided it has for observer and interpreter such a witness as Velazquez; it was a new viewpoint of nature, a method of fruitful and infinite application. We are assured that on seeing the "Meninas" the king was so charmed with the work that he perceived only one oversight, and taking up a brush, painted on the breast of the artist's own portrait the grand cross of St. James. Whatever the worth of the legend, the coveted order was none the less granted to Velazquez 12 June, 1658. He had given proof of his limpieza de sangre, that is, that he had in his family not a drop of Jewish or Moorish blood, that he had never worked for his living, that he had never made a trade of painting, that he had never practised his art save as a recreation and in the service of the king.

To these last years belong some busts (london, Turin, Madrid) which Velazquez made of the prince, stirring works, in which we discern beneath the coldness of the mask the interior tragedy which froze the charming countenance of the poet that Philip IV had been. The last, and one of the most charming, of Velazquez' works is the "Anchorites" of the Prado, which is perhaps his most airy and luminous, his tenderest and most poetic work. After his return from Italy, filling the post of royal aposentador, he was charged with all the preparations for the journey on the occasion of the Peace of the Pyrenees and the marriage of Louis XIV with the infanta. Worn out by this excess of labour, the painter was attacked, on his return, by a fever which proved fatal. Philip IV keenly felt the loss of his friend. In the margin of a report of the Junta de Obras y Bosques, ordering that 1000 ducats of the painter's estate be returned to the budget of the Alcazar, of which Velazquez had been superintendent (proving that his management had been negligent and irregular), the King wrote the heart-broken words: "I am crushed" (Quedo adbatido).

In his sphere Velazquez had no superiors and perhaps no equals. Not only must all painting compared with one of his seem artificial and forced, so that in the wonder-crowded Prado, he seems the sole painter, but we must discern in him one of the finest minds and serenest souls that has ever been on earth, a glance capable of embracing and understanding nature, the whole of life without omission or scorn, passion or hatred, and of reproducing it in its true aspect as it appeared in the mirror of his thought. Alone of all the Spanish painters, although the most local of all, he is universal. But no more than any other master of his class did he form pupils worthy of him. No school emerged from "The Spinners" and "The Weavers". Rare pictures were connected with them, such as the family picture of J.B. del Mazo, mentioned above, and the "Santa Forma" of Coello in the Escurial, after which we find no companion to "The Maids of Honour" until Goya's "Family of Charles IV". But modern art is chiefly connected with Velazquez; the work of Whistler, for example, or of Lucien Simon, to mention only these two, are attempts to utilize the lesson of the last works of Velazquez. It was more than two centuries before European painting reached the point to which extraordinary genius had brought this Catholic Spaniard of the time of Philip IV.

PACHECO, Arte de la pintura (Seville, 1649; new ed. by CRUZADA VILLAAMIL, 2 vols., Madrid, 1866); BERMUDEZ in Dicc. hist. de los mas ilustres profesores de las Bellas Artes (Madrid, 1800); GAUTIER, Diego Velazquez de Silva in L'Artiste, 38th year, I, 351 sqq.; STIRLING-MAXWELL, Velazquez (London, 1855); IDEM, Annals of the Artists of Spain (2nd ed., 4 vols., London, 1890); ZARCO DEL VALLE, Documentos ineditos para la historia de las Bellas Artes (Madrid, 1870), 398-432; LEFORT, Velazquez in Gazette des Beaux Arts (1879, 1884); JUSTI, Diego Velazquez (Bonn, 1889), tr. KEANE (London, 1890); KNACKFUSS, Velazquez (Bielefeld, 1896); BONNAT, Velazquez in Gaz. des Beaux Arts (1898), I, 177; BERUETE, Velazquez (Paris, 1898), tr. London, 1906); DEVILLIER, Memoire de Velazquez sur 41 tableaux envoyes a l'Escurial (Paris, 1874); ARMSTRONG, Velazquez (London, 1897); STEVENSON, Velazquez (London, 2nd ed., 1899); BREAL, Velazquez (London, 1904); GENSEL, Velazquez in Meisters Gemalde in 146 Abbildungen, Klassiker der Kunst, VI (Stuttgart, 1905).

LOUIS GILLET

Venezuela

A republic formed out of the provinces which, under Spanish rule, constituted the captaincy general of the same name. This republic has an area of 280,918 square miles, lying between the meridians of 62° and 73° W. longitude, and between 1° 8' and 12° 16' N. latitude. Its surface is distributed as follows: mountain ranges, 92,913 square miles; table lands, 1591 square miles; plains, 228,993 square miles; lakes, 7509 square miles; lands liable to inundation, 24,544 square miles; the remainder being swamps, uninhabitable paramos, and small islands. It is bounded on the north by the Atlantic Ocean and the Caribbean Sea, which it has a coastline of 898 miles; south, by the Republic of Brazil, from which it is separated by the great Parima range; east, by the Atlantic Ocean and British Guiana; west, by the Republic of Colombia. Without including the rivers that rise in Colombia, there are 1047 rivers in Venezuela, the principal being the Orinoco, which rises in the forest regions and by means of the Casiquiare branch unites with the Rio Negro, which, again, flows into the Amazon; it then flows north and afterwards east, and discharges by means of eighty mouths into the Atlantic ocean, after a course of 1323 miles. The other rivers are the Apure, Meta, Cuyuni, Quariare, Cuara, Puruni. There are also two lakes, the Maracaibo and the Valencia; 204 lagoons, among which are the Tacarigua, the Sinamaica and the Guasaconica; three principal gulfs, the Maracaibo, the Triste, and the Paria. The highest mountain peaks are the Sierra Nevada, 16,437 ft.; Naiguata, 10,500 ft.; Maraguata, 9000 ft. There are no volcanoes, but some thermal springs, the most famous being those of Trincheras in Carabobo, Cuiva in Coro, and Guarume in the Guarico.

CLIMATE AND NATURAL RESOURCES

Venezuela is divided into three well-defined zones; first, the mountainous, formed by a direct arm of the Andes penetrating through Tachira and Trujillo, and running along the sea coast to the peninsula of Paria; secondly, the zone of the plains which extend to the banks of the Orinoco; thirdly, the forest region, which extends from the right bank of the Orinoco to the Brazilian boundary line. In the first of these zones all varieties of climate are to be found, from the cold of the Sierra Nevada of Mérida, to the genial warmth of the foot-hills; and excepting the coast, which is warm and unhealthy, the remainder, which forms a great agricultural belt, is both salubrious and fertile. In the plains, where the climate is warm, pastures abound, and all kinds of live stock are raised, cattle, sheep, goats, hogs, horses, mules, asses. In this zone may also be seen large stretches of plain covered with a luxuriant growth of wild flowers, and alive with flocks of numberless birds of the most marvellously variegated plumage. In the forest zones all kinds of timber and dye woods, medicinal plants, etc. are to be found, and also enormous birds, crocodiles, and boas. The climate here is, for the most part, warm and unhealthy. Mammals abound, chiefly monkeys, bears, jaguars, panthers, ocelots, pumas, water dogs, and manatees.

The annual mean temperature of some of the principal cities is: Caracas, 66° 43'; Valencia, 80°; Maracaibo, 86° 20'; Barquisemeto, 77° 54'; Ciudad BolBolivariacute; var, 86° 40'; Mérida, 64° 36' Fahrenheit. The country has extensive mineral products, copper in Aroa, gold in Guiana, hard coal in Coro, Barcelona, and Maracaibo, mene in Cumaná, saline deposits along the coast of Barcelona, Carabobo, Mayarita, and Maracaibo, and large quantities of asphalt in Barcelona and Maracaibo. The principal agricultural products are coffee, cocoa, and sugar-cane, besides a great abundance and variety of fruits. Cattle-raising is extensively carried on in the plains. The population, at the census of 1911, was 2,713,703; that of the capital, Caracas, 72,429.

COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES

As the most important product of exportation has always been coffee, and the market price of this has been so low during recent years, the economic situation of the country has suffered. To this other causes, especially political, have also contributed. The official computation for the year 1910 gave the amount of exports as 64,184,206.63 bolivars ($12,387,552 or &$163;2,477,510). Among the exports of Venezuela are: cotton, starch, hemp sandals, asphalt, cocoa, coffee, rubber, copper, coconut, copaiba, cinchona, horn, hides, divi-divi, fresh fruits, cabinet woods, gold, feathers, sarsaparilla, tobacco in leaf. In manufactures Venezuela is still backward, but a movement in this direction is progressing. Some establishments, such as the weaving mills of Caracas and Valencia, and the oil factory of Valencia, have been very successful, and other such enterprises are in contemplation. There are twelve lines of railroad. Their income in 1910 from passenger traffic was 1,653,488.04 bolivars ($319,124 or &$163;63,825) and from all sources 9,239,363.32 bolivars ($1,783,197 or &$163;356,620).

CIVIL HISTORY

The coast of Venezuela was discovered by Christopher Columbus during his third voyage, on 1 August, 1498. Its name, meaning "Little Venice", was given it by reason of the fact that Alonso de Ojeda, who first explored the coast, in 1499, found a small aboriginal village built on piles in one of the gulfs to the west. Modified into Venezuela, the name afterwards served to designate the whole territory of the captaincy general (cf. Felipe Fejera, "Manual de Historia de Venezuela"). The Spanish conquest was complete in the year 1600. Since then there has existed in Venezuela a regularly organized society with peculiar ethnic characteristics and a self-developed culture. The colony was under the administration of governors and captains general during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The first decisive step toward political emancipation taken by the country was the Conspiracy of 19 April, 1810, by means of which it was wrested from the control of the captain general, Vicente Empran. The definitive Declaration of Independence was issued by the Congress 5 July, 1811. This Declaration contains the following confession of faith: "Taking the Supreme Being as witness to the justice of our actions and the rectitude of our intentions; imploring His Divine and heavenly aid, and protesting before Him, in the moment of our birth to that dignity which His Providence restores to us, our desire to live and die free; believing and maintaining the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Religion of Jesus Christ as the first of our duties. . ." The War of Independence ended with the battle of Carabobo, won by the Liberator Simó n BolBolivariacute;var, 24 June, 1821. When the Republic of Colombia, formed by BolBolivariacute; var out of the States of Nueva Granada, Ecuador, and Venezuela, was dismembered, the last-named of these three states became the Republic of Venezuela, in 1830. Since that date the development of the country has been retarded by internecine struggles, which, however, have not entirely impeded all advance towards culture and material progress. In the early days of independence, General José Antonio Paez, the hero of the War of Independence, was prominent in political affairs, aided by Dr. José María Varjas and Gen. Carlos Toublette. Following this, for a period of ten years, the country wavered between content and discontent under the rule of the brothers José Tadeo and Jose Gregorio Monagas, also celebrated leaders in the War of Independence. To José Gregorio Monagas is due the abolition of Slavery. The Monagas were overthrown in 1858, after which began the bloody and disastrous rule of the Federación, lasting five years, and terminating in the triumph of the Federal cause and the elevation of Juan Crisostomo Falcón to the supreme power. His rule was characterized by administrative inefficiency and a state of turmoil lasting until 1868. After a precarious regime, known as El Gobierno Azul, which consisted in a fusion of the parties, Guzmán Blanco came into power in 1870. During his term of office, a period of twenty years, strife and bloodshed continued, and Venezuela suffered from a despotism such as she had not known up to this time. Intellectually gifted and possessed of great energy, he availed himself of a spectacular political policy and, carefully measuring the elements with which he had to deal, was able to dominate persons and events completely. He would have been able to direct his country into safer paths and to have established her once for all in the foremost ranks of the truly progressive nations, had not his desire for personal aggrandizement so led him astray that he discarded all the established methods of civilization, concealed internal decay under a show of material progress, and laid the foundations of that political venality which has ever since so seriously retarded the progress of the republic. Rojas Paul and Andueza Palacio followed him, and would have been able to establish peace and advance the welfare of the nation had not political ambition once more asserted itself, bringing with it revolution and military ascendency. The last of these governments by bloodshed was that of Cipriano Castro, which lasted nine years and ended in December, 1908. With the celebration of the first centenary of its independence the entire nation demanded peace; the government then proclaimed, and has since endeavoured to procure, the establishment of law and order.

The United States of Venezuela is now composed of twenty federal states and a federal district, the seat of the national government, the capital of which is Caracas. Outside the limits of the Federal District the president had no executive authority except in such cases as are provided for by the constitution. The supreme executive power is vested in the president, assisted by the cabinet ministers and the Council of State. The legislative body consists of a Senate and a House of Representatives which meet in ordinary sessions once a year and may be convoked for extra sessions by the president. The judicial power is represented by the Federal Court and the Court of Cassation, whose members are elected by Congress from candidates presented by the various States. There are lesser tribunals to meet various needs. The political organization in the several states is similar to that of the national government. The president of the Council of State fills the office of vice-president for the republic or the state. The president is elected for a term of four years.

EDUCATION

Though internal disturbances in Venezuela have not altogether impeded the advance of civilization, they have somewhat retarded it. Education, however, never completely neglected, has acquired new vigour and extension. Guzmán Blanco issued a decree to extend it throughout the whole country, and although this has not been very effective, owing to the poor organization of the school system, it cannot be denied that much good has resulted. The total number of students in the primary grade in the entire republic for the third quarterly session in 1909 was 48,869, of which only 5799 attended private schools, the remainder attending the national schools, federal and municipal. In the secondary schools there were 3565 students, 1343 of whom attended private schools. In the fourth quarterly session of 1910 there were 50,991 students registered for the primary schools. Nevertheless, attention having been concentrated upon the principal cities and towns of importance, the interior of the republic has remained in a state of illiteracy. At present the Government is endeavouring to give a more efficient organization to the educational system, both by providing suitable buildings and increasing the number of students, as in supervising the management of the schools, and finding the best means of extending their usefulness. The Government also takes an equal interest in the secondary schools, both those maintained at government expense and the many and excellent private schools which exist throughout the country. In July, 1909, one hundred and two such schools were registered, sixty-three of these being private schools. In these schools the courses are literacy, mercantile, and philosophic. For the higher branches there are two universities, a school of engineers, and the episcopal seminaries. There are eight schools for the fine arts, and fourteen manual training schools. The average of education is not low among the Venezuelans; they are naturally intelligent and assimilate knowledge readily. The one drawback is a lax system in the various courses. Medical science, in its various branches, has many representatives who stand high in their profession; judges and lawyers of high reputation represent the law; in belles-lettres Venezuelan writers have produced works that bear comparison with the best product of the other Spanish-speaking nations, and in the fine arts, such painters a Tovar y Tovar, Arturo Michilena, and Cristobal Rojas have produced works of which their country is justly proud. The Press in Venezuela has considerable merit: it is unfortunate that the influence of modern anti-religious ideas, for which no antidote is provided, should tinge with unbelief otherwise creditable work; notwithstanding this, it cannot be generally said that the Venezuelans are irreligious.

RELIGIOUS HISTORY

The religion of Venezuela has always been the Catholic faith. Missionary work was very efficaciously done in the early days: the Capuchins, in particular, carried that work very far forward, and many of the settlements of Venezuela were founded by them and reached a high degree of prosperity under their direction. Nevertheless, there have been undeniable shortcomings in public morality, due to the interference of extrinsic causes. One of the greatest glories of the religious orders and of the Spanish nation is the record of their unselfish devotion to the social redemption of the American races. The religious always defended the aborigines against their cruel assailants, being the first to claim for them the rights of humanity, and the kings of Spain fostered these humane and Christian views, promulgating a great body of laws--the leyes de las Indias--which will always be a monument of the noble principles which inspired those monarchs in their dealings with the aborigines. The Franciscans and Dominicans had the chief part in their civilizing work. In Venezuela they exercised their ministry with fruitful results; and when the conquest was completed, they still continued their mission with the greatest zeal. According to Dr. Francisco Gonazlez Guzmán in his "Historia Contemporanea de Venezuela", vol. II, pp. 34; 35:

Before 1830 there were forty convents in Venezuela: at Caracas, those of San Francisco, San Jacinto, San Felipe, the Mercedes, and the Capuchins; at Barcelona, of San Francisco; at Pívitu, of San Francisco; at Barquisimeto, of San Francisco; at Focuyo, of San Francisco, and of San Domingo; at Carora, of San Francisco; at Valencia, of San Francisco; at Cumaná, of San Francisco and of San Domingo; at Cumanacoa, of San Francisco; on the Gulf of Santa Fe, that of San Domingo; at Cabruta, the Jesuits; at Angostura (Ciudad BolBolivariacute; var), the Jesuits; at San Francisco, that of the same name; at Caripe, of San Francisco; at Mérida, San Domingo, San Agustin, and Candelaria; at Asunción, of San Francisco and of Santo Domingo; at Guanare, of San Francisco; at San Cristóbal, of San Agustín; at Trujillo, of San Francisco and of San Domingo; at Guasipati, of San Francisco; at Upata, of San Francisco; at Caruachi, of San Francisco; at Gury, of San Francisco; at Tupuquen, of San Francisco; at Santa Maria, of San Francisco; at Maracaibo, of San Felipe and the Jesuits.

About the year 1830 there were in Venezuela the following communities of nuns: at Caracas, that of the Concepciones, founded in 1617 by Dona Juana Villela and her daughters, Spanish ladies, and authorized by the King of Spain, 3 March, 1619; that of the Discalced Carmelites of Santa Teresa, founded by Dona Josefa Melchora de Ponte y Aguirre, Dona Mejías, and Don Miguel de Ponte, authorized by royal warrant of 1 October, 1725, the building begun in 1726 and opened 19 May, 1732; and the Dominicanesses established in 1817. The convent of the Dominican nuns at Trujillo was begun in 1599 and opened in 1617. That of the Clarissas of Mérida was founded in 1651 by Don Juan de Bedoya. The Beaterio of Valencia was founded by the Revs. Juan José Rodríguez Felipe, Dr. Carlos Hernández de Monagas, and Dr. Juan Antonio Hernández de Monagas. The first idea of these charitable priests was to established a college for the education of young girls, and this object was contemplated in the authorization given by Archbishop Francisco de Ibarra, 28 January, 1806. Dr. Carlos Hernandez de Monagas having been assassinated, and the Rev. Rodriguez Felipes being absent, Dr. Antonio Hernandez de Monagas, with the consent of Archbishop Coll y Prat, given 3 March, 1814, turned the college into a beaterio. In accordance with the archbishop's authorization, the girls were to be taught by Carmelite beatas (devout women), who were to observe the monastic vows so long as they wished to live in the Beaterio. Archbisho Coll y Prat received the vows of, and gave the veil to, the first beatas in 1814.

The secularized clergy likewise contributed to the work of civilization. An illustrious phalanx of priests, conspicuous by the austerity of their lives, their learning and piety, and comprising members of the most distinguished families, maintained the dignity of the priesthood and the deep popular reverence for ministers of religion. This deep and broad rooting of faith and piety, watered with the blood of martyrs, explains their wonderful persistence among the Venezuelan people of the present day, in spite of all the assaults of this present age. The influence for good which the bishops have had upon the civilization of Venezuela has been brought out clearly by Pedro M. Arcaya, a judge of the national courts in "El episcopado en la formación de la sociendad venezolana", published on the occasion of the Centenary of Independence (5 July, 1905), in the special commemorative number issued by "La Religión", of Caracas. Recalling a number of facts, taken at random, illustrative of the meritorious work of Bishops Gonzalo de Angulo, Antonio Gonzalez de Acuna, and Mauro de Tovar, Dr. Arcaya draws these conclusions:

In the sixteenth century, and almost as late as the middle of the seventeenth, the royal power was undoubtedly less efficacious for order than was that of the Church. The former depended very much on the actual force which supported it; and that force was not in evidence to any great degree in the colony; European troops seldom appeared there, and indeed the territory was too large for the armies and fleets at the Spanish king's disposal. It was, therefore, almost exclusively through the influence of the Church that the habits of civilized life could be implanted in the country--habits which, but for the Church, the conquerors would have lost, and which, as a matter of fact, they did lose to a great extent, by contact with aboriginal savagery. The conquest would probably have ended in ferocious civil wars, in which the Europeans would have lost ground, and would have sunk to the level of the tribes who were their adversaries, had not the Church spoken to their conscience, reviving the sentiments of justice and duty, which, in the heat of the struggle, had been supplanted by base passions. The retrogression had been terrible, and to restore the moral level of these people was a difficult undertaking. To this work, and to that of inculcating into the Indians and the negro slaves the moral and religious principles which form the basis of civilization, the Venezuelan bishops applied themselves with extraordinary energy. They encountered great resistance, and, in order to accomplish their civilizing mission, they had not only to use persuasion and gentleness, but actually to assume a sort of dictatorship so as to break up abuses, protect the weak, chastise iniquity, and finally lay the foundations of a society inspired by justice and not brute force. They made great progress in this direction; and if the work was not, after all, solidly accomplished, it was not through the lack of any efforts of theirs, but because the conditions were difficult in the extreme. In this way, then, the quasi-dictatorship of our first bishops was just and beneficial. Venezuelan society was in its medieval stage; the same phenomenon was reproduced which had occurred in Europe, when the bishops and abbots were the only persons capable of protecting the masses against the excesses of chieftains and warrior bands.

The first episcopal see in Venezuela was that of Caro, founded pursuant to a Bull of Clement VII which was published 21 July, 1531. This see was transferred to Caracas in 1637, and elevated to archiepiscopal rank by a Bull of Pius VII 24 November, 1803. The Dioceses of Mérida and Guayana were created at a much later period, while those of Barquisimeto, Calabozo, and Zulia came into existence in the course of the nineteenth century. The union of Church and State has always obtained in the Republic of Venezuela, though this union has suffered the trials incidental to modern political ideas, trials which with each repetition render the situation of the Church in its relations with the civil power more precarious. No sooner was the Colombian nationality constituted than the State, by the Law of 28 July, 1824, assumed to the fullest extent those prerogatives over the Churches of America which, under the name of Patronato, the popes had conferred upon the Catholic kings. Without any fresh ratification or negotiations with the Holy See with respect to this privilege, Venezuela, when it separated from the Colombian Union, incorporated the Patronato in its legislation (14 October, 1830), in consequence of which a note, accompanied by documents, was formulated, in which the Archbishop of Cracas and other Venezuelan prelates asked the Constituent Congress for the suspension of the law in question. On 21 March, 1833, an Act of congress declared it to be once more in vigour, and this law, with possible applications, the Government has continued to maintain as the principle of its relations with the Holy See. The steps taken to conclude a concordat, as prescribed by the Law of Patronato, "to prevent disputes and complaints in the future", have so far had no satisfactory results, while the convention with the Holy See, concluded in 1862, was repudiated by the Constituent Assembly of 1864, which resolved: "That the national executive open fresh negotiations with His Holiness in order to establish a concordat in relation with the laws of the Republic and in harmony with the spirit and letter of the Constitution which has just been ratified". The diplomatic mission sent to Rome for this purpose was not successful.

Conflicts between the ecclesiastical and civil authorities occurred in the earliest period of the Republic's existence. The first of these arose out of the refusal of Ramón Ignacio Méndez, Archbishop of Caracas, to swear allegiance, without qualification, fully, and in the form prescribed by the Constituent Congress, to the Constitution ratified in 1830. This refusal, based chiefly on the absence from the Constitution of any explicit recognition of Catholicism as the religion of the State, resulted, in spite of endeavours on the part of the Government to solve the difficulty amicably, in the exile of the archbishop, together with Mariano Talavera y Garces, titular Bishop of Tricala, Vicar Apostolic of Guayana, and Buenaventura Arias, titular Bishop of Jericho, Vicar Apostolic of Merída, who associated themselves with their metropolitan. The exile lasted seventeen months, the prelates (with the exception of Mgr. Arias, who died 21 November, 1831) returning in April, 1832, after reaching an understanding with the Government. We may add, in passing, that Mgr. Arias left behind him a holy memory, the populace even crediting him with miracles. Another conflict, with Archbishop Méndez, arose in 1836. The prelate refused canonical institution to the persons nominated as dean and archdeacon, and the matter was taken up to the Supreme Court. To the same tribunal was afterwards referred the complaint of the Government against a pastoral letter in which Mgr. Méndez protested against the abolition of tithes, declaring this legislative act to be null. The result was another exile for the archbishop, who embarked for Curacao, 30 November, 1830, never to return, as he died on Colombian territory, 6 August, 1839.

The most lamentable quarrel between the Church in Venezuela and the Government was that in which Archbishop Silvestre Guevara y Lira and President Antonio Guzmán Blanco were the principals. The latter having won the battle which definitively established his power, in 1870, his Government at Caracas requested of the archbishop the celebration of a Te Deum in thanksgiving for the bloody victory. The prelate replied that there would be no objection to complying with the request of the Government, but that it seemed to him more fitting to defer this religious function until the general amnesty, offered by the president during the campaign, had been put into effect, so that the public participation of the Church in the rejoicings of the victors might not be coincident with the mourning of families for the shedding of blood and for the many captives who lay in prison. This postponement was not satisfactory to the Government; Dr. Diego B. Urbaneja, its most influential member, seizing the opportunity to satisfy a private grudge, announced to Mgr. Guevara that his banishment was decreed. In justice to Guzmán Blanco it must be recorded that he received the news of this banishment with no expression of satisfaction, and that, after his return to Caracas, in the discharge of his official duties, he took steps to effect the prelate's recall and to re-establish the harmony which had been so rashly interrupted.

Unfortunately no good understanding could be reached, as political passions helped to make the rupture more and more irremediable, and the disastrous results became lamentable in the extreme. Guzmán kept no restraint on his anger; he visited it upon the whole Church and its most prized institutions, and, to destroy the influence of the priesthood completely, thenceforward set on foot a systematic persecution which, unhappily, met with complete success. He expelled with savage violence the last communities of religious women left in Venezuela, despoiling them of their possessions; he suppressed the seminaries, despoiling them also, and bringing ruin on that budding revival of ecclesiastical education which already constituted a fair hope for the country's progress in civilization; he destroyed churches, took possession of buildings, pious institutions, and sacred property of every kind, abolished revenues, secularized the cemeteries, defamed the clergy, and, eliminating every element of distinction in the sacred ministry that could hinder his plan for the ruin of the Church, opened the field to mediocrity and low intrigue, bringing in ecclesiastics incapable of any lofty social influences, whose indecorous character reflected upon the Church itself-a course abundantly fruitful of misfortune and innumerable evils. Guzmán Blanco put the finishing touch to the legislation which, from the beginning of the republic, had been creating obstacles to the liberty of association, so far as religious communities are concerned, by decreeing the total suppression of convents in the country and prohibiting their restoration in future. He moreover aimed at setting up in Venezuela a national Church independent of Rome, but without the slightest success. Finally, he sought to bring about the relaxation of the clergy by recognizing, in the legislation establishing civil marriage, unions entered into by those in Holy orders; the design, however, was frustrated by an outraged public conscience, and this article of the Code was supressed.

The struggle terminated in 1875, when Mgr. Guevara abdicated the See of Caracas at the suggestion of Pius IX and through the mediation of Mgr. Rocca Cocchia, delegate Apostolic. But the wounds inflicted on the Church were deep, the consequent diminution of her strength was dangerous, and the process of convalescence which followed was, in the existing political conditions of the country, necessarily slow in its inception. At present the reaction seems hardly to be commencing, the fatal consequences having gone to extreme lengths, and the problem of bringing that reaction to a successful issue is fraught with difficulties. During the twenty years of Guzmán Blanco's tyranny, laws were imposed on Venezuela which greatly hampered the salutary action of the Church. These laws continue to exist because, unhappily, the same principles of antagonism are dominant among the legislators of the country; though, by reason of the good will which subsequent rulers of the republic have entertained towards the Church, they have effected less harm than they might have done under a more drastic application. To ensure compliance with the law, the Registro Civil, created by Guzmán Blanco, prohibited the recording of baptisms in parish books without a corresponding entry in the public register of births; and in subsequent amendments of the Code additional provisions have been made to the prejudice of the Church's rights in the custody of parochial archives. With the same purpose in view, the civil marriage instituted by Guzmán Blanco prescribed, under heavy penalties, the precedence of the civil over the religious ceremony, and surrounded the former with so many formalities and difficulties as to make marriage extremely difficult. This law has become a constant source of public demoralization. On account of the difficulties here indicated, aggravated by abuses on the part of subordinate officials and the extortion of pecuniary payments which the law itself prohibits, marriages have become very infrequent, while it has been extremely difficult for the Church to exercise her moral power in this respect. Concubinage is not infrequent in the country. In the last reform of the Civil Code, Cipriano Castro, exercising a brutal despotism over the national conscience, introduced a divorce law, though repugnant to the people. The present (1912) government of Venezuela, however, presided over by Juan Vicente Gomez, has taken effective steps to improve the situation, perceiving plainly the deplorable moral and social effects which have resulted from the degradation of the marriage contract and heeding the zealous remonstrance of the bishops. A recently issued government order (12 October, 1911) has for its object the extermination of these abuses, and promises, moreover, to lay once more before the national congress the bill for revision of the laws concerning civil marriage. It must also be stated that the administration of Gen. Gómez has shown marked consideration to the Church, thereby affording a remedy for many of the evils that have beset her.

The Venezuelan Code recognizes the right of the Church to acquire and possess property, but curtails it to a great degree by closing the two most usual and effective ways of acquiring property for ecclesiastical institutions, viz., donations and bequests. The Code prohibits acquisition of property in these ways by churches, and even persons in Holy orders are forbidden to receive anything under testamentary disposition or by gift outside of the eighth civil (fourth ecclesiastical) degree. Thus the Church in Venezuela, despoiled of almost all that it once possessed, has been unable to recover itself in this respect, and is placed in pecuniary straits which preclude it from energetic social action and from rising out of the prostrate condition in which it was left by the persecutor. As a matter of fact, it can count only on the poor offerings of the faithful for the functions of religion, while the clergy with difficulty support themselves on stipends. The State now provides, under the head of ecclesiastical appropriations, only for the maintenance of prelates and chapters, and that with really insufficient sums, although, when the tithes were abolished by the Decree of 6 April, 1833, an engagement was entered into "to defray the expenses of public worship". This ecclesiastical budget has been incessantly mutilated, so that the state subvention becomes more and more precarious. The Government, however, punctually takes care of the church buildings and exempts from import duties all articles intended for the service of religion.

When the power of Guzmán Blanco was broken, a reaction in favour of the Church set in, and in consequence, as well as by the operation of the inevitable law of human progress, certain advantages gained for the interests of religion may now be discerned in the country. To be sure, this recovery has been only very slow; the Church has nothing to rely upon but the good will of those who wield of the supreme power, so that there is always the fear of some despotic excess on their part, or of their falling under some sinister influence. There have, moreover, been very unfortunate periods in the administration of the Church; a certain section of Venezuelan "intellectuals" are far from sympathetic with the Catholic cause, and the Church does not possess in Venezuela any large number of subjects capable of pushing the defence of Catholicism with brilliant success. There is nothing but the inherent power of the Faith to operate in society and in individual souls for the recovery of its legitimate influence.

In 1886 the Government itself introduced into Venezuela the Sister of Charity of St. Joseph of Tarbes and entrusted to them the service of the hospitals. The Sisters founded educational establishments for girls, which are still considered among the best of their kind in the country. The two best are at Caracas; but the congregation also has efficiently conducted colleges at Valencia, Puerto Cabello, and Barquisimeto. Later on, another congregation of Sisters of Charity, those of St. Anne (Spanish), established themselves at Maracaibo, Mérida, and Ciudad BolBolivariacute;var; at present, however, they are found only at Maracaibo. Other institutes of women afterwards began to appear in the country, devoted to the service of charity, catechetical teaching, and, in some degree, the contemplative life, but no cloistered. Among these may be mentioned in particular the Little Sisters of the Poor of Maiquetia, the Servants of the Most Holy Sacrament, and the Franciscan Sisters. All of these work with great abnegation for the respective objects of their institutes, and do a great deal to maintain the influence of religion among the people.

With a view to providing for the evangelization of the aborigines, some thousands of whom still live as savages in the regions of the Orinoco, the Government invited Capuchin monks to Venezuela in 1891. The work among the Indians has not been successfully completed, but the Capuchins have done very meritorious work as missionaries, assisting prelates in their apostolic journeyings, preaching to the people in many districts, and greatly fostering piety in the cities where they are stationed. At present they have residences at Caracas and Maracaibo. At the invitation of the Government, the Salesians came to Venezuela in 1894. This congregation has been obliged to exercise its mission slowly and has not yet attained the full development of its programme; it has, however, proceeded with a persistent firmness the efficacy of which is seen in the results obtained in the education of youth. It now has a considerable establishment at Caracas, a college at Valencia, and one at Maracaibo. Its members have rendered devoted service in the salvation of souls. In 1899 the Augustinian Recollects came to Venezuela; their ministrations have been utilized by the bishops in parochial work. They are employed in the Archdiocese of Caracas and the Dioceses of Guayana and Zulia. In 1903, at the invitation of the Government, the Sons of Mary Immaculate established themselves at Caracas, where they are known as the French Fathers. There they conduct a magnificent college and at the same time afford valuable assistance to the clergy of the capital in the care of souls. Lastly, in the same year, 1903, the Dominican Fathers, also under government protection, took possession of the Church of the Sacred Heart of Jesus at Caracas. They are gaining more and more in the esteem of society at large and the appreciation of the metropolitan. Certain members of their community are now engaged in teaching in the seminary of Caracas.

All these elements of religious progress, although the numbers of the communities have been small in each case, have entered Venezuela in spite of the existence of special laws against them and in virtue of the religious liberty guaranteed to Venezuelans. Certain it is that, owing to that mistrust of Catholicism which in these days disturbs the judgment of politicians throughout the world, the last two Constitutions adopted in this country embody restrictions which may be considered invidious to the Church and which, given the occasion, could be used as a weapon against her; at the same time, these restrictions might very well serve to protect her in view of the peculiar way in which power is exercised in the Republic of Venezuela. One most important compensation made to the Church by the Government was the legal re-establishment of the seminaries in virtue of an executive order of General Cipriano Castro, issued 28 September, 1900. These institutions now no longer lead the diminished existence that was formerly theirs. That of Caracas, known as the metropolitan, is divided into a great and a little seminary; the Government contributes to its support, and its professorships of ecclesiastical science have the official character of cátedras universitarias. The Dioceses of Mérida and Barquisimeto also possess seminaries with lesser academic privileges, and one is now being organized in the Diocese of Zulia. These foundations encourage fair hopes for the future, even through the number of students be small owing to the paucity of genuine vocations in the scanty population.

A large proportion of the secular clergy of Venezuela conscientiously discharge the duties of their ministry, labouring to foster piety, teaching the Catechism, and performing other parochial offices. Nor must it be overlooked that in the last ten years very efficacious efforts have been made by worthy priests for the Catholic revival in the fatherland. It is a lamentable fact, indeed, that, whether through the shortcomings of individuals, melancholy relaxations of discipline, or other internal troubles, deficiencies are still evident. Certain co-operative enterprises--for the instruction of youth, for propaganda through the Press, for the warfare against particular vices, and other activities of equal importance--are still awaiting their hour in Venezuela. As to religious instruction in schools and colleges, the State, having assumed the burden of public education, making it gratuitous and obligatory, explicitly authorizes the teaching of religion in elementary schools. Principals of colleges, on their part, anxious that their establishments, most of them excellent centres of mental culture, should also be in good esteem among Catholics, are almost invariably attentive to the duty of giving their pupils religious instruction and making them fulfil their religious obligations, and at the same time of fostering piety among them.

In the religious conditions, and consequently the progress of social culture, throughout vast tracts of the national territory, much is lacking. In all parts of the county the Faith exists, but daily life does not always correspond with belief. This is due to the constraints which the government places upon the free exercise of the Church's activities. It must be taken into account that the religious institutes, for this reason, and on account of the fewness of their subjects, exercise their activities only with great difficulty in the capital and in some other important centres of population. Alcoholism, sensuality, and gambling are the predominant vices; it must be admitted, too, that peculation and other political abuses have greatly helped to pervert the moral sense of Venezuelan society. Of the 2,713,703 inhabitants only 3361 are Protestants and 247 Jews. In Guayana and Goajira there are still remnants of the aboriginal tribes, a total of 98,932 souls for whose evangelization it has not been possible to do very much up to the present time, notwithstanding the efforts of the Government. During the last few years, owing to a misinterpretation of the law of freedom of worship, the Protestants have begun to spread their doctrines among the people, but the Government, by a recent decree, 24 October, 1911, put a stop to this propaganda by designating exactly the limits within which, according to the Constitution, representatives of other religions may exercise their ministerial functions.

The archdiocese (see CARACAS) has a numerous chapter and eighty-two parishes, besides twenty-two affiliated churches and private chapels. It has two seminaries, a great and a little. There are 35 male religious, taking all the regular institutes together. The congregations of women aggregate 242 sisters. The present archbishop (1911) is Mgr. Juan Bautista Castro, whose zeal has always manifested itself in the defence of the Church, and especially as an apostle of the Divine Eucharist, for the adoration of which he has consecrated at Caracas the sanctuary of the Santa Capilla, where perpetual homage is rendered to the Blessed Sacrament with daily Exposition. He is the founder of the Congregation of Servants of the Mot Holy Sacrament. It is in this part of Venezuela that the religious movement is most intense. The administration of this Church, as of most of the Venezuelan Churches, was formerly regulated by the synodal constitutions enacted at Caracas in 1687; at present all the dioceses are governed under the Pastoral Instruction promulgated by the Venezuelan episcopate in the Conference of 23 May to 27 July, 1904. This Instruction is based upon the decrees of the Plenary Council of Latin America. It is signed by Juan Bautista Castro, Archbishop of Caracas, and Antonio María Durán, Antonio Ramón Silva, Felipe Neri Sendrea, and Francisco Marvez, Bishops respectively of Guayana, Mérida, Calabozo, and Zulia; Aguedo Felipe Alvarado, at that time vicar capitular, now Bishop, of Barquisimeto, also assisted at the conferences. The Catholic Press has flourished at Caracas, even though, in the existing conditions of the country, it has never been materially prosperous; it is represented by periodicals which defend the interests of the Church with boldness. The present most fully authorized organ is "La Religión", which has existed for twenty years; the "Heraldo Cathólico", a weekly, exercises a very salutary influence, as well as several monthly reviews of a devotional character--such as the "Mensajero Venezolano del Corazón de Jesús", "El Santisimo Sacramento"-and periodicals published by religious houses-such as the "Boletin del Pan de San Antonio". The "Boletín Eclesiástico de la Arquidiolcesis" is a model of its kind. Mention should here be made of the Eucharistic Congress, to commemorate the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Perpetual Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament at Caracas, celebrated there in December, 1907.

Mariano Marti, twenty-seventh Bishop of Venezuela and fifteenth of Caracas, bequeathed to posterity a very important work. In the compilation entitled "Documentos para la historia de la vida publica del Libertador de Colombia, Peru y Bolivia", by General José F´lix Blanco, vol. I, pp. 501, 502, we read: "I visited the diocese, making lists of and descriptions of all the villages, the distances, products, occupations of the inhabitants, etc. In the absence of a general census of Venezuela, the lists drawn up by Marti, on his visitation of half of what was the Province of Venezuela, have served as the most probable data of the Venezuelan population towards the end of the seventeenth century. These statistical works of Marti's furnished the first data which the governments of Venezuela obtained in the way of a formal census. A large folio volume, unpublished, of the visitations of this bishop is to be found in manuscript in the National Library at the capital of the United States of Venezuela (1875). Bishop Marti laid down wise rules for the reformation of the customs and services of churches. He died at Caracas, 20 February, 1792."

The Diocese of Mérida (q.v.) has for its territory the States of Mérida, Trujillo, Tachira, and Zamora in the most mountainous region of the republic. Its present bishop (1911) is Mgr. Antonio Ramón Silva. In this diocese the traditions of ecclesiastical disciple are well maintained, with a grateful memory of the bishops of old who organized its administration and bravely defended the rights of the Church, as well as of priests meritorious for wisdom, austerity, and patriotism. Among the former should be mentioned Lasso de la Vega (Don Ramón), who, as a senator in the first Congresses of Colombia, admirably discharged his duties towards the interests of religion, and by whose intervention relations between the republic and the Holy See were first established. Transferred to the Diocese of Quito, he died there 4 April, 1831. In 1904, when his tomb was opened, with a view to building a more artistic one, "his body was found in a state of good preservation, so much so to permit of its being vested anew in pontificals and piously laid to rest in a new coffin" (from a report sent by the secretary of the Archbishop of Quito to the present Bishop of Mérida). We may also mention Juan Hilario Boset, who died 26 May, 1873, while suffering exile on account of a pastoral which he issued in reference to the Civil Marriage Law. The present bishop has created the diocesan press, from which "Documentos para la historia de la Diocésis de Mérida" is being published-a work of individual zeal and the first great step taken in Venezuela towards the production of an ecclesiastical history. Here, too, is published the "Boletin Diocesano". There are other Catholic publications in the diocese-such as "El Castillo" of Valera, "La Colmena" of Fáriba, the "Angel Guardián" of Mérida.

The Diocese of Guayana (see SAINT THOMAS OF GUIANA) covers the whole southern, south-eastern, and eastern portion of the republic. To its second bishop, José Antonio Mohedano (d. 1804), belongs the credit of introducing into Venezuela the cultivation of coffee; in 1783, while still parish priest of Chacao, in the neighbourhood of Caracas, he set out the first plantation of this shrub, which has become a great source of agricultural prosperity to the nation. This diocese numbers in the list of its prelates Mariano Talavera y Garcés, "the Orator of Colombia", and Mariano Fernandez Fortique, an eminent man of letters. Bishop Talavera, who governed the diocese only as vicar Apostolic, edited a periodical called the "Cronica Eclesiastica de Venezuela", in which he gave some excellent data for the religious history of the country. It has not been possible to adequately cultivate this widely extended field of souls: the diocese has 102 parishes and only 40 priests all told. Such are the obstacles which the zeal and good will of the present bishop (1911), Mgr. Antonio Maria Durán, has had to encounter.

Within the Diocese of Barquisimeto (q.v.) is included the territory of Coro, which was the first episcopal see of the country. It was at Coro that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass was first celebrated on Venezuelan soil, in 1527, under a cují (myrrh) tree. The cross which was used for the altar on this occasion was carefully preserved, and in 1864 Juan Crisóstomo Falcón restored it and erected a monument to it in the same city. The present bishop of this diocese (1911), Mgr. Aguedo F. Alvarado, has infused much energy into its administration ever since his occupancy of the vicariate capitular, which lasted ten years. By means of pastoral visitations, organized as missions, and other resources of his apostolic zeal, the religious spirit of his flock has been greatly developed and strengthened. The diocese has its ecclesiastical bulletin and some Catholic periodicals-such as "Rayos de Luz" of Barquisimeto and "La Paz" of Guarico. The Sisters of St. Joseph of Tarbes serve in a hospital here and conduct a school for girls. The Little Sisters of the Poor of Maiquetia have houses at Barquisimeto and El Focuyo.

The Diocese of Calabozo (q.v.) comprises the central and south-eastern portions of the republic, where the plains of Venezuela are chiefly situated. This diocese is poorly supplied with clergy. The present bishop is Mgr. Felipe Neri Sendrea.

The Diocese of Zulia (q.v.) covers only the State of Zulia, in the extreme north-eastern part of the republic. Maracaibo, its capital, is a city of great importance, remarkable, also, for its religious fervour and attachment to Catholic principles. The present bishop (1911) is Mgr. Arturo Celestino Alvarez, consecrated 6 November, 1910.

THEJERA, Manual de historia de Venezuela para uso de las escuelas y colegios (1895); GONZALEZ GUINAN, Historia contemporanea de Venezuela (a monumental work issued under government auspices); GIL FORTOUL, Historia constitucional de Venezuela (1907-09); La Religion (commemorative number issued on the first centenary of Venezuelan independence, 5 July, 1911); Anuario estadistico de Venezuela, correspondiente a 1908 (1910); Gaceta Oficial, de Venezuela, no. 71,399 (statistical synopsis etc., 1910).

N.E. NAVARRO

Venice

Venice, the capital of a province in Northern Italy, is formed of a group of 117 small islands joined together by 378 bridges mostly built of stone. These islands are partly natural, partly artificial, constructed by means of piles driven into the bottom of the shallow sea, as all the houses of the city are built upon a network of rows of piles. The islands are separated by a number of canals, three of which are larger than others; the Grand Canal, which traverses the city in the shape of a letter S, the Giudecca, and the S. Marco, which is the widest of all. The city is connected with the mainland by a railroad which crosses the lagoon on a bridge 2 miles 2555 feet in length. Transportation within the city is carried on by means of gondolas and also, on the three large canals, by small steamers. The lagoon of Venice is divided into the "dead" and the "living". The former (Laguna Morta) is a system of little salt lakes and marshes formed by the sedimentary deposits of the streams flowing down from the Alps, and extends from the mouth of the Po to that of the Isonzo; the latter (Laguna Viva) is a shallow body of salt water out of which rises a few small islands, among them the group which forms the city itself. The Laguna Viva is separated from the Adriatic by a narrow strip of land (the Lido) which extends from Chioggia to Cortellazzo at the mouth of the Piave. The strip of land is reinforced at many points with Istrian marble, and has a number of openings for the passage of ships, being thus broken up into the several Lidi of Pellestrina, Malmocco, and S. Erasmo. There is a tide in the "live" lagoon, rising at certain times to a height of between 9 and 10 feet, when it floods the pavements of Venice. The city is a commercial and military port girdled by six forts distributed about the Laguna Viva.

CHURCHES

St. Marks's, which, since 1807, has also been the cathedral, was built in 829, when Venetian merchants purchased the relics of St. Mark at Alexandria. In the eleventh century it was remodelled in imitation of the Basilica of the Apostles at Constantinople. The succeeding centuries, especially the fourteenth, all contributed to its adornment, and seldom did a Venetian vessel return from the Orient without bringing a column, capitals, or friezes, taken from some ancient building, to add to the fabric of the basilica. Its whole pavement is mosaic; it contains gold, bronze, and the greatest variety of stones. The façade is decorated with mosaics of different periods, Byzantine sculptures, and statues of the Evangelists and the Saviour. The four horses of gilded bronze above the great doorway once adorned the Arch of Trajan; they were transferred to the Hippodrome at Constantinople, and in 1204 Enrico Dandolo brought them to Venice. The mosaics of the atrium and the interior belong partly to the tenth century. The plan of the interior consists of three longitudinal and three transverse naves. Over the high altar is a baldacchino on columns decorated with eleventh-century reliefs; the altarpiece is the famous Pala d'oro (Golden Pall), Byzantine metal- work of the year 1105, originally designed for an antependium. Behind the high altar is another altar with alabaster columns. The choir stalls are embellished with inlaying by Fra Sebastiano Schiavone, and above them on both sides are three reliefs by Sansovino. On the two marble pulpits of the ambo are statuettes by the Massegne brothers (1394). Also in the choir are Sansovino's bronze statutes of the Evangelists and Caliari's of the Four Doctors. The crypt is underneath the choir. In the baptistery is a beautiful font with a bronze cover by Tiziano Minio, Desiderio da Firenze, and Francesco Segala (sixteenth century). The Capella Zeno (mausoleum of Cardinal Zeno, 1501) is the work of Al. Leopardi, Ant. Lombardi, and Paolo Savino. In the treasury of St. Mark's is an episcopal chair of the seventh century. The campanile, 321 1/3 feet high, was built in 900 and repeatedly restored. Sansovino added the graceful loggetta in 1540. In 1902 the campanile fell, damaging the library of St. Mark's; it has now (1912) risen again to its ancient splendour.

S. Moise (1668); S. Maria del Giglio (by Sardi, 1680, with statues of the Barbaro family); the church of the discalced (Longhena, 1649; façade by Sardi, 1693; frescoes by Tiepolo; high altar by Pozzo); S. Maria of the Jesuits (Rossi, 1750; façade by Fattoretto; high altar by Pozzo; pictures by Titian and Tintoretto; tomb by Girolamo Campagna); S. Pantaleone (pictures by Fumiani, Solari, Vivarini, Gio. Alemanno; relief by Mariono Cedrino); the Madonna del Rosario (Massari, 1726; pictures by Tintoretto and Tiepolo); S. Maria della Salute (by Longhena, built after the plague of 1630; plan, octagonal with cupola; pictures by Luca Giordano, Titian, Tintoretto, and Giusto le Court). These churches are in the Barocco style with a profusion of many-coloured marbles in which all the magnificence of Venice is displayed. In the Gothic style are: S. Stefano (fourteenth century, restored in 1904; contains marble balustrade with statues by Lombardi; Madonna dell' Orto [1460; pictures by Tintoretto, who is buried there, Dan. Van Dyck, the younger Palma (Giovane), Giov. Bellini, Cima da Conegliano, etc.]; SS. Giovanni e Paolo (1333; the largest church after St. Mark's. It contains pictures by Vivarini and Lorenzo Lotto; statues and other sculpture by Vittoria and Bartolo di Francesco; wood-carving by Andrea Brustolon. In it are also important monuments of the doges). Also of Gothic was S. Maria del Carmine, but modernized in the seventeenth century (pictures by Cima da Conegliano, Tintoretto, Lorenzo Lotto, bronze relief by Verrocchio), as also S. Maria dei Frari (1250; statues of Al. Vittoria, Andrea Vincentino, Donatello, Sansovino; and numerous tombs). In the Renaissance style are S. Fantino di Scarpagnino (1507; choir by Sansovino); S. Giobbe (by Ant. Gambello and Pietro Lombardi, 1451; pictures by Paris Bordone, Previtali, Giovanni Bellini, Salvoldo; majolica by Luca della Robbia); S. Alvise (pictures by Tiepolo); S. Giuliano (the work of Sansovino); S. Salvatore (by Giorgio Spaventa and Tullio Lombardi, 1506; the façade, 1663; pictures by Girolamo Campagna, Titian, Giovanni Bellini; statues by Al. Vittoria and Danese Cattaneo; important tombs); S. Bartolomeo (pictures by Sebastiano del Piombo); S. Giovanni Crisostomo (Maria Carducci, 1497; pictures by Giovanni Bellini and Seb. Del Piombo; relief by Tullio Lombardi); Santi Apostoli (the Communion of St. Lucia, by Tiepolo); S. Zaccaria (which still keeps much of its Gothic character; on its façade is a statue of the saint by Al. Vittoria; pictures by Giov. Bellini and Tintoretto; the altars carved in wood in the chapel of S. Tarasio); S. Maria Formosa (pictures by Palma Vecchio, Vivarini, Leandro da Bassano, Sassoferrato), S. Maria dei Miracoli (by Tullio Lombardi, vaulting painting by Pennacchi); S. Francesco della Vigna (by Sansovino and Fra Francesco di Giorgio, has pictures by Girol. Da S. Croce, Fra Ant. Da Negroponte, Giov. Bellini, Paolo Veronese; statutes by Al. Vittoria); the scuola, or guild, of S. Giorgio degli Schiavoni (pictures by Vittorio Carpaccio and Vinc. Catena); S. Giorgio dei Greci di Serate (iconostasis with Byzantine paintings by Lombardi); S. Giuseppe di Castello (pictures by Tintoretto and Paolo Veronese); S. Pietro di Castello (one of the oldest churches in Venice, contains the relics of St. Lawrence Giustiniani); S. Giovanni Elemosinario (1525; pictures by Titian and Pordenone); S. Cassiano (Palma Vecchio and Tintoretto), the guild of S. Rocco (works of Tintoretto, Titian, and others); S. Sebastiano (1506; works of Paolo Veronese, who is buried in the church; tomb by Sansovino), the Redentore (Palladio's masterpiece; pictures by Tintoretto, Girolamo Campagna, and others). On the island of S. Lazzaro there has been since 1716 an establishment of the Armenian Mechitarists, famous for their Oriental publications. The cathedral (seventh and tenth centuries) of Torcello is worthy of mention, with its mosaics of the twelfth century. Torcello was at one time a city of importance. The seminary, the work of Longhena (1670), contains a museum of sculpture and a picture gallery; its faculty confers degrees in philosophy, theology, and canon law.

NON-RELIGIOUS BUILDINGS

The Palace of the Doges is said to date from the ninth century; its actual form, a singularly graceful type of Gothic, dates from the fifteenth and fourteenth. Chief among the artists who wrought upon it are Pierpaolo Massegne, the three Buon, Ant. Rizzo, Pietro Lombardo, and Scarpagnino. The Giants' Staircase takes its name from the colossal statutes of Mars and Nepture by Sansovino. The halls contain paintings by Tintoretto, Paolo Veronese, Palma Giovane, Titian, Tiepolo, Andrea Vicentino, Gabriele Caliari. The doge's private apartments now house the Archaeological Museum. The Marciana Library (Library of St. Mark) is in the old Mint, while the Libreria Vecchia, the work of Sansovino and the most magnificent non-religious edifice in Italy, is now the Royal Palace. The Academy of the Fine Arts, in the guild of S. Maria della Carità, contains pictures almost exclusively of the Venetian School. In the Middle Ages the arsenal gave employment to 16,000 labourers, where that are now 3000; the annexed museum of nautical objects and arms contains the model of the Bucentaur, the ship on which the doge annually, on the feast of the Ascension, celebrated the nuptials of the sea, casting a ring into it. The Art Exposition Palace, founded in 1895, is used for the international art exposition which takes place every other year. The International Gallery of Modern Art was opened in 1905 in the Pesaro Palace. Since 1880 there has been established in the Fondaco de' Turchi the Civic Museum, containing pictures, antique statutes, warlike trophies, portraits and busts, medals, coins, specimens of Venetian industries, costumes etc. One portion of this exhibition is housed in the Correr Palace. Among the most important bridges are the Rialto and the Bridge of Sighs. The finest private palaces are along the Grand Canal. Of the public monuments we shall note only the equestrian statue of the Condottiere Bartolommeo Colleoni, modelled by Verrocchio and cast by Al. Leopardi.

The principal industries are ship-building, silk-spinning, galloons and laces, glass (Murano), objects of art. The sea baths of the Lido are the most elegant in Italy. Besides the seminary, there are two lyceum-gymnasia, a national boarding-school, a technical institute, a normal school for girls, a fine-arts institute, a nautical institute, technical and commercial schools, a school of marine engineering, etc.; also a municipal and a military hospital, special hospital for phthisis, two lunatic asylums, two orphanages, two observatories, six theatres. The exports in 1905 amounted to 2,576,000,000 tons (tonnelate).

HISTORY

The beginnings of Venice go back to the flight of the inhabitants of the Venetian state to the islands of the lagoon between Chioggia and Grado, when, in 452, Attila devastated Northern Italy. Nevertheless it is certain that these islands had already been inhabited in Roman times. The fugitives from the mainland in the fifth century greatly augmented the population. About 520 Cassiodorus represents the inhabitants of the islands as governed by tribunes, inhabiting pile-structures, occupied with fishing and in the navigation of distant seas; salt was their medium of exchange. The Lombard invasion resulted in a further increase of this lagoon population; it remained under the rule of Byzantium, which had the sagacity to allow a great measure of autonomy to the tribunes. The latter probably resided in the cities. In 697 a doge (dux) was elected for the whole lagoon, to put an end to the conflicts between various tribunes and provide a more efficacious defence against the Lombards and the Slavs. The first doge was Anafestus Paulucius, a noble of Heraclea, then the capital of the state. The military command was vested in a magister militum. The third doge, Ursus I (726-37), at the request of Gregory III delivered Ravenna, which had fallen into the hands of the Lombards (735); he, however, was killed (737) in a popular tumult. For five years the state authority was entrusted to the magister militum, instead of doges; but that functionary held office for only one year, with the title of hypatos, or consul. In 742 the office of doge was restored and entrusted to Deusdedit, son of Ursus I, who transferred the capital to Malamocco. He was slain (755) by a certain Galla, who, after a dogeship of fourteen months, was slain in his turn. Dominicus Monegarius (756-64) became doge, two tribunes, however, being associated with him. He was expelled by the Byzantine party, and Maurizio Galbaio (764-87) was elected. For security against the Lombards and Franks, Galbaio leaned on Byzantium, and obtained that his son Giovanni should be associated with him in office and have the right of succession. Giovanni (787-805) also had an associate in his son Maurizio. By reason of the slaying (803) of Joannes, Patriarch of Grado, his nephew and successor, Fortunatus, organized a conspiracy; the doges were driven out and the Frankish party brought about the election of Oberlierus (805-10). In the ninth century the commerce of the Venetians was very extensive. Their flag was respected even by the Saracens, and their factories sprang up in all the ports of the East. From that time they traded with the Christian Slavs, and sold to the Mussulmans of Spain and Africa. Popes Zacharias and Adrian tried to prevent this, while for some time Charlemagne excluded them from the markets of the Empire.

In 775 took place an event which may be called the foundation of the State of Venice, the establishment of an episcopal see on the little island of Olivolo, the jurisdiction of which extended over the islands of Luprio, Dorosoduro, and Rialto, taken from the Diocese of Malamocco. These islands thus formed a new polity. With the conquests of Charlemagne in Italy and Istria, the Venetian islands were threatened on all sides. Obelierius pursued a policy of alliance with the Franks, and helped them to gain possession of the maritime cities of Istria; but a Byzantine fleet aided the Byzantine party to expel Obelierius, and Angelo I Participazzo was made doge (810). Pipin, son of Charlemagne, then attempted the conquest of the Lagoon; Brandolo and Malamocco fell into his hands, but the Venetians made head against him on Rialto. Protracted negotiations followed between Charlemagne and Byzantium. The Venetian Lagoon remained under the Byzantine sway, and Charlemagne granted the Venetians freedom of commerce throughout the Empire. From this period the doge's seat was the island of Rialto; the city, formed by the combination of the surrounding islands, including Olivolo, the episcopal see, began to call itself Venetiae. Then followed the reign of Participazzo (864-81) and of his sons Giustiniano (829) and Giovanni (deposed, 836). Doges Pietro Tradonico (836-64) and Orso Participazzo (864-81) fought victoriously against the Croats and Saracens. Giovanni Participazzo (881-88), son of Orso, was deposed for his Francophilism. Pietro (888-911) defended the state against the Hungarians (906). After Orso Praticipazzo II (912-32) there began, with Pietro Candiano (932-39), the policy of expansion on the mainland; Comacchio, at the mouths of the Po, and Capo d'Istria. Then followed Pietro Badoario (932-42) and Pietro Candiano III, who was forced to abdicate in favour of his son Pietro Candiano IV (959-76).

Under the latter we meet for the first time with the Grand Council, the assent of which was necessary to all laws; besides the laity, it also included the bishops of the Venetian States. The new Government prohibited the sale to Saracens of slaves and of any merchandise which could be used in war against Christians. But in 976 the doge's palace was set on fire, and he himself killed as he attempted to escape. His partisans, supported by the Emperor Otto II, drove out (978) his successor, Pietro Orscolo I, who became a disciple of St. Romuald. Under Memmo, the next doge, certain rebels attempted to place Venice under the sway of Otto II, but the republic defended itself, and in 983 peace was restored. Memmo was obliged to become a monk (992). Under Pietro Orscolo II (992-1009) the prestige of the republic revived. The Latin cities of the Istrian and Dalmatian coasts, incessantly menaced by the Slavs, voluntarily acknowledged the dominion of Venice, and from that time the doge, with the consent of the Emperor of Constantinople, was styled Duke of Dalmatia. He gained a splendid victory over the Saracens at Bari (1003). His son Ottone (1009-26) was suspected of wishing to bring the state under Western imperial domination, and died a prisoner at Constantinople. He was succeeded by the weak Pietro Barvolano (1030), under whom Peter, King of Hungary, son of the Doge Ottone, tried to get possession of Dalmatia. After grievous internal conflicts, Flavanico became doge in 1033 and enacted wise laws against hereditary dogeship. Domenico Contareno (1043-71) was fortunate in the defence of Dalmatia against the Hungarians. At this time the office of procurator of St. Mark was instituted, instead of that of state treasurer, making a clear separation between the personal patrimony of the doge and the state revenues. Domenico Silvio married a daughter of the Emperor Constantine Ducas, and, at the request of Alexius Comnenus, made war at sea against the Normans; he was fortunate at first, but was defeated at Corfu in 1084, with the lost of nine large ships and 13,000 men, which lead to his deposition. Vitale Faledro (1084-96) retrieved the loss with the victory of Botrinto. Alexius Comnenus, by the famous Golden Bull (1084), granted the Venetians freedom from tributes and imposts, a full liberty of commerce, exemption from Greek jurisdiction, an appropriation for the Church of St. Mark, and an income for the doge, with the title of Protosebastos. From this time Venice is an independent state.

The Doge Vitale Michiel (1096-1112) participated in the First Crusade only when he saw the Genoese and Pisans bringing back booty from Palestine; and, in general, the Venetians turned the succeeding crusades to their own advantage. Alexius Comnenus, perceiving this, refused, the bull of investiture to Domenico Michiel (1117-29) and had the Venetian ships sequestrated. The Venetians, however, defeated by the Mussulmans near Jaffa (1123), turned against the Greeks, and from that time even the nominal sovereignty of Constantinople was at an end. It was especially by their aid that, in 1124, Tyre was taken, one-third of the city being assigned to them. In 1771 another expedition against Manual Comnenus was necessary; it had small success, however, on account of the plague, and the Doge Vitale Michiel II (1156-72) fell a victim to the fury of the populace. Another reform in the government was then introduced, increasing the powers of the Grand Council at the doge's expense. At the same period Venice joined the Lombardic League, without, however, showing any excessive zeal for a cause which mattered but little to her, and thus the Peace of 1177, between Alexander III and Frederic Barbarossa, was solemnized at Venice, as being a neutral city. With the Doge Enrico Dandolo (1192-1205) began the most glorious period of the republic. Assuming command of the French crusading army, he used it to reduce to obedience Trieste and Zara, which had placed themselves under the sway of Hungary, and then turned against Constantinople, where the Latin Empire had been set up. Venice obtained three quarters in the capital, most of the Peloponnesus, the eastern shoes of the Adriatic, the Sea of Marmora, and the Black Sea, the coasts of Terraglia. Ægina, Corfu, and other islands of the Archipelago, and the rule over about 8,000,000 of new subjects. In these vast dominions the doge found compensation for his diminished power, as the appointment of podesta and other magistrates belonged to him, and thereby he could always win the friendship of those who entertained ambitions. These conquests before long became veritable fiefs of the principal families, which thus had an interest in preserving and increasing them without calling upon the State for any help to that end. The Government even purchased the island of Crete from the Marquis of Monferrato. Venice had now become the greatest power in the Mediterranean, and this stirred up the rivalry of Genoa, which republic, in 1257 and 1258, suffered two naval defeats. Genoa then formed an alliance with Michael Palaeologus, who recovered Constantinople, and Venice, her possessions threatened, engaged in a war with her rival (1262-79), in which the Genoese were, on the whole, worsted. In 1292 the war recommenced with greater ferocity. The Genoese were victorious at Laiazzo on the Black Sea (1294); the Venetians at Galata (1296). In 1297 the Genoese under Spinola wasted the coasts of Dalmatia. In 1298 the Venetian fleet was destroyed by Lamba d'Oria, a victory which brought about the Peace of Milan (1299). Venice now needed consolidation. The Venetians had meanwhile become interested in Italian affairs.

In the thirteenth century the election of the doge was reserved to the Greater Council, composed of 480 members taken from certain families. The doge could do nothing without his councillors the obligation of the office were restated afresh for every new doge, and he must swear to observe them. Affairs of greater moment were discussed by councillors, who invited a certain number of members of the Council (pregadi) of whom the Senate was afterwards constituted. In 1297 it was enacted that only those who had sat in the Greater Council and their descendants should be eligible; thus was formed an aristocracy which monopolized the offices of State. The conspiracy of Boemondo Tiepolo (1310), for the restoration of democratic government, was repressed by the Doge Gradenigo (1289- 1310); the Council of Ten was instituted to guard the existing constitution, and the most important matters were afterwards reserved to it. At first provisional, it became permanent in 1335; the individual members, however, held office for only one year. In 1454 the three inquisitors of State were instituted for cases of high policy; it was thanks to this institution that Venice remained a republic, and no one succeeded in becoming its Signore. Besides, until 1506 there was no juridical distinction between nobles and plebeians. In the fourteenth century Venice began to extend her dominion on the mainland, joining the league against Mastino della Scala, from whom it took Treviso (1338), Castelfranco, and Ceneda. The possession of Crete had to be defended by force of arms in 1307 and 1365.

About the same time (1334 and 1342) alliances were formed with the Byzantines and the Knights of Rhodes against the Turks, who were beginning to render navigation unsafe. The Genoese having taken the island of Sico and interfered with Venetian navigation in the Black Sea, war again broke out in 1350. There was fighting on the Bosporus (1352) and off the coasts of Sardinia (1353), where the Genoese were beaten; and then peace was restored, Venice having to abandon all her ports in the Red Sea.

In 1355 the Doge Marion Falieri was beheaded, charged with having conspired to overturn the Government and make himself Lord of Venice. This incident occasioned new limitations to the rights of the doge. Next followed the war with Hungary for the possession of Dalmatia, in which all its neighbours took sides against the republic, and Venice lost the greater part of Dalmatia (1358). The possession of the island of Tenedos was the cause of a war with Genoa, assisted by other foes of Venice. The Venetians, victors at Anzio (1378), were defeated at Pola (1379). Checked by the Genoese at sea and by Francesco Carrara, Lord of Padua, on land, Venice would then have made peace, had not the conditions been exorbitant. A new armament was prepared, with which Vettor Pisani blockaded the Genoese fleet at Chioggia, forcing it to surrender (1380). By the Peace of Turin, however, Venice had to cede all Dalmatia to Hungary, Trieste to the Patriarch of Aquileia, Treviso to the Duke of Austria, Tenedos to Byzantium. But the loss was soon recovered. The Genoese were defeated near Modono in 1403; in 1406 Padua and all the possessions of Francesco Carrara were taken and the prince and his sons strangled in prison. Then the Emperor Sigismund seized the Dalmatian coast, while Verona and all the Scala possessions were annexed between 1403 and 1405 by Venice, which not long after took Friuli, Udive, Feltre, and Belluno from the Patriarch of Aquileia. In the mentime the Venetian possessions had been growing in the Morea and Albania (1390-1400), and the republic was co-operating with the Christian princes against the Ottomans.

In 1423 the republic joined the league of Freancesco Gonzaga, Nicolo d'Este, and Florence against Filippo Maria Visconti. Venetian troops routed the Visconti forces at Maclodio (1427), and Filippo Maria ceded Bergamo and Bresci to Venice. The war being renewed, the Venetian squadron defeated the Genoese allies of the Visconti at Portofino (1431). When peace was made, Venice retained her acquisitions. In 1437 she again allied herself with Florence against the Visconti, and the war lasted until 1441, when she had taken Ravenna from the Polenta. When Francesco Sforza became Duke of Milan, Venice united with the King of Naples against him, to increase her territory on the mainland; but Nicholas V brought about the Peace of Lodi (1454), which was designed to ensure Italian equilibrium. So soon was Venice again embroiled with Florence that it seemed as though she aimed at dominating the whole peninsula, but she was forced to keep still (1468). In 1480 a pretext was made to serve for a war against the Duke of Ferrara. Then all the Italian states united against the republic, and even Sixtus IV, after the Venetian victory of Velletri (1482), withdrew from his alliance with Venice. Still, from this war, too, Venice carried off an augmentation of her Italian territory. At the same time, however, the Turks took from Venice the greater part of the Ægean Islands, as well as Negropont and all her possessions in the Morea, and pushed their conquests as far as Friuli, threatening the republic's Italian possessions. In 1479 Venice had to renounce all claims to the territory taken from her by the Turks. Not less disastrous was the war against the Turks from 1498 to 1503. These losses were to some degree compensated by the acquisition of Cyprus, ceded in 1489 by Caterina Cornaro, widow of the last king, and Zante and Cephalonia. But another great blow for Venice was the discovery of the maritime route to India in 1498. To the discovery of the New World two Venetians, Giovanni Caboto and his son Sebastiano, contributed; with English vessels they discovered Newfoundland, Labrador, and Nova Scotia. Still more famous are the travels of the Venetian Marco Polo in the interior of Asia, extending as far as China, in the thirteenth century.

After the accession of Julius II and the fall of Cesare Borgia, the Venetians invaded the Romagna. Julius II then formed the League of Cambrai, which, besides the pope and the princes of Southern Italy, included the emperor, Spain, and France, at that time mistress of the Duchy of Milan (1508). At first it seemed that the last hour of Venice had come; in Apulia the Spanish took the coast towns which Venice had occupied during the wars between France and Spain for the possession of Naples; at Agnadello the French defeated the bulk of the Venetian army, and Brescia, Cremona, and Peschiera were occupied by France (1509); the Venetians were driven out of Romagna, while other portions of their territory were seized by the Bonzaga and the Duke of Ferrara. Maximilian had the imperial standard raised at Verona, Vicenza, and Padua. But the pope and Spain, having accomplished their purpose, withdrew from the league, and the emperor was obliged to recross the Alps the same year. The pope formed another league, the Holy League (1511), against the French and their Italian allies, especially the Duke of Ferrara. On the death of Julius II, Venice formed an alliance (League of Blois, 1513) with France for mutual assistance against the emperor, or against the Turks, or for the reconquest of the Milanese. But the Spaniards and Imperialists, having defeated the French, occupied all the Venetian possessions on the mainland. The unexpected arrival of Francis I in Italy (1515) made it possible, however, for Venice to recover everything. Again in 1521 and 1525 Venice was the ally of France against Spain, without suffering by the victories of Charles V. The Turks meanwhile went on gaining victories; Venice joined the league of Spain and the pope, but, believing that she had been betrayed at the battle of Prevesa (1538), concluded an unfavourable peace with the Turks, paying them a tribute for the islands which she still retained. In 1569 the Sultan Selim II set about the conquest of Cyprus, which was heroically defended; the city of Famagosta was the last to surrender (18 August, 1571). Meanwhile an alliance had been formed with the pope and Spain, and the allied fleet defeated the Turks at Lepanto (October, 1571). Venice, however, making peace on her own account, surrendered her claims to Cyprus. The republic was beginning to decline politically and commercially. The habits and customs of the feudal nobility had been introduced among the Venetian nobles, and thus an aristocracy had been formed without wealth, and which it was not longer possible to provide with offices in foreign possessions. This ruined nobility, with a keen appetite for luxury and pleasures, was a constant element of political disturbance and of foreign intrigue.

A serious difficulty with Pope Paul V arose out of the trial of certain priests by lay tribunals, contrary to the provisions which had then recently been made. Gaining nothing by an interdict, the pope prepared for war; but the intervention of Henry IV of France effected a reconciliation (1606-07). The Protestants sought to profit by this occasion to pervert the population of Venice. Venice, indeed, had always granted a wide liberty to the various creeds, though she would not permit her own subjects to apostatize. Forced by the Italian princes to combat the Uscochs Uskoken (Croatian Christians who had escaped from the Turks and become pirates), she made war against the empire at Friuli. In the Valtellina controversy Venice was allied with the Protestant Grisons, out of hatred for Spain. In 1644 a Turkish fleet attacked Canea, a city of Crete which Venice had kept in her possession by the expenditure of blood and treasure. Canea fell before the arrival of the Venetian fleet aided by the pope and the Knights of Malta and of St. Stephen. This war lasted until 1669, when Candia fell, after a siege of twenty-four years, attacked by sea, by land, and underground. The victories over the Turks near Phocaea (1649), in the Cyclades (1651), and near the Dardanelles (1652, 1656 and 1657), could only retard the issue of this unequal war. Francesco Morosini capitulated, and was allowed to depart with all the honours of war. In 1695 he resumed command and conquered all the Morea as far as Corinth. The war ended with the Peace of Carlowitz (1699), which secured to Venice the Morea and the Ionian Isles free of tribute. In 1714 the Turks returned to the attack, and, with the Peace of Passarowitz (1718), Venice lost all her conquests in the Balkan Peninsula except a few towns in Albania.

The period of peace which followed was favourable to literature and the sciences, but luxury and licence increased; the philosophy of the Encyclopaedists, together with indifference to religion, had sown the seed of revolutionary doctrines. The nobles of the mainland, in particular, were becoming restless, desiring a share in the government, which had been accessible only to Venetians. The last warlike action of the republic was the expedition of Angelo Emo against the Barbary States (1784-86). The war between Napoleon and Austria in 1796 soon passed from Lombardy to Venetian territory, the republic being unable to defend its neutrality. When the Veronese rose against their French garrison (17-21 April, 1797), Bonaparte used the pretext to arrest the inquisitors of State and to change the Venetian Government from aristocratic to democratic. To effect this change, French troops entered the city, seized all the ships, the treasury, and a great many works of art. Soon after this, by the Treaty of Campoformio, Napoleon gave Venice, with its territory on the mainland, to Austria. Thus ended the republic. In 1805 Austria abandoned all Italian possessions, and thus Venice was united to the Napoleonic Kingdom of Italy. In 1814 the viceroy Eugene, to save Lombardy, retroceded Venetia to Austria. The news of the Revolution of Vienna and the Milanese Insurrection, in 1848, found a ready echo in Venice, where the Austrian garrison, the Italians excepted, departed after peacefully capitulating. Daniele Manin was at the head of the provisional government, which the cities of the mainland accepted; they soon after joined the union with Piedmont under Carlo Alberto, as had already been done by Venice, and in a few days news arrived of the cessation of hostilities between Piedmont and Austria. The Venetian republic was then re-established (11 August, 1848). The Neapolitan general Guglielmo Pepe commanded the Venetian troops against the Austrians who came to retake the city. It was besieged in October; on 24 August, 1849, after a bombardment of twenty-four days, it surrendered. In 1866 Austria ceded Venice to Napoleon III, who gave it to the Kingdom of Italy.

COMMERCIAL HISTORY

The city itself was chiefly occupied in the importation from Africa, the Levant, and the Black Sea, of the greatest variety of raw products, such as hides, minerals, salt, wax, sugar, borax, wool, silk, spices, drugs, guns, ivory, ostrich feathers, parrots, gold dust, etc. The Venetians also exploited the iron and copper mines of Friuli, Cadore, and Carmizia. From Lombardy and their own possessions on the mainland came their exportations of woollen, silk, and linen fabrics. The manufacturers of the Venetian dominions might not export directly; everything must pass through the capital. They maintained important relations with the city of Augsburg, from which the products were distributed through the North. On the other hand, the silver of the Tyrolean mines was brought to Venice. The special industries of Venice were the manufacture of chemicals-- cream of tartar, cinnabar (vermilion), shellac, white lead, and triaca (the "universal medicine"), sugar-refining, tanning, the preparation of furs imported from Russia, the manufacture of imitation pearls and gems, and goldsmith's work. The industries had their guilds, with chapels of their own in various churches. It was in Venice that banks of deposit and circulation originated, and Venice was the first state to raise a public loan (1156, the monte vecchio; the monte nuovo was issued in 1580; the nuovissimo, in 1610). Banking law had its origin in Venice. As early as 1253 marine insurance was made obligatory by law. The Doge Renier Zeno (1253-68) had a code of navigation and commerce compiled. One important branch of commerce was the supply of the African Mussulman princes with tools and timber for building, a practice forbidden under excommunication by the popes because it tended to the perpetuation of piracy. Printing was an important industry. Venice was also a thriving centre of the slave trade.

ART

In Venice art found an exceptionally favourable field. The traditions of centuries, however, and relations with the East retarded the influence of that new art impulse which had reached other Italian cities in the thirteenth century. In painting, especially, Venetian artists in the fourteenth century were still trammelled by the Byzantine tradition. The first art to become emancipated was architecture, architects and workmen from the mainland being employed. It appears that the Romanesque style, no less than the Gothic, in Venice felt the influence of the environment. When, with its conquests on the mainland, the republic had become an Italian power; it soon became one of the principal centres of art; its immense wealth, both public and private, afforded opportunity to the choicest geniuses for the creation of the works already mentioned in this article. It is to be noted, however, that few of the famous artists of the so-called Venetian School were really Venetians. They were mostly natives of the Venetian provinces, and therefore Lombards. First to inaugurate the revival, or rinascimento, in painting was the Paduan Guardiento (1365), a pupil of Giotto. Next the three Muranesi, Antonio, Giovanni, and Andrea, were eminent, influenced by the German and Flemish schools, and the Vivarini, Bartolommeo (1450-99) and Luigi (1461-1503). These, as well as Jacobello del Fiore, Carlo Crivelli, Fra Francesco da Negroponte, and also Jacopo and Gentile Bellini, exhibit, as compared with the contemporary Lombards, an art still in the archaic stage. With Giovanni Bellini Venetian art attains perfection, while at the same time displaying its own special prerogative, mastery of colouring. To this School belong the following Venetians: G. B. Cima (da Conegliano); Vittore Carpaccio; Giorgio Barbarelli (Giorgione), from whom his fellow student, Tiziano Veceili (Titian), learned much; Sebastiano del Piombo, who carried to Rome the art of colour; the two Palma, the elder of whom (Palma Vecchio) has various styles at his command; Jacopo Robusti (Tintoretto), the master of lights and shadows of whom Titian was jealous, and who knew how to combine beauty and idealism with Titian's power and naturalness; Paolo Veronese, the exponent of the Venetian School. But after him the repute of Venetian painting was soon brought low by his successors. Only with Giovanni Battista Tiepolo, a pupil of G. B. Piazzetta, in the eighteenth century, does Venetian painting, with a still more perfect technic, celebrate a glorious resurrection. Even in the nineteenth century the Venetian painters remained faithful to the tradition of their School; conspicuous among them, Giacomo Favretto and Giulio Ciardi. In sculpture even more than in painting Venice took her artists from abroad. The most distinguished of the fifteenth century were Pietro Lombardo and his sons Tullio and Andrea. Verrocchio modelled perhaps the finest equestrian statue in the world. Also eminent were Alessandro Leopardo and his sons, and the brothers Antonio and Lorenzo Bregno, to whose credit are the finest monuments in the various churches of the city.

ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY

The Venetian islands at first belonged to the Diocese of Altino or of Padua. It is certain that Bishop Tricidius of Padua took refuge on the island of Malamocco. But when Tricidius returned to Padua there still remained a bishop at Malamocco (Methamancus), and the Venetian islands remained under his jurisdiction until 775. In that year, with the consent of Adrian I and the Patriarch of Grado, an episcopal see was erected on the island of Olivolo (afterwards called Castello) with jurisdiction over Gemini, Rialto, Luprio, and dorsoduro. The first bishop (nominated by the doge) was Obelerius, who was invested and enthroned by the doge, and consecrated by the patriarch. The rest of the islands which now form Venice remained under the Patriarch of Grado. To succeed him (798), the doge named a certain Cristoforo, whom, on account of his extreme youth, Giovanni, Patriarch of Grado, refused to consecrate. Giovanni was killed, and his successor, after much hesitation, consecrated Cristoforo. Under the fourth bishop, Orso, the relics of St. Mark were brought to Venice; the legend, that St. Mark himself had preached the Gospel at Venice, grew up in later times. As many bodies of saints had already been brought from the East, so, following the conquest of Constantinople, a still greater number now came to Venice, besides the Madonna called Nicopoeia, which is still in St. Mark's. Marco II Michel (1225) finally secured the exemption of the clergy from lay jurisdiction, except in cases involving real property. Jacopo Albertini (1311) became attached to the schism of Louis of Bavaria, whom he crowned with the Iron Crown (1327), and was therefore deposed. Under Nicolo' Morosini (1336) the dispute between the clergy and Government concerning the mortuary tithes was settled, though it began afresh under Paolo Foscari (1367) and was ended only in 1376.

During the Schism of the West, Venice always adhered to the Roman obedience. In 1457, upon the death of Domenico Michel, Patriarch of Grado, Nicholas V suppressed the patriarchate and the Bishopric of Csastello, incorporating them both in the new Patriarchate of Venice (Bull, "Regis aeterni"), thus Venice succeeded to the whole metropolitan jurisdiction of Grado, including the sees of Dalmatia. The election of the patriarch belonged to the Senate, and this practice sometimes led to differences between the republic and the Holy See. In like manner parishoners elected their parish priests, by the right of patronage. Girolamo Quirini, O.P. (1519-54), had many disputes with the clergy, with the Government, and with the Holy See; to avoid these disputes, the Senate decreed that in future no one but a senator should be eligible. Those elected after this were frequently laymen. Giovanni Trevisano, O.S.B. (1560), introduced the Tridentine reforms, founding the seminary, holding synods, and collecting the regulations made by his predecessors (Constitutiones et privilegia patriarchatus et cleri Venetiarum). In 1581 the visita Apostolica was sent to Venice; a libellus exhortatorius was published, in which the visita highly praises the clergy of Venice.

In 1807, by favour of the Viceroy of Italy, the Neapolitan Nicola Gambroni was promoted to the patriarchate and of his own authority transferred the patriarchal seat to the Basilica of St. Mark, uniting the two chapters; he reduced the number of parish churches from seventy to thirty. The work of enlarging the choir of the basilica brought to light the relics of St. Mark (1808). In 1811 Napoleon intruded into the See of Venice Stefano Bonsignore, Bishop of Faenza, but in 1814 that prelate returned to his own see. In 1818 the Dioceses of Torcello and Carole were merged in that of Venice, while the dioceses of the Venetian territory were placed under its metropolitan jurisdiction. Cardinal Giuseppe Sarto, afterwards Pius X, succeeded in 1893; he was refused recognition by the Italian Government, which claimed the right of nomination formerly employed by the Emperor of Austria and in earlier times by the Venetian Senate, but after eleven months this pretension was abandoned.

The suffragans of Venice are Adria, Belluno and Feltre, Ceneda, Chioggia, Concordia, Padua, Treviso, Verona, and Vicenza. The diocese contains 45 parishes (32 in the city), about 160 churches, chapels, etc; 250 secular and 280 regular priests; 12 houses of male and 32 of female religious; 150,000 souls; 5 institutes for boys and 15 for girls. It has one Catholic daily (La Difesa) and two weeklies.

CAREN HAZLITT, The Venetian Republic (New York, 1900); MOLMENTI, tr. BROWN, Venice, Its Individual Growth (London, 1906); MONNIER, Venice in the Eighteenth Century, tr. (London, 1910); BROWN, Life on the Lagoons (London, 1894); RUSKIN, The Stones of Venice (2nd ed., 3 vols. with illustrations by the author, London 1856-67; New York, 3 vols. in 2, 1885); Plan of Venice in BARTHOLOMEW, Tourist's Atlas Guide to the Continent (London, 1893); CAPPELLETTI, Le Chiese d'Italia, IX; IDEM, Storia della Chiesa di Venezia; FLAMINIUS CORNELIUS, Ecclesiae Veneta et Torcellensis antiquis monumentis illustratae (Venice, 1749); SABELLICO, Dell' historia vinitiana (Venice, 1558); QUIRINI AND GRADENIGO, Tiara et purpura veneta (Brescia, 1761); HOLL, Dissertatio de patriarchatu Veneto (Heidelberg, 1776); ROMAININ, Storia documentata di Venezia (Venice, 1856-60); CANTU, Venezia in Storie minori, II (Turin, 1864); DARU, Hist. de le Rep. de Venise (Paris, 1821); VON ZWIEDENECK-SUDENHORST, Venidig als Weltnacht u. Weltstadt (Bielefeld, 1906); KRETSCHMAYR, Gesch. v. Venedig, I (Gotha, 1905); MATIN, Storia civile e politica del commercio dei Veneziani (Venice, 1798-1808); TAFEL AND THOMAS, Urkunden zur alteren Handels . . . u. Staat-gesch. Venedigs (Vienna, 1856-58); THOMAS AND PREDELI, Diplomatarium Veneto-Levantinum (Venice, 1880, 1899); FRANCO, MADALENA, AND MORCHIO, Tavole sinnottiche nummografiche della republica di Venezia (Venice, 1878); PAOLETTI, Architettura e Scultura del rinascimento (3 vols., Venice, 1893); TROTTO CAMPURIN, Venezia nel presente e nel passato (Padua, 1902); ZANOTTA, Storia della pittura veneziana (Venice, 1837); YRIARTE, Venice (Paris, 1878); ZENO, Memorie di scrittori veneti (Venice, 1774); FOSCARINI, Della letteratura veneziana (Venice, 1854). Cf. Archivio Veneto (1876-); Monumenti storici (pub. by the Deputazioni Veneta di Storia Patria, 1881-).

U. BENIGNI

Veni Creator Spiritus

The most famous of hymns" (Frere), is assigned in the Roman Breviary to Vespers (I and II) and Terce of Pentecost and throughout the octave. The Church also sings it at such solemn functions as the election of popes, the consecration of bishops, the ordination of priests, the dedication of churches, the celebration of synods or councils, the coronation of kings, etc. It is also sung in the more private devotions attending the opening and closing of that scholastic year in institutions of learning. The Congregation of Rites decreed (20 June, 1899) that the Eastertide doxology (Deo Patri sit gloria -- Et Filio qui a mortuis -- Surrexit ac Paraclito -- In s culorum s cula) should always be used, no matter what, the feast or season of the year might be. The Vatican Graduale (1908) gives the older text, (attestation of which does not go back beyond the ninth century) and also, under the heading "secundum usum recentiorem", the present Breviary text, which is a revision, in the interest of classical prosody, of the older text, by the correctors of the Breviary under Urban VIII. The doxology of the older text (which is probably not original with the text itsell) is: "Sit laus Patri cum Filio -- Sancto simul Paraclito -- Nobisque mittat Filius -- Charisma Sancti Spiritus". This doxology is generally associated with the hymn "Beata nobis gaudia". It is unnecessary to indicate here the points of revision, since the printing of both texts in the Vatican Graduale makes comparison easy. Hymnologists think the revision uncalled for.

Dreves (Analecta Hymnica, L, 195) places the hymn in the section he devotes to Rabanus Maurus (d. 856), Abbot of Fulda and Archbishop of Mainz, and shows (p. 194) the importance of the manuscript evidence in his favour. Frere (Introduction to Hymns Ancient and Modern, historical edition, p. xxii) thinks the hymn can with some confidence" be ascribed to him; as does also Blume (1908). Added support of the ascription is found in the scansion of the line Qui Paracletus dicitur (revised into Qui dicitur Paraclitus"), where, in accordance with precedent found in Rabanus, Paracletus is accented on the penultimate syllable, as against the almost universal medieval custom of accenting it on the ante-penultimate, an illustration of which is found in the third line of the doxology (which is not part of the original hymn). Guéranger with many others, ascribed the hymn to Charlemagne, but with slight ground except his zeal for the doctrine of the Procession of the Holy Ghost from Father and Son. The legendary story of Ekkehard V contains its own refutation. The hymn has also been attributed to St. Ambrose and to St. Gregory the Great, but without real evidence for either ascription. No ancient writer ascribes it to St. Ambrose, nor can a good argument be based on its inclusion of two lines (Infirma nostri corporis -- Virtute firmans perpeti) from the "Veni Redemptor gentium" (which is certainly by St. Ambrose) or on the phrasal similarity of its two lines "Accende lumen sensibus -- Infunde amorem cordibus" with the line "Infunde lumen cordibus" of the hymn "O lux beata Trinitas" (which is probably by St. Ambrose). Borrowing from celebrated hymns was a common practice of medieval hymnodists. Mone ascribes it to St. Gregory because of its classical metre and occasional rhymes, and especially its prayerfulncss, which he declares is a feature of St. Gregory's hymns; and the scansion of Paracletus (with the accent on the penultimate) he considers referable to the learning of such an author.

The hymn was probably first assigned to Vespers. One eleventh-century manuscript has it at both Lauds and Vespers, two others have it at Lauds. Its use at Terce is said to have begun at Cluny -- a highly appropriate assignment, as it thus commemorates the descent of the Holy Ghost at the third hour of the day (Acts, ii, 15). In the council held at Reims in 1049, Pope Leo IX presiding, it was sung at the commencement of the third session in place of the ordinary antiphon, "Exaudi nos, Domine . It is found in several pontificals of the same century. It is the only Breviary hymn retained by the Protestant Episcopal Church, a translation being given in the Prayer Book (Ordering of Priests). There are about sixty English versions. Warton styles the translation of Dryden most elegant and beautiful. It begins:

JULIAN, Dict. of Hymnology (2nd ed., London, 1907), 1206-1211, 1720; DREVES, Lateinisehs Hymnendichter des Mittel-alters, II. in Analecta Hymnica, L (Leipzig, 1907), 193-4 (Latin text. MS. references, additional stanzas, notes), 180-1, biographical notice of Rabanus; FRERE, Introduction to Hymns Ancient and Modern. (hist. ed., London, 1909) p. (see hymns Nos. 180, 181, for text and two trs., two harmonized plainsong melodies, modern settings and comment); PIMONT, Les hymnes du bréviare romain, III (Paris, 1884), 125-143, extensive comment: "The other two hymns of Pentecost are mostly narrative, while the Veni Creator is entirely an address to the Holy Ghost. This characteristic trait, and the exceptional beauty of the hymn, have always made it dear and venerable to Holy Church . . . The Dominicana sing it only at Terce. Other manuscripts locate it at Matins. The ancient Ordinarium of Laon indicates its use a all the canonical hours. The nuns of the Paraclete (Nogent-sur-Seine) repeated the first stanza seven times at Terce, five times at Sext, and thrice at None." He refers to MARTÈNE, De antiq. rit. eccl., III, iv, c. 28; HENRY, The Hymn "Veni Creator Spiritus" in Amer. Eccl. Review (June, 1897), 573-596, text and original translation. comment; SHIPLEY, Annus Sanctus (London, 1874), gives trs. by AYLWARD (161), ANON. in Evening Office, 1710 (165), HUSENBETH (167), R. CAMPBELL (170). and in the Appendix, 10, 11, 26, 27, trs. of the Primers of 1604, 1619, 1685, 1706 (this last being Dryden's); MONE, Lateinische Hymnen des Mittelalters, I (Freiburg, 1853), 241-243; DANIEL, Thesaurus Hymnologicus, I, 213-215; IV, 124-126; DUFFIELD, Latin Hymn-Writers and their Hymns (New York, 1889), 114-131, text and original tr., biography of Rabanus, for whose authorship Duffield contends vigorously; The Seven Great Hymns of the Medieval Church (7th ed., New York, 1868), 134-139); Amer. Eccl. Review (May, 1900, 525), decree S.C.R. (20 June, 1899) concerning the doxology; IDEM (Oct., 1896, 432-434), the singing of the Veni Creator before the sermon at High Mass; JOHNER, A New School of Gregorian Chant (New York, 1906, p. 87) gives the melody with marked accents and calls attention to "the upward movement from the first to the third line . For imitative hymns: DREVES, Analecta Hymnica, XII, 139; XXI, 52, 56; XXX (three hymns); XLIII, 211; XXXIII, 23. OIT, L'Innodia ambrosiana in Rassegna Gregoriana. VI (1907), 490, gives the melody of the hymn Hic est dies verus Dei, shows that it is the same as that of the Veni Creator, remarks that "all the spirit of the Ambrosian hymnody is felt in this fresh and vivacious melody", and thinks that "the music probably belongs to Saint Ambrose; BLUME, Ein neuer Markstein in der liturgischen Hymnodie in Stimmen aus Maria-laach, LXXV, No. 1 (July, 1, 1908), 6and footnote, for comment on revision.

H.T. HENRY

Veni Sancte Spiritus Et Emitte Coelitus

The sequence for Pentecost (the "Golden Sequence"). It is sung at Mass from Whitsunday until the following Saturday inclusively, and comprises ten stanzas of the form:

Some hymnologists bind two such stanzas into one, doubtless in order to complete the rhythmic scheme for the third line, as in the case of the "Lauda Sion" and the "Stabat Mater". The peculiar feature of the "Veni Sancte Spiritus, however, the persistence throughout the hymn of the same rhthymic close in "ium" For all the stanzas -- a feature imitated in Dr. Neale's translation (given in the Baltimore Manual of Prayers"). This version of the Anglican hymnologist is only less popular than that of Brother Caswall, which is found alike in Protestant and Catholic hymnals and in the "Raccolta" (Philadelphia, 1881). Dean Trench and others follow Durandus in ascribing the authorship of the sequence to Robert II, who reigned in France from 997-1031. With Cardinal Bona, Duffield gives it to Hermann Contractus (q.v.) and argues earnestly for the ascription. The sequence has indeed been found in manuscripts of the eleventh century, and of the twelfth, but written by a later hand, and the conclusion is drawn that it dates sometime after the middle of the twelfth century. This makes probable the ascription to Stephen Langton (q.v.), made by a writer whom Cardinal Pitra thinks an English Cistercian who lived about the year 1210. More probable is the ascription to Innocent III made by Ekkehard V in his "Vita S. Notkeri", written about 1220. Ekkehard, a monk of St. Gall, says that his abbot, Ulrich, was sent to Rome by Frederick II, conferred with the pope on various matters, and was present at the Mass of the Holy Spirit celebrated before the Holy Father. The sequence of the Mass was Sancti Spiritus adsit nobis gratia". Hereupon Ekkehard remarks (what he probably learned from Abbot Ulrich himself on his return to St. Gall) that the pope himself "had composed a sequence of the Holy Spirit, namely Veni Sancte Spiritus". The older sequence yielded but gradually to its rival, which was almost universally assigned to one or more days within the octave. The revised Missal of 1570 finally assigned it to Whitsunday and the octave. The revision (1634) under Urban VIII left, it unaltered. Well styled by medieval writers the "Golden Sequence", it has won universal esteem, the reasons for which are set forth by Clichtoveus, who in his "Elucidatorium" considers it "above all praise because of its wondrous sweetness, clarity of style, pleasant brevity combined with wealth of thought (so that every line is a sentence), and finally the constructive grace and elegance displayed in the skilful and apt juxtaposition of contrasting thoughts . Daniel applauds this appreciation. Gihr spends not a little space in his work on the Mass in praise of the hymn, and Julian accords it a careful and appreciative tribute.

KAYSER, Beiträge zur Gesch. u. Erklärung der alten Kirchen-hymnen, II (Paderborn, 1886), 61-76, a good commentary; JULIAN, Dict. of Hymnol. (2nd ed., London, 1907), 1212, 1721, discussion of authorship, first lines of trs., etc.; to his list should be added: BAGSHAWE, Breviary Hymns and Missal Sequences (London, s. d.), 36: "Come, O Holy Spirit, down; DONAHOE, Early Christian Hymns (New York, 1908), 149: "Holy Spirit, come and shine"; Irish Monthly (Nov., 1887): O Holy Spirit, come!"; Missal for the Use of the Laity (London, 1903), 410: Holy Spirit, come possess us, a four-lined stanza, etc. The version frequently used by Catholic sodalities is a revision of that by AUSTIN (l668): "Come Holy Spirit, send down those beams which gently flow in silent streams" etc. For indulgences, plenary and partial, attached to the recitation of the sequence, see tr. of the Raccolta. TRENCH, Sacred Latin Poetry (3rd ed., London, 1874), 198-9 for text with notes, and 197 for biographical notice of Robert II; Trench thinks the sequence "the loveliest . . . of all the hymns in the whole circle of Latin sacred poetry". DUFFIED, The Latin Hymn Writers and Their Hymns (New York, 1889), 149-68 (prose tr., 163). DREVES, Analecta Hymnica (Leipzig), for hymns founded on the sequence, e.g., IX, p. 199: Veni sancte Spiritus, Katharin coelitus Invitatus meritor; Consolator optime, Doctor disertissime, Katharinam instruens; O lux beatissima" etc.; for other illustrations see: X., 32, 122, 253; XXXVIII, 166; XXI, 56; XXXIX, 30; XL, 52; XLI, 195; XLII, 69. Hymns Ancient and Modern (hist. ed., London, 1909), 263-6 for Latin text, tr. based on CASWALL, plainsong and modern setting. The Vatican Graduale (Rome, 1908) gives the typical and official plain, song. SHIPLEY, Annus Sanctus (London, 1874), for trs. (pp. 164, 166, 169, 173: also, in Appendix, pp. 33-4, Primers of 1685 and 1706). The Seven Great Hymns Of The Mediæval Church (7th ed., New York, 1868), 126-33, text and tr. of WINKWORTH. MARCH, Latin Hymns (New York, 1875), 92 (text), 268 (grammatical notes). JOHNER, An New School of Gregorian Chant (New York, 1906), 115: "Do not lengthen the accented syllables, as otherwise an unpleasant 6-8 time is unavoidable".

H.T. HENRY

Veni Sancte Spiritus Reple

A prose invocation of the Holy Ghost. The Alleluia following the Epistle of Whitsunday comprises two parts: (1) a chant in the fourth tone: "Alleluia, alleluia. V. Emitte Spiritum tuum, et creabuntur; et renovabis faciem terræ" (Ps. ciii, 30, Vulgate edition, with change of "emittes" into "emitte"); (2) a chant in the second tone: "Alleluia. V. Veni sancte Spiritus, reple tuorum corda fidelium, et tui amoris in eis ignem accende . A rubric directs all to kneel when the Veni Sancte Spiritus" begins. Then follows the sequence (see VENI SANCTE SPIRITUS ET EMITTE COELITUS). An invocation much used in schools and in private devotions is constructed from the above "Alleluia by taking first the Veni...accende", then the "Emitte...terræ", and concluding with the prayer of the feast: "Deus qui corda...gaudere" (omitting the words hodierna die"). From the plainsong melody (composed in the eleventh century) of this Veni was developed the exquisite plainsong of the sequence following it.

MEARNS in. JULIAN, Dict. of Hymnol. (2nd ed., London, 1907), 1215, 631 ("Komm heiliger Geist, Herre Gott"); ESLING, tr. in Catholic Record, VII (Philadelphia), 43, 44; MARBACH, Carmina Scripturarum (Strasburg, 1907), 207-8, liturgical uses; La Tribune de Saint-Gervais (May, 1907), 115-6, analysis of plainsong; DREVES, Analecta Hymnica, X, 32 (twelfth-cent. hymn founded on prose prayer, sequence, and hymn Veni Creator). Prose trs. in: YOUNG, Roman Hymnal, I (New York, 1884); Crown of Jesus (1862); Altar Hymnal (1884), etc. Tr. of component parts in Missal for the Use of the Laity (London, 1903), 409.

H.T. HENRY

Venosa

(VENUSIN.)

Diocese in Southern Italy. The city is situated on a high precipitous hill, one of the most advanced posts of the Apennines, overlooking a fertile plain. Near its sixteenth century cathedral, the SS. Trinita stands an old Benedictine abbey founded by the first Norman counts. Venosa is the native place of Horace. it was an important Samnite city, and was captured in 291 B.C. by the Romans, who made it a Latin colony. It resisted Hannibal in the Punic War, and during the Civil War was stormed by Metellus. It was flourishing as late as the fourth century. Among its antiquities is a Jewish cemetery. The earliest events at Venosa are the martyrdoms of the Twelve Brothers (286) and of Feliz, Bishop of Tabara in Africa, and his companions (303). Stephanus (498) is the first Bishop of Venosa whose date is known accurately. The names of other bishops up to the Norman conquest have not been preserved. Buono (1223) was assassinated by a cleric; Lamberto Arbaudo (1509) embellished the cathedral, which was demolished a little later to permit the erection of fortifications. In 1818 the See of Lavello, suffragan to Bari, founded in 1042 when the Norman count Arnichino fixed his seat at Lavello, was united to Venosa. The diocese is suffragan to Accrenza and contains 8 parishes, 48,300 inhabitants, 54 secular priests, and 2 convents of nuns.

CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, XX; CIMAGLIA, Antiquitates venusinae (Naples, 1757); DE LORENZO, Venosa e la regione del Vulture in italia artistica (Bergamo, 1906).

U. BENIGNI

Diocese of Ventimiglia

(VENTIMILIENSIS)

Located in the Province of Porto Maurizio, northern Italy. The city is situated on the Gulf of Genoa, having a small harbour at the mouth of the Roia. It contains a fine cathedral with a fifth-century baptistery. The Church of S. Michele is erected on the foundations of a pagan temple. Some antiquities are collected in the town hall. Ventimiglia is the ancient Albium Intemelium, the capital of the Intemelii, a Ligurian tribe which long resisted the Romans, but was forced in 115 B.C. to submit to Scaurus. In A.D. 69 the city was sacked by the army of Otho and Vitellius. In the Gothic wars it was besieged by the Byzantines and the Goths, and suffered from the raids of Rotharis, King of the Lombards, but flourished again under King Rodoaldo. In the tenth century it was attacked by the Saracens of Frassineto. Berengarius made his son Conrad first Count of Ventimiglia. In 1139 the Genoese attacked it by land and sea and forced it to surrender; the count continued to hold the city and countship as a vassal of the victors. The city rebelled more than once against the Genoese and sided with their enemies. It was thus temporarily held by the dukes of Savoy (1389 and 1746) and Ladislas, King of Naples (1410). In general it shared the fortunes of Genoa. The most ancient Christian mention of Ventimiglia is the alleged preaching of Sts. Marcelinus (Bishop of Embrn), Vincentius, and Dominus (fourth century).

It is probable that it had a bishop from the fifth century; the first known is Joannes (680). Among his successors were: Cardinal Antonio Pallavicino (1484) and Alessandro Fregoso, both more distinguished as warriors than as clerics; Filippo de'Mari (1519), who restored ecclesiastical discipline; Carlo Visconti (1561), later a cardinal; Carlo Grimaldo (1565), who distinguished himself at the Council of Trent: Girolamo Curlo (1614), who died by poison in Corsica, whither he had been sent as Commissary Apostolic: Gianfrancesco Gandoflfi (1622), who negotiated the peace between Savoy and Genoa; Antonio Maria Bacigaluppi (1773), who converted the episcopal residence into a seminary. The diocese, which has been suffragan to Genoa since 1775, contains 65 parishes, 96,000 inhabitants, 250 secular and regular priests, 6 houses of religious men, 37 convents of nuns, 3 educational institutions for boys, and 10 for girls. There are 4 religious periodicals published in the diocese.

CAPELLETTI, Le Chiese d'Italia; ROSSI, Storia della citta di Ventimiglia (Oneglia, 1888); SAVIO, I conti di Ventimiglia (Genoa, 1894).

U. BENIGNI

Gioacchino Ventura di Raulica

Italian pulpit orator, patriot, phyilosopher, b. at Palermo, 8 Dec., 1792; d. at Versailles, 2 Aug., 1861. He entered the Society of Jesus in 1808, and in 1817, when the Society was suppressed in Sicily, joined the Theatines. Ordained a priest, he distinguished himself as a Catholic journalist and apologist, as a preacher, especially by his "Funeral Oration of Pius VII" (1823), as an exponent of the systems of de Lamennais, de Maistre, and de Bonald. He was appointed by Leo XII professor of canon law at the Sapienza, and in 1830 was elected Superior-General of the Theatines. He published his "De methodo philosophandi" in 1828 and "Bellezze della Fede" in 1839. After his generalship (1830-33) he preached in Rome. His eloquence, though somewhat exaggerated and prolix, was vehement and direct, with a noble bearing, a magnificent voice, and an affecting delivery, and it won him great renown. In Paris, though not perfectly master of French, he almost rivalled Lacordaire. With the accession of Pius IX, Ventura became politically prominent. His "Funeral Oration of O'Connell" (1847) glorified the union of religion and liberty. His eulogy of liberty on the "Morti di Vienna" sounded almost like a diatribe against kings in general. It was put on the Index; the author nobly submitted.

Ventura maintained the lawfulness of the Sicilian Revolution (cf. his "Sul riconoscimento della Sicilia, etc.", Palermo, 1848; "Menzogne diplomatiche", etc.). His ideal was an Italian Confederation under the presidency of the pope. During the exile of Pius IX at Gaeta, Ventura's position in Rome was a delicate and compromising one. Though refusing a seat in the Roman Assembly, he advocated the separation of the ecclesiastical and temporal powers, and in the name of the Sicilians recognized the Roman Republic. As commissioner from Sicily, he was present at an unseemly politico- religious ceremony in St. Peter's, but took no active part in the services. He opposed French intervention in behalf of the pope and when Oudinot attacked Rome, spoke of Pius IX in words which he bitterly regretted. On the downfall of the Triumvirs (1849), he went to Montpellier and then to Paris (1851). Here he made an ineffectual attempt to convert his former friend de Lamennais. His Conferences at the "Madeleine" etc. were published as "La raison philosophique et la raison catholique" (1852---). In 1857 he gave the Lenten Sermons at the Tuileries before Napoleon III; these appeared as "Le pouvoir politique chrétien". Ventura's philosophical views received final expression in "La tradizione e semi-pelagiani della philosophia", "Saggio sull' origine dell' idee", "Philosophie chrétienne" (Paris, 1861). He is a moderate Traditionalist of the Bonald-Bonnetty School. Ventura's private life was irreproachable. In spite of some blunders he remained a loyal Catholic and died an edifying death. His works were published as: "Opere Complete" (31 vols., Milan, 1854-64); "Opere Postume", (Venice, 1863).

CULTRERA, Della vita e delle opere del Rev. P. D. Giocchino Ventura (Palermo, 1877); MONTAZIO, Gioacchino Ventura (Turin, 1862); RASTOUL, Le P. Ventura (Paris, 1906); BROWNSON, Works (Detroit, 1904), III, 180; X, 69, 78, 263; XII, 423; XIV, 526; XVI, 139; DUDON, Lettres inedites de Lamennais a Ventura (1826-33), in Etudes, CXXII, 602; CXXIII, 239, 621; Etudes, VIII, 156; XII, 650; HURTER, Nomenclator Litterarius, III (Innsbruck, 1895), 1005; DARRAS-FEVRE, Histoire de l'Eglise, XLII (Paris, 1884-97), 419-31; LAURENTIE, Melanges (Paris, 1865); DE REMUSAT, Le P. Ventura et la Philosophie in Revue des Deux Mondes (Feb., 1853); Revue du Monde Catholique (Feb., 1874). For Ventura's philosophy cf. BONALD, LOUIS JACQUES MAURICE DE; BONNETTY, AUGUSTIN; URRABURU, Institutones Philosophicae (Rome, 1896); KLEUTGEN, Theologie der Vorzeit, I (Innsbruck, 1873), 361.

JOHN C. REVILLE

Venturino of Bergamo

Preacher, b. at Bergamo, 9 April, 1304; d. at Smyrna, 28 March, 1346. He received the habit of the Order of Friars Preachers at the convent of St. Stephen, Bergamo, 22 January, 1319. From 1328 to 1335 he won fame preaching in all the cities of upper Italy. In February, 1335, he planned to make a penitential pilgrimage to Rome with about thirty thousand of his converts. His purpose was misunderstood, and Benedict XII, then residing at Avignon, thought that Venturino wished to make himself pope. He wrote letters to Giovanni Pagnotti, Bishop of Anagni, his spiritual vicar, to the Canons of St. Peter's and St. John Lateran's, and to the Roman senators empowering them to stop the pilgrimage. This complaint to the Dominican Master General resulted in an ordinance of the Chapter of London (1335) condemning such pilgrimages. The pope's letters and commands, however, did not reach Venturino, and he arrived in Rome, 21 March, 1335. He was well received, and preached in various churches. Twelve days later he left Rome, without explanation, and the pilgrimage ended in disorder. In June, he requested an audience with Benedict XII at Avignon; he was seized and cast into prison (1335-43). He was restored to favour by Clement VI, who appointed him to preach a crusade against the Turks, 4 January, 1344; his success was remarkable. He urged the pope to appoint Humbert II of Dauphiné, whose friend and spiritual adviser he had been, leader of the crusade, but Humbert proved incapable and the crusade came to naught. Venturino's writings consist of sermons (now lost) and letters.

QUETIF-ECHARD, Scriptores Ordinis Praedicatorum, I (Paris, 1719), 620; LEANDER, De viris illustribus Ord. Praed., V; MORTIER, Histoire des Maitres Generaux de l'Ordre des Freres Pr., III (Paris, 1907), passim; CLEMENTI, Il beato Venturino da Bergamo (Rome, 1904).

C. O'NEIL

Raffaele Venusti

(VENOSTA.)

Born at Tirano, Valtellina, northern Italy, about the end of the fifteenth century; died at Venice, in 1543; he joined the Canons Regular of SS. Salvatore, devoting himself to theological and canonical studies, and winning fame as a powerful Catholic controversialist against the Lutherans and Calvinists. When the discussion concerning the divorce of Henry VIII of England arose, Venusti was invited both by the king and by the Emperor Charles V, the protector of Catherine of Aragon, to write an expression of his views on the question. His polemical and apologetic works were printed in 1543; they treat of the truth of the Catholic doctrine as opposed to Protestantism, especially of the notes of the true Church, free will, the councils, etc. These writings have a special historical value as representing the first phase of anti-Lutheran, anti-Calvinistic Catholic polemics, a phase which gave way later to the writings of Catholic theologians like Melchior Cano and the early Jesuit theologians. This class to which Venusti belonged is, in theology, parallel to the group of Catholic apologists in the field of history, who were predecessors of Baronius in his controversies with the Centuriators of Magdeburg.

Nuovo dizionario istorico (Bassano, 1796); see also the works relating to the order of the Canons Regular of SS. Salvatore.

U. BENIGNI

Vera Cruz

(VERAE CRUCIS or JALAPENSIS).

Diocese of the Mexican Republic, suffragan of the Archbishopric of Mexico. Its area covers all the State of Vera Cruz with the exception of one or two parishes in the northern part which belong to Tamaulipas, one in the western part which belongs to the Diocese of Tulancingo and a few others in the southern part which are a part of the Bishopric of Tehuantepec. Its population amounts to 1,124,368. The capital of the State, which is the residence of the bishop, is Jalapa, 4335 feet above the level of the sea, and has a population of 24,816 inhabitants. (Census of 1910). When Hernando Cortés landed at what is now the seaport of Vera Cruz on 2 April, 1519 (Good Friday, whence the town obtained its name) he was accompanied by Father Fray Bartolome de Olmedo, who was intrusted with the spiritual direction of the new colony founded by this audacious leader. With them was the licenciado, Juan Diaz, and the deacon, Geronimo Aguilar, who, having been kept a prisoner by the Indians for a few years, knew their language and acted as interpreter for the expedition. From a letter written by Hernando Cortés to the Emperor Charles V, it is known that on 15 Oct., 1524, there were parishes, with their rectors, sextons, and ornaments, in Vera Cruz.

During the first century of the existence of the colony, Vera Cruz was considered of such importance, and Christianity had made such headway, that the establishment of a bishopric was thought advisable. In consequence, the viceroy, Martin Enriquez, brought over a royal decree in which the name of Father Fray Domingo Tineo Dominico was presented for the bishopric; but when the nomination was received in 1567, a year had already elapsed since the candidate had died at Puebla. While passing through Vera Cruz, Bishop Luis de Penalver of New Orleans, who had been promoted to the Metropolitan See of Guatemala, was asked by the Church Board of Vera Cruz to visit the coast of Sotavento which had not been visited by a bishop for a period of forty years; Bishop Penalver complied with this request and in his report showed the necessity of establishing a bishopric in that country with Vera Cruz in its episcopal see. This request was granted in 1804 but was never fulfilled. Futile attempts were also made in 1835 and 1845; finally, Pius IX, in a secret consistory on 19 March, 1863, named Francisco Suarez Peredo, Bishop of Vera Cruz, and the bishop established his residence in Jalapa, the city in which his successor still resides. The parishes of this diocese were taken from the Bishopric of Puebla and Oaxaca; since its establishment it has always been suffragan of the Archbishopric of Mexico. It has a seminary with a few alumni; 57 parochial schools and 11 Catholic colleges which have about 5205 students; it has 61 parishes and 3 permanent vicariates. There are 3 Protestant colleges with 113 students and 5 Protestant churches in this diocese. The most important city of the Diocese is Vera Cruz, the principal seaport of the Republic of Mexico, situated not far from the town founded by Cortés. Only a few ruins are left to-day to attest the good work inspired by the faithful of the times, where stood a great many convents at the time of the colony. It was there that the Franciscan Fathers, the Dominican Fathers, the Barefooted Carmelites, and other orders made their residences.

VERA, Catecismo geog.-hist. estadist, de la Iglesia Mexicana (Amecameca, 1881).

CAMILLUS CRIVELLI

Archdiocese of Verapoly

(VERAPOLITANA.)

Located on the Malabar Coast, India, having the Diocese of Quilon as suffragan; extends northwards to the River Ponany, southwards to the Rani River, bounded on the east by the Ghaut line and on the west by the Indian Ocean. The Catholic population within the confines of the archdiocese is divided into two parts-those of the Syrian Rite, called Thomas Christians, who are under the personal (and quasi-territorial) jurisdiction of the three Vicars Apostolic of Trichur, Ernakulam, and Changancherry; and those of the Latin Rite, originally converts of the Portuguese missionaries, who are territorially under the jurisdiction of the archbishop. These later form a Catholic population of 75,389, having 31 churches and 25 chapels, served by 25 European Fathers of the Carmelite Order (mostly Spaniards), about 40 native secular priests of the Latin Rite, and of the Syrian Rite. There are besides in monastic enclosure 10 Carmelite Fathers of the First Order and 12 of the Third Order, making a total of about 90 priests. Also 19 Carmelite Nuns of the Third Order, 6 Brothers of St. Teresa, and 15 catechists. Candidates for the priesthood are sent partly to St. Joseph's Central Seminary, Puttenpally, under the direction of the Carmelite Fathers, and partly to Kandy. The archbishop's present residence is at Ernakulam in the Cochin State, but the cathedral is at Verapoly.

History

This district was occupied in the first instance by a large community of Christians claiming to have been converted by St. Thomas the Apostle, and using a Syrian Rite. These were brought under the jurisdiction of the Portuguese after the Synod of Diamper in 1599, and ruled by Jesuit archbishops at Angamalé, and afterwards at Cranganore. After a few years, there arose a factional dispute which led to a revolt of practically the whole community. Carmelite missionaries were sent by Alexander VI in 1637 to bring about a reconciliation between the people and the Jesuits; but failing this they managed at least to bring the majority of them into ecclesiastical unity under their own rule. Thereupon the Carmelites (under Propaganda) were placed in full charge of the Syrian Christians, while those of the Latin Rite, who had been converted by Portuguese missionaries, were attached to the Diocese of Cochin. When the Dutch in 1663 drove the Portuguese out of Cochin, the Carmelites extended their care to the Latin Christians in Dutch territory. After 1700 the See of Cranganore acquired once more the allegiance of a certain portion of the Syrian Christians -- the rest, with the Latin Christians, remaining under the Carmelite Vicar Apostolic of Verapoly or Malabar. During this time the lines between the two jurisdictions were practically indefinite, and the faithful passed freely from one side to the other. In more recent times the vicar Apostolic had, besides Malabar, active centres along the coast northwards up to Portuguese limits, including Mangalore and Carwar; and there was a free interchange of missionaries between the Malabar and the Bombay vicariates. In 1838 by the Brief Multa praeclare jurisdiction was totally withdrawn from the Portuguese Sees of Cochin and Cranganore, though in many places the Portuguese clergy still remained in possession and maintained their claims to jurisdiction as derived from Goa.

The Vicariate of Verapoly, which extended indefinitely even as far as Tanjore, was curtailed by dividing of the Vicariate of Quilon in 1845, and the Vicariate of Mangalore in 183. Further retrenchments occurred when the hierarchy was established in 1886. By this act Verapoly was made into an archbishopric; Quilon became a suffragan bishopric; the padroado Diocese of Cochin was restored, but with limits much smaller than formerly; the next year the Syrian Christians were assigned to two new vicars Apostolic of the Latin Rite at Kottayam and Trichur, who thus took the place of the suppressed See of Cranganore; and only Latin Christians in the remaining territory were left to form the Archdiocese of Verapoly.

Succession of Vicars Apostolic (all Carmelites)

Joseph a Sta. Maria de Sebastiani 1656 (1661), retired before the Dutch in 1663; Alexander de Campo, 1663-1678; Thomas de Castro, 1675-1684; Raphael de Figuredo Salgado, 1681, retired on account of quarrels in 1694; Angelus Francis of St. Teresa, 1700, was in 1709 entitled "Vicar Apostolic of Cranganore and Cochin" on account of long vacancy of those sees, died 1712; John Baptist Multedo of St. Teresa, 1714-1750; Florence of Jesus of Nazareth, 1750-1773; Francis de Sales a Matre Dolorosa, 1774-1787; John Mary of St. Thomas, 1780 (died before consecration); John Mary of Jesus, 1784 (death not marked); Raymond of St. Joseph, 1803-1816; Miles Prendergast, 1819, resigned 1831; Francis Xavier Pescetto of St. Anne, 1831-1844; Ludovico Nartini of St. Teresa, 1839, resigned 1859; Bernardino Baccinelli of St. Teresa, 1847 (1859), 1868, received archiepiscopal rank; Leonardo Mellano of St. Louis, 1868, received archiepiscopal rank 1860, became first Archbishop of Verapoly in 1887, died 1897; Bernard of Jesus, present archbishop since 1897.

Religious Institutions

For Men

St. Teresa's Monastery, Ernakulam, with 7 Discalced Carmelite Fathers of the First Order and 3 lay brothers; Monastery of the Immaculate Conception, Magnumel, near Verapoly, with 9 Tertiary Carmelite Fathers, and 9 lay brothers, besides novices; St. Philomena's Monastery, Cunemao, near Verapoly, with 3 Tertiary Fathers, 3 lay brothers and some postulants.

For Women

St. Teresa's Carmelite Convent, with 7 Tertiary sisters; St. Joseph's Convent, Verapoly, with 8 sisters; and St. Joseph's Convent, Kottayam, with 4 sisters, besides novices in each convent.

Educational Institutions for Boys

St. Joseph's Preparatory Seminary, founded in 1908, with 16 students; St. Albert's High School, Ernakulam, teaching up to matriculation with 600 pupils, of whom above 100 are boarders.

For Girls

St. Teresa's Convent Boarding School, Ernakulam, with 191 pupils; St. Joseph's Boarding School Convent, Verapoly, with 95 pupils; St. Joseph's Convent Boarding School with 144 pupils; all under Tertiary Carmelite sisters. Also 10 vernacular schools and 123 parochial schools, with a collective roll of 4625 boys and 2918 girls.

Charitable Institutions for Boys

St. Joseph's Orphanage, Ernakulam, vernacular, English and industrial schools, with 30 orphans; Good Shepherd Orphanage, Kottayam, under Brothers of St. Teresa, with industrial school, etc., 28 orphans.

For Girls

St. Teresa's Orphanage, Ernakulam, with 84 orphans; St. Joseph's Orphanage, Verapoly, with 45 orphans; St. Joseph's Orphanage, Kottayam, with 39 orphans, all under Carmelite Sisters.

Various

St. Joseph's Hospital, Magnumel, and dispensary with 128 indoor and about 12,000 outdoor patients during the year. Four catechumenates at Verapoly, Magnumel, Cranganore and Kottayam. The number of conversions recorded in 1909 was 632. The publications of the archdiocese are: "Messenger of the Sacred Heart" in Malayalam; "Promptuarium Canonico-Liturgicum" for the clergy; both printed at the Industrial School Press, Ernakulam.

ERNEST R. HULL

Ferdinand Verbiest

Missionary and astronomer, b. at Pitthem near Coutrai, Belgium, 9 Oct., 1623; d. at Peking, 28 January, 1688. He entered the Society of Jesus on 2 Sept., 1641, and studied theology at Seville, where he defended public theses in 1655. In 1658 with thirty-five new missionaries he accompanied Father Martin Martini on his return to China after having secured at Rome the Decree of Alexander VII for the toleration of the Chinese rites (see RICCI, MATTEO). He reached Macao in 1659, and was exercising his ministry in Shen-si when in 1660 he was called to Peking to assist, and eventually to replace, Father Adam Schall in his astronomical labours. He was among those imprisoned during the persecution of 1664. Father Schall, the chief of those accused, being unable to make himself understood by his judges, Father Verbiest, himself loaded with nine chains, defended him with courage and eloquence. In fact the Church in China owed to Father Verbiest the recovery of peace and greater security than it had before the outbreak. In 1668 the young emperor commanded a public test, which allowed the priest to prove beyond dispute the merits of European astronomy compared with the ancient astronomy of China. Father Verbiest and the mandarin who had instigated the persecution and who had taken Father Schall's place as president of the bureau of mathematics, were each commissioned to determine in advance the length of the shadow thrown by a gnomon of a given height at noon of a certain day; then the absolute and relative positions of the sun and the planets on a given date; and finally the moment of a lunar eclipse. The results of the test, which the emperor, ministers, and nobles established in person, were a triumph for the astronomy for the missionaries. Father Verbiest was immediately placed at the head of the Bureau of Mathematics, and, out of consideration for him, his exiled brethren were authorized to return to their missions.

Thenceforth K'ang-hi's benevolence towards Father Verbiest and the Christian religion increased steadily. The emperor requested the priest to construct instruments like those of Europe, and in May, 1674, Verbiest was able to present him with six, made under his direction: a quadrant, six feet in radius; an azimuth compass, six feet in diameter; a sextant, eight feet in radius; a celestial globe, six feet in diameter; and two armillary spheres, zodiacal and equinoctial, each six feet in diameter. These large instruments, all of brass and with decorations which made them notable works of art, were, despite their weight, very easy to manipulate, and a credit to Verbiest's mechanical skill as well as to his knowledge of astronomy and mathematics. They are still in a perfect state of preservation, and at the time of the expedition against the Boxers (1900) the international troops admired them on the platform of a tower of the imperial palace where Father Verbiest installed them more than two centuries and a half ago. K'ang-hi made use of the talents of the Belgian Jesuit in various other ways, e.g. the transportation of enormous blocks of stone, the construction of an aqueduct, and the casting of canons. Not only did Father Verbiest cast 132 cannons of far superior power than those possessed by the Chinese, but he invented a new gun- carriage.

At the same time the missionary had to write in Chinese a collection of works explaining the construction of the instruments, their object, and the manner of using them. The emperor also desired him to compile astronomical tables indicating the movements of the planets and the solar and lunar eclipses for 2000 years to come; moreover, he had him give on certain days a course in mathematics and astronomy, at which many of the great mandarins as well as the 160 students of the Bureau of Mathematics assisted. In his desire to acquire the European sciences, K'ang-hi himself became a pupil of the missionary; for five whole months he summoned him almost daily to his presence, setting aside in his behalf all the laws of Chinese etiquette and detaining him for whole days, while Father Verbiest explained the astronomical books compiled in Chinese by himself and his fellow-religious, and finally studying like a school-boy under his direction arithmetic, rectilinear and spherical geometry, geodesy, topography, etc. On beholding the earnestness with which K'ang-hi endeavoured to learn especially the chart of the heavens, Father Verbiest began to hope that "as a star of old brought the magi to the adoration of the true God, so the princes of the Far East through knowledge of the stars would be brought to recognize and adore the Lord of the stars". K'ang-hi did not fulfil this hope, but his bent for the European sciences, by inclining him to favour more and more the missionaries who made them known to him, became the means of salvation for thousands of his subjects. Through his influence with the emperor Father Verbiest did more for the spread of the Gospel than any of the missionaries who preached it in the provinces; nevertheless he found time for the direct exercise of the apostolate, especially in the composition of short works in Chinese on the principles of the Christian religion. As he says in one of his letters, books which the Chinese always welcomed as gifts, and which were especially esteemed coming from his pen, were a means of conveying the truth to persons to whom the missionaries would otherwise not have access. K'ang-hi recognized the services of the missionary by conferring on him successively the highest degrees of the mandarinate. The liberty to preach, the only reward Father Verbiest looked for, was almost the sole benefit he derived from his dignities.

It would seem that the use of the human sciences, which had so powerfully assisted Father Ricci to found the Chinese mission, and permitted Father Verbiest to save it, would henceforth not be misrepresented. But such was not the case, and, as is well known, it was a missionary from China who considered it his duty to carry to Rome, and by means of his writings to spread throughout the world, impassioned accusations against the methods of the Jesuit missionaries. Among the replies elicited by the attack of Father Navarrete there is one by Father Verbiest; it was not published, but was read at Rome and thence came an ample justification of the worthy missionary astronomer. Innocent XI, to whom he had dedicated the Chinese translation of the Missal printed at Peking and another work containing his astronomical observations, answered him on 3 December, 1681, by a Brief which means much more than a commonplace expression of thanks: "It has pleased us especially", says the pope, "to learn from your letter with what wisdom and seasonableness (quam sapienter atquie opportune) you have made use of the profane sciences for the salvation of the Chinese peoples and the advancement and benefit of the Christian faith: employing them to repel the false accusations and calumnies which have been heaped upon the Christian name, opening the way to that high degree of favour with the Chinese king and his advisers, which has obtained both that you yourself should be delivered from the harsh persecutions which you have long endured with the greatest courage, and the power to recall your fellow-missionaries from exile and to restore to religion not only its former liberty and splendour, but to inspire it with the hope of daily progress. . ."

In 1677 Father Verbiest was appointed vice provincial, i.e. superior of all the Jesuit missions of China. This nomination was a stimulus to seek new means of developing the work confided to his direction, with which object he addressed (15 Aug., 1678) a circular letter to all the members of his order in Europe. In it he set forth the hopes which more than ever were held out to the Faith in China, together with the impossibility for the missionaries taken in the field, with the fewness of their number and the inadequacy of their resources, to gather in all the harvest. He then urged his brethren in Europe by most touching arguments to come in as great numbers as possible to reinforce this body of overworked labourers, and also to procure for the mission the material resources necessary for founding new Christian communities, supporting catechists, establishing schools, etc. While seeking assistants in Europe he endeavoured to obtain them also in China itself. The question of a native clergy had arisen at the beginning of the mission. There were difficulties in the way. Hitherto no Chinese had been raised to the priesthood, though many of them had entered the Society and had rendered good service to the mission as catechists. The persecution of 1664, which for nearly five years deprived the Christians of their European missionaries, emphasized more urgently the need of Chinese priests. There is a memoir of the consultation then ordered by the Jesuit superiors; it was drawn up for the father general by Father Vebiest, and is dated from Peking, 12 June, 1678. Herein the vice- provincial energetically advocated the necessity of ordaining Chinese priests; to better assure their perseverance he urged that none be raised to the priesthood save young or mature men who had previously been received and tried in the Society. Moreover, he desired that these Chinese priests might be allowed to say Mass and administer the sacraments in the Chinese language, which permission had been granted in principle by Paul V, as early as 1615. Among the things which Father Verbiest particularly recommend to Father Couplet, sent to Rome in 1680 as procurator of the missions of China, was a request for a confirmation of this permission. His gift to the pope of the Chinese translation of the Missal by Father Buglio was calculated to support this request, but Father Couplet's negotiations in this respect were without result.

Father Verbiest was more fortunate in his appeal to his brethren in Europe. Well seconded by F. Couplet in his journeys with a Chinaman through Italy, France, and the Low Countries, this appeal aroused numerous and ardent volunteers. The strongest contingent of aspirants was furnished by France. Louis XIV, who had several times received Father Couplet and Michael, the Chinaman, at Versailles, longed for the glory of founding at his own expense a French mission, which would simultaneously serve the interest of religion and science in the Far East. And his ministers rightly divined how much France's commercial expansion would gain thereby. Consequently, six Jesuits were taken from the chosen staff of the college of Paris. Having previously been made fellows of the Academy of Sciences and given the title of mathematicians to the king, they set sail from Brest, 3 March, 1685, with the embassy which the king was sending to Siam. Five of them set out from Siam in 1687 and landed at Ning-po in China on 23 July. The authorization to penetrate to the interior, which the Viceroy of Chekiang and even the Tribunal of Rites at Peking would have refused them, was granted them by the emperor at Father Verbiest's request. The arrival of these recruits was a great consolation to the venerable missionary. Nevertheless he was not to have the joy of receiving them at Peking, which they reached (7 February) ten days after his death. They arrived in time for his funeral which K'ang-hi delayed in order that it might be more solemn. On 11 March Father Verbiest's remains were carried to the burial-place formerly given to Father Ricci.

CARTON, Notice biog. sur le P. F. Verbiest, missionaire a la Chine (Bruges, 1839); DE BACKER-SOMMERVOGEL, Bibl. de la comp. De Jesus, VIII, 574-586; CORDIER, Bibl. sinica, II, 1098; GRESLON, Hist. de la Chine sous la domination des Tartares (Paris, 1671); IDEM, Recit des choses les plus remarquables qui se soni passees a la cour de Pekin touchant nos peres et touchant les mathematiques cette annee 1669 (MS. Archives of the state, at Brussels; Jesuits, no. 1427), 173-192; Astronomia Europaea sub imperatore Tartaro-Sinico Cam-Hy appellato ex umbra in lucem revocata a R. P. Ferdinando Verbiest (Dillingen, 1687); Acta SS., XIII, Paralipomena dissert. 48 and 49; LE COMTE, Nouveaux mm. Sur l'etat present de la Chine, I (Paris, 1696), 139-49, describing and illustrating Verbiest's instruments; DELAMBRE, Hist. de l'astronomie du moyen-age (Paris, 1819), 213; Lettre ecrite de la Chine ou l'on voit l'etat present du christianisme dans cet empire, et les biens qu'on y peut faire (Paris, 1682), containing Verbiest's letter to the Society, the Brief of Innocent XI to Verbiest, etc.; Lettre du P. de Fontaney au P. de la Chaize (Tcheou-chan. 15 Feb., 1903) in Lettres edifiantes et curicuses, VII (Paris, 1707), 61; Lettre du P. Antoine Thomas, S.J., datee de Pekin 8 Septembre, 1688, published by BOSMANS in Archiv fur die Gesch. der Naturwissenschaften und der Technik, I (Leipzig, 1909); BOSMANS, Ferdinand Verbiest in Revue des Quest. Scientif. (1912).

JOSEPH BRUCKER

Verbum Supernum Prodiens

The first line of two hymns celebrating respectively the Nativity of Christ and the Institution of the Holy Eucharist. The hymnologist Daniel remarks on the obvious relation between the Nativity and the Eucharist "by which through all ages the Word made Flesh will dwell among us" as justifying the similar forms of the two hymns (Thesaurus, I, 254).

The Nativity Hymn

In its unrevised form the second line was: "A Patre olim exiens". The correctors of the Breviary under Urban VIII changed it into its present Breviary form: "E Patris aeterni sinu". Sometimes ascribed to St. Ambrose or to St. Gregory the Great, its authorship is unknown. Mone supposed it to be of the second half of the fifth century; but although Advent may possibly date back that far, the hymn is probably much later. From the tenth century it has been the usual hymn for Matins, although given in a few manuscripts to Lauds. Originally the hymn was rhymed throughout in couplets (with one exception). The revision under Urban VIII left not a single strophe unchanged, in the removal of its many unclassical prosodic features.

The Eucharist Hymn

Its second line is: "Nec Patris linquens dexteram". Left untouched by the revisers of Urban VIII, it lacks classical prosody, is in accentual rhythm, and rhymes alternately:

Verbum supernum prodiens
Nec Patris linquens dexteram,
Ad opus suum exiens
Venit ad vitae vesperam.
The Word of God proceeding forth
Yet leaving not the Father's side,
And going to His work on earth,
Had reached at length life's eventide.

The hymn is assigned to Lauds of Corpus Christi (q.v.) and is commonly ascribed to St. Thomas Aquinas. Some scholars compare the Office of Corpus Christi with that of the older Cistercian breviaries (1484-1674), and suggest that St. Thomas probably borrowed (while revising) seven of the responsories of Matins from it, and also probably the hymn "Verbum Supernum". In the Cistercian Office the hymn comprised nine stanzas divided into two hymns (for Matins and Lauds respectively), whereas now the hymn has only six stanzas. The Cistercian hymn was sung to the melody of the Advent hymn, "Verbum Supernum", whereas we now sing the Eucharistic hymn to the different melody of the Ascensiontide hymn, "Aeterne Rex Altissime". "It is very natural to suppose that this choice (a common melody, as in the Cistercian Office, for both of the Verbum Supernum hymns) was the primitive one" (Morin).

H.T. HENRY

Vercelli

(VERCELLENSIS).

Archdiocese in the Province of Novara, Piedmont, Italy. The city of Vercelli is an important commercial centre for agricultural produce. The cathedral, erected and enlarged by St. Eusebius, formerly adorned with precious pillars and mosaics, was remodelled in the ninth century, and radically changed in the sixteenth by Count Alfieri. Like the other churches in the city it contains valuable paintings, especially those of Gaudenzio Ferrari, Giovenone, and Lanino, who were natives of Vercelli. Noteworthy also are Sta. Maria Maggiore and Sant' Andrea. The latter was erected by Cardinal Guala Bicchieri (1219) together with the old Cistercian monastery, one of the most beautiful and best preserved Romanesque monuments in Italy. There is an Institute of the Beaux-Arts, containing paintings by Vercellese artists. There are many relics of the Roman period, e.g. an amphitheatre, hippodrome, sarcophagi, many important inscriptions, some of which are Christian. There are old charitable institutions, like the hospital founded by Cardinal Guala Bicchieri (11224), which has an annual revenue of more than 600,000 lire ($117,000); the hospices for orphan girls (1553), and for boys (1542), and mendicant homes. The archives of the metropolitan chapter contain valuable MSS., including an evangelarium of the fourth century, the "Novels" of Justinian, the "Leges Langobardorum", the "Capitulare regum Francorum", also hagiographical MSS. not all of which have been critically examined, and a very old copy of the "Imitation of Christ", which is relied upon as an argument for attributing the authorship of the work to John Gersen. The civil archives are not less important, and contain documents dating from 882. The extensive seminary contains a large library.

Vercellae (Vercelum) was a city of the Libici, or Lebecili, a Ligurian tribe; it became an important municipium, near which in 101 B.C. Marius defeated the Cimbri and the Teutones, and Stilicho annihilated the Goths 500 years later. It was half ruined in St. Jerome's time. After the Lombard invasion it belonged to the Duchy of Ivrea. From 885 it was under the jurisdiction of the bishop, who was a count of the empire. It became an independent commune in 11120, and joined the first and second Lombard leagues. Its statutes are among the most interesting of those of the medieval republics. In 1197 they abolished the servitude of the glebe. In 1228 the University of Pavia was transferred to Vercelli, where it remained till the fourteenth century, but without gaining much prominence. Only a university school of law has been maintained. During the troubles of the thirteenth century it fell into the power of the Della Torre of Milan (1263), of the Marquesses of Monferrato (1277), who appointed Matteo Visconti captain (1290-9). The Ghibellines (Tizzoni) and Guelphs (Avogadri) disputed the city from 1301 to 1334, the latter party being expelled several times, thus enabling the Marquess of Monferrato to take Vercelli (1328), which voluntarily placed itself under the Viscount of Milan in 1334. In 1373 Bishop Giovanni Fieschi expelled the Visconti, but Matteo reconquered the city. Facino Cane (1402), profiting by the strife between Giovani Maria and Filippo Maria Visconti, took Vercelli, but was driven out by Teodoro di Monferrato (1404), from whom the city passed to the dukes of Savoy (1427). In 1499 and 1553 it was captured by the French, and in 1616 and 1678 by the Spaniards. In 1704 it sustained an energetic siege by the French, who failed to destroy the fortress; after this it shared the fortunes of Savoy. In 1821 Vercelli rose in favour of the Constitution.

According to an ancient lectionary the Gospel was first preached here in the second half of the third century by Sts. Sabinianus and Martialis, bishops from Gaul, when they were returning to their dioceses. The episcopal see was not established till after the Peace of Constantine. The first bishop was St. Eusebius, a Sardinian, a lector of the Roman Church and a strenuous opponent of Arianism. From Vercelli the Gospel spread through the valley of the Po and its environs; towards the end of the fourth century, perhaps even during the episcopate of St. Eusebius, new dioceses were erected. From Eusebius to Nottingo (830) there were forty bishops, whose images were preserved in the Eusebian basilica, so called because St. Eusebius dedicated it to St. Theonestus, martyr, and was interred in it. He introduced the common and monastic life among his clergy, from whom bishops for the surrounding territory were often selected. Among his successors were: St. Simenus (370), who baptized and consecrated St. Ambrose; St. Honoratus (396), who administered the Viaticum to St. Ambrose; St. Justinianus (living in 451); St. AEmilianus (about 500) built an aqueduct for the city at his own expense; St. Flavianus (541); St. Celsus (665); Norgaudus (844) restored common life among the canons; Liutuardus (880), who had been archchancellor of Charles the Fat (deposed later); and who was slain during the invasion of the Huns (899), like Regenbertus (904- 24); Atto (d. 960), reformer of ecclesiastical discipline; Petrus (978), imprisoned in the Holy Land by the Egyptian Mussulmans; Leo (999), chancellor of Otto III and Henry II; Gisulfus (1133) re-established common life among the canons in 1144; St. Albertus (1185-1204), founder of the chair of theology, later Patriarch of Jerusalem; Renerio Avogadro (1296) opposed the partisans of the heretic Fra Dolcino; Guglielmo Didier (1437), an elector of Felix V, antipope; Giuliano della Rovere (1502), later Pope Julius II (1503); Cardinal Guido Ferrerio (1562), founder of the seminary, embellished the cathedral and introduced the Tridentine reform; Gianfrancesco Bonomo (1572) continued the reform and replaced (1573) the Eusebian Rite by the Roman. In 1817 the Diocese of Vercelli, then suffragan of Turin (but previously of Milan) was made an archdiocese, the first archbishop being Giuseppe di Grimaldi. The dioceses suffragan to Vercelli are: Alessandri, Biella, Casale, Novara, Vigevano. The archdiocese contains 136 parishes; 250,000 inhabitants; 447 secular and 33 regular priests; 7 houses of religious (men) and 4 of nuns; 4 educational institutes for boys and 8 for girls. The religious periodicals are "L'unione" (weekly) and "La santa infanzia" (monthly).

CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, XII; SAVIO, Gli antichi vescovi del Piemonte (Turin, 1899), 403; PASTI, Vercelli sacra (Como, 1909).

U. BENIGNI

Carlo Vercellone

Biblical scholar, born at Biella, Milan; died at Rome, 19 January, 1869. He entered the Order of the Barnabites, at Genoa, in 1829; studied philosophy at Turin and theology at Rome, under Aloysius Ungarelli; taught the sacred sciences at Alessandria, Turin, Perugia, and Parma; and, in 1847, was made president of the college of the Barnabites at Rome, a position which he held together with the charge, first, of procurator, and then general of his order, and with various offices in several Roman Congregations, until his death. His first publication was (1857) the edition (5 quarto volumes) of the Vatican manuscript (B) of the Scriptures prepared by Cardinal Mai under the auspices of Leo XII and printed from 1828 to 1838, to which he added by way of preface a letter to the reader. That this edition was far from perfect, Mai himself had well realized, and Vercellone publicly acknowledged in the above-mentioned letter; he at once set out to have it corrected mainly from Mai's notes, the outcome of his labours being a new octavo edition of the New Testament (Rome, 1859), prefaced by an excellent epistle. A few months before, a poor reprint of the New Testament edition of 1857 had been struck off at Leipzig for a London firm. Yet critics persisted in thinking a new and accurate edition of the "Vaticanus" was imperatively needed, and Pius IX manifested his intention to carry out the design and entrust it to Vercellone. The latter helped Tischendorf in the preparat ion of his "Nov. Test. Vat." (Leipzig, 1867).

In 1868, appeared the first volume of the "Bibliorum sacrorum graecus codex vaticanus, auspice PIO IX...editus", the work of Vercellone and the Basilian monk Cozza; the second volume (Genesis-Josue) followed in 1869, shortly before Vercellone's deat h, and the others in 1870, 1871, 1872, and 1881, Cajetan Sergio and Canon Henry Fabiani having replaced Vercellone. Vercellone's critical studies on the text of the Latin Vulgate, although he brought the work only as far as IV Kings, contributed more to his fame than the editing of the Vatican manuscript. These studies, with important and valuable prolegomena, appeared (2 vols., 1860-64) under the title, "Variae lectiones Vulgatae latinae editionis Bibliorum", and may be said to have paved the way to the revisi on of the Vulgate now in progress. As preparatory to his edition of the Greek Bible, Vercellone wrote "Ulteriori studii sul N. T. greco dell' antichissimo Cod. Vaticano" (Rome, 1866); in 1867 he published a critical study, "La Storia dell' adultera nel Vangelo di s. Giovanni" (Rome), in which he defended the authenticity of the passage (John, vii, 53-viii, 11). He also edited nine pamphlets of Gerdil on the Hierarchy of the Church. In 1869 he published a "Discours sur l'his toire des langues semitiques de Renan", in which he refuted some of the assertions of the French critic.

CHARLES L. SOUVAY

Jacinto Verdaguer

Poet, b. at Riudeperas, Province of Barcelona, Spain, 17 April, 1845; d. at Vallvidrera, Barcelona, 10 June, 1902. While in training to receive Holy orders, he early showed his literary instincts by competing for the prizes offered in the Jochs Florals or poetical tournament, held yearly for the purpose of stimulating composition in the vernacular of the eastern part of the Iberian peninsula. Religious faith, country, and love are the main themes promoted by the Jochs Florals, and on the first two of these Verdaguer wrote with signal success, winning his first prize in 1861. He was ordained in 1870. In 1877 he published is most famous work, one of the most notable in the history of modern Catalan, the epic "La Atlantida" which quickly attracted attention and was translated in Spanish, French, Italian, English, and German. The "Oda a Barcelona" of 1883 was followed by the epic legend, "Canigó" (dealing with the times of the reconquest of Spain from the Moors and locating its scenes in the Pyrenees region). Then came the noted "Idilis y cants mistichs" (1879), the "Cansons de Montserat" (1880), the "Caritat" (1885), the "Patria" (1888), the "Cants religiosos pel poble" (1882), the "Somni de Sant Joan" (1887), the "Jesus Infant" (1890-05), the "Sant Francesch" (1895), the "Flors de Calvari" (1896), the "Santa Eularia" (1898), etc.

Obres completes ordenades y anotades (7 vols., Barcelona, 1905-1908); La Atlantida ab la traduccio Castellana per Melcior de Palau (Barcelona, 1878); Sp. tr. PALAU (Madrid, 1906); SAVINE, L'Atlantide, porme traduit du Catalan de Mossen Jacinto Verdaguer (Paris, 1884); this contains the Catalan text with the French and an interesting essay on la renaissance de la poesie catalane.

J.D.M. FORD

Giuseppe Verdi

Composer, b. at Le Roncole, Parma, Italy, 10 October, 1813; d. at S. Agata, near Busseto, 27 January, 1901. From his earliest years he evinced an extraordinary musical aptitude, and at the age of ten became organist of the village church. From 1826 to 1829 he took lessons from Provesi, organist of Busseto cathedral, and in 1831 went to Milan to study under Lavigna. On the death of Provesi (1833) Verdi returned to Brusset, where he remained for five years, during which he married Margherita Barezzi; in 1838, however, he settled in Milan. His first opera, "Oberto", was performed in 1839 and gave a foretaste of the young composer's abilities, but the production of "Nabuco" (9 March, 1842), followed by "Lombardi" (11 Feb., 1843), showed that a rising star had appeared. The success was accentuated by "Ernani" (9 Mar., 1844), and Verdi's fame as an operatic composer was assured. Several other operas followed in the years 1844 and 1846, and he declined an offer as conductor of Drury Lane Theatre, London, in succession to Costa, though his reception in England was not over cordial. His "Luisa Miller" (8 Dec., 1849) added to his triumphs, and with it ended his fame in one style of opera. Verdi entered on a new phase in 1850, and his "Rigoletto" (produced at Venice on 11 March, 1851) astonished the musical world. Then followed "Ll Travatore" (19 Jan., 1853) and "La Traviata" (6 Mar., 1853), all three being still popular. "Un Ballo in Maschera" (17 Feb., 1859) completed his triumph in a new style of writing. "Don Carlos" (11 Mar., 1867) and "Aida" (produced at Cairo, 24 Dec., 1871) represent what has been aptly termed Verdi's third style. "Aida" is not only an advance on "Rigoletto", but is clearly a development of genius so strong that it may well be regarded as a new style.

Meantime Verdi visited England in 1855 and again in 1862, when he conducted his "Inne delle Nazioni" at Her Majesty's Theatre. His last visit was in 1875, when he was at the zenith of his powers. It was rumoured that he had laid down his pen forever after the production of "Aida", but on 5 Feb., 1887, he astonished even his warmest admirers by a four-act opera, "Otello" (libretto by Boito). On 5 Feb., 1893, his "Falstaff" was given at La Scala, and he was created Marchese of Busseto by the King of Italy. For an octogenarian this opera was a tour de force in musical annals. Its dramatic qualities place it on a level with Wagner's operas, and Verdi's handling of the comic element showed an undreamt-of power. Indeed it has been truly said that "Otello" and "Falstaff" rank as a fourth style of Verdi. His place in music is as an operatic composer of the first rank, and he considerably influenced the Italian School of the second half of the nineteenth century.

Verdi deserves to be reckoned in the category of church composers; his "Requiem" (written for the anniversary of Manzoni's death) is a work of art, and continues to find much favour; it was first performed at Milan on 22 May, 1874. Among his religious compositions are: "Pater Noster", for five voices; an "Ave Maria", for soprano solo and strings (both performed in 1880); a "Te Deum", for two four-part choirs, voices, and orchestra; a "Stabat Mater", four-part, and two motets in honour of the Blessed Virgin. These four appeared in 1898, and were performed in Paris on 7 April, 1899. Verdi's Catholic spirit was shown by his resigning his office as member of the Italian parliament for Busseto; and, subsequently, when, on being appointed a senator by the King of Italy (1875), he went to Rome to be duly admitted, but never assisted at a single sitting. Professor Dickenson in his "Music in the History of the Western Church" writes: "In Verdi also we have a truly filial devotion to the Catholic Church, united with a temperament easily excited to a white heat when submitted to his musical inspiration." By his will Verdi bequeathed an endowment fund for a home for aged musicians.

POUGIN, Verdi (Paris, 1881); STREATFIELD, Masters of Italian Music (London, 1895); MAZZUCATO in GROVE, Dict. of Music and Musicians (new ed., London, 1910), s. v.

W.H. GRATTAN-FLOOD

Diocese of Verdun

(VIRODUNENSIS.)

Comprises the Department of the Meuse. Suppressed by the Concordat of 1802, and subsequently united to the Diocese of Nancy, Verdun was re-established by the Bull of 27 July, 1817, and by the Royal Decree of 31 October, 1822. It was formed practically of the entire ancient Diocese of Verdun, portions of the ancient Dioceses of Trier, Châlons, Toul, Metz, and Reims, and became suffragan of the Archdiocese of Besançon. For the late tradition attributing the foundation of the Church of Verdun to St. Sanctinus, disciple of St. Denis the Areopagite, after he had founded the Church of Meaux, see MEAUX. Certain local traditions state that Sts. Maurus, Salvinus, and Arator were bishops of Verdun after St. Sanctinus, but the first bishop known to history is St. Polychronius (Pulchrone) who lived in the fifth century and was a relative and disciple of St. Lupus de Troyes. Other bishops worthy of mention are: St. Possessor (470-86); St. Firminus (486-502); Vitonus (Vanne) (502-29); St. Désiré (Desideratus) (529-54), St. Agricus (Airy) (554-91), friend of St. Gregory of Tours and of Fortunatus; St. Paul (630-48), formerly Abbot of the Benedictine Monastery of Tholey in the Diocese of Trier; and St. Madalvaeus (Mauve) (753-76). The legend according to which Peter, successor of Madalvaeus, received the Diocese of Verdun from Charlemagne as a reward for the cession of the town of Pavia or Treviso to the Franks, is no longer accepted. Peter became Bishop of Verdun in 781, named to that office by Adrian I at the request of Charlemagne; shortly afterwards he was accused of conspiring against the emperor but was cleared of the accusation at the Synod of Frankfort (794). Bishop Dado (880-923) caused the "Gesta episcoporum Virodunensium" to be begun by Bertharius, a Benedictine of Saint-Vanne, afterwards continued down to 1250 by Lawrence, another monk of Saint-Vanne, and later by an anonymous writer.

Verdun, which had been originally a Roman civitas, shared the destiny of Lorraine in the Middle Ages and formed part of Lower Lorraine. The counts of Verdun belonged to the family of Ardennes of which Godfrey of Bouillon, the hero of the First Crusade, was an illustrious member. The Emperor Otto III in 997 conferred on Bishop Haymon of Verdun and his successors the titles of counts of their episcopal city and princes of the Holy Roman Empire with all the rights of sovereigns, especially that of naming for life a count subject to the commands of the bishop (Comte viager). These "episcopal counts" also called voués (advocati) continued to be selected by the bishops of Verdun from the family of Ardennes, and there were frequent quarrels between the bishops and the voués. Thus Godfrey of Bouillon, Voué of Verdun, was in conflict with Thierry the Great, Bishop of Verdun from 1047 to 1088, before leaving for the #1>Crusade, and renounced his rights to the countship. During the first half of the twelfth century, Renauld le Borgne, Count de Bar and Voué of Verdun, governed the town as a tyrant and resisted the authority of the bishops for thirty-five years. The feast entitled "Commemoration of the Miracles of the Virgin Mary" is celebrated in the diocese on 20 October, in honour of the final victory of Bishop Albero (1131-56) over "le Borgne" to whom the former ceded Clermontois and Vienne-le-Château. From this time the voués of Verdun were suppressed. The concessions obtained from the Emperor Louis of Bavaria in 1227 by the people of Verdun were the cause of a two-years' war between them and Bishop Raoul de Torote (1224-45). Jacques de Troyes, later pope under the name of Urban IV, was Bishop of Verdun from 1252-1255. Among other bishops are: Liébauld de Cusance (1379-1403), who signed a treaty with King Charles VI of France by which French dominion was established in Verdun; Cardinal Louis de Bar (1419-30); Guillaume de Fillastre (1437-49), historian of the Golden Fleece (Toison d'Or); and Cardinal Jean de Lorraine (1523-44). Nicolas Psaulme (1548-75) successfully withstood the inroads of Protestantism in the diocese. At the Council of Trent he vigorously attacked the system of commendatory abbots. It was during his episcopate that the Constable de Montmorency conquered in the name of Henry II, King of France, the "Three Bishoprics" of Metz, Toul, and Verdun (1552), though theoretically they remained territories of the empire until the Peace of Westphalia in 1648. Other incumbants of the see were Charles de Lorraine, Cardinal de Vaudemont (1585-87), and Eric de Lorraine Vaudemont (1593-1610) to whom, at the end of 1603, after many difficulties, Clement VIII gave full power to legalize the marriage of the Catholic Henry, heir to the Duchy of Lorraine, to his Calvinist cousin Catherine, sister of Henry IV.

Under the old regime the bishops of Verdun were suffragans of Trier. Eugene III visited Verdun to consecrate the new cathedral on 11 November, 1147. This cathedral was built at the order of Bishop Albero by the architect Garin, its cloister being a masterpiece of flamboyant Gothic, built from 1509 to 1517. The Abbey of Tholey was given in 634 to the church of Verdun by the rich deacon Adalgisus, its founder, out of esteem for his friend Bishop Paul. Until the time of Charlemagne it was the chief ecclesiastical school for the clergy of Verdun. The Benedictine Abbey of Vasloge, later Beaulieu, founded in 642 by St. Rouyn, numbered among its abbots in the eleventh century Blessed Richard (d. 1046), Abbot of Saint-Vanne, who reformed it, and St. Poppon, who died in 1048. The Benedictine Abbey of Saint-Vanne de Verdun was founded in 952 to replace a community which had established in the same church by St. Vitonus. Among the abbots of Saint-Vanne may be mentioned the aforesaid Blessed Richard, who dissuaded the Emperor St. Henry from becoming a monk of Saint-Vanne when he came to Verdun for that purpose about the year 1024; also Abbot Conon, who played an important part in the conflict of investitures, and who died in 1178. For the important monastic reforms of the beginning of the seventeenth century, which, thanks to the prior Dom Didier de la Cour, emanated from the Abbey of Saint-Vanne, see BENEDICTINE ORDER. The superb Church of Saint-Vanne was destroyed in 1832 and its cloister, which had been converted into barracks, was burned in 1870. The Abbey of Saint-Paul de Verdun was founded (970-973) by Bishop Viefrid. It was originally occupied by Benedictines, but in 1135 by Premonstratensians, and was finally destroyed in 1552. The Benedictine Abbey of Saint-Airy de Verdun, founded between 1025 and 1042, opened public schools about the year 1100, which enjoyed renown for a number of years. In 709 a monastery dedicated to St. Michael was established on Mount de Châtillon by Vulfoad, mayor of the palace under Childeric, King of Austrasia. Abbot Maragdus, a friend of Charlemagne, transferred it in 819 to the borders of the Meuse, thus founding the town of Saint-Mihiel. The reform inaugurated by the congregation of Saint Vanne was introduced into this monastery in 1606 by Cardinal Charles de Lorraine, one of its abbots. Cardinal de Retz was also an abbot of Saint-Mihiel and occupied the castle of Commercy, where he wrote his "Memoirs on the Fronde", and which castle he restored and afterwards sold to Charles IV of Lorraine.

The castle and town of Vaucouleurs belonged to the lords of Joinville, one of whom wrote the life of St. Louis. At this town Joan of Arc presented herself to Robert de Baudricout, offering her services against the English who were then besieging Orléans. Before the foundation of the Fortress of Montmedy there existed, on the rock dominating the town, a chapel under the protection of the Blessed Virgin which in the sixth century had replaced a statue of the Gaulish Mercury. The Diocese of Verdun figures largely in the history of art, owing to the sculptor Ligier Richier (1500-72), a pupil of Michelangelo. His mausoleum of Rene de Chalons, Prince of Orange, at Bar-le-Duc and his Holy Sepulchre in the church of Saint-Mihiel are admirable works of art. A council held at Verdun in 947 dealt with the conflict between Hugues and Artaud both of whom claimed the See of Reims, finally retained by Artaud. At Tusey (Tusiacum) near Vaucouleurs, a council, convened by Charles the Bald and Lothaire, was held in 860. The synodal letter despatched by the council and revised by Hincmar, dealt with usurpers of ecclesiastical benefices and maintained against the doctrine of Gottschalk that Jesus died for all men without exception. The Treaty of Verdun signed in 843 by the three Kings, Lothaire, Charles the Bald, and Louis the German, definitively confirmed the division of Charlemagne's empire. A number of saints are connected with the history of the diocese of whom the following are worthy of mention: St. Euspicius, who during the siege of Verdun in 502 by Clovis, prevailed on him to spare the town and received the territory of Micy near Orléans on which to build an abbey; he was an uncle of St. Vanne (Vitonus), Bishop of Verdun, and of St. Mesmin (Maximinus) from whom the Abbey of Micy received its name. St. Wandrille (Wandregesilus), b. in Verdun in 570, founder of the Monastery of Fontenelle and his nephew St. Gou, also born in Verdun and a monk of Fontenelle; St. Rouyn (Rodingus) of Irish origin, who founded the Abbey of Beaulieu in the episcopate of St. Paul and died in 708 at the age of 117; also Blessed Pierre of Luxembourg (1369-1387), Bishop of Metz and cardinal, son of Gui de Luxembourg, Count de Ligny. Father Gerbillon (1634-1707), a Jesuit, who played an important part in the Chinese Missions, came originally from Verdun, and the celebrated and learned Dom Calmet (1672-1757) was born at Mesnil la Horgne.

The chief pilgrimages of the diocese are: Notre Dame d'Avioth, near Montmédy, dating from the twelfth century, with a sanctuary dating from the fourteenth to the fifteenth centuries; Notre Dame de Benoite Vaux; Notre Dame de la Belle Epine, at Bouchon; Notre Dame du Guet, at Bar-le-Duc, dating from 1130; Notre Dame des Vertus, at Ligny; Ste Anne d'Argonne, dating from 1338; and Notre Dame of La Voûte at Vaucouleurs. Before the application of the law of 1901 regarding the associations, the following orders were represented in the Diocese of Verdun: Capuchins; Clerks Regular of our Saviour and several orders of teaching brothers. Among orders for women were: Canonesses Regular of St. Augustine of the Congregation of Our Lady, founded at Corbeil (Seine et Oise) in 1643, in 1816 they were charged with the education at Versailles of the daughters of the Chevaliers de St. Louis and were transferred to Verdun in 1839; also the Sisters of Compassion, a teaching order founded in 1846 with a mother-house at St-Hilaire-en-Woevre. At the end of the nineteenth century the religious congregations directed: 64 infant schools, 7 orphan asylums for girls, 2 houses of charity, 1 dispensary, 3 houses for nursing the sick in their homes, 1 house of retreat, 1 lunatic asylum, and 18 hospitals. In 1905 at the end of the concordatory regime there were 283,480 inhabitants, 30 first-class parishes, 444 succursals and 34 vicariates.

Gallia christiana, XIII (nova, 1785), 1160-1263; insir. 551-584; ROUSSEL, Hist. ecclesiastique et civile de Verdun, first published in 1745 (rev. ed., Bar-le-Duc, 1863); CLOUET, Hist. de Verdun et du pays verdunois (Verdun, 1867-1869); ROBINET AND GILANT, Pouille du diocese de Verdun (Verdun, 1888-1904); DUFOUR, Eglise cathedrale de Verdun (Verdun, 1863); LABANDE, Le charite a Verdun (Verdun, 1894); GABRIEL, Verdun, notice historique (Verdun, 1888).

GEORGES GOYAU

Verecundus

Bishop of Junca, in the African Province of Byzacena, in the middle of the sixth century, when the question of the Three Chapters was raised. at Chalcedony, in the beginning of 552. Pope Vigilius's "Judicatum" having excited almost universal discontent, both the pope and the Emperor Justinian agreed the question should be settled in a general council to be held at Constantinople. Verecundus, with Primasius of Hadrumeta, went to represent the Province of Byzacena, and arrived at Constantinop le towards the middle of 551. At once the Greek bishops set out to induce them by promises and threats to anathematize the Three Chapters. Both resisted strenuously at first, and, in the grave difficulties then besetting Pope Vigilius, stood by his side; and when the latter had taken refuge in the Basilica of St. Peter's, both, in union with him, issued a sentence of excommunication against Theodore Askidas and of deposition against Mennas, the patriarch of the imperial city (17 August, 551). Soon, however, the conditions became so unbearable that on 23 December Pope Vigilius, although his residence was carefully watched, managed to escape across the Bosporus and to reach the Church of St. Euphemia at Chalcedon. Thither Primasius and Verecundus followed him a few days later. Verecundus, up to the end an ardent champion of the Three Chapters, died shortly afterwards. After Verecundus's death, Primasius was moved by ambition to relent from his unyielding attitude.

As an ecclesiastical writer, Verecundus is little known. His works, edited by Cardinal Petra (Spicil. Solesm.", IV, Paris, 1858) consist first of a collection of historical documents on the Council of Chalcedon, "Excerptiones de gestis Chalcedonensis Con cilii", of which we possess two recensions; secondly, of an exegetical commentary in nine books upon the Canticles of the Old Testament; and thirdly, of a poem of 212 hexameter lines, "De satisfactione poenitentiae", in which exquisite thoughts are unfort unately presented in a very incorrect form. St. Isidore of Seville (De vir. ill., vii) attributes also to Verecundus another poem on resurrection and judgment, which is possibly no other than the "De iudicio Domini" or "De resurrectione mortuorum", found among the works of Tertullian and St. Cyprian.

Bardenhewer, Patrology, tr. Shahan (St. Louis, 1908); Hefele, Conciliengeschichte; Fr. tr. Leclercq, III (Paris, 1909), ii, 41 sq.

CHARLES L. SOUVAY

Paolo Vergani

Italian political economist, b. in Piedmont, 1753; d. in Paris, about 1820. As a student, he devoted himself especially to ecclesiastical and civil law, and history. Having won distinction in theology, and been ordained priest, he went to Rome the better to prosecute his studies and soon became a canon of St. John Lateran. It was then that he wrote the "Trattato sulla pena di morte" (2nd ed., Milan, 1780), the "Discorso sulla giustizia criminale", and "Dell' enormità del duello", which earned for him a distinguished position among the jurists of the eighteenth century and particularly contributed to the reform of the criminal law. It was also probably due to them that he was appointed assessor general of finances and commerce, and inspector of agriculture and he arts. He wrote on the financial system of the Pontifical States as reformed by Pius VI (Rome, 1791), taking the position of an advocate of import duties for the protection of home industries, and maintaining that agriculture cannot be the only source of wealth in a state. He displays at the same time a thorough acquaintance with the history of political economy. In this work the author makes a remarkable appeal to religion and the duty of Christian charity, asserting the necessity of protecting and fostering the home industries, which provide occupation for so large a number of people, while manufacturing and foreign importation give work to only a few. This literary activity was interrupted for some thirty years: the Lateran Chapter having been dispersed in 1811, Monsignor Vergani went to Paris and there supported himself by giving lessons in Italian. He published also "la législation de Napoléon le Grand considéréé dans ses rapports avec l'agriculture" (Paris, 1812) and "Essai historique sur le dernière persécution de l'église" (1814).

U. BENIGNI

Pier Paolo Vergerio, the Elder

Humanist, statesman, and canonist, b. at Capodistria, 23 July, 1370; d. at Budapest, 8 July, 1444 or 1445. He studied rhetoric at Padua, canon law at Florence (1387- 89) and at Bologna (1389-90); taught logic at Padua and Florence, and was tutor of the princes of Carrara at their court at Padua. After 1406 we find him at Rome as secretary to Innocent VII and Gregory XII. Later he became canon of Ravenna and took part in the Council of Constance in 1414. The next year he was one of the fifteen delegates who accompanied the Emperor Sigismund to Perpignan, where an endeavour was made to induce Benedict XIII to renounce his claims. From 1417 to his death he was secretary to the Emperor Sigismund. In July, 1420, he was the chief orator of the Catholic party at the Hussite disputation at Prague. Though never married and probably in minor orders, he was not a priest. The following of his works have been printed: "Pro redintegranda uniendaque Ecclesia", edited with introduction and notes by Combi in "Archivio storico per Trieste, l'Istria ed il Trentino" (Rome, 1882), 351-74; "Historia rincipum Carrariensium ad annum circiter MXXXLV", edited by Muratori, "Rerum ital. Script.", XVI, 113-184; "Vita Petrarcae", edited by Tommassini in "Petrarca redivivus", (Padua, 1701); "De ingenuis moribus ac liberalibus studiis" (Venice, 1472). His letters, 146 in number, were edited by Luciani (Venice, 1887). There are still in manuscript: a Latin version of Arrian's "Gesta Alexandri Magni"; a Life of Seneca; a panegyric on St. Jerome; a few comedies, satires, and other poems.

BISCHOFF, Studien zu P. P. Vergerio dem Aeltern (Berlin, 1909); KOPP, Pietro Paolo Vergerio der erste humanistische Padagog (Lucerne, 1894); BADUBER, P. P. Vergerio il seniore (Capodistria, 1866); WOODWARD, Vittorino da Feltro and other Humanist Educators (Cambridge, 1897); JACHINO, Del pedagogista Pier Paolo Vergerio (Florence, 1894); BUSCHBELL, Reformation und Inquisition in Italien und die Mite des 16. Jahrhunderts (Paderborn, 1910), 103-54.

MICHAEL OTT

Polydore Vergil

Born at Ubino about 1470; died there probably in 1555. Having studied at Bologna and Padua, he became successfully secretary to the Duke of Urbino and chamberlain to Alexander VI. He became famous by two early works, "Proverbiorum libellus" and "De inventoribus rerum", which attained extraordinary popularity. In 1501 the pope sent him to England as a sub-collector of Peterspence. He became intimate with Henry VII, who in 1505 commissioned him to write the history of England, and he obtained much preferment, including the archdeaconry of Wells. On 22 Oct., 1510, he was naturalized as an English subject. Subsequently to a visit to Rome in 1514, he offended Wolsey who had entrusted him with business, and was imprisoned and deprived of his sub-collectorship. Though finally released, he avenged himself by writing a hostile view of Wolsey in his history, which profoundly influenced later English historians. This work was published in 1533 and is specially valuable for his account of Henry VII's reign. In the third edition (Basle, 1555) the work is continued from 1509 to 1538. He is the first of the modern historians, consulting authorities, weighing evidence, and writing a connected story, not a simple chronicle. His other works are too numerous to specify. Throughout the religious changes he remained loyal, though not a fervent, Catholic. He kept in touch with Italy by frequent visits, and the religious changes under Edward VI led him to return there to spend his last years in his native land.

There is no complete biography, but references to him and his career are found in all the numerous sources for the reigns of Henry VII and Henry VIII. The best connected accounts are: ELLIS, Prefaces to the History of England published by the Camden Society (London, 1844); ARCHBOLD in Dict. Nat. Biog., s.v.

EDWIN BURTON

St. Vergilius of Salzburg

Irish missionary and astronomer, of the eighth century. Vergilius (or Virgilius, in Irish Fergal, Ferghil, or Feirghil) is said to have been a descendant of Niall of the Nine Hostages. In the "Annals of the Four Masters" and the "Annals of Ulster" he is mentioned as Abbot of Aghaboe, in Queen's County. About 745 he left Ireland, intending to visit the Holy land, but, like many of his countrymen, who seemed to have adopted this practice as a work of piety, he settled down in France, where he was received with great favour by Pepin, then mayor of the Palace under Childeric III. After spending two years at Cressy, near Compiegne, he went to Bavaria, at the invitation of Duke Otilo, and within a year or two was made Abbot of St. Peter's at Salzburg. Out of humility, he "concealed his orders", and had a bishop named Dobdagrecus, a fellow countryman, appointed to perform his episcopal functions for him. It was while Abbot of St. Peter's that he came into collision with St. Boniface. A priest having, through ignorance, conferred the Sacrament of Baptism using, in place of the correct formula, the words Baptizo te in nomine patria et filia et spiritu sancta", Vergilius held that the sacrament had been validly conferred. Boniface complained to Pope Zachary. The latter, however, decided in favour of Vergilius. Later on, St. Boniface accused Vergilius of teaching a doctrine in regard to the rotundity of the earth, which was "contrary to the Scriptures". Pope Zachary's decision in this case was that "if it be proved that he held the said doctrine, a council be held, and Vergilius expelled from the Church and deprived of his priestly dignity" (Jaffe, "Biblioth. rerum germ.", III, 191). Unfortunately we no longer possess the treatise in which Vergilius expounded his doctrine. Two things, however, are certain: first, that there was involved the problem of original sin and the universality of redemption; secondly, that Vergilius succeeded in freeing himself from the charge of teaching a doctrine contrary to Scripture. It is likely that Boniface misunderstood him, taking it for granted, perhaps, that if there are antipodes, the "other race of men" are not descendants of Adam and were not redeemed by Christ. Vergilius, no doubt, had little difficulty in showing that his doctrine did not involve consequences of that kind. (See ANTIPODES.)

After the martyrdom of St. Boniface, Vergilius was made Bishop of Salzburg (766 or 767) and laboured successfully for the upbuilding of his diocese as well as for the spread of the Faith in neighbouring heathen countries, especially in Carinthia. He died at Salzburg, 27 November, 789. In 1233 he was canonized by Gregory IX. His doctrine that the earth is a sphere was derived from the teaching of ancient geographers, and his belief in the existence of the antipodes was probably influenced by the accounts which the ancient Irish voyagers gave of their journeys. This, at least, is the opinion of Rettberg ("Kirchengesch. Deutschlands", II, 236).

Dict. of Christian Biog., s. v. Vergilius; OLDEN in Dict. of National Biography, s. v. Fergil; KRETSCHMER, Die physiche Erdkunde (Vienna, 1889).

WILLIAM TURNER

Friedrich Heinrich Vering

A German canonist, b. at Liesborn in Westphalia, 9 March, 1833; d. at Prague, 30 March, 1896. After completing his course at the gymnasium of Paderborn in 1850, he studied law at the Universities of Bonn and Heidelberg, graduated at the latter university in 1856, was admitted there as privatdocent of Roman and canon law in 1857, and became professor extraordinary in 1862. He held this position until 1875 when he accepted the chair of canon law at the newly-erected university of Czernowitz in Bukowina, Austria. In 1879 he became professor of canon law at the German University of Prague, holding this position till his death. He was one of the leading German canonists of the nineteenth century. Though a layman, he was a staunch defender of the rights of the Church against the encroachments of the State. His best known work is his comprehensive text-book on canon law: "Lehrbuch des katholischen, orientalischen und protestantischen Kirchenrechts" (Freiburg, 1876; 3rd ed., ibid., 1893). His two other important works are: "Geschichte und Institutionen des römischen Privatrechts" (Mainz, 1865, 5th ed., entitled: "Gesch. und Pandekten d. röm. und heutigen gemeinen Privatr.", Mainz, 1887); and "Römisches Erbrecht in historischer und dogmatischer Entwickelung" (Heidelberg, 1861). He also wrote the eighth volume of Philipps's "Kirchenrecht" (Mainz, 1889) and numerous smaller juridical treatises. From 1860 he was, with Moy de Sons, joint editor, and from 182, sole editor, of "Archiv für katholisches Kirchenrecht" (Mainz).

Alte und neue Welt, XXXI (Einsledeln, 1896), 574, and Deutscher Hausschatz (Ratisbon, 1896).

MICHAEL OTT

Vermont

One of the New England states, extends from the line of Massachusetts, on the south 42£ 44' N. lat. to the Province of Quebec in Canada, on the north, at 45£ N. lat. Its eastern boundary, throughout its entire length, is the Connecticut River which separates it from New Hampshire; it is bounded on the west by the State of New York, from which it is separated by Lake Champlain for a distance of more than one hundred miles south from the Canadian border. Its area is 10,212 sq. miles. Its length between Massachusetts and Canada being 158 miles, and its width on the northerly border 88 miles, while it narrows to a width of 40 miles on its southerly border.

PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS

The Green Mountains, from which the State derives its name, extend through its entire length, about midway between the easterly and westerly borders. Five of these mountains exceed 4000 feet in elevation, the highest, Mount Mansfield, being 4389 feet above sea-level. Several parallel ranges of mountains lie upon either side of the main chain and the surface of the state generally is broken and diversified, the mountain slopes being densely covered with forest growths, principally of spruce and other evergreen trees. The scenery is everywhere attractive, and in many districts very beautiful. Five rivers flow westerly and northerly into Lake Champlain; three flow northerly to Lake Memphremagog, on the Canadian border; eleven are tributaries of the Connecticut, on the east; while two run in a southerly direction to the Hudson. Not only do the streams of Vermont water beautiful and fertile valleys, but along their courses they furnish valuable water power for manufacturing purposes. The climate is healthful, although subject to sudden changes. The mean annual temperature for the different parts of the state varies from 40£; the highest temperature runs from 90 to 100£ F. and the lowest from 30 to 45£ F. The average annual rainfall is from 30 to 45 inches.

RESOURCES

The soil of Vermont is very fertile, especially in the river valleys. The low rolling hills are excellent for tillage purposes; the uplands furnish good pasturage and the mountain sides produce much valuable timber. Agriculture is the chief industry of the people, and the state leads all others in the production of butter and cheese, in proportion to population, while in the amount of these products it is surpassed by only nine states. On the eastern slope of the mountains, in the Counties of Windsor, Washing, and Caledonia, granite of excellent quality is produced and its manufacture forms an extensive and important industry. the westerly portion of Rutland County is one of the principal slate producing regions of the country. Marble is found n several localities on the western mountain slope, principally in Rutland, Bennington, and Addison counties, which furnish about three-fourths of the finer grade marble produced in the United States. A large number of manufacturing establishments are in operation, producing a great variety of products, many of which, like the Fairbanks scales, made at St. Johnsbury, and the Howe scales made at Rutland, are shipped to distant countries. The value of the agricultural output of the state in 1910, comprising corn, wheat, oats, rye, buckwheat, potatoes, and tobacco, aggregated $21,491,400. A summary, issued by the United States Census Bureau for the year 1909, shows that the capital employed in manufacturing in the state was $62,658,741; the number of wage-earners employed in the several factories was 33,106, and the total wages paid them was $15,221,059. The total value of the manufactured products was $63,083,611.

POPULATION

The first census taken in 1791 showed a population of 85,499, which had nearly doubled in 1800. Rapid gains were made in each succeeding decade up to 1850, after which the increase was smaller owing to emigration to the western parts of the country. In 1910 the total population was 355,956. The state contains six cities and two hundred and forty organized towns.

LEGISLATURE AND JUDICIARY

The Legislative Assembly consists of a senate with thirty members, apportioned among the counties according to population, and chosen by the votes of the several counties; and a house of representatives, in which each town and city has one member. The governor, members of the Legislature, state and county officers are elected biennially, in the even years, in September, and the sessions of the Legislature convene in October following. The Supreme court of the state consists of five judges, elected for a term of two years by the two houses of the Legislature in joint assembly. Regular terms of this court are held in Montpelier in January, February, May, and October, with one session each year at Rutland, St. Johnsbury, and Brattleboro. In each county is a court which holds two sessions annually, the presiding judges being elected by the Legislature in joint assembly. Associated with the presiding judge in each county court are two assistant judges, elected by the freemen of the several counties. Probate courts are established in the several counties, being divided into two probate districts for each. The state is represented in the National Congress by two senators and two representatives. Since 1903 the liquor traffic has been regulated by a local option law under which the voters of each town or city determine its policy at the annual town elections in March.

HISTORY

Starting from Quebec, in the spring of 1609, Samuel Champlain ascended the St. Lawrence and Richelieu Rivers, accompanied by two Frenchmen and about sixty Algonquin Indians. He entered the lake which bears his name on 4 July, and upon seeing the mountain range extending upon the eastern shore, he exclaimed "Voila les monts verts", thus giving their name to the mountains and the state. A month was spent in exploring the lake and the adjacent country. Proceeding southward, Champlain reached another large lake, now called Lake George, to which he gave the name of St. Sacrement. The first settlement by white men, within the borders of the state, was made by the French on Isle la Motte, in Lake Champlain, in 1666. It was called Fort St. Anne, and was occupied until about 1690. The French claimed the territory as far south as the south end of Lake champlain, and forts were built by them early in the eighteenth century at Crown Point and Ticonderoga, on the west side of the lake. At about the same time they established a settlement on the east shore at Chimney Point, in the present town of Addison. This settlement together with one in what is now the town of Alburg, Vermont, flourished until Canada was ceded to the British. The first English settlement within the present limits of the state was made about 1690, in the present town of Vernon. This was an extension of the settlement of Northfield, in Massachusetts, which a later survey showed to be north of the boundary of that colony. In 1724 Fort Dummer was built on the west bank of the Connecticut River near the present village of Brattleboro. This also was supposed to be within the territory of Massachusetts, but a survey made in 1741 established the northern boundary line of the colony several miles south of the fort.

During the period covered by the Colonial wars, the country was the gateway through which the contending forces advanced to attack each other, the troops of each side being generally accompanied by savage allies. Raiding expeditions were frequent, and the country was so exposed to attack as to make settlement and development practically impossible; but after the final conquest of Canada by the British in 1760, this feature being practically removed, settlements increased very rapidly, the rich lands of the valley being much sought after. In 1761 a settlement was made in Bennington, under a charter granted by New Hampshire in 1749, and others grew up near it in the next few succeeding years. Newbury on the eastern border of the state near the Connecticut River was permanently settled in 1762. Before the close of 1765, 150 townships lying west of the Connecticut River had been granted by Governor Wentworth of New Hampshire to purchasers from the New England colonies, and the country became known by the name of the "New Hampshire Grants". In granting charters, the Governor of New Hampshire had acted upon the theory that the western boundary of that colony was an extension of the west line of Connecticut and Massachusetts, substantially 20 miles east of the Hudson River, but in 1765 claim was made, by the Governor of New York, that the easterly boundary of New York was the Connecticut River. Several townships were granted by New York in the disputed territory, regardless of the authority of New Hampshire, and the titles of purchasers from New Hampshire were declared to be void. The dispute was carried to the courts of New York, whose decision was adverse to the settlers, and in 1770 a convention at Bennington declared that the inhabitants would resist by force the claims of New York. For defense against the aggression of New York, committees of safety in several towns were established, and a regiment of militia called "Green Mountain Boys" was organized with Ethan Allen as colonel commandant. Few of the settlers complied with the demand that their lands be repurchased from New York, and the officers of the latter colony found it impossible to execute the judgments of the courts of Albany.

In spite of an order made by the British king in council on 24 July, 1767, prohibiting all further grants by the Government of New York pending the settlement of the questions involved, the colonial Government continued to make grants, to press its claims, and attempted to organize counties in the disputed territory, with courts and county officers. Indictments were filed against many of the settlers in the courts at Albany, but the principals could not be apprehended nor brought to trial. A convention of the settlers prohibited the holding of offices and the accepting of grants of land under the authority of New York, and obedience to these orders was enforced. The only legislative authority recognized was that of the conventions of settlers and the country became in fact an independent state, which it was formally declared to be by a convention held at Windsor on 4 June, 1777, and it continued as such until its admission into the Union in 1791. Upon the outbreak of the Revolutionary War, the Green Mountain Boys gave valuable aid to the cause of the patriots. On 10 May, 1775, Ethan Allen in command of a small party captured the fortress at Ticonderoga and made its garrison prisoners. On the following day Crown Point was captured by troops under Captain Seth Warner. A large number of settlers joined the expedition of General Montgomery against Canada and participated in the capture of St. Johns and Montreal, and in an unsuccessful assault upon Quebec. On 7 July, 1777, the rear guard of the American army, retreating from Ticonderoga, gave battle to the advancing British forces at Hubbardton. Colonel Warner commanded the patriot forces, composed largely of Green Mountain Boys. After an obstinate struggle, the patriot forces were finally greatly outnumbered and forced to retreat. On 16 August following the same troops participated, with a force from New Hampshire under General John Stark, in the important battle of Bennington, which resulted in a victory for the patriots that helped to bring about the final surrender of Burgoyne's army. In the war of 1812 the state furnished its full quota of 3000 troops for service; in addition more than 2500 of the inhabitants volunteered for the defence of Plattsburg, and participated in MacDonough's victory on 11 Sept., 1814. The state's troops were among the first to respond to the call of President Lincoln for service in the Civil War in 1861; they served principally in the Army of the Potomac and participated in all its engagements and campaigns. The total number of men furnished for the national forces was 35,242, or a little more than one-half of the total available population between the ages of 18 and 45.

EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM

The University of Vermont, founded at Burlington in 1890, provides instruction in the arts, engineering, chemistry, agriculture, and medicine. In 1910 it had a teaching staff of 53 in the collegiate departments and 37 in the professional departments, with an attendance of 498 students. Middlebury College has 18 professors and instructors with 334 students enrolled; Norwich University has 15 professors and instructors, and 172 students; St. Michael's College (Catholic) at Winooski Park, near Burlington, has 14 professors and 125 students; there are 18 academies with a total attendance of 1350 students, and 71 high schools, which in 1910 had 3650 students. Public schools are required to be maintained by the several towns and cities throughout the state, the total attendance in 1910 being 66,615. The total number of public schools is 2489 with 3266 teachers. The state agricultural college is located at Burlington, and is a department of the University of Vermont; in 1910 it had 35 students, and the medical department f the University had 168 students. There are 25 Catholic parochial schools with 16 teachers and 5950 pupils. In the original township allotments lands were reserved for the maintenance of schools in each town, and the income is used to defray the expense of public schools. State supervision is exercised through a superintendent elected by the General Assembly.

MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION

There are 1094 miles of steam railway in the state, of which the three principal systems run to Montreal and Canadian points on the north, and to New York and Boston on the south and east. The Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada controls and operates the Central Vermont system extending from the Canadian border tot he Connecticut River; the Rutland Railroad system extending from Bellows Falls, on the east, and Bennington on the South, through the Western part of the state to the Canadian border, is controlled and operated by the New York, New Haven, and Hartford Railroad Company, which also controls the line extending from the southern border of the state northerly through the Connecticut valley. In all the cities and some of the larger towns there are electric street railways, which in 1910 comprised a total of 135 liens. the ports of Lake Champlain have water transportation to Canadian points, and by means of the Champlain Canal, to the Hudson River.

ECCLESIASTICAL

As already noted, the state was discovered and named by a Catholic nobleman, Samuel Champlain, whose high character is shown by the sentiment he often expressed, that the "salvation of one soul is of more value than the conquest of an empire". The first sacred edifice to be erected within the state was the little chapel at Ft. Anne, which was built in 1666, and the Sacrifice of Mass there offered up was the earliest Christian service within the territory that now comprises the State of Vermont. Father Dollier de Casson came to the fort from Montreal in the winter of 1666 and ministered to the spiritual wants of a battalion of soldiers stationed at the fort. Father de Casson, in his youth, had been a soldier in France, and tradition credits him with wonderful physical strength; it is related that he was able to stand, with his arms outstretched, and hold up an ordinary man with each hand. He was of a most cheerful and genial disposition, as well as courageous and zealous in his missionary work. A mission was preached by three Jesuit Fathers at Fort St. Anne in 1667, and in 1668 confirmation was administered there by Mgr Laval, Bishop of Quebec. This was, undoubtedly, the first administration of confirmation in New England, and probably in the United States. In the early years of the seventeenth century, the Jesuits established several missions in the vicinity of Lake Champlain; they had a chapel at a permanent Indian settlement near the present village of Swanton, and another in the town of Ferrisburg. A Swedish naturalist, Peter Kalm, who went through Lake Champlain in 1749, says: "Near every town and village, peopled by converted Indians, are one or two Jesuits. There are, likewise, Jesuits with those who are not converted, so that there is, commonly, a Jesuit in every village belonging to the Indians."

Vermont was included within the jurisdiction of the Diocese of Baltimore, established in 1789, and the bishops of Quebec continued to look after the spiritual interests of the Catholic settlers and Indians. When the Diocese of Boston was formed in 1810 Vermont became part of its territory. In the early years of the nineteenth century, there were no resident priests in Vermont, but missions were given from time to time. Father Matignon, of Boston, visited Burlington in 1815 and found in that place about 100 Catholic Canadians. Commencing about 1818 Father Migneault, from Chamblay, Canada, looked after the settlers on the shores of Lake Champlain for several years. He was appointed vicar-general of this part of the diocese by the Bishop of Boston and continued in that capacity until 1853. In 1808 Fannie Allen, daughter of General Ethan Allen, the hero of Ticonderoga, became converted to the Catholic Faith, and entered the novitiate of Hotel-Dieu, Montreal, where she was received as a member of the order, and after a most exemplary life died there on 10 Sept., 1819. Orestes A. Brownson, the noted Catholic author and philosopher, was a native of the state. He was born in Stockbridge, Windsor County, in 1803. Father Fitton, of Boston, came to Burlington for a short time in the summer of 1829. Rt. Rev. Bishop Fenwick, second Bishop of Boston, visited Windsor in 1826. The first resident priest in Vermont was Rev. Jeremiah O'Callaghan, who in 1830 was sent by Bishop Fenwick to Vermont, and visited successively Wallingford, Pittsford, Vergennes, and Burlington. He settled at Burlington, where his influence and pastoral zeal radiated far and wide for nearly a quarter of a century. His field of labour extended from Rutland to the Canadian line, a distance of about 100 miles, and from the shores of Lake Champlain to the Connecticut River.

In 1837 Rev. John Daley who is still lovingly remembered by many of the generation which is passing, came to the southern part of the state. He is described as an "eccentric, but very learned man". During the time of his zealous labours in Vermont, he had no particular home; he usually made his headquarters at Rutland or Middlebury. He was in every sense a missionary, travelling from place to place wherever there were Catholics, and stopping wherever night overtook him; he remained in the state until 1854 and died at New York in 1870. Bishop Fenwick made his first pastoral visit, as Bishop of Boston, to Vermont in 1830, and in 1832 he dedicated the first church built in Vermont in the nineteenth century. This was erected at Burlington under the supervision of Father O'Callaghan. A census of the Catholic population of Vermont, taken in 1843, showed the total number to be 4940. At about this time emigration from European countries, particularly from Ireland, increased very rapidly, and there was a great increase in the Catholic population. In 1852 a meeting of the bishops of the province of New York decided to ask the Holy See to erect Vermont into a diocese, with Burlington as the capital city, and Bishop Fitzpatrick of Boston proposed for Bishop of Burlington, Very Rev. Louis De Goesbriand, Vicar-General of Cleveland, Ohio. On 29 July, 1853, the Diocese of Burlington was created and Father De Goesbriand named as bishop. He was consecrated at New York by the papal ablegate, Mgr Bedini, on 30 Oct., 1853, and on 5 Nov. arrived at Burlington, where he was installed the following day by Bishop Fitzpatrick. Bishop De Goesbriand entered upon his work with the greatest zeal, making a visitation of the entire diocese. He then found about 20,000 Catholics scattered throughout Vermont. In 1855 he visited France and Ireland for the purpose of securing priests for the Diocese of Vermont, in which work he was eminently successful, and he brought tot he diocese in the succeeding years, several priests who did splendid work in the up-building of the Church in Vermont.

The first diocesan synod was held at Burlington, 4 Oct., 1855. Rev. Thomas Lynch was appointed vicar-general in 1858. The cathedral at Burlington was build under the supervision of Bishop De Goesbriand, work having commenced in 1861; it was completed and dedicated on 8 Dec., 1867. Bishop De Goesbriand laboured for the welfare and prosperity of his diocese with tireless zeal and gratifying success during thirty-eight years. In 1892 on account of advancing years and failing health, he requested the appointment of a coadjutor. Rev. J. S. Michaud, then pastor of Bennington, Vermont, was appointed. Bishop De Goesbriand retired to the orphanage, which he himself had founded, and there on 3 Nov., 1899, he died at the age of 84. Bishop Michaud died on 22 Dec., 1908, and Rev. J.J. Rice, D.D., then pastor of St. Peter's Church, Northbridge, Massachusetts, was selected as his successor. Bishop Rice was consecrated on 14 April, 1910.

There are now in the Diocese of Burlington 97 churches of which 72 have resident priests and 25 are missions. There are 93 secular priests and 14 priests of religious orders. Twenty parishes maintain parochial schools, attended by 5950 pupils. There are three academies for boys, and six for young ladies; an orphan asylum is maintained at Burlington, which cares for 220 children. Two orphan schools have 252 pupils, making the total number of young people under Catholic care 6202. Two hospitals are maintained, one at Burlington and one at St. Johnsbury. The Loretto Home for aged women at Rutland, under the care of the Sisters of St. Joseph, was built and equipped by the late Rev. Thomas J. Gaffney, almost entirely with his private funds. The Catholic population in the diocese in 1911 was 77,389 divided almost equally between Irish and Canadians, by birth or descent. There are two Polish congregations, and a small percentage of other nationalities. The principal non-Catholic denominations are: Congregationalists, 20,271 members, 197 churches, 186 ministers; Baptists, 8623 members, 105 churches, 111 ministers; the Methodists, 16,067 members, 182 churches, 161 ministers; the Episcopalians, 3926 communicants, 36 ministers, 52 parishes; Free Baptists, 4000 members, 60 churches; Adventists, 1750 members, 35 churches.

LEGISLATION

The first Constitution of Vermont was adopted in 1877 and provided (Art. 3, chap. 1): "That all men have the natural and unalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences and understanding, regulated by the word of God, and that no man should, nor of right can be compelled to attend any religious worship, or erect or support, any place of worship, or maintain any minister, contrary to the dictates of his conscience; nor can any man who professes the Protestant religion be justly deprived or abridged of any civil right as a citizen on account of his religious sentiment or peculiar mode of religious worship. . .Nevertheless, every sect ought to observe the Sabbath or Lord's Day, and keep up and support some sort of religious worship, which to them shall seem most agreeable to the revealed word of God." The same Constitution (Chap. 2, sec. 9) provided "that each member of the House of Representatives, before he takes his seat, shall make and subscribe the following declaration, viz. I do believe in one God, the creator and governor of the universe, the rewarder of the good and the punisher of the wicked; and I do acknowledge the scriptures of the old and new Testament to be given by Divine Inspiration, and own and profess the Protestant religion". The Constitution was revised and amended in 1786 and the clause requiring a test declaration was dropped entirely from the revision. The words "who professes the Protestant religion" were also eliminated from the third article of chapter 1, leaving the declaration one of freedom of worship for all. And such was the provision of the Constitution adopted after the admission of Vermont to the Union in 1793.

No legislation nor constitutional provisions, discriminating in favour of one sect, or against another, have ever since been enacted in the state. The exercise of any business or employment, except such only as works of necessity and charity, and the resorting to any ball or dance, or any game, sport, or house of entertainment or amusement on Sunday, is prohibited by statute. The administration and voluntary taking of an unnecessary oath is made penal by statute (Pub. Stat., sec. 5917). The provision was originally a part of the anti-Masonic legislation enacted in 1833. the ordinary form of oaths which are administered without the use of the Bible and while the recipient holds his right hand raised, commences with "You do solemnly swear" and ends with "So help you God". The statute provides (Pub. Stat., sec. 6268) that the word "swear" may be omitted and the word "affirm" substituted, when the person to whom the obligation is administered is religiously scrupulous of swearing or taking an oath in the prescribed form, and in such case the words: "So help you God" are also omitted, and the words: "Under the pains and penalties of perjury" are substituted. The daily sessions of each house of the Legislature are opened by prayer. 1 January and 25 December are legal holidays (Sec. 2690). It is provided by statute that no priest nor minister of the Gospel shall be permitted to testify in court to statements made to him by a person under the sanctity of a religious confessional (Pub. Stat., sec. 1594).

The Catholic Diocese of Burlington is a corporation under a special charter from the Legislature. Incorporation of churches can be had by the filing of articles of association with the Secretary of State, signed by five or more persons (Pub. Stat., sec. 4237); and this may be done without the payment of charter fees or taxes (Pub. Stat., sec. 802). All real and personal estate, granted, sequestered, or used for public, pious or charitable uses, and lands used for cemetery purposes, and the structures thereon are exempt from taxation (Pub. Stat., sec. 496). Divorces from the bond of matrimony may be decreed by the several county courts. Five causes for divorce are recognized by law, for any one of which may be also granted a divorce from bed and board. In 1910, 369 divorces were granted in the state. Marriages may be solemnized by a justice of the peace in the county for which he is appointed, or by a minister of the Gospel ordained according to the usage of his denomination, who resides in the state or labours steadily in the state as a minister or missionary. The number of marriages solemnized in 1910 was 2992. The state prison is located at Windsor, the house of correction at Rutland, and the industrial school at Vergennes. The free exercise of religious belief is granted to prisoners by Public Statutes, Sec. 6075. All bequests to charitable, educational, or religious societies or institutions, existing under the laws of the state, are exempted from the payment of the state inheritance tax of 5% (Pub. Stat., sec. 822). Blasphemy and profanity are punishable as crimes, the former by a fine not exceeding $200. All persons who have arrived at the use of reason are amenable to the penalty for profanity (Pub. Stat., secs. 5896-7).

Licences for the sale of intoxicating liquors are granted only in towns and cities which vote to grant them at the annual March elections. They are restricted in number, one for each 1000 inhabitants or major fraction thereof. Licencees must be legal voters, and more than twenty-five years of age. No licences can be exercised within 200 feet of a church or school; sales can be made only on the street floor of the building specified, and no screens or obstructions can be maintained so as to prevent a view from the street; tables, chairs, stalls, and sofas are prohibited on the licensed premises, and all licensed drinking-places are required to close at ten o'clock in the evening. Those authorized to sell liquor in packages are required to close at 7 P.M. All places are to close on Sundays, legal holidays, election days, and the days of circus exhibitions and agricultural fairs; no liquor can be furnished to a minor for his own or another's use, or to a habitual drunkard or a person known to have been intoxicated within six months. Minors are not allowed to be employed in licensed places.

THOMPSON, Hist. of Vermont (1853); CONANT, Vermont (1907); MICHAUD, Diocese of Burlington in Hist. of Catholic Church, II (1899); BENEDICT, Vermont in the Civil War (1886); WALTON, Vermont Register (1911-2).

THOS. W. MALONEY

La Verna

An isolated mountain hallowed by association with St. Francis of Assisi, situated in the centre of the Tuscan Appenines, and rising about 4000 feet above the valley of the Casentino. Its name (Latin, Alverna) is said to come from the Italian verb vernare, to make cold or freeze. On 8 May, 1213, La Verna was given to St. Francis by Count Orlando of Chiusi as a retreat "specially favourable for contemplation". Thither the siant withdrew in August, 1224, to keep a forty days fast in preparation for Michelmas, and it was while praying on the mountain-side that he received (on or about 14 Sept.) the stigmata. Thenceforth La Verna became sacred ground. Pope Alexander IV took it under his protection. In 1260 a church was consecrated there in presence of St. Bonaventure and several bishops. A few years later the Chapel of the Stigmata was erected, through the munificence of Count Simone of Battifole, near the spot where the miracle took place. An older chapel, S. Maria degli Angeli, which was built 1218 for St. Francis by Orlando, is approached from the sacristy of the Chiesa Maggiore, which was begu in 1348, but not finished until 1459. From the latter church the friars dwelling on La Verna go in solemn procesion twice daily (at 2 P.M. and at midnight) to the Chapel of the Stigmata. On the Feast of the Stigmata (17 Sept.) and on other festivals, large crowds of priests with their people from neighbouring parishes, as well as strangers, visit the mountains, and on sch occasions the friars often accommodate and entertain between 2000 and 3000 pilgrims. The convent was partly destroyed by fire in the fifteenth century; it suffered desecration also during the war of this century. In 1810, and again in 1866, the friars were expelled in consequence of the suppression of religious orders. At present they are in possession of La Verna which belongs, however, to the municipality of Florence.

SBARALEA, Bullarium Franciscanum, IV (Rome, 1768), 156, gives a copy (made in 1274 by the sons of Orlando) of the deed confirming the gift of La Verna to St. Francis. The original of this deed is preserved at Borgo San Sepolero. MENCHERINI, Guida illustr. della Verna (2nd ed., Quaracchi, 1907), 462, gives details of historical and traditional events conected with the mountain, as well as a complete list of its flora; IDEM, L'Appenino Serafico prose di Vari autori sulla Verna (Quaracchi, 1908), 262; CARMICHAEL, In Tuscany (London, 1901), 221- 44; DE SELICOURT, Homes of the First Franciscans (London, 1905), 278-316: JORGENSEN, Pilgrim Walks in Franciscan Italy (London, 1908), 135-76; ECKENSTEIN, Through the Casentino (London, 1902), 33-50; NOYES, The Casentino and its Story (London, 1905), 139-88.

PASCHAL ROBINSON

Tommasina Vernazza

Born at Genoa, 1497; died there, 1587. Her father, Ettore Vernazza, was a patrician, founder of several hospitals for the sick poor in Genoa, Rome, and Naples. Her godmother was St. Catherine Fieschi-Adorno. At the early age of 13, Tommasina entered the monastery of St. Maria delle Grazie, and became a canoness regular, taking the name of Battistina. She filled at various times the office of treasurer, novice-mistress, and prioress. She wrote, among other things, a commentary on the Pater Noster; "The Union of the soul with God"; "Of the knowledge of God"; "Of prayer"; "Of the heavenly joys and of the means of attaining them"; "Of those who have risen with Christ"; meditations, spiritual canticles, and letters to eminent men of her time. Possevin speaks of her writings as inspired. Her works were published at Venice in 3 vols. in 1588. They have been published many times since in 4 or 6 vols.; in Genoa 6 editions have been issued.

VERNAZZA, Opere Spirituali (Venice, 1588; Genoa, 1785); ROSSINI, Lyceum Lateranense Cesenae (1622); SERRA, Storia letteraria (Genoa, 1832); SEMERIA, Storia ecclesiastica di Genova (Turin, 1838); RONCO, Sonetti inediti (Genoa, 1819); BOERI, Una Gloria di Genova (1906).

A. ALLARIA

Jules Verne

Novelist, b. at Nantes, France, 1828; d. at Amiens, 1905. His first literary venture was a little play, Les pailles rompues", which was produced on the stage in the early fifties, but the difficulty he experience in overcoming the ill-will of the theatre managers discouraged him, and he began to publish, in the "Musée des Familles", novelettes after the fashion of Edgar Allan Poe. One of them, "A Drama in the Air", attracted the attention of the public. The subject is this: a madman embarks by mistake in the car of an aeronaut, and while in the air he tries to kill his companion. Verne had discovered his forte and it was his good fortune at this juncture to find in his publisher, Mr. Herzel, a man of sound judgment, who advised him not to waste his strength, but to limit his energies to the kind of novel he seemed to have discovered. Verne followed this advice, and success crowned his talent and strenuous work. Most of his novels have had a vogue that has been denied many a masterpiece of French literature, and this vogue has not been limited to France; it has spread beyond its frontiers. Verne was wont to show to visitors, not without a certain legitimate pride, the translations of his works kept in his library, where they occupied a goodly number of shelves, on which every language seemed to be represented. This wonderful success was undoubtedly due to the charming talent of the writer and the public's fondness for novels of adventure, but there was another cause for it, at least in so far as France was concerned. The French reading public had become tired of the pale copies of Dumas' stories that were published in the early fifties, and it was Verne's good luck and merit to revive in an attractive manner a kind of novel that seemed to be exhausted. With no less dexterity, and, it must be said, with no greater regard to accuracy, then that displayed by Dumas in his adaptation of history to the whims and fancies of story-telling, he brought science into the realm of fiction, and whatever may be the final verdict on the value of his work, he deserves the commendation that none of his books contains anything offensive to good taste or morals. Verne lived and died a Catholic.

The following are the best-known of his novels that have been translated into English: "Around the World in Eighty Days"; "Twenty Thousand Leagues under the Sea"; "Michael Strogoff"; "A Floating City, and the Blockade Runners"; "Hector Servadac"; "Dick Sands"; "A Journey to the Centre of the Earth"; "The Mysterious Island"; "From the Earth to the Moon"; "The Steam House"; and "The Giant Raft".

P. MARIQUE

Pierre Vernier

Inventor of the instrument which bears his name, b. at Ornans, Franche-Comte, c. 1580; d. there, 14 Sept., 1637. His father was his teacher in science. He became captain and castellan, for the King of Spain, of the castle at Ornans, and councillor and director general of moneys in the County of Burgundy. At Brussels, 1631, he published and dedicated to the Infanta, the treatise "La construction, l'usage, et les propriétés du quadrant nouveau de mathématiques", describing the ingenious device on which his fame now rests. To a quadrant with a primary scale in half degrees Vernier proposed to attach a movable sector, thirty-one half degrees in length but divided into thirty equal parts (each part consisting then of a half degree plus one minute). In measuring an angle, minutes could be easily reckoned by noticing which division line of the sector coincided with a division line of the quadrant. Christopher Clavius (q.v.) had mentioned the idea but had not proposed to attach permanently the scale to the alidade. The name vernier, now commonly applied to a small movable scale attached to a sextant, barometer, or other graduated instrument, was given by Lalande who showed that the previous name nonius, after Peter Nunez, belonged more properly to a different contrivance.

DELAMBRE, Histoire de l'astronomie moderne, II (Paris, 1821), 119-25; LALANDE, Bibligraphie astronomique (Paris, 1803), 196.

PAUL H. LINEHAN

Diocese of Veroli

(VERULANA).

Located in the Province of Rome. The city of Veroli (Verulae) is situated on the crest of the Hernican Mountains, at the elevation of 1640 feet above the sea level, with the River Cora running beneath it. Its antiquity is evidenced by the remains of Pelargic walls. Upon the loftiest portion stand the ruins of a very ancient castle which served as a prison for John X. The textile industry, which still flourished in the middle of the nineteenth century, is now reduced to very small portions. The cathedral and episcopal palace received their present form from Bishop Ennio Filonardi in the beginning of the sixteenth century. Some very precious manuscripts and documents are preserved in the archives of the chapter, among them the Breviary of St. Louis, Bishop of Tolosa. Adjoining the cathedral is the Church of St. Salome, whose body is believed to be preserved there. S. Erasmo still retains its Gothic porch, though its interior has been entirely transformed. The seminary has a rich library, the gift of Bishop Vittorio Giovardi, who had the seminary rebuilt in 1753. At the same period a school of canon and civil law, founded as early as 1538, was combined with the seminary.

Veroli was a city of the Hernici, and thus was allied with the Romans against the Volsei; remaining so during the Samnite War, it was able to preserve its autonomy. In 872 it was taken by the Saracens. In 1144 Roger I besieged it in vain. It served as a place of retreat for Alexander III and other popes. A memorable event in its history was the meeting which took place there between Honorius III and Frederick II. The humanists Giovanni Sulpizio and Aonio Palcario (Antonio Pagliari), the latter burned in 1570 for his writings in support of Protestantism, were natives of Veroli. The city boasts of having received the light of the Gospel from St. Mary Salome, whose relics, it is said, were discovered in 1209 through a vision sen by one Thomas. Nevertheless, no bishop is known before Martinus (743). The martyrs Blasius and Demetrius are still venerated there. Among the bishops worthy of mention are Agostino (1106) and Faramondo (1160), who had been abbots of Casamari; Giovanni (1223), the restorer of clerical discipline; Ennio Filonardi (1503), who was distinguished in the nunciature; Gerolamo Asteo (1608) a Conventual, founder of the seminary and author of many works, mostly unpublished; Domenico de Zaulis (1690), who restored the cathedral and other churches; Antonio Rossi (1786), who, with his whole chapter, took the oath of allegiance to Napoleon.

The diocese is immediately subject to the Holy See. It has 37 parishes, with 7000 souls; 100 secular and 100 regular priests; 10 houses of male religious, 11 of sisters; 4 schools for boys, and 5 for girls.

CAPERNA, Storia di Veroli (Veroli, 1907); CAPPELLETTI, Le Chiese d'Italian, VI, 467; RONDININI, Monasterii. . .deCasae Mario brevis historia (Rome, 1707).

U. BENIGNI

François Véron

French controversialist, b. at Paris about 1575; d. at Charenton, 1625. After brilliant studies under the Jesuits he became one and taught in several colleges. In order to devote himself more freely to preaching and controversy against Protestants, he left the Society. He did not hesitate to challenge every minister he encountered, even the most learned and famous, such as Moulin, Blondel, Daillé, or Bochard. His conferences with them and many other occasional or controversial writings he afterwards published. Having secured from King Louis XIII letters patent authorizing him to deliver his sermons in public and to conduct conferences with the ministers or any other Protestants wheresoever he pleased, he went to Paris, to Charenton, where he was cure for ten years (1638-48), because Calvinism had there its chief stronghold, to Saintonge, Béarn, Brie, Champagne, Lorraine, Normandy etc. Enormous success crowned his zeal, which was supported by animation of spirit, facility of speech, extensive and solid learning, and courage. He preached before audiences of 9000 or 10,000 persons; ministers like Boule, after having heard him, abjured Calvinism after thirty years in the ministry. "He has vanquished more ministers", wrote publicly the congregation of the Propagation of the Faith, "than another could have seen, alone he has converted more heretics to the Catholic faith than a thousand others." Véron became the most celebrated controversialist in France; the general assembly of the clergy assigned him a pension of 600 livres yearly and accepted the dedication of some of his books of which it defrayed the expenses; the Estates of Languedoe undertook his support while he preached in their province; Gregory XV sent his encouragement. He was invited to give lessons in controversy at the Collège de France and to teach his method at Saint-Lazaire under St. Vincent de Paul and at St. Sulpice under M. Olier.

This method Véron set forth in a theoretical treatise and illustrated by his other works. Since the Protestants reject Tradition and admit only Holy Scripture as the source and ground of faith they must be required to show all their dogmas in the Bible, and all the articles of their Confession of Faith which they cannot support with formal and explicit texts from the Sacred Books should be considered as untenable. On the other hand, it is of great importance to set forth the doctrine of the Church in all its purity; thus explained, it is entitled to the respect and the acceptance of heretics; hence it is important to separate authentic points of doctrine from what the heretics confuse with it, for example all the opinions of the schools, historical errors, popular legends, or private practices. By this matter of simplifying Catholic dogma and of showing consideration to Protestants, Véron sometimes aroused the protests of certain Catholics; his treatise on the primacy of the church wherein he refutes Blondel's work of the same name was even placed on the Index at Rome (Jan., 1643). He was also accused of sometimes using blustering language and excessive harshness against his adversaries, who used the same towards him. Véron next attacked the Jansenists, writing three books against them during the last years of his life.

WORKS

Apart from his anti-Jansenistic works and some partial translations of the Bible all of Véron's writings have to do with controversy. They are about eighty in number. Several of them are only a few pages in length; some are successive redactions of the same work under different names. Three are worthy of mention because they summarize nearly all the others: (1) "La méthode nouvelle, acile et solide de convainere de nullité la religion prétendue reformée", published in 1615, re-edited in 1617, 1618, 1619, 1623, in several cities of France, translated into English, Dutch, and German, read and praised by Leibnitz, reprinted by Migne in his "Theologiae cursus completus" (Paris, 1860); (2) "L'epitome de toutes les controverses de religion en ce siècle" (1 vol., Paris, 1638; re-edited in 2 and 3 vols., translated into Latin, and abridged); (3) "Règle de la foi catholique" (Paris, 1649), approved by the general assembly of the French clergy, by the faculty of theology of Paris, translated into Latin, read and praised by Leibniz, reprinted several times abroad and three times in France in the nineteenth century.

LA BOUDERIE, Notice sur la vie de Fr. Véron et sur ses ouvrages; DE BACKER, Biblioth. des ecrivains de la Comp. de Jesus, III (Paris, 1876); FERET, Un cure de Charenton au XVII siecle (Paris, 1881); La Faculte de theologie de Paris, IV, Epoque moderne (Paris, 1906).

ANTOINE DEGERT

Verona

(VERONENSIS.)

Diocese in Venetia (Northern Italy). The city, situated on both branches of the River Adige, is the centre of extensive agricultural industry. In the days of the Venetian Republic it was already an important fortress, and was surrounded with walls and other defences by the Veronese Fra Giocondo, and remained so under the Austrian domination and under the Kingdom of Italy. The headquarters of the Third Army Corps are in the Castel S. Pietro, on a hill formerly occupied by the Ostrogothic and Lombard kings and the Visconti.

CHURCHES AND PRINCIPAL BUILDINGS

The duomo (cathedral) is in the Romanesque style of the twelfth century, with additions of the fifteenth. It has an ambo by Sanmicheli; pictures by Liberale da Verona (Adoration of the Magi) and Titian (Assumption), and frescoes by Falconnetto. Adjoining it is S. Giovanni in Fonte, with a baptismal font decorated with reliefs of the twelfth century; in the cloister are remains of ancient marbles and mosaics. In the palace of the canons is the capitular library, rich in precious manuscripts. S. Maria Antica is surrounded with the tombs (arche) of the Scaligeri, lords of Verona, in the form of Gothic shrines, or tempietti, enclosing their sarcophagi (Can Grande, with equestrian statue; Can Signorio, the finest work, by Bonino da Campione). S. Anastasia, the Dominican church (1261), is Gothic; the sculptures of the great door represent scenes from the life of St. Peter Martyr; inside is the gobbo (hunchback), bearing the holy-water font, also pictures by Niccolo Giolfino, Giunesello da Folgaria (Entombment of Christ), Liberale, and Girolamo dai Libri; frescoes by Antichiero, Vittore Pisano (St. George), and Michele da Verona. S. Bernardino, fifteenth century, is adorned with frescoes by Giolfino, Morone, and others; noteworthy is the Pellegrini chapel, by Sanmicheli (1557). Of S. Zeno Maggiore mention is made as early as the time of St. Gregory the Great; in its present form it dates back to the eleventh century, and was restored in 1870. Its doorway is decorated with Biblical sculptures by Nicolaus and Guilelmus, and the bronze doors themselves are sculptured with scenes from the life of St. Zeno. The ambo is crowned with marble statues (1200). The statue of St. Zeno is of the ninth century, and a Madonna enthroned in the midst of saints is by Mantegna. Adjoining the church was a Benedictine abbey, which was suppressed in 1770. S. Fermo Maggiore, a Gothic church (1313), belonged first to the Benedictines, then to the Franciscans; its façade is adorned with marbles and with the sarcophagus of the physician Aventino Fracastoro (1350); it contains pictures by Caroto, also by Giambattista del Moro, Liberale, and Torbido, frescoes of the fourteenth century; the marble pulpit dates from 1396. Santi Nazzaro e Celso, a very ancient church, restored in the fourteenth and sixteenth centuries, contains pictures by Montagna and frescoes by Farinato and Falconetto. S. Maria in Organo was restored by Sanmicheli in 1481, and contains frescoes by Marone; in its choir and sacristy are intarsie (inlaid decorations) by Fra Giovanni (1499). Among the other churches are S. Giorgio in Braide, S. Stefano, and S. Eufemia (thirteenth century).

A very fine public piazza is that known as the Erbe, the ancient forum of the city, surrounded by imposing and historical residences--the Palazzo Maffei, the Mazzanti, once the residence of the Scaligeri, the Case dei Mercanti (1210), the Casa della Fontana (tenth century)--and an ancient statue known as the Verona. In the middle of the piazza is the tribune where, in the Middle Ages, trials used to be held. The Piazza dei Signori is surrounded by the Palazzo dei Giurisconsulti [Lawyers (1263)] and the Palazzo della Ragione (1193). The court house and the prefecture were formerly palaces of the Scaligeri; the Council Building, the old Municipio (1476), has a tower (the Civica) 272 feet high. Other buildings are: the Rocca (Keep) of Can Grande II; the Teatro Filarmonico, containing the lapidary museum; the Palazzo Lavezzola Pompeii, built by Sanmicheli in 1530, containing the civic museum, with its prehistoric discoveries, Roman and medieval sculpture, and a special collection of Veronese painters. The communal library contains 100,000 volumes and 3100 manuscripts. Noteworthy among the Roman antiquities are the arena, which is in better preservation than the Colosseum at Rome; the remains of a threatre, the greater axis of which is 502 feet in length; the Borsari Gates (265); the Arch of the Lions. The ancient Christian cemetery has not been found.

HISTORY

Verona, or Veronia, was a city of the Euganei, who were obliged to cede it to the Cenomani (550 B.C.). With the conquest of the Valley of the Po the Veronese territory became Roman (about 300 B.C.); Verona had the franchise in 59. The city derived importance from being at the intersection of many roads. With the taking of Verona (A.D. 489) the Gothic domination of Italy began; Theodoric built his palace there, and in Germanic legend the name of Verona is linked with his. This city remained in the power of the Goths all through the Gothic war, with the exception of a single day in 541, when an Armenian officer effected an entrance. Dissensions which arose among the Byzantine generals in regard to booty enabled the Goths to regain possession. In 552 Valerian vainly endeavoured to gain an entrance, and only the complete overthrow of the Goths brought abut its surrender. In 569 it was taken by Alboin, King of the Lombards, in whose kingdom it was, in a sense, the second city in importance. There Alboin himself was killed by his own wife in 572. The dukes of Treviso often resided there. At Verona Adalgisus, son of Desiderius, in 774 made his last desperate resistance to Charlemagne, who had destroyed the Lombard kingdom. Verona was then the ordinary residence of the kings of Italy, the government of the city becoming hereditary in the family of Count Milo, progenitor of the counts of San Bonifacio. From 880 to 951 the two Berengarii resided there. Otto I ceded to Verona the marquisate dependent on the Duchy of Bavaria.

The splendor of the city in those days, dominated by its forty- eight towers, is described in a Latin ode of which we shall speak later on. The increasing wealth of the burgher families eclipsed the power of the counts, and in 1100 we find Verona organized as a commune. The San Bonifacio could at most hold the office of podestè of the city now and then. Verona, at first undecided, was forced by Vicenza to join the Lombard League. This, however, gave rise to the factions of Guelphs and Ghibellines in Verona. When Ezzelino IV was elected podestè, in 1226, he was able to convert the office into a permanent lordship, and in 1257 he caused the slaughter of 11,000 Paduans on the plain of Verona (Campi di Verona). Upon his death the Great Council elected as podestè Mastino della Scala, and he converted the "signoria" into a family possession, though leaving the burghers a share in the government. Failing to be re-elected podestè in 1262, he effected a coup d'état, and was acclaimed capitano del popolo, with the command of the communal troops. It was not without long internal discord that he succeeded in establishing this new office, to which was attached the function of confirming the podestè. In 1272 Mastino was killed by the faction of the nobles. The reign of his son Alberto as capitano (1277-1302) was one incessant war against the counts of San Bonifacio, who were aided by the House of Este. Of his sons, Bartolommeo, Alboino, and Can Grande I, only the last shared the government (1308); he was great as warrior, prince, and patron of the arts; he protected Dante, Petrarch, and Giotto. By war or treaty he brought under his control the cities of Padua (1328), Treviso (1308), and Vicenza.

Alberto was succeeded by Mastino II (1329-51) and Alberto, sons of Alboino. Mastino continued his uncle's policy, conquering Brescia in 1332 and carrying his power beyond the Po. He purchased Parma (1335) and Lucca (1339). After the King of France, he was the richest prince of his time. But a powerful league was formed against him in 1337---Florence, Venice, the Visconti, the Este, and the Gonzaga. After a three years war, the Scaliger dominions were reduced to Verona and Vicenza. His son Can Grande II (1351-59) was a cruel, dissolute, and suspicious tyrant; not trusting his own subjects, he surrounded himself with Brandenburg mercenaries. He was killed by his brother Cansignorio (1359-75), who beautified the city with palaces, provided it with aqueducts and bridges, and founded the state treasury. He also killed his other brother, Paolo Alboino. Fratricide seems to have become a family custom, for Antonio (1375-87), Cansignorio's natural brother, slew his brother Bartolommeo, thereby arousing the indignation of the people, who deserted him when Gian Galeazzo Visconti of Milan made war on him. Having exhausted all his resources, he fled from Verona at midnight (19 October, 1387), thus putting an end to the Scaliger domination, which, however, survived in its monuments. His son Can Francesco in vain attempted to recover Verona (1390). Guglielmo (1404), natural son of Can Grande II, was more fortunate; with the support of the people, he drove out the Milanese, but he died ten days after, and Verona then submitted to Venice (1405). The last representatives of the Scaligeri lived at the imperial court and repeatedly attempted to recover Verona by the aid of popular risings. From 1490 to 1517 the city was in the power of the Emperor Maximilian I. It was occupied by Napoleon in 1797, but on Easter Monday the populace rose and drove out the French. It was then that Napoleon made an end of the Venetian Republic. In 1866, on the anniversary of the defeat of Königrätz, the Austrians evacuated Verona, their strongest fortress in Venetia, which thus became Italian.

For the origins of the Church in Verona the important document is the "Carmen Pipinianum" (ninth century), in which, besides a description of the city and an enumeration of its churches, there is a list of the first eight bishops, from St. Euprepius to St. Zeno, who died in 380. Less important is the famous pianeta (chasuble) of Classe, Ravenna, on which are represented not only the bishops of Verona, but also other saints and bishops of other dioceses venerated at Verona in the ninth century. St. Zeno having been the eighth bishop, the period of St. Euprepius, and therefore of the erection of the see, must be placed not before the peace given to the Church under Gallienus (260), but rather under the first period of the reign of Diocletian, when the Church enjoyed peace. In the same "Carmen" mention is made of Sts. Firmus and Rusticus, martyred at Verona, probably under Maximian. The list of the earliest bishops is as follows: Euprepius, Dimidrianus (Demetrianus), Simplicius, Proculus, Saturninus, Lucilius, present at the Council of Sardica in 343 (called Lucillus by St. Athanasius and Lucius in the signatures of the bishops at Sardica), Gricinus, Zeno. This St. Zeno is called a martyr in the "Carmen" and is placed in the time of Gallienus. At any rate the existence of a distinguished St. Zeno, Bishop of Verona, a contemporary of St. Ambrose, and author of a series of religious discourses, is historically attested, and as, on the other hand, the ancient documents know but one bishop of that name, it must be concluded that, as early as the ninth century, the legend had corrupted chronology. For the rest, we know from the sermons of St. Zeno how deeply paganism was still rooted in Verona in his time, particularly in the country districts. His successor was Syagrius. Other bishops were: St. Petronius (c. 410); Gaudentius (465); St. Valens (522-31); Solatius and Junior, who joined the schism of the Three Chapters; Hanno (about 758); Ratoldus, who imposed community life on the canons (806) and reorganized the education of the clergy. Among the masters of his school the deacon Pacificus was eminent for his knowledge of Greek and Hebrew. Nottingus (840) was the first to denounce the heretic Godescalcus. Adelardus (876) was excommunicated for invading the monastery of Nonnantula. Ratherius (930), a Benedictine and a distinguished author, was thrice driven from his see by usurpers, among whom was the notorious Manasses of Arles. He, too, fostered learning in the cathedral school. Joannes (1027) was distinguished for sanctity and learning. Bruno (1073), who wrote some interpretations of Scripture, was killed by one of his chaplains.

In the time of Bishop Ognibene (1157), a distinguished canonist, Pope Lucius III died at Verona, in 1183, after meeting Barbarossa and holding a synod there. There, too, was held the conclave which elected Urban III, who spent nearly all of his brief pontificate at Verona. Bishops Jacopo da Breganze (1225) and Gerardo Cossadocca (1254) were exiled by the tyrant Ezzellino. Manfredo Roberti (1259) suffered insult and imprisonment at the hands of the Ghibellines. Bonincontro (1295) died in the odour of sanctity. Bartolommeo della Scala (1336), a Benedictine, was calumniated to his nephew Mastino, Lord of Verona, who slew him with his own hand, and among the penalties for this crime inflicted by Benedict XII was the revocation of the privilege of nominating bishops. Pietro della Scala reformed the lives of the clergy and vainly endeavoured to bring the canons under his own jurisdiction instead of that of the Patriarch of Aquileia. When the Visconti obtained possession of Verona, Pietro was banished. Francesco Condulmer (1439) founded the college of acolytes to add to the beauty of public worship and to form a learned and pious clergy; the school still exists. This institution was necessary because, with the establishment of the University of Verona, the cathedral school had been suppressed, and the young clerics who attended the university were at that time dispensed from officiating in church functions: the acolytes of the new college were obliged both to study and to attend ecclesiastical functions. Ermolao Barbaro also did much for the reform of the diocese. Cardinal Giovanni Michele (1471) was a munificent restorer of the cathedral and the episcopal palace, as also was Cardinal Marco Cornaro (1592). For Gian Matteo Giberti (1524) and Pietro and Luigi Lippomano (1544, 1548) see articles under their respective names. Agostino Valier (1565) was a cardinal. Sebastiano Pisani (1650) was a zealous pastor. Giovanni Bragadino (1733) was a mirror of all the virtues; in his episcopate the Patriarchate of Aquileia was suppressed, and Benedict XIV brought the chapter under the bishop's jurisdiction, at the same time laying down wise rules for the government of the diocese. Giovanni Andrea Avogadro (1790) abdicated the see to return to the Society of Jesus. Benedetto de Riccabona (1854), A Tyrolese, was a model pastor. The present bishop is Bartolommeo Cardinal Bacilieri (1900). Councils of Verona worthy of note are those of 1184, at which the pope presided, and 1276, against the Patarenes who were somewhat numerous in the Veronese territory, even among the clergy.

At Verona is the mother-house of the Sons of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and their college for the Central African missions. The Congregation of the Stimmatini was also founded at Verona. Natives of this city were the architects Fra Giocondo, a Dominician, and Sanmichele; the painter Paolo Caliari (known also as Paolo Veronese), Falconetto, Liberali, Francesco and Girolamo dai Libri, Brusasorci, and others; among men of learning, Guarino, Lipomanno, Maffei, Bianchini, and others. The diocese was suffragan of Aquileia, then of Udine; since 1818 it has been suffragan of Venice. It has 262 parishes with 400,500 faithful; 786 secular priests; 132 regular priests; 17 houses of male religious; 45 of Sisters; 4 colleges for boys; 7 for girls. The Catholic Press consists of "Verona Fedele" (a daily paper), three weeklies, and the monthly "La Nigrizia".

CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, X; MAFFEI, Verona Illustrata (Verona, 1731; Milan, 1825); BIANCOLINI, Serie cronologica dei Vescovi e governatori di Verona (Verona, 1760); ZAGATA, Cronica di Verona (3 vols., Verona, 1745-49); FAINELLI, Podesta e ufficiali di Verona dal 1305 to 1405 (Verona, 1909); BIERMANN, Verona (Leipzig, 1904); SPAGNOLA, Le Scuole accolitali di Verona (Verona, 1905); CIPOLLA, Compendio della storia poliltica di Verona (Verona, 1900); BOLOGNINI, L'Universita di Verona (Verona, 1896).

U. BENIGNI

St. Veronica

In several regions of Christendom there is honored under this name a pious matron of Jerusalem who, during the Passion of Christ, as one of the holy women who accompanied Him to Calvary, offered Him a towel on which he left the imprint of His face. She went to Rome, bringing with her this image of Christ, which was long exposed to public veneration. To her likewise are traced other relics of the Blessed Virgin venerated in several churches of the West. The belief in the existence of authentic images of Christ is connected with the old legend of Abgar of Edessa and the apocryphal writing known as the "Mors Pilati". To distinguish at Rome the oldest and best known of these images it was called vera icon (true image), which ordinary language soon made veronica. It is thus designated in several medieval texts mentioned by the Bollandists (e.g. an old Missal of Augsburg has a Mass "De S. Veronica seu Vultus Domini"), and Matthew of Westminster speaks of the imprint of the image of the Savior which is called Veronica: "Effigies Domenici vultus quae Veronica nuncupatur". By degrees, popular imagination mistook this word for the name of a person and attached thereto several legends which vary according to the country.

• In Italy Veronica comes to Rome at the summons of the Emperor Tiberius, whom she cures by making him touch the sacred image. She thenceforth remains in the capitol of the empire, living there at the same time as Sts. Peter and Paul, and at her death bequeaths the precious image to Pope Clement and his successors.
• In France she is given in marriage to Zacheus, the convert of the Gospel, accompanies him to Rome, and then to Quiercy, where her husband becomes a hermit, under the name of Amadour, in the region now called Rocamadour. Meanwhile Veronica joins Martial, whom she assists in his apostolic preaching.
• In the region of Bordeaux Veronica, shortly after the Ascension of Christ, lands at Soulac at the mouth of the Gironde, bringing relics of the Blessed Virgin; there she preaches, dies, and is buried in the tomb which was long venerated either at Soulac or in the Church of St. Seurin at Bordeaux. Sometimes she has even been confounded with a pious woman who, according to Gregory of Tours, brought to the neighboring town of Bazas some drops of the blood of John the Baptist, at whose beheading she was present.
• In many places she is identified with the Haemorrhissa who was cured in the Gospel.

These pious traditions cannot be documented, but there is no reason why the belief that such an act of compassion did occur should not find expression in the veneration paid to one called Veronica, even though the name has found no place in the Hieronymian Martyrology or the oldest historical Martyrologies, and St. Charles Borromeo excluded the Office of St. Veronica from the Milan Missal where it had been introduced. The Roman Martyrology also records at Milan St. Veronica de Binasco, the Order of St. Augustine, on 13 January, and St. Veronica Giuliani on 9 July.

Acta SS. Bolland., Feb. I (Paris, 1863); Maury, Lettres sur l'etymologie du nom de Veronique, apotre de l'Aquitaine (Toulouse, 1877); Bourrieres, Saint Amadour et Sainte Veronique (Cahors, 1894); Palme, Die deutchen Veronicalegenden des XII Jahrh. (Prague, 1892)

ANTOINE DEGERT

St. Veronica Giuliani

Born at Mercatello in the Duchy of Urbino, Italy, 1660; died at Citt` di Castello, 9 July, 1727. Her parents, Francesco Giuliana and Benedetta Mancini, were both of gentle birth. In baptism she was named Ursula, and showed marvelous signs of sanctity. When but eighteen months old she uttered her first words to upbraid a shopman who was serving a false measure of oil, saying distinctly: "Do justice, God sees you." At the age of three years she began to be favoured with Divine communications, and to show great compassion for the poor. She would set apart a portion of her food for them, and even part with her clothes when she met a poor child scantily clad. These traits and a great love for the Cross developed as she grew older. When others did not readily join in her religious practices she was inclined to be dictatorial. In her sixteenth year this imperfection of character was brought home to her in a vision in which she saw her own heart as a heart of steel. In her writings she confesses that she took a certain pleasure in the more stately circumstances which her family adopted when her father was appointed superintendent of finance at Piacenza. But this did not in any way affect her early-formed resolution to dedicate herself to religion, although her father urged her to marry and procured for her several suitors as soon as she became of marriageable age. Owing to her father's opposition to her desire to enter a convent, Veronica fell ill and only recovered when he gave his consent.

In 1677 she was received into the convent of the Capuchin Poor Clares in Citt` di Castello, taking the name of Veronica in memory of the Passion. At the conclusion of the ceremony of her reception the bishop said to the abbess: "I commend this new daughter to your special care, for she will one day be a great saint." She became absolutely submissive to the will of her directors, though her novitiate was marked by extraordinary interior trials and temptations to return to the world. At her profession in 1678 she conceived a great desire to suffer in union with our Saviour crucified for the conversion of sinners. About this time she had a vision of Christ bearing His cross and henceforth suffered an acute physical pain in her heart. After her death the figure of the cross was found impressed upon her heart. In 1693 she entered upon a new phase in her spiritual life, when she had a vision of the chalice symbolizing the Divine Passion which was to be re-enacted in her own soul. At first she shrank from accepting it and only be great effort eventually submitted. She then began to endure intense spiritual suffering. In 1694 she received the impression of the Crown of Thorns, the wounds being visible and the pain permanent. By order of the bishop she submitted to medical treatment, but obtained no relief. Yet, although she lived in this supernaturally mystical life, she was a practical woman of affairs. For thirty-four years she was novice-mistress, and guided the novices with great prudence. It is noticeable that she would not allow them to read mystical books. In 1716 she was elected abbess and whilst holding that office enlarged the convent and had a good system of water-pipes laid down, the convent hitherto having been without a proper water supply. She was canonized by Gregory XVI in 1839. She is usually represented crowned with thorns and embracing the Cross.

FATHER CUTHBERT

Augustin Verot

Third Bishop of Savannah, first of St. Augustine, b. at Le Puy, France, May, 1804; d. at St. Augustine, 10 June, 1876. He studied at St-Sulpice, Paris, was ordained priest by Archbishop de Quelen, 20 Sept., 1828, subsequently joined the Society of St-Sulpice, and in 1830 came to Baltimore. He taught science, philosophy, and theology at St. Mary's College and the seminary until 1853, when, being appointed pastor at Ellicot's Mills, he continued four years in missionary activity. Nominated Vicar Apostolic of Florida, 11 Dec., 1857, he was consecrated titular Bishop of Danabe, 25 April, 1858, by Archbishop Kenrick in the cathedral of Baltimore. Religious conditions in Florida, owing chiefly to repeated mutations and instability in both civil and ecclesiastical regimes, were disheartening. Unbounded zeal and resourcefulness characterized Bishop Verot's administration from the beginning. The new vicariate had only three priests. He sought assistance in France and soon the churches at St. Augustine, Jacksonville, and Key West were repaired, new ones were erected at Tampa, Fernandina, Palatka, Mandarin, and Tallahassee and provided with resident pastors, religious communities were introduced, and Catholic schools inaugurated. In July, 1861, Bishop Verot was translated to the See of Savannah, retaining meanwhile vicarial powers over Florida. Religion suffered enormously during the disastrous periods of the Civil War and the subsequent "reconstruction". The bishop's unfailing courage and energy inspired his afflicted people with patience and resolution in repairing the great losses they sustained in their religious and material interests. The Florida vicariate was constituted a diocese in March, 1870, and Bishop Verot became first Bishop of St. Augustine, concentrating henceforth all his efforts on the work begun there fourteen years previously. Contemporaneous files of the "Catholic Directory" disclose his just appraisal of the latent material resources of a then undeveloped region. Florida owes to Bishop Verot's initiative much of its present material as well as religious progress. He was amongst the first to advocate its claim as a health resort and its adaptability for the culture of products which have since become valuable. He made an annual visitation of the whole diocese, establishing churches and schools at advantageous points, and aiming to lay a broad and solid foundation on which his successors might build. He loved to revive the memory of Florida's early martyrs. His numerous contributions on religious and historical themes in contemporary periodicals possess permanent value; his best-known writings are his "Pastoral on Slavery" and his "Catechism". He took a prominent part in the Councils of Baltimore and in the Vatican Council (see FLORIDA).

SHEA, Hist. Catholic Church in the U.S., IV (New York, 1892); CLARKE, Lives of Deceased Bishops, III (New York, 1888); various pastoral letters (Savannah and St. Augustine, 1858-75); O'CONNELL, Catholicity in the Carolinas and Georgia (New York, 1878).

JAMES VEALE

Giovanni da Verrazano

Navigator, b. about 1485, of good family, at Val di Greve, near Florence; executed at Puerto del Pico, Spain, November, 1527.

Entering the naval service of Francis I of France, he soon became famous as a corsair, preying on the ships of Spain and Portugal, one of his prizes in 1522 being the treasure-ship sent to Charles V by Cortés with Mexican spoils, valued at nearly two million dollars.

In Jan., 1524, he began a voyage of discovery to the New World on behalf of his patron Francis I, during which he kept a log-book of his experiences. In 1556 Ramusio published in his collection of voyages a letter written by Verrazano giving an account of his voyage to the coast of North America and its exploration from 30 degrees to 50 degrees N. lat. It is the first post-Columbian description of the North Atlantic coast, and gives the first description of New York Bay and harbour and the present Hudson River. Thence he sailed along Long Island Sound to Block Island and Newport, of which he makes mention. From this note-book of the voyage his brother Hieronimo drew in 1529 a map of the North Atlantic coast, which is now in the museum of the Propaganda at Rome, and testifies to the accuracy of Verrazano's observations along the coast as far as a point in the present State of Maine, whence he returned to France, arriving at Dieppe in July, 1524.

Little that is authentic is known of his subsequent career; Spanish records relate that he was captured in 1527, while cruising off the coast of Cadiz, and executed by order of the Emperor Charles V. The authenticity of his letter descriptive of his voyage along the Atlantic coast has given rise to an extensive historical controversy, but the most recent researches affirm its reliability as well as that of his brother's map, the best sixteenth-century map extant in its original form, which has special influence on the subsequent cartography of the time.

A bronze statute, set up in 1910, by his admiring fellow-countrymen, facing the mouth of the great river on whose east bank the metropolis of the United States has grown, proclaims their conviction that Giovanni da Verrazano, and not Henry Hudson, was its discoverer.

Memorial History of the City of New York, II (New York, 1892); BREVOORT, Verrazano the Navigator (New York, 1874); IDEM, Verrazano the First Explorer of the Atlantic Coast in Magazine of Am. Hist., VIII (New York, 1882), 481; DE COSTA, Verrazano the Explorer (New York, 1880); MURPHY, Voyages of Verrazano (New York, 1875); Collections of N.Y. Hist. Soc., I (New York, 1841), 37; BENNETT, Catholic Footsteps in Old New York (New York, 1909).

THOMAS F. MEEHAN

Hospice-Anthelme Verreau

A French-Canadian priest, educator, and historian, b. at l'Islet, P.Q., 6 Sept., 1828, of Germain V. and Ursule Fournier; d. at Montreal in 1901. After terminating his classical course at the Quebec Seminary, he taught at Ste Thérèse College, and, in 1857, was appointed principal of the newly founded Jacques-Cartier Normal School, an office he held until his death. He was made a Lit.D. of Laval (1878) and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada. In 1873 he was commissioned by the Quebec Government to investigate certain European archives for materials relating to Canadian history. Besides many contributions to the Historical Society of Montreal, of which he was the first president, and to the Royal Society, he published (1870-73) two volumes of memoirs concerning the invasion of Canada by the Americans. His chief publications are: "Notice sur la fondation de Montréal"; "Des commencements de l'église du Canada"; "Jacques-Cartier; Questions du calendrier civil et ecclésiastique; Questions de droit politique, de législation et d'usages maritimes". These works of patient research and erudition are written in a chaste, clear, and easy style. He elucidates some very obscure historical points regarding the true motives animating the founders of Ville- Marie. As an educator he was incomparable, ever striving to realize his lofty ideal of those who are called to train youth for life's duties. This he strove to obtain through love of God and country, by a firm and just discipline, whereby order was observed, study seriously pursued, application duly controlled, and Christian politeness inculcated.

MORGAN, Bibliotheca canadensis (Toronto, 1898); CASGRAIN, Annuaire de l'Universite Laval (Quebec, 1902); DESROSIERS, Les Ecoles Normales de la Prov. De Quebec (Montreal, 1909).

LIONEL LINDSAY

Count Pietro Verri

Economist, b. at Milan, Dec., 1728; d. there, 29 June, 1797. After studying at Monza, Rome, and Parma, he entered the Austrian army. Returning home, he devoted himself to the study of administration and political economy. He became vice- president (1772), and then president (1780), of the Chamber of Counts; but retired to private life in 1786. With his brother Alessandro (1741-1816), the philosopher Beccaria, and other, Verri founded the "Società del Caffè", in which the chief problems of philosophy, economy, and literature were discussed. His chief works are: "Meditazioni sull' economia politica" (Leghorn, 1771), translated into French and German; "Discorsi sull' indole del piacere e del dolore, sulla felicità e sulla economia politica" (Milan, 1781); "Riflessioni sulle leggi vincolanti principalmente nel commercio dei grani" (Milan, 1796); "Memorie storiche sull' economia politica nelo stato di Milano" (published after the author's death in Custodi's collection); and some memoranda on coinage in the Milanese territory. He also wrote small dramatic works. His economic theories are midway between Physiocratism and the theories of Smith. He advocated the breaking up of large estates in favour of small holdings. His greatest merit is to have formulated and expounded the theory of demand and supply, in defence of which he carried on a controversy with Melchiorre Gioia. His works have been printed in Custodi's "Scrittori classici italiani di economia politica" (Milan, 1803-16) and, in part, in Ferrara's "Biblioteca del' Economista" (Turin, 1852).

BIANCHI, Elogio storico di P. Verri (Cremona, 1803); CUSTODI, Notizie sulla vita del P. Verri (Milan, 1843); BOUVY, Le comie P. Verri (Paris, 1889); PECCHIO, Hist. de l'economie politique en Italie, tr. GALLOIS (Paris, 1830); MCCULLOCH, Literature of Political Ecomony (London, 1845); Nouveau dict. d'economie politique, s.v. Verri.

U. BENIGNI

Andrea del Verrocchio

Born at Florence, 1435; d. at Venice, 1488. He was called Andrea di Michele di Francesco de' Cioni, but for his true name he substituted that of his master, the goldsmith Giuliano Verrocchio. Some authorities hold that the frequented the studies of Donatello and Baldovinetti, but in any case the impress of his early education with a goldsmith is strongly evident in his work. He always retained a very keen taste for delicate chasing, which taste is especially manifested in the equestrian statue of Colleoni, wherein the horse's head and the harness are chased like a piece of jewellery. He excelled in depicting the charms of children and womanly grace. Nevertheless he was not married, but lived in the household of a married sister, who had many children. Although favoured with the friendship of Lorenzo de' Medici, honoured with important commissions, and reputed the greatest artist of his time, he seems never to have known the favours of fortune. His art, which often shone with a radiantly smiling beauty, seems to have been the reflection of a happy and cheerful life. He was both painter and sculptor, but chiefly the latter.

His chief sculptural works were: the tomb of Piero and Giovanni de' Medici, in the Church of San Lorenzo, in marble and bronze, without religious emblem. His "David" in bronze was in the national museum (the Bargello), Florence. The "Child holding a dolphin", in bronze, made to adorn a fountain of the Villa Medici at Careggi, is in the courtyard of the Palazzo Vecchio at Florence. These three works were ordered from Verrocchio by Lorenzo the Magnificent. In the terra-cotta "Madonna" made for the hospital of Santa Maria Novella "supreme distinction of thought is united to the most scrupulous observation of nature" (A. Michel). The marble bust of the "Flower-girl" is in the Bargello. The silver bas-relief of the "Decollation of St. John the Baptist", which adorned the altar of the baptistery of San Giovanni, is preserved n the cathedral museum (Opera del Duomo), Florence. The marble monument erected in memory of Cardinal Fortteguera in the cathedral of Pistoia was designed by Verrocchio but executed by his pupils.

His two masterpieces, both in bronze, were the "Incredulity of St. Thomas" (1483) and the "Colleone" (1479-88). The first group, wherein the artist has touchingly represented Christ urging the doubting Apostle to put his hand in His pierced side, was ordered by the Council of Merchants and placed outside the Church of San Michele, in a beautiful niche made by Donatello. But Verrocchio erred in making so much of the draperies, for this exaggerated realism greatly distracts the attention from a subject so pathetic in itself. The second work was the splendid equestrian statue which the Republic of Venice ordered to honour the memory of the celebrated condottiere, Bartolommeo Colleoni of Bergamo, who had commanded the Venetian troops. While casting it Verrocchio was seized with a chill, which ended fatally. The statute was completed by the Venetian Alessandro Leopardi, who had the audacity to sign a work of which he had only finished the casting and perfected the details. The statute was not erected until 1495; it is still to be seen on the Piazza dei Santi Giovanni e Paolo. Assuredly, "we have a right to say that this equestrian statute is the finest in the world" (J. Burckhardt).

Only two paintings can with certainty be assigned to Verrocchio, the "Baptism of Christ", which was made for the Convent of San Salvi at the gates of Florence, and which is now at the Academy of Fine Arts n the same city; and the "Madonna" of the Duomo of Pistoia, long ascribed to Lorenzo di Credi, on the word of Vasari, but which a document published by Signor Chiti assigns to Verrocchio. The "Baptism" (c. 1470) is an oil painting, at that time still a great novelty in Florence. Accordingly, it shows traces of grouping and experiment. Its different parts are of unequal value, which led Vasari to assert boldly that the angel respectfully guarding the garments of Christ is by Leonardo da Vinci. It is more perfect than the other figures in the picture. The "Baptism" marked an epoch in the history of Italian painting, because the accuracy of design and the refinement of the model were an innovation whereby Verrocchio broke with the school of the frescoists, less correct and broader in execution. But these technical studies, so evident especially in the angular figure of St. John Baptist, explain why Vasari called Verrocchio's manner "alquanto dura e crudetta". The perfection of the landscape which forms the background of the picture foreshadows modern art, because "for the first time the artist gives attentive observance to the study of values, the gradation of colours, especially to the unity of the figures with the environment" (M. Raymond). This "somewhat rough and crude" manner disappears in the "Madonna" of Pistoia. This delightful composition represents the Blessed Virgin between St. John the Baptist and St. Zeno, supporting the Infant Jesus Who lifts His little hand to bless.

Critics do not agree with regard to the other pictures ascribed to Verrocchio; nevertheless he may be unhesitatingly credited with the beautiful "Annunciation" at the Uffizi, and the graceful "Madonna with the Carnation", in the Old Pinacothek at Munich. The authorship of the Madonnas at the museums of Berlin and London is disputed. Verrocchio was perhaps the greatest artist of the second half of the fifteenth century. On the boundary of two ages, between the old Florentine school, about to disappear, and the School of the Renaissance in course of formation, he was not, like the masters of preceding periods, a Christian artist, because he rejected the purpose of placing art at the service of a moral and religious idea; he was not as yet an artist of the Renaissance neglecting the soul to study the body, for he did not attempt to imitate antiquity; instead of drawing his inspiration from the statutes which he has bequeathed to us, and of becoming exclusively enamoured of the plastic beauty of corporeal forms, he preferred to observe living nature, and like his predecessors continued to subordinate form to the expression of the feelings of the soul, but, more skilful than they, he succeeded in perfecting his methods of expression, because his drawing is more correct and his modelling more scientific.

Hence Verrocchio's powerful influence over painting; his studio was the centre of resistance to the invasion of antique influence; and his pupils Lorenzo di Credi, Perugino, and Leonardo da Vinci continued to spread the doctrine of the Florentine School. This doctrine may be summarized as follows: art should be spiritual, that is, it should make form serve the expression of thought and sentiment.

VASARI, Le Vita de piu eccellenti pittori, ed. MILANESI, III (Florence, 1878), 357-82; SEMPER, Andrea del Verrocchio (Leipzig, 1878); MUNTZ, Histoire de l'art pendant la Renaissance, II (Paris, 1891); CHITI, Andrea del Verrocchio in Pistoia in Bolletin storica pistoiese (1899); MACKOWSKY, Verrocchio (Leipzig, 1901); BURCKHARDT and BODE, Der Cicerone (Leipzig, 1904), Fr. tr. GERARD, II (Paris, 1896), 373-77, 557-58; CRUTTWELL, Verrocchio (London, 1904); REYMOND, Verrocchio (Paris, 1906); VENTURI, Storia dell' Arte italiana, VI (Milan, 1908), 706-34; VI, pt. I (1911), 776-86; MICHEL, Histoire de l'Art, IV, pt. I (Paris, 1909), 128-135.

GASTON SORTAIS

Versailles

(VERSALIENSIS).

Diocese; includes the Department of Seine-et-Oise, France. Created in 1790 by the Civil Constitution of the Clergy, this diocese was maintained by the Concordat of 1802; it included also the Department of Eure-et-Loir, detached from it in 1822 by the restoration of the Diocese of Chartres. It was made up of considerable parts of the ancient Dioceses of Paris, Chartres, Rouen, Sens, and some cantons belonging formerly to the Dioceses of Beauvais, Senlis, and Evreux. At the beginning of the seventeenth century Versailles was a mere village, whose seigneur was Antoinede Loménie. Louis XIII bought it in 1632, and had a small château built there. The present château was begun under Louis XIV by Mansart (1661), the gardens were designed by Lenôtre; the interior decorations were entrusted to Lebrun. Louis XIV lived there in 1672 and constantly from 1682. The residence was finished in 1684, and a town soon grew up. The French monarchs resided at Versailles for more than century; here was signed (3 Sept., 1783) the treaty between France and England, acknowledging the independence of the United States; here took place (1 May, 1789) the opening of the States-General, and it was here too, in the hall of the Jeu de Paume, that the delegates of the Third Estate, and some members of the other two estates (nobility and clergy), constituted themselves a national assembly. It was from Versailles that the parisian populace took Louis XVI and his family (6 Oct., 1789), and brought them back to Paris. The Grand Trianon was built under Louis XIV by Mansart; the Petit Trianon was given by Louis XVI to Marie Antoinette. The chapel of the château was built 1699- 1710; the Theophilantropists worshipped there during 1794-95. "This chapel", Pératé says, "is, in the whole and its details, one of the most perfect monuments that Louis XIV ever built."

Saint-Cyr, near Versailles, is famous for the educational institute that Madame de Maintenon founded there for young girls. The city of St-Cloud, whose château dates from Louis XIV, owes its origin to the Monastery of Novigentum, founded by St. Clodald or Cloud, son of King Clodomir (d. About 560). At St-Cloud, Jacques Clément attempted the life of Henry III. There also Bonaparte executed against the "Assembly of the Five Hundred" the coup d'état of 18 Brumaire. Nearby is Meudon, once the parish of Rabelais. The town of St-Germain-en-Laye, whose present château dates from Louis XIV, owes its origin to a convent founded during the eleventh century by King Robert; Louis XIII died there. Louis XIV was born there, and James II of England died there. The Benedictine Abbey of Morigny, near Etampes, was founded about 1102 by a nobleman called Ansaeu. He established in it monks from St-Gerner de Flaix, a monastery in the Diocese of Beauvais. At the beginning of the eleventh century the abbey and revenues of St-Martin d'Etampes, said to have been founded by Clovis, were given to the monks of Morigny by Philip I. On 3 Oct., 1120, Calixtus II consecrated the church of Morigny. In Jan., 1131, Innocent II consecrated an altar to St. Lawrence there; Abelard and St. Bernard were present at this ceremony. The Abbey of Morigny was united in 1629 to the Congregation of St-Maur, and has ceased to exist since the French Revolution. In 1092, 1099, 1130 councils took place at Etampes (in the latter of which, on the advice of St. Bernard, the bishops sided with Innocent II, against the antipope Anacletus); also in 1147. At Poissy, St. Louis was baptized. The Dominican priory, founded at Poissy in 1304, was celebrated.

The "Colloquy of Poissy" took place (1561) between Catholic theologians under the Cardinal of Lorraine, and Montluc, Bishop of Valence, and Calvinist theologians under Theodore Beza. It opened on 9 Sept., in the refectory of the abbey, before Charles IX and Catharine de'Medici. A second sitting took place 16 Sept., and was followed by two conferences between the theologians on both sides. The colloquy had no result. The town of Isle-Adam, in the Diocese of Versailles, belonged, since the twelfth century, to the family of the Villiers de l'Isle-Adam, whose most famous member was Philipe de l'Isle-Adam (1464-1534), Grand Master of the Order of Jerusalem, who in 1522 held Rhodes for six months against 200,000 Turks. The monastery of Port-Royal was situated in the commune of St-Lambert, at the hamlet of Vaumurier. Among the natives of the present territory of the Diocese of Versailles may be mentioned: Duplessis-Mornay (1549-1623), surnamed the "pope of the Huguenots", author of a treatise on "The Institution of the Eucharist", and who was defeated by the Catholic theologians at the Conference of Fontainebleau (1600); Pierre du Moulin (1568-1658), a Calvinist theologian, who composed for James I of England several apologetic writings, and taught theology at Sedan; Abbé de l'Epée (1712-89), inventor of a method for teaching the deaf and dumb; Abbé Guénée (1717-1803), born at Etampes, author (1769) of the well-known "Lettres de plusieurs Juifs Portugais etc., à M. De Voltaire"; Marquise de La Rochejacquelein (1772-1857), author of memoirs concerning the War of La Vendée.

The chief pilgrimages of the diocese are: Notre-Dame de Bonne Garde, at Longpoint (ninth century); St. Bernard, Philip the Fair, and St. Jeanne de Valois visited this sanctuary; Notre-Dame de Pontoise (1226) to which St. Louis, Charles V, and Louis XIV were very generous; Notre-Dame des Anges, at Clichy l'Aunois (1212); the pilgrimage of the Holy Tunic of Christ that Charlemagne, who had received it from the Empress Irene gave (August, 800) to his daughter Theodrade, Abbess of Argenteuil, and that was transferred (1804) from the priory, destroyed during the Revolution, to the parish church of Argenteuil. There were in the Diocese of Versailles before the Law of Associations (1901): Assumptionists; Capuchins; Cistercians of the Immaculate Conception; Jesuits; Missionaries of Notre-Dame of Africa; Resurrectionists; Salesians of Don Bosco; and several orders of teaching brothers. Several orders of women arose in this diocese: the Hospitaller Augustines of Etampes, founded in 1515; the Maid-Servants of the Sacred Heart of Jesus (hospitals and teaching), founded in 1866 with mother house at Versailles; the Sisters of the Holy Childhood, with mother house at Versailles. Religious congregations conducted in the diocese at the end of the nineteenth century: 7 infant asylums; 121 infant schools; 5 special homes for sick children; 2 mixed orphan asylums; 12 orphan asylums for boys; 54 orphan asylums for girls; 3 apprenticeship houses; 3 refuges and asylums for imperilled girls; a work-house for beggars; 29 houses of nuns for taking care of sick persons at home; 44 hospitals; 1 hospital for incurables. The Diocese of Versailles had (1905) 707,325 inhabitants, 64 first class parishes, 520 second class parishes, 38 curacies, recognized by the Concordat.

BAUNARD, L'Episcopal Francais depuis le Concordat jusqu'a la Separation (Paris, 1907); PERATE, Versailles (Paris, 1904); DE NOLHAC, Histoire du château de Versailles (Paris, 1900); BRADBY, The Great Days of Versailles: Studies from Court life in the later years of Louis XIV (London, 1906); FARMER, Versailles and the Court under Louis XIV (London, 1906); GRIMOT, Histoire de la Ville de l'Isle- Adam, et notice biographique de ses seigneurs (Pontoise, 1885); MONT-ROND, Essais historiques sur la ville d'Etampes (2 vols., Etampes, 1836-37).

GEORGES GOYAU

Versions of the Bible

Synopsis

• GREEK: Septuagint; Aquila; Theodotion; Symmachus; other versions.
• VERSIONS FROM THE SEPTUAGINT: Vetus Itala or Old Latin; Egyptian or Coptic (Bohairic, Sahidic, Akhmimic, and Fayûmic, i.e. Middle Egyptian or Bashmuric); Ethiopic and Amharic (Falasha, Galla); Gothic; Georgian or Grusian; Syriac; Slavic (Old Slavonic, Russian, Ruthenian, Polish, Czech or Bohemian, Slovak, Serbian or Illyrian, Croation, Bosnian, Dalmatian); Arabic; Armenian.
• VERSIONS FROM THE HEBREW: Chaldaic; Syriac (Peschitto); Arabic (Carshuni); Persian; Samaritan Pentateuch; Vulgate; other Latin versions.
• HEBREW VERSIONS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
• VERSIONS FROM MIXED SOURCES: Italian; Spanish; Basque; Portuguese; French; German; Dutch and Flemish; Scandinavian (Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, Icelandic); Finnish (Estonian, Laplandish); Hungarian; Celtic (Irish, Scottish, Breton or Armoric, Welsh or Cymric).
• MISCELLANEOUS: Aleutian; Aniwa; Aneitumese; Battak; Benga; Bengali; Chinese; Gipsy or Romany; Hindu; Hindustani; Japanese; Javanese; Mexican; Modern Greek.
• ENGLISH VERSIONS

GREEK

(1) The Septuagint

The Septuagint, or Alexandrine, Version, the first and foremost translation of the Hebrew Bible, was made in the third and second centuries B.C. An account of its origin, recensions, and its historical importance has been given above (see SEPTUAGINT VERSION). It is still the official text of the Greek Church. Among the Latins its authority was explicitly recognized by the Fathers of the Council of Trent, in compliance with whose wishes Sixtus V, in 1587, published an edition of the Vatican Codex. This, with three others, the Complutensian, Aldine, and Grabian, are the leading representative editions available.

(2) Version of Aquila

In the second century, to meet the demands of both Jews and Christians, three other Greek versions of the Old Testament were produced, though they never took the place of the Septuagint. Only fragmentary remains of them are preserved, chiefly from Origen's "Hexapla" (q.v.). The first and the most original is that of Aquila, a native of Sinope in Pontus, a proselyte to Judaism, and according to St. Jerome, a pupil of Rabbi Akiba who taught in the Palestinian schools, 95-135. Aquila, taking the Hebrew as he found it, proves in his rendering to be "a slave to the letter". When his version appeared, about 130, its rabbinical character won approval from the Jews but distrust from the Christians. It was the favoured among the Greek-speaking Jews of the fourth and fifth centuries, and in the sixth was sanctioned by Justinian for public reading in the synagogues. Then it rapidly fell into disuse and disappeared. Origen and St. Jerome found it of value in the study of the original text and of the methods of Jewish interpretation in the early Christian years.

(3) Version of Theodotion

Another Greek version practically contemporaneous with Aquila's was made by Theodotion, probably an Ephesian Jew or Ebionite. It held a middle place among the ancient Greek translations, preserving the character of a free revision of the Septuagint, the omissions and erroneous renderings of which it corrected. It also showed parts not appearing in the original, as the deuterocanonical fragments of Daniel, the postscript of Job, the Book of Baruch, but not the Book of Esther. It was not approved by the Jews but was favourably received by the Christians. Origin gave it a place in his "Hexapla" and from it supplied parts missing in the Septuagint. St. Irenæus used its text of Daniel, which was afterwards adopted in the Church.

(4) Version of Symmachus

This appeared at the close of the second century. Its author was an Ebionite of Jewish or Samaritan origin. Giving the sense rather than the letter of the Hebrew, he turned its idioms into good Greek, used paraphrases, and translated independently of the earlier versions. His work, though finished and intelligible to readers ignorant of Hebrew, sometimes failed to give the real meaning of the original. It was but little used by the Jews. St. Jerome admired its literary qualities and was often guided by it in preparing the Vulgate.

(5) Other Greek Versions

In limited portions of the Hexapla, Origen made use of other partial Greek versions which he designated as the Quinta, Sexta and Septima, from the numerical position of the columns assigned them in his work, but their authors are unknown and very little can be said of the merits of the versions.

VERSIONS FROM THE SEPTUAGINT

(1) The "Vetus Itala" or Old Latin

The origin of the oldest Latin version or versions is involved in much uncertainty. Some contend that there was but one primitive version, others show with strong arguments that there were several. It is generally admitted that long before the end of the second century, Latin translations, though rude and defective, of Tobias, I and II Machabees, and Baruch were in use and that towards the close of the same period, there existed at least one version of the whole Bible, based on the Septuagint and on Greek manuscripts of the New Testament. This was the Vetus Itala, or Old Latin. Its New Testament is possessed complete in some thirty-eight manuscripts, but its Old-Testament text has survived only in parts. As it contained both the protocanonical and the deuterocanonical books and parts of books of the Old Testament, it figured importantly in the history of the Biblical Canon. It exercised a vast influence on the Vulgate and through it on modern translations and the Church language. In the latter part of the fourth century, the text of the Itala was found to have variant readings in different parts of the Church. Pope Damasus therefore requested St. Jerome to undertake its revision. Guided by old Greek manuscripts, he corrected its mistakes and emended such translations as affected the true sense of the Gospels, and probably followed the same method in revising all the books of the New Testament, which he put forth at Rome about 383. In that year, working from the commonly received text of the Septuagint, he made a cursory revision of the Psalter, which was used in the Roman Church until the time of St. Pius V, and is still retained at St. Peter's, Rome, in the Ambrosian Rite at Milan, and in the Invitatory psalm of Matins in the modern Breviary. About 388, using the Hexaplar text as a basis, he revised the Psalter more carefully and this recension, called the Gallican Psalter from becoming current in Gaul, is now read in the Breviary and in the Vulgate. From the same sources he later corrected all the Old-Testament books that he judged canonical, but even in his own day all this revision, excepting the book of Job was lost. The unrevised text of the greater part of the Old Latin Version continued in use in the Western Church until it was supplanted by the Vulgate.

(2) Egyptian, or Coptic, Versions

The first Christians of Lower Egypt commonly used Greek, but the natives generally spoke Coptic (see EGYPT, VI, COPTIC LITERATURE), which is now recognized in four dialects, viz.: Bohairic, Sahidic, Akhmimic and Fayûmic (Middle Egyptian). As Christian communities formed and flourished, the Bible was translated into these dialects and it is generally admitted that some versions, if not all, date back to the second century. That they were independent translations from the Greek seems certain, and Biblical criticism has therefore profited by the light they have thrown on the Septuagint and the New-Testament manuscripts. Of these versions the most important are in Bohairic or Memphite, the language used at Memphis and Alexandria, and the Sahidic, the language of the upper Thebais. The former is entirely extant and since the eleventh or twelfth century has been the standard text of the Church in Egypt. The latter exists in large fragments, but little has so far been found of the others.

Fayûmic (Middle Egyptian) or as it has been termed Bashmuric (Bushmuric), one of the Coptic dialects according to the division of Athanasius, Bishop of Cos (eleventh cent.), is the name now applied to some fragmentary versions published as the "Codices Basmyrici" by Zoega ("Catalogus", Rome, 1810).

(3) Ethiopic and Amharic Versions

Early in the fourth century, St. Frumentius preached the Gospel in Abyssinia and there laid the foundation of the Ethiopic Church. Its version of the Scriptures probably dates from the close of the following century. It undoubtedly originated from the Septuagint and Greek manuscripts, but present texts do not certainly represent the original version and may possibly be a later translation from the Arabic or Coptic.

Falasha Version

This is an Old Testament in Geez, the sacred speech of Abyssinia, among the Falasha in North Abyssinia, who follow the Jewish religion and claim to be descended from the Jewish exiles of the time of Solomon.

Amharic Versions

As a language, the Amharic supplanted the Geez about 1300 and is still in use. Catholic missionaries have made it the medium of their translations of portions of the Scriptures, but the first Amharic Bible was completed in 1810-20 by Asselin de Cherville, French consul at Cairo. A Bible Society reprint appeared in 1842, and a new edition was prepared in 1875 by Krapf, aided by several Abyssinian scholars.

Galla Version

A Gospel of St. Matthew in the language of the South Abyssinian Galla was published by Krapf (Ankobar, 1842). A Galla New Testament in Amharic characters was edited by a Bible Society in 1876; Genesis and Psalms, 1873; Exodus, 1877.

(4) Gothic Version

The Goths embraced the faith in the third century but in the fourth they fell into Arianism. Their Bishop Ulfilas (318-388), after devising an alphabet, produced a version of the Scriptures from the Septuagint Old Testament and from the Greek of the New. Extant fragments, the oldest of which are of the fifth and sixth century, bear traces of the Septuagint recension of Lucian and of the Syriac versions of the New Testament.

(5) Armenian Version

History

In 406 the Armenian alphabet was invented by Mesrob, who five years later completed a translation of the Old and New Testament from the Syriac version into Armenian. This translation was recognized as imperfect, and a few years later Joseph of Baghim and Eznak, disciples of Mesrob, were sent to Edessa to make a new version from the Syriac. When they returned bringing some copies of the Greek version it was seen that their work would be greatly benefited by the use of this "authentic" copy. Consequently some of the translators, including Moses Chorenensis, were sent to study Greek at Alexandria, where the final revision was made, the Old Testament being translated from the Septuagint according to the "Hexapla" of Origen. This version was without delay officially adopted by the authorities in the Armenian Church. Comparatively little use has been made of the Armenian version by scholars engaged in critical work on the Bible, as few of them in the past knew Armenian, and the version moreover was believed to have been modified according to the Peschitto, and even revised under King Haitho II (1224-70), according to the Vulgate. The insertion in particular of the text concerning the three heavenly witnesses (I John, v, 7) was attributed to him, since it was found in Uscan's first printed edition of the Armenian Bible (Amsterdam, 1666). Modern investigation reveals no solid ground for believing in these revisions. As regards I John, v, 7, it is not necessary to assume its insertion by anyone before Uscan, whose edition is lacking in critical value and embodies many emendations and additions taken from the Vulgate. The Armenian version follows quite closely the "received" Greek text. The variations in the manuscripts are probably due to divergencies in the Greek sources. The version is a witness to the general reading of certain Greek copies of the fifth century.

Principle Editions

The first part of the Armenian version to be printed was the Psalter, published at Venice in 1565 by Abgar. In 1666 Uscan (probably Bishop of Uschovank in Erivan) published at Amsterdam a complete Bible in 4to, and in 1668 a New Testament in 8vo. The former work leaves much to be desired from the standpoint of critical accuracy. Apart from the insertion of the verse I John, v, 7, Ecclesiasticus and IV Esdras were simply translations from the Vulgate made by Uscan himself and the Apocalypse was scarcely less so. The work begun by Uscan was continued and perfected by the Mechitarists (q.v.) and Zohrab published a New Testament (1789), and a critical edition of the whole Bible (1805). Another was issued in 1859. In both these editions the verse I John, v, 7, was omitted as it was not to be found in any of the older manuscripts. The Protestant Bible societies have brought out several editions of the Armenian version both in the classical and in the modern language. Among the former are: Complete Bible (St. Petersburg, 1814; Calcutta, 1817); Old and New Testament separately (St. Petersburg, 1817). Editions in the modern dialect are, among others: Complete Bible (Moscow, 1835); Psalter (Basle, 1844); New Testament (Constantinople, 1860).

(6) Georgian, or Grusian, Versions

Apparently kindred to the Armenian and probably derived from in the sixth century is the Gregorian version, showing the influence of the Septuagint and the Greek New Testament. It was revised after the Slav translation by Prince Wakuset (Moscow, 1743), and has appeared later with many changes (e.g., Moscow, 1816; St. Petersburg, 1818).

(7) Syriac Versions

In the earliest years of Christianity, a Syriac version of the Old Testament made directly from the Hebrew text was employed in the Syrian Church, but in the seventh century, Paul, Bishop of Tella, gave the Monophysites a translation (617) from the Septuagint. It followed literally Origen's Hexaplar text and was later revised by James of Edessa (died 907). In the sixth century there had appeared a version of the Psalter and New Testament from the Greek at the request of Philoxenus, by whose name it has been known. A century later it appeared at Alexandria in a recension of great critical value.

(8) Slavic Version

Saints Cyril and Methodius preached the Gospel to the Slavs in the second half of the ninth century, and St. Cyril, having formed an alphabet, made for them, in Old Ecclesiastical Slavic, or Bulgarian, a translation of the Bible from the Greek. Toward the close of the tenth century this version found its way into Russia with Christianity, and after the twelfth century it underwent many linguistic and textual changes. A complete Slav Bible after an ancient codex of the time of Waldimir (d. 1008) was published at Ostrog in 1581. When Empress Elizabeth ordered a new revision of St. Cyril's translation (1751), the translators used the Ostrog edition, correcting it according to the Septuagint and changing the Old Slavonic in great part to Modern Russian. This has remained the norm for later Russian Bibles.

The United Ruthenians have a version approved by their bishops and printed at Poczajow (1798) and Przemysl (1862).

The first complete Polish Bible was printed at Cracow in 1561, 1574, and 1577. As it was proved unsatisfactory for Catholics, Jacob Wujek, S.J., undertook a new translation from the Vulgate (Cracow, 1593), which was praised by Clement VIII, and reprinted frequently. Other Polish Bibles are a Socinian version (Cracow, 1563), and a Unitarian from the Hebrew by von Budey (Czaslaw, 1572).

In the Czech, or Bohemian, tongue, thirty-three manuscript versions of the entire Bible and twenty-eight of the New Testament are known to have existed in the fifteenth century. A New Testament was printed at Pilsen in 1475 and 1480. A complete Bible by John Pytlik and others appeared at Prague in 1488. In the sixteenth century there were six versions of the whole Bible and sixteen of the New Testament. In the seventeenth century the Jesuits edited the so-called St. Wenceslaus Bible at Prague (1677, 1715, and later). A new translation was made by Durych and Prochaska (Prague, 1778, 1786, 1807). Protestant versions appeared at Pressburg (1787, 1808), Berlin (1807, 1813), and Kisek (1842).

A Slovak version of the Bible for Catholics was made by Bernolak (Gran, 1829).

A Serbian, or Illyrian, version of the Bible was made by Kassich (1632). There are also two manuscript versions, by Stephen Rosy (1750) and Burgadelli (1800).

A Croatian version of the Bible was made by Stephen Istranin and Anton Dalmatin in the sixteenth century.

The Vulgate was translated into Bosnian by Peter Katanic. O.S.F. (Budapest, 1831).

A Dalmatian version with commentary by John Skaric appeared at Vienna (1857-61); a Bible Society edition, the Old Testament by George Danicic and the New Testament by Vuk Karadzic, was also published there (1868).

(9) Arabic Versions

There exist six or seven Arabic translations of portions of the Old Testament according to the Septuagint, some of them belonging to the tenth century.

VERSIONS DIRECTLY FROM THE HEBREW

(1) Chaldaic Versions or Targums

After the Babylonian Captivity, the Jews developed a large use of the Chaldaic, or Aramaic, tongue. To meet their needs the Sacred Books were translated into this dialect, and used in the public services of the synagogues not later than the second century B.C. At first the translations were oral, being largely paraphrastic interpretations with comments. In time rules of exegesis were determined, the translations were fixed in writing, and were thus widely circulated even before the time of Christ. Of these Chaldaic versions, called Targums (Paraphrases), there is none extant containing the entire Hebrew Bible.

• The earliest is on the Pentateuch and is known as the Targum of Onkelos, whom tradition has identified with Aquila and whose Greek translation has something of the same literal character. This Targum, however, was produced by some other, probably in Babylon in the third century.
• A Targum on the Prophets, in its present form of the fourth century, is attributed to Jonathan ben Uzziel, to whom the Talmud alludes as a disciple of Hillel. In style it resembles the Targum of Onkelos, but its paraphrase is freer.
• A Targum on the Pentateuch, said to be of Jeruskalmi, or of Pseudo-Jonathan, is also a freer rendition and belongs to the sixth or seventh century.
• There are also Targums on the Hagiographa, Psalms, Job, Proverbs, etc. (See TARGUM.)

(2) Syriac Versions

The Peschitto

As early as the second century, portions of the Hebrew Bible, as the Pentateuch, the Prophets, and the Psalms, had been translated into Syriac and were in use in the Syrian Church. Gradually the remaining books were given out with versions from the Greek of all the deuterocanonical books except Ecclesiasticus, which was rendered from the Hebrew. The fourth century found the Syrian Christians possessed of a complete translation of the Old Testament, which is known since the ninth century as the Peschitto or "Simple". This name denotes its literal fidelity, or, as others think, a meaning like Vulgate, or Communis, or again indicates its distinction from the version of Paul of Tella, its source, which contains the critical additions of the Hexaplar text. It is the first version of the Hebrew Scriptures made for and by Christians. In antiquity and importance, it ranks next to the Septuagint, according to which it was revised later. A recent edition of the Peschitto was issued from the Dominican printing-press at Mossul (1887-91).

• Of Syriac versions of the New Testament, one of the earliest is the Diatessaron of Tatian (q.v.).
• The Peschitto New Testament, like the Old, is still used in the Syrian Church; it was in circulation in the fourth century and existed, in part at least, in the third.
• In 1842 a portion of what is believed to be an independent Syriac version was found in Egypt. Since its publication in 1858 by Dr. Cureton, it is known as the Curetonian text.
• The Sinaitic text of a Syrian version consists of fragments found at Mt. Sinai in 1892, and seems an independent version of great antiquity.

(3) Arabic Versions

An Arabic version of the Hebrew Bible was made in the tenth century by Saadia ha Gaon. Only its Pentateuch, Minor Prophets, Isaias, Psalms, and Job have been preserved. In 1671 an Arabic Bible was published at Rome under the direction of Sergius Risi, Archbishop of Damascus. It appeared in numerous later editions. A mutilated reprint of it (London, 1822) was circulated by the Bible Society. To offset this Protestant influence, complete Arabic versions were issued both by the Dominicans at Mossul (1875-8) and the Jesuits at Beirut (1876-8).

Carshuni (Karshuni) Version

This is an Arabic version made in Syriac characters for Syrian Christians chiefly of Mesopotamia, Aleppo, and adjacent parts. A New Testament in Carshuni characters containing in two columns the Syriac Peschitto and the Arabic of the Codex of Erpenius was published at Rome (1703) for the Maronites of Lebanon. A Bible Society edition appeared at Paris (1827).

(4) Persian Version

In the first half of the sixteenth century Rabbi Jacob Tawus translated literally the Massoretic text of the Pentateuch.

(5) Samaritan Version of the Pentateuch

From at least the fourth century B.C. the Samaritans used a copy of Hebrew Law. It was written in archaic Hebrew characters and differed in some respects from the original. Many of its readings have found favour with not a few Biblical scholars. It was translated with a literal fidelity into Samaritan in the second century B.C. This version was printed in the Polyglots of 1645 and 1647.

(6) The Vulgate

While revising the text of the Old Latin Version, St. Jerome became convinced of the need in the Western Church of a new translation directly from the Hebrew. His Latin scholarship, his acquaintance with Biblical places and customs obtained by residence in Palestine, and his remarkable knowledge of Hebrew and of Jewish exegetical traditions, especially fitted him for a work of this kind. He set himself to the task A.D. 390 and in A.D. 405 completed the protocanonical books of the Old Testament from the Hebrew, and the deuterocanonical Books of Tobias and Judith from the Aramaic. To these were added his revision of the Old Latin, or Gallican, Psalter, the New Testament, revised from the Old Latin with the aid of the original Greek, and the remaining deuterocanonical books, and portions of Esther, and Daniel, just as they existed in the Itala. Thus was formed that version of the Bible which has had no less influence in the Western Church than the Septuagint has had in the Eastern, which has enriched the thought and language of Europe and has been the source of nearly all modern translations of the Scriptures. The Hebrew text used by St. Jerome was comparatively late, being practically that of the Massoretes. For this reason his version, for textual criticism, has less value than the Peschitto and the Septuagint. As a translation it holds a place between these two. It is elegant in style, clear in expression, and on the whole, notwithstanding some freedoms in the way of restricted or amplified readings, it is faithful to the sense of the original. At first it met with little favour. It was looked upon by some as a perversion suggested and encouraged by the Jews. Others held it to be inferior to the Septuagint, and those who recognized its merits feared it would cause dissensions. But it gradually supplanted the Old Latin Version. Adopted by several writers in the fifth century, it came into more general use in the sixth. At least the Spanish churches employed it in the seventh century, and in the ninth it was found in practically the whole Roman Church. Its title "Vulgate", indicating its common use, and belonging to the Old Latin until the seventh century, was firmly established in the thirteenth. In the sixteenth the Council of Trent declared it the authentic version of the Church.

From an early day the text of the Vulgate began to suffer corruptions, mostly through the copyists who introduced familiar readings of the Old Latin or inserted the marginal glosses of the manuscripts which they were transcribing. In the eighth century Alcuin undertook and completed (A.D. 801) a revision with the aid of the best manuscripts then current. Another was made about the same time by Theodulph, Bishop of Orléans. The best known of other and subsequent recensions are those of Lanfranc (d. 1089), of St. Stephen, Abbot of Cîteaux (d. 1134), and of Cardinal Nicolas (d. 1150). Then the universities and religious orders began to publish their "Correctoria biblica", or critical commentaries an the various readings found in the manuscripts and writings of the Fathers. After the first printing of the Vulgate by Gutenberg in 1456, other editions came out rapidly. Their circulation with other Latin versions led to increasing uncertainties as to a standard text and caused the Fathers of the Council of Trent to declare that the Vulgate alone was to be held as "authentic in public readings, discourses, and disputes, and that nobody might dare or presume to reject it on any pretence" (Sess. IV, decr. de editione et usu sacrorum librorum). By this declaration the Council, without depreciating the Hebrew or the Septuagint or any other version then in circulation and without forbidding the original texts, approved the Vulgate and enjoined its public and official use as a text free from error in doctrine and morals. It was left to the Holy See itself to provide for a corrected revision of the Vulgate, but the work went on but slowly. Contributing towards the desired end, John Henten, O.P., published at Louvain, 1547, as amended text with variants, which was favourably received. The same was republished at Antwerp, 1583, with a larger number of variants, by the Louvain theologians under the direction of Lucas of Bruges. In 1590 a Roman edition was prepared by a commission of scholars. After revising it, Sixtus V ordered it to be taken as the standard text. After his death a further revision was carried out under the direction of Franciscus Toletus, S.J., and finally the work was printed in 1598, with its title unchanged: "Biblia Sacra Vulgatæ editionis, Sixti V Pontificis Maximi jussu recognita et edita". This was under the pontificate of Clement VIII, and his name has appeared in the title since 1641. This revision is now the officially recognized version of the Latin Rite and contains the only authorized text of the Vulgate. That it has numerous defects has never been denied, yet it ranks high in the evidence it affords of the competent scholarship that produced it. To bring it into closer touch with the latter developments of textual criticism is the purpose that induced Pius X to entrust to the Benedictines the work of further revision. The importance of this enterprise consists in this that it will reproduce, as correctly as possible, the original translation of St. Jerome, and will thereby furnish biblicists with a reliable clue to an ancient Hebrew text, differing in many details from the Septuagint, or the Massoretic Text (BELLARMINE; VULGATE, REVISION OF).

Other Latin Versions

After St. Jerome the first to translate the Old Testament from the Hebrew into Latin appears to have been Cardinal Carton (d. 1307), Bishop of London, whose work has been lost. Of numerous versions, many of which have perished or are preserved only in manuscripts, noteworthy are the Psalms from the Hebrew by Felix Pratensis, O.S.A. (Venice, 1515). Another Psalter with a version of Job was made by Aug. Justinian, O.P. (Paris, 1516). Kantes Pagninus, O.P. (d. 1514), made an interlinear version of both the Old and New Testaments from the original languages, which by its literal fidelity pleased Christians and Jews and was much used by the Reformers. A revision of this translation resulting in a text even more literal was made by Arias Montano. His work appeared in the Antwerp Polyglot (1572). Another literal version was undertaken by Thomas Malvenda, O.P. (d. 1628), as the basis of an extensive commentary but death ended his labours at the fifteenth chapter of Ezechiel. His work was published at Lyons (1650). In 1763 the Oratorian F. Houbigant edited his "Biblia Veteris Testamenti", rendered from the Hebrew. In the "Biblia Maxima" (Paris, 1660), J. de la Haye, O.Min., collected a great number of variant readings of older Latin versions. A revision of the Vulgate (Venice, 1542, 1557) by Isadore Clarius gave offence on account of many arbitrary changes in the text and was put on the Index.

Among the Reformers, Latin Scriptural labours were largely confined to commentaries and the translation of single books, e. g. Melanchthon, Proverbs (1524); Luther, Deuteronomy (1525); Brentius, Job (1527); Drach, Psalms (1540), Daniel (1544), and Joel (1565). A complete Hebrew-Latin Old Testament was given out by Sebastian Münster (Basle, 1534-46). Another Latin version of the Old Testament (Zurich, 1543, and Paris, 1545), bearing the name of Leo Juda, was partly the work of Bibliander, who translated Ezechiel, Daniel, Job, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, and the last forty-eight psalms. Its Apocrypha were translated from the Greek by P. Cholin. A version whose author, Castalion, affected a style of classic elegance, was printed at Basle in 1551. Other versions were put forth by Tremellius and Junius or du Jon (Frankfurt, 1575-9), and by Luc and Andrew Osiander, who sought to correct the Vulgate after the Hebrew.

HEBREW VERSIONS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

In 1537 Sebastian Münster published an old translation of the Gospel of St. Matthew, in a rabbinical Hebrew by Schemtob Isaac. Improved editions were made by Tillet (1555), and by Herbst (Göttingen, 1879). The four Gospels were done into classic Hebrew by a converted Jew, Giona, at Rome (1668). The first complete New Testament in Hebrew was made by Elias Hutter and was published in the Nuremberg Polyglot (1600), revised by Robertson (London, 1666). A corrected New Testament in Hebrew was given out by Caddock (London, 1798). A number of Bible Society versions have appeared since 1818, and in 1866 Reichhardt and Biesenthal edited a text with accents and vowels. This was revised by Delitzsch in 1877.

MIXED SOURCES

Italian Versions

Evidences of early versions of at least portions of the Scriptures for liturgical purposes, public readings, and private devotion are not wanting in the history of the Church among any of the peoples to whom her missionaries carried the Gospel. Leaving them and even many later recensions unnoticed, this article will touch on only the more important versions which have had some part and influence in national religious life. In Italy popular knowledge of the Bible in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries was spread chiefly by the Franciscan and Dominican Friars. A complete version in the vernacular, a manuscript preserved in the National Library at Paris, was made by Nicholas de Nardo, O.P., in 1472. The first printed Bible (Venice, 1471) was due to Nicholas Malermi, O. Camald. A revision of this, with notes, rubrics, and résumés largely after the Biblical commentaries of Nicholas of Lyra, was made by Marine de Veneto, O.P. (Venice, 1477). Santes Marmochini, O.P. (d. 1545), corrected the heretical version of Bruccioli according to the Vulgate (Venice, 1538, 1547, etc.). Two noteworthy translations of the New Testament were made by Zaccaria Florentini, O.P. (Venice, 1542), and Domenico Gigli (Venice, 1551). The most widely used complete version was produced by Antonio Martini, Archbishop of Florence (Turin, 1776-81). It was approved by Pius VI and has been widely circulated.

The first complete Protestant Bible in Italian was printed at Geneva (1562). It was made up of the slightly revised heretical text of Bruccioli's Old Testament (1532), which was a perversion of the Latin of Kantes Pagninus, and not, as pretended, a translation from original sources, and of the apostate Massimo Teofilo's New Testament, first published at Lyons (1551), and revised by Gallars and Beza. This was adopted by the Bible societies. Martini's translation was also taken and shaped to Protestant purposes by the British and Foreign Bible Society (New Testament, 1813, and Bible, 1821).

Spanish Versions

Several manuscripts of early Spanish versions, e.g. the Biblia Alfonsina, and some made from the Hebrew, are preserved at the Escurial, Madrid. A later work (sixteenth century) is called the Bible of Quiroga, a convert from Judaism, who rose to be cardinal inquisitor. The first printed Bible (Valencia, 1478), following an Old-Testament version from the French and Latin by Romeu de Sabruguera, O.P., was in the Catalonian dialect and was the work of the General of the Carthusians, Boniface Ferrer (d. 1417), a brother of St. Vincent Ferrer, O.P. His manuscript was revised and extensively corrected by Jaime Borrell, O.P. A later translation, of classic elegance and with copious notes, by Philip Scio de S. Miguel, was published at Madrid (1794). Another with a paraphrastic commentary in the text was given out at Madrid (1823) by Amat, but the work is said to have been taken from a manuscript of Father Petisco, S.J. A New Testament by Francisco do Enzinas (Antwerp, 1543) was later much used by the British and Foreign Bible Society. It also adopted a complete version from the Vulgate by the apostate Cassiodore Reyna (Basle, 1596), and a revision of this by the apostate Cypriano de Valera (Amsterdam, 1602). A Lutheran version, the so-called Biblia del Oso, was published by Juan de Valdes (Basle, 1567-69). The Bible of Ferrara, or the Bible of the Jews, was a Spanish version from the Hebrew by Abraham Usque, a Portuguese Jew. Under a pseudonym he issued an edition of the same for Christians. It gained considerable authority and was many times reprinted. A revision by Jos. Athias appeared at Amsterdam in 1661.

Portuguese Versions

A Portuguese Bible for Catholics was issued by Ant. Pereira de Figueiredo at Lisbon (1784). A New Testament (Amsterdam, 1712), and the Pentateuch and historical books (1719) by J. Ferreira a Almeida, a "convert from Rome", supplied the Bible societies with a version for Portuguese Protestants.

Basque Versions

A New Testament by Jean Licarrague (Rochelle, 1571) is probably the earliest Biblical work in the Basque tongue. The first Catholic New Testament, translated by Jean Haraneder and later revised by two priests, was published at Bayonne (1855). A complete Bible after the Vulgate was edited at London (1859-65), under the patronage of Prince Lucien Bonaparte. Various portions of the Scriptures and revisions have appeared since.

French Versions

Versions of the Psalms and the Apocalypse, and a metrical rendering of the Book of Kings, appeared as early as the seventh century. Up to the fourteenth century, many Bible histories were produced. A complete version of the Bible was made in the thirteenth century; the translation of the various parts is of unequal merit. The fourteenth century manuscript Anglo-Norman Bible follows it closely. Independent of either in the manuscript Bible of King John the Good, which though unfinished is described as a "work of science and good taste". Done in the second half of the fourteenth century, it is largely the work of the Dominicans Jean de Sy, Jehan Nicolas, William Vivien, and Jehan de Chambly. Another incomplete version based on the thirteenth-century Bible was the work of Raoul de Presles and is known as the Bible of Charles V. About 1478, appearing at Lyons among the incunabula of France, is a New Testament by Julian Macho and Pierre Farget, and the books of the Old Testament history, published six times. A complete version done literally from the Vulgate and the Greek New Testament was given out by Lefèvre d'Etaples (Antwerp, 1530, 1534, 1541). After revisions by Nicolas de Leuze (Antwerp, 1548), and by Louvain theologians (1550), it remained a standard for over a century. Only verbal improvements were the versions of Pierre de Besse (1608), Pierre Frizon (1621), and Béron (1647). By order of Louis XIII, Jacques Corbin edited his version of the Vulgate (Paris, 1643-61), A translation by René Benoist (Paris, 1566) savoured of Calvinism and aroused much controversy. Well known and widely read were the Latin-French editions of Calmet (Paris, 1770-16) and de Carrières (Paris, 1709-17); the latter gave out the French alone (1741), but it was not without errors. A version from original sources (Cologne, 1739; Paris, 1753, 1777, 1819) was the work of Le Gros. Another popular French-Latin Bible was put forth by de Vence (Paris, 1748, 1750). It was revised and furnished with Carrières's translation and a commentary after Calmet by Rondet (Paris, 1767-73; Nîmes, 1779). A translation which went through some six editions despite inaccuracies was published at Paris (1821-2) by de Genoude. Bourassé and Janvier gave out a complete version at Tours in 1865. Arnaud published his translations at Paris (1881), but perhaps the most popular of the French versions is that of J.-B. Glaire (Paris, 1871-3, later edited with notes by M. Vigouroux. These complete versions but partially represent the extensive Biblical work of the French Catholics.

The first and nearest approach to a national Protestant version for France was made (Serrières, 1535) by Pierre-Robert Olivetan, Calvin's cousin. He was supposed on his own statement to have translated independently, but it is clear that he used almost wholly the New Testament with the interlinear version of Pagninus. Corrected by Calvin, it was republished at Geneva in 1545, and later in other editions, the principal one being the revision (1588) of the pastors of Geneva. This was supplanted by the recension of Osterwald (1744), an improvement in style, but a work replete with errors. Others differing but little from the Olivetan-Genevan versions were edited by Castalio (Basle, 1555) and Martin (Amsterdam, 1707). A version from original sources, and accepted by the Oxford University Press for national official use, was given out by Segond (Geneva, 1874; Nancy, 1877; and Geneva, 1879).

The Jansenists are represented in a New Testament translation (Amsterdam, 1667) by Isaac Le Maistre de Sacy and Antoine Arnauld. The work contained many errors and the writers' bias appeared in frequent alterations. A version of the whole Bible was undertaken by de Sacy in 1666, but death intervened; it was completed by du Fossé and Huré (Paris, 1682-1706; Brussels, 1705-30; Nîmes, 1781). Whilst the work was never censured as a whole, several of its New-Testament books were condemned by individual bishops. A Jewish Bible by S. Cahen, presenting both the Hebrew and the French with notes philological, etc., was issued at Paris (1831-51), but its text has been found incorrect and its notes often contradictory. A Rationalist Bible after the Hebrew and Greek by Ledrain appeared at Paris (1886-96).

German Versions

The history of Biblical research in Germany shows that of the numerous partial versions in the vernacular some go back to the seventh and eighth centuries. It also establishes the certainty of such versions on a considerable scale in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, and points to a complete Bible of the fifteenth in general use before the invention of printing. Of special interest are the five complete folio editions printed before 1477, nine from 1477 to 1522, and four in Low German, all prior to Luther's New Testament in 1522. They were made from the Vulgate, differing only in dialect and presenting variant readings. Their worth even to this day has been attested by many scholars. Deserving notice as belonging to the same period are some fourteen editions of the Psalter and no less than ninety editions of the Epistles and Gospels for Sundays and Holy Days. On the authority of a Nuremberg manuscript, Jostes (Histor. Jahrbuch, 1894, XV, 771, and 1897, XVIII, 133) establishes the fact of a complete translation of the Bible by John Rellach, O.P., of Constance (before 1450), and thinks it was the first German version printed. A New Testament by Beringer (Speyer, 1526) was in part a correction of Luther's version. In 1527 another New Testament was put forth by Emser who worked from the Vulgate and an older version, likewise correcting Luther.

In 1534 John Dietenberger, O.P., gave out a complete version at Mainz based on a primitive translation with aid from Emser's New Testament and from the deuterocanonical books by Leo Juda. His agreement in places with Luther is due to the use by both of a common source. The Dietenberger Bible underwent frequent revision, and up to 1776 had fifty-eight complete editions. It was revised (1) by Caspar Ulenberg (Mainz, 1549, 1617; Cologne, 1630); (2) by the theologians of Mainz, i.e. Jesuits (1661, 1662, etc.), from whom it received the title of the Catholic Bible; (3) by Th. Erhard, O.S.B. (Augsburg, 1722, 6th ed., 1748); (4) by G. Cartier, O.S.B. (Constance, 1751); (5) by Ignatius Weitenauer (Augsburg, 1783-89), whose version with notes was valued even by Protestants for its fidelity and literary excellence. An important new translation of the Vulgate was published at Augsburg (1788-97) by H. Braun, O.S.B. This was revised by Feder (Nürnberg, 1803) and by Allioli (Landshut, 1830, 1832). In successive editions the last named has almost wholly changed the original so that it is now known only by his name. It is much esteemed as a literary rendering and is widely read. An excellent version made from the Vulgate and compared with original sources was put forth by Loch and Reischl (Ratisbon, 1851-66). From original sources D. Brentano began and Th. A. Dereser finished a version (Frankfurt, 1799-1828), with notes savouring of Rationalism. A second edition was emended by J.M. Scholz. This account includes only the most representative versions made by German Catholics.

Luther's Biblical translations, begun in 1522, when he issued his New Testament, and carried on to 1545, when he finished the deuterocanonical books and the first complete edition of his Bible, have retained a strong hold on German and other Protestants and by many are esteemed as little less than inspired. He saw to many corrections and revisions himself, and his work went through some ten editions in his own lifetime. Though supposed to translate from the originals, he made use of the Latin version of Lyra, the Hebrew-Latin interlinear of Pagninus, and an older German translation of the Vulgate whose order he retained. His renderings were often excessively free and at times he arbitrarily changed the sense of the original. The Swiss Zwinglians adopted such portions of Luther's work as had appeared before 1529. That year they added their own version of the Prophets and the deuterocanonical books by Leo Juda, the whole being called the Zurich Bible. In 1860-8 this work was revised and is still in use. An Anabaptist version was made by Hetzer (Worms, 1529), and Calvinist versions by Parens (1579) and by Piscator (Herborn, 1602-4). A Socinian Bible was given out by Crellius (Racovia, 1630). In the eighteenth century versions reflecting different beliefs and doctrinal attitudes were put forth by Michaelis (1709), Moldenhauer (1774), Grynæus (1776), and Vögelin (1781). Of several nineteenth-century versions the most important is that of de Wette and Augusti (Heidelberg, 1809-14). A complete revision by Wette was published in 1831-3 and later. It is considered a good translation but excessively literal.

A Jewish-German Bible (Old Testament) by Athias appeared in 1666. It was reproduced in the Biblia Pentapla (Hamburg, 1711). Another Jewish version (Berlin, 1838) was the work of Arnheim, Füchs, and Sachs.

Dutch and Flemish Versions

The first Bible for Catholics in Holland was printed at Delft in 1475. Among several issued from the press of Jacob van Leisveldt at Antwerp, one (1540) with the text of the Vulgate is called the Biblia Belgica. The first authoritative version for Catholics was translated from Henten's Vulgate by Nicholas van Wingh, Peter de Cort, and Godevaert Stryode, O.P. (Louvain, 1545). After seventeen complete editions it was revised according to the Clementine Vulgate and became the celebrated Bible of Moerentorf or Moretus (1599). This revision reached more than a hundred editions, and is still used. Among several unfinished versions, one by Th. Beelen was carried out by a group of ecclesiastics, viz. Old Testament (Bruges, 1894-6). Beelen's New Testament had previously appeared at Louvain (1859-69).

A complete Bible based largely on Luther's version was given out by Jacob Van Liesveldt at Antwerp in 1526. In 1556 it was superseded by Van Utenhove's version after Luther and Olivetan. The Calvinists of Holland completed in 1637 a so-called state Bible, a version said to be from original sources, but greatly influenced by the English Authorized Version, reproducing in a great measure its remarkable felicity of style.

Scandinavian Versions

In the fourteenth century, versions of the Sunday Epistles and Gospels were made for popular use in Denmark. Large portions of the Bible, if not an entire version, were published about 1470. The historical books of the Old Testament and the Apocalypse in Swedish are all that are preserved of a complete version made in the fifteenth century and derived from earlier translations in use in the time of St. Bridget (d. 1373). In the beginning of the fourteenth century, King Hakon V provided for a Norwegian translation of the historical books of the Old Testament, with glossary. (Cf. Danish Heptateuch edited by Molbech, Havnian, 1828.) Scandinavian Protestant Bibles for the most part are translated from Luther's version. A complete Danish Bible was published 1550 under the direction of Christian Pedersen (revised in 1824). Two independent versions were given out by Lindberg and Kalkar. In 1541 the first Swedish version appeared; it has been frequently revised. An Icelandic version was published at Holum in 1584.

Finnish Version

A translation of the New Testament by Michael Agricola, a Lutheran, was made for the Finns and published at Stockholm (1548), and a complete Bible from original sources by several scholars was put forth in 1642, 1758, 1776, etc. A less successful version of the Bible was issued by Henry Florin at Abo (1685). Numerous Bible Society editions of both Testaments appeared later. In the Esthonian dialect, a New Testament by John Fisher (1686), and the Old Testament by Fisher and Gosekenius (1689), are noteworthy. Other complete Bibles from partial versions of an earlier date were made in the Esthonian dialect of Reval (Berlin, 1876) and in the Esthonian of Dorpot (1850). A Laplandish version of the whole Bible was published it Hernösand (1811).

Hungarian Versions

A fourteenth-fifteenth-century manuscript in Vienna gives parts of the Old Testament from the Vulgate by the Friars Minor, Thomas and Valentine. A fifteenth-century manuscript of the whole Bible at Gran, the Codex Jordanszky, is believed to contain at least in part a version that was made by Ladislaus Bathory, Hermit of the Order of St. Paul (d. 1456). John Sylvester, or Serestely, O.P., is credited with a translation of the New Testament which was published at Novæ Insulæ (1541) and Vienna (1574). A complete version was made towards the end of the sixteenth century by Stephen Szántó (Latin, Arator). In 1626 a translation after the Vulgate was put forth at Vienna by George Káldi, S.J. Having ecclesiastical approbation, it gained a wide circulation and is still in use after having been printed in many editions. A version after the Protestant Genevan Bible was made by Caspar Károly in 1590. It was revised by Albert Molnar (Hanau, 1608). Other translations appeared by Caspar Heltai (Klausenberg, 1551-64) and by George Csipkés (Leyden, 1717). Andrew Torkos (Wittenberg, 1736) and G. Bárány (Lauban, 1754) gave out Lutheran versions.

Celtic Versions

Irish

Ancient Gaelic versions of the Psalms, of a Gospel of St. Matthew, and other sacred writings with glosses and commentaries are found as early as the seventh century, Most of the literature through subsequent centuries abounds in Scriptural quotations. A fourteenth-century manuscript, the "Leabhar Braec" (Speckled Book), published at Dublin (1872-5), contains a history of Israel and a compendious history of the New Testament. It has also the Passion of Jesus Christ, a translation from the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus. Another fourteenth-century manuscript, the "Leabhar Buide Lecain", also gives the Passion and a brief Old-Testament history. Some scholars see in these writings indications of an early Gaelic version of the Scriptures previous to the time of St. Jerome. A modern Protestant Gaelic New Testament, begun from the original Greek by John Kearney, 1574, Nicholas Walsh (later Bishop of Ossory), and Nehemias Donellan (later Archbishop of Tuam), and finished by William O'Donnell and Mortogh O'Cionga (King), was printed in 1602. An Old-Testament version from original sources by Dr. Bedell was published at London (1686). A second edition in Roman characters was published (1790) for the Scottish Highlanders. A version of Genesis and Exodus was made by Connellan (London, 1820), and also by John MacHale, later Archbishop of Tuam (1840).

Scottish

In Scotland the Synod of Argyll gave out a Gaelic version of fifty psalms (Glasgow, 1659), and all the psalms in 1715. A Psalter was also made by Robert Kick (Edinburg, 1684). A complete Bible, based on earlier versions of the Testaments, was published for the London Bible Society (London, 1807), and a revision of it was ordered by the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church at Edinburgh (1826). A New Testament from the Latin for Catholics by P. MacEachain appeared at Aberdeen in 1875.

Breton, or Armoric, Versions

A New Testament was in existence at the end of the fifteenth century, but the first complete Bible was published by Le Gonidec at St. Brieuc (1866), and a Protestant version by M. Le Coat appeared at London in 1890. These versions differ in dialect.

Welsh, or Cymric, Versions

Partial versions were made before the fifteenth century, but a translation by Celydd Sfan was known to be in existence about 1470. A New Testament, decreed by Parliament in 1526, was edited by several scholars in 1557. A revision of this and an Old Testament version by William Morgan appeared at London in 1588. This was got out in a revision which was practically a new translation by Richard Parry and John Davies (London, 1620). It was the standard for later reprints. A more convenient edition, including the Book of Common Prayer, etc., was published by Pryce (London, 1630). A version made at Oxford (1690) was called the Bishop Lloyd's Bible and was the first to be printed in Roman characters. The Moses Williams' Bible (London, 1718) was put forth by the Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge. The British and Foreign Bible Society grew out of the efforts of Thomas Charles to provide Bibles for the people of Wales. Its first Welsh Bible following an edition of 1752 was printed in 1806.

MISCELLANEOUS VERSIONS

Aleutian

An Aleutian version of St. Matthew was made by the Russian priest, Ivan Veniaminoff, in 1840 for the Aleutian Islanders.

Aniwa

The Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Luke were translated into the dialect of the Island of Aniwa by Paton (Melbourne, 1877).

Aneitumese Versions

For the inhabitants of the Island of Aneiteum, New Hebrides Islands, a New Testament was made by Geddie and Inglis (1863), and an Old Testament version by Inglis (1878).

Battak Versions

A New Testament for the Battaks of Sumatra was made in the Toba dialect by Nommensen (Elberfeld, 1878); another by Schreiber, revised by Leipoldt, was made in the Mandeling dialect (1878).

Benga Versions

A version of St. Matthew in 1858, and of the other Gospels and the Acts later, revised by Nassau in 1874, was provided for the people south of the Congo River, who use the Benga dialect.

Bengali Versions

This was a New Testament by Carey (Serampur, 1801; 8th ed., 1832), and an Old-Testament version (1802-09). The Old Testament also appeared at Calcutta (1833-44). Revisions of both Testaments were made by Wenger (1873) and by others.

Chinese Versions

Among earlier translations is a version of St. Matthew by Anger, a Japanese Christian (Goa, 1548). The Jesuit Father de Mailla wrote an explanation of the Gospels for Sundays and feasts in 1740, and it is still used. The four Gospels with notes were edited by J. Dejean, Apostolic missionary (Hong-Kong, 1892). Other partial versions were made by missionaries, but the first Bible for Protestant use was the work of Lassar and Marshman (Serampur, 1815-22). Another version is credited to Dr. Morrison. Aided by Milne he translated the Old Testament, to which he added the New Testament of Hodgson; the whole was published at Malacca (1823; new edition, 1834). A company of Protestant missionaries gave out a new translation of the New Testament in 1850 and of the whole Bible in 1855 at Shanghai and Hong-Kong. This, which was the generally adopted version, came out in a new edition at Shanghai (1873). An Old Testament in the Mandarin colloquial dialect was made by Schereschewsky and published at Pekin (1875). These translations in general are unsatisfactory.

Gypsy or Romany Version

A Gospel of St. Luke by G. Borrow was published at Madrid (1837). It is said to have been the first book ever printed in this tongue. It was revised and reissued in 1872.

Hindi Version

A New Testament was published by Carey (Serampur, 1811); and the whole Bible, after the Hindustani, by Bowley (1866-69).

Hindustani Versions

A translation of the Psalms and the New Testament was made by Schulze, a Danish missionary, and published at Halle (1746-58). another New Testament by Henry Martyn appeared at Serampur (1814). There was also a Bible Society edition at Calcutta (1817) and one at London (1819); the Pentateuch (1823), and the Old Testament (1844). Other editions have followed.

Japanese Versions

A version of St. John's Gospel and of the Acts was edited in katakana (square type) at Singapore (1836) by Charles Gutzlaff. The four Gospels and the Acts were put forth in a very imperfect hiragana (round type) version at Vienna (1872) by Bettleheim, who was aided by an American student of Japanese origin. A company of revisers and translators gave out the Gospels of Saints Matthew, Mark, and John and the Acts at Yokohama in 1871 and a New Testament in 1879. A later and better version was provided by the Baptists, and the Old Testament (except the deuterocanonical books) was published in 1888. A version of Saints Matthew and Mark (1895) and of Saints Luke and John (1897), edited at Tokio, was made by Fathers Péri and Steichen, aided by a native littérateur, M. Takahashigorô.

Javanese Version

Gottlob Brücker published a New Testament at Serampur in 1831. This was made a Bible Society revision in 1848, and under the same auspices an Old-Testament version appeared in 1857 and later.

Mexican Versions

The first known Biblical undertaking in Mexico was a version of the Gospels and Epistles in 1579 by Didacus de S. Maria, O.P., and the Book of Proverbs by Louis Rodríguez, O.S.F. A Bible Society version of the New Testament was made in 1829, but only the Gospel of St. Luke was printed.

Modern Greek Version

A New Testament for Catholics was made by Colletus (Venice, 1708). A Protestant edition by Maximus of Kallipoli was published at Geneva or Leyden in 1638. It appeared in later revisions. A Bible Society version of the Old Testament was published in England (1840); a New Testament at Athens (1848).

ENGLISH VERSIONS

What prevented the earliest English missionaries from translating the Scriptures into the vernacular, or what caused the loss of such immediate translations, if any were made, is hard to determine at this late date. Though Christianity had been established among the Anglo-Saxons in England about the middle of the sixth century, the first known attempt to translate or paraphrase parts of the Bible is Cædmons's song, "De creatione mundi, et origine humani generis, et tota Genesis historia etc." (St. Bede, "Hist. eccl.", IV, xxiv). Some authors even doubt the authenticity of the poetry ascribed to Cædmon. The English work in Bible study of the following nine centuries will be conveniently divided into three periods comprising three centuries each.

A. Eighth to Tenth Century

In the first period extending from the eighth to the tenth century we meet: (1) St. Bede's translation of John, i, 1-vi, 9; (2) interlinear glosses on the Psalms; (3) the Paris Psalter; (4) the so-called Lindisfarne Gospels; (5) the Rushworth version; (6) the West-Saxon Gospels; (7) Ælfric's version of a number of Old-Testament books.

(1) The proof for the existence of St. Bede's work rests on the authority of his pupil Guthberht who wrote about this fact to his fellow-student Cuthwine (see Mayor and Lumby, "Bedæ hist. eccl.", 178).

(2) The "Glossed Psalters" have come down to us in twelve manuscripts, six of which represent the Roman Psalter, and six the Gallican. The oldest and most important of these manuscripts is the so called Vespesian Psalter, written in Mercia in the first half of the ninth century.

(3) The Paris Psalter advances beyond the glosses in as far as it is a real translation of Ps. i, 1-l, 10, ascribed by some scholars to King Alfred (d. 901), though others deny this view. Cf. William of Malmesbury. "Gesta regum Anglorum", II, 123.

(4) The Lindisfarne Gospels, called also the Durham Book, the Book of St. Cuthbert, present the Latin text of the Gospels dating from Redfrith, Bishop of Lindisfarne (698-721), with the so-called Northumbrian Gloss on the Gospels, added about 950 by Aldred. Cf. Dr. Charles O'Conor, "Bibl. stowensis", II (1818-19), 180.

(5) The Rushworth version of the first Gospel, with glosses on the second, third, and fourth Gospels, based on the Lindisfarne glosses. Faerman, a priest of Harewood (Harwood), made the translation of St. Matthew and furnished the glosses on St. Mark, i, 1-ii, 15; St. John, xviii, 1-3; the rest of the work is taken from Owun's glosses.

(6) The West-Saxon Gospels are a rendering of the Gospels originating in the south of England about the year 1000; seven manuscripts of this version have come down to us. Cf. W.W. Skeat, "The Gospels in Anglo-Saxon etc." (Cambridge, 1871-87).

(7) Ælfric himself states in his work "De vetere testamento", written about 1010, that he had translated the Pentateuch, Josue, Judges, Kings, Job, Esther, Judith, and the Books of the Machabees. The translator frequently abridges, slightly in Genesis, more notably in the Book of Judges and the following books; he adopts a metrical form in Judith. Cf. Nieder in "Zeitschrift für historische Theologie" (1855-56).

B. Eleventh to Fourteenth Century

The second period coincides with the Anglo-Norman time, extending from the tenth to the thirteenth or fourteenth century. During this time, French or the Anglo-Norman dialect reigned supreme among the upper classes, and in academic and official circles, while English was confined to the lower classes and the country-districts. The Bible renderings during the twelfth, thirteenth, and early fourteenth centuries were in French, whether they were made in England or brought over from France. Before the middle of the fourteenth century the entire Old Testament and a great part of the New Testament had been translated into the Anglo-Norman dialect of the period (cf. Berger, "La Bible française au moyen âge", Paris, 1884, 78 sqq.). As to English work, we may note two transcripts of the West-Saxon Gospels during the course of the eleventh century and some copies of the same Gospels into the Kentish dialect made in the twelfth century. The thirteenth century is an absolute blank as far as our knowledge of its English Bible study is concerned. The English which emerged about the middle and during the second half of the fourteenth century was practically a new language, so that both the Old English versions which might have remained, and the French versions hitherto in use, failed to fulfil their purpose.

C. Fourteenth Century and After

The third period extends from the late fourteenth to the sixteenth or early seventeenth century, and has furnished us with the pre-Wyclifite, the Wyclif, and the printed versions of the Bible.

(1) Pre-Wyclifite Translations

Among the pre-Wyclifite translations we may note:

• The West Midland Psalter, probably written between 1340 and 1350; some attribute it to William of Shoreham. It contains the whole Psalter, eleven canticles, and the Athanasian Creed, and is preserved in three manuscripts (cd. Bülbring, "The Earliest Complete English Prose Psalter", I, London, 1891).
• Richard Rolle's (d. 1349) English version of the "Commentary on the Psalms" by Peter Lombard spread in numerous copies throughout the country (cf. Bramley, "The Psalter and Certain Canticles...by Richard Rolle of Hampole", Oxford, 1884).
• Here belongs a version of the Apocalypse with a commentary; the latter was for some time attributed to Wyclif, but is really a version of a Norman commentary from the first half of the thirteenth century. Its later revisions agree so well with the Wyclif version that they must have been utilized in its preparation.
• The Pauline Epistles were rendered in the North Midlands or the North; they are still extant in a manuscript of the fifteenth century.
• Another version of the Pauline Epistles, and of the Epistles of St. James and St. Peter (only the first) originated in the south of England somewhere in the fourteenth century (cf. the edition of A. C. Paves, Cambridge, 1904).
• A scholar of the north of England translated also commentaries on the Gospels of St. Matthew, St. Mark, and St. Luke.
• Several manuscripts preserve to us a version of the Books of Acts and the Catholic Epistles, either separately or in conjunction with a fragmentary Southern version of the Pauline Epistles and part of the Catholic Epistles, mentioned under (5). Cf. A. C. Paues, "A Fourteenth-Century English Biblical Version", Cambridge, 1904.
• Besides these versions of particular books of Holy Scripture, there existed numerous renderings of the Our Father, the Ten Commandments, the Life, Passion, and Resurrection of Christ, and of the parts read on Sundays and Feastdays in the Mass. In general, if we may believe the testimony of Archbishop Cranmer, Sir Thomas More, Foxe the martyrologist, and the authors of the Preface to the Reims Testament, the whole Bible was to be found in the mother tongue long before John Wyclif was born (cf. "American Ecclesiastical Review", XXXII, Philadelphia, June, 1905, 594).

(2) Wyclifite Versions

The Wyclifite versions embrace the earlier and the later version of this name.

The Early Version was probably completed in 1382, the Later Version about 1388 (cf. Madden and Forshall, "The Holy Bible . . . made from the Latin Vulgate by John Wycliffe and his Followers", Oxford, 1850; Gasquet, "The Old English Bible and other Essays", London, 1897, pp. 102 sqq.). It is quite uncertain what part Wyclif himself took in the work that bears his name. As far as the New Testament is concerned, Wyclif's authorship of the Early Version is based on his authorship of the "Commentary on the Gospels", the text of which is said to have been used in the Early Edition; the style of this text is claimed to resemble the style of the translation of the Book of Acts, the Epistles, and the Apocalypse. But the style of the text of the "Commentary" resembles that of the Later Version rather than that of the Early Version; besides, passages from both the Old and the New Testament of the Early Version are quoted in the "Commentary on the Gospels". It would be folly, therefore, not to assign the authorship of the "Commentary" to a time posterior to the Early Edition. As to the Old Testament, the translator's original copy and a coeval transcript are still extant, but both break off at Baruch, iii, 19, with the words: "explicit translacionem Nicholay de herford". It is claimed that the similarity of style and mode of translating shows that Nicholas of Herford translated the Old Testament up to Bar., iii, 19. It is claimed, furthermore, that the remaining portion of the Old Testament was translated by one hand, the one who made the version of the New Testament. But both these claims rest on very slender evidence. The extant translator's copy is written in not less than five hands, differing in orthography and dialect. Nicholas, therefore, translated at most only the portion ending with Bar., iii, 19. Besides, the magnitude of the work renders it most probable that other translators beside Wyclif and Nicholas took part in the work, and that already existing versions were incorporated or utilized by the translators.

The Early Edition was complete indeed, as far as the translators considered the books canonical, but it was soon found lacking in the necessary qualities of style and English idiom. It is at times unintelligible and even nonsensical from a too close adherence to the Latin text. A revision was, therefore, found necessary and taken in hand shortly after the completion of the Early Version. The principles of the work are laid down in the prologue of the so-called Later Version. We do not know either the revisers or the exact date of the revision. John Purvey, the leader of the Lollard party, is generally assumed to have taken a large part in the work. The style and idiom of the Later Version are far superior to those of the Early, and there can be little doubt as to its popularity among the Wyclifites. But the Lollards soon introduced interpolations of a virulent character into their sacred texts; violence and anarchy set in, and the party came to be regarded as enemies of order and disturbers of society. It is small wonder that the ecclesiastical authorities soon convened in the Synod of Oxford (1408) and forbade the publication and reading of unauthorized vernacular versions of the Scriptures, restricting the permission to read the Bible in the vernacular to versions approved by the ordinary of the place, or, if the case so require, by the provincial council.

(3) Printed English Bibles

We are now entering the period of printed English Scriptures. France, Spain, Italy, Bohemia, and Holland possessed the Bible in the vernacular before the accession of Henry VIII; in Germany the Scriptures were printed in 1466, and seventeen editions had left the press before the apostasy of Luther. No part of the English Bible was printed before 1525, no complete Bible before 1535, and none in England before 1538.

(a) William Tyndale was the first to avail himself of the new opportunities furnished by the press and the new learning. Tyndale went early to Oxford, thence to Cambridge; he was ordained priest, and professed among the Franciscan Fathers at Greenwich. In 1524 he went to Hamburg and from there to Wittenberg to visit Luther. Assisted by William Roye, like himself an apostate Franciscan from the monastery at Greenwich, he translated the New Testament, and began to have it printed in Cologne in 1525. Driven from Cologne, he went to Worms where he printed 3000 copies, and sent them to England in the early summer of 1526. The fourth edition was printed at Antwerp (1534). In 1530 Tyndale's Pentateuch was printed, in 1531 his book of Jonas. Between the date of Tyndale's execution, 6 Oct., 1536, and the year 1550 numerous editions of the New Testament were reprinted, twenty-one of which Francis Fry (Biographical Descriptions of the Editions of the New Testament, 1878) enumerates and describes (see Westcott, "Hist. of the English Bible", London, 1905).

(b) Miles Coverdale, born about 1488, educated at the Augustinian monastery at Cambridge, was ordained priest in that order about 1514. After 1528 we find him on the Continent in Tyndale's society. He was favoured by Edward VI, but was imprisoned under Queen Mary in 1553; after obtaining his freedom, he remained on the Continent till the death of Mary, after which he returned to England, and died in February, 1569. He prepared a complete English Bible, the printing of which was finished 4 Oct., 1535. He was the first to omit the deuterocanonical books in the body of the Old Testament, adding them at the end as "apocrypha". His work is a second-hand eclectic translation, based on the Latin and the German versions.

(c) The London booksellers now became alive to the ready sale of the Bible in English; Grafton and Whitchurch were the first to avail themselves of this business opportunity, bringing out in 1537 the so-called Matthew's Bible. Thomas Matthew is an alias for John Rogers, a friend and fellow-worker of Tyndale. The Matthew's Bible is only a compilation of the renderings of Tyndale and Coverdale.

(d) In 1539 the Matthew's Bible was followed by Taverner's edition of the Bible, a work which in our day would be considered a literary "piracy", being nothing more than a revision of the Matthew text. Though Taverner was an accomplished Greek scholar and somewhat of an English purist, his edition had no influence on the subsequent translations.

(e) About 1536 Cromwell had placed Coverdale at the head of the enterprise for bringing out an approved version of the English Bible. The new version was based on the Matthew's Bible. Coverdale consulted in his revision of the Latin Version of the Old Testament with the Hebrew text by Sebastian Münster, the Vulgate, and Erasmus's edition of the Greek for the New Testament. The work was ready for the press in 1538, and the printing was begun at Paris, but had to be transferred to London on 17 December of the same year. In April of the following year the edition was finished, and owing to its size the version was called the Great Bible. Before 1541 six other editions issued from the press.

(f) During the reign of Mary a number of English reformers withdrew to Geneva, the town of Calvin and Beza, and here they issued in 1557 a New Testament with an introduction by Calvin. It was probably the work of William Whittingham, and it was the first English Bible which had its text divided into "verses and sections according to the best editions in other languages".

(g) Whittingham's work was soon superseded by an issue of the whole Bible, which appeared in 1560, the so-called Geneva Bible, also known as the Breeches Bible from its rendering of Gen., iii, 7, "they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves breeches". The Old Testament represented the text of the Great Bible thoroughly revised with the help of the Hebrew original and other sources, while the New Testament consisted of Tyndale's latest text revised in accordance with Beza's translation and commentary. The handy form and other attractive features of the work rendered it so popular that between 1560 and 1644 at least 140 editions were published.

(h) After the accession of Elizabeth an attempt was made to improve the authorized Great Bible and thus to counteract the growing popularity of the Calvinistic Geneva Bible. Bishop Parker divided the whole Bible into parcels, and distributed them among bishops and other learned men for revision. The resultant version was ready for publication on 5 October, 1568, and became generally known as the Bishops' Bible. Several editions were afterwards published, and the Great Bible ceased to be reprinted in 1569, excepting its Psalter which was introduced into the Bishops' Bible in 1572, and admitted exclusively in 1585. The Bishops' Bible is noted for its inequality in style and general merit; it could not replace the Geneva Bible in the English home.

(i) In October, 1578, Gregory Martin, assisted chiefly by William (later Cardinal) Allen, Richard Bristow, Thomas Worthington, and William Reynolds began the work of preparing an English translation of the Bible for Catholic readers. Dr. Martin rendered into English one or two chapters every day; the others then revised, criticised, and corrected the translation. Thus the New Testament was published at Reims in 1582 with a preface and explanatory notes. The notes were written chiefly by Bristow, Allen, and Worthington. The Old Testament was published at Douai (1609-10) through the efforts of Dr. Worthington, then superior of the seminary. The translation had been prepared before the appearance of the New Testament, but the publication was delayed "for lack of good means" and "our poor estate in banishment". The religious adherence to the Latin text is the reason of the less elegant and idiomatic words and phrases found in the translation. The original Douai Version has undergone so many revisions that "scarcely any verse remains as it was originally published". Dr. Challoner probably merits the credit of being the principal reviser of the Douai Version (1749-50); among the many other revisers we may mention Archbishop Kenrick, Dr. Lingard, Dr. John Gilmary Shea.

(j) The Reims Version had its influence on the Authorized Version, which was begun in 1604 and published in 1611 (see Carleton, "The Part of the Reims in the Making of the English Bible", Oxford, 1902). The work was distributed among six committees of scholars, the Bishops' Bible being taken as the basis to work on. A body of rules was drawn up which contained both a scheme of revision and general directions for the execution of their work. The actual work of revision occupied about two years and nine months, and an additional nine months were required for the final preparation of the press. But even after its publication in 1611 deliberate changes were introduced silently and without authority by men whose very names are often unknown.

(k) In February, 1870, the Convocation of Canterbury appointed a committee to consider the subject of an authorized revision of the Authorized Version. After the report of the committee had been presented in May and had been adopted, two companies were formed for the revision of the Old and the New Testaments respectively. The members of each company were partly appointed, partly invited. The revision of the New Testament was completed in 407 meetings, distributed over more than ten years, and was finally presented to Convocation on 17 May, 1881; the revision of the Old Testament occupied 792 days, and was finished on 20 June, 1884. The revised Apocrypha did not appear until 1895. At first the work of the revisers satisfied neither the advanced nor the conservative party, but in course of time it has grown steadily in popularity.

LEWIS, Complete Hist. of the several Translations of the Holy Bible into English (London, 1739); NEWCOME, Hist. View of Engl. Bible Translations (Dublin, 1792); BAGSTER, English Hexapla (London, 1841); COTTON, List of Editions of the Bible (Oxford, 1851-2); ANDERSON, Annals of the Engl. Bible (London, 1845); EDGAR, The Bibles of England (London, 1889); WESTCOTT, Hist. of the Engl. Bible (London, 1868); HOARE, Evolution of the Engl. Bible (London, 1902); EADIE, Hist. of the Engl. Bible (London, 1876); WESTCOTT AND HORT, New Testament (Cambridge, 1882), introduction; GRAHAM, Where we got the Bible. Our debt to the Catholic Church (St. Louis, 1911); POPE, Origin of the Douay Bible in Dublin Rev., CXLVII, 97; IDEM, The Origin of the Clementine Vulgate in Amer. Eccl. Rev. (Oct. 1911); MAAS, The English Protestant Version of the Bible after 300 years in Eccles. Rev.(Nov., 1911); IDEM, The Revision of the Vulgate in Amer. Eccl. Rev.

ENGLISH VERSIONS: VIGOUROUX, Dict. de la Bible (Paris, 1895); CORNELY, Historica et crit. introd. in libros sacros (Paris, 1885); GIGOT, Gen. Introd. to the Study of Holy Script. (New York, 1901); BRIGGS, Gen. Introd. to the Study of Holy Script. (New York, 1899); DAVIDSON, Treatise on Bibl. Criticism (Boston, 1853); SAUL, Das Bibelstudium im Prediger Orden in Der Katholik, XXVII (Mainz, Oct. and Nov., 1902); NESTLE, Urtext und Uebersetzungen der Bibel (Leipzig, 1897); MARSH, Hist. of the Translations ... of the Scriptures from the earliest to the present age (London, 1912) SCHRÖDER, Thesaurus ling. armenicæ (Amsterdam, 1711); HYVERNAT, Etude sur les versions coptes de la Bible in Revue biblique, III, IV, 6, 1; WHITTAKER, Hist. and Crit. Inquiry into the Interpretations of the Hebrew Script. (London, 1819-20); SWETE, Introd. to the Old Testament in Greek (Cambridge, 1900); HODY, De bibliorum textibus originalibus, versionibus græcis, et latina Vulgata (Oxford, 1705); ZIEGLER, Die lateinische Bibelübersetzungen vor Hieronymus (Munich, 1879); SABATIER, Bibliorum sacr. latinæ vers. antiq. seu Vetus Itala (Reims, 1739-49); WISEMAN, Two Letters on I John, v, 7, in Essays, I (London, 1853); RÖNSCH, Itala und Vulgata (Marburg, 1869); BURKITT, The Old Latin and Itala in Texts and Studies (Cambridge, 1896); KAULEN, Gesch. der Vulgata (Mainz, 1868); BERGER, Hist. de la Vulgate (Paris, 1893); Revue biblique (1893), 307, 544; (1903), 633; (1908), 159, treats of the Vulgate; LAGARDE, Probe einer neuen Ausgabe der latein. Uebersetzungen des Alten Testaments (1870); BATIFFOL, Chrysostome et la version gothique in Rev. biblique, VI (1899), 566-72; WESTCOTT AND HORT, New Test. (Cambridge, 1882), introduction; KEHREIN, Gesch. der deutschen Bibelübersetzungen vor Luther (Stuttgart, 1851); WALTHER, Die Bibelübersetzung im Mittelalter (Brunswick, 1889-92); HINLAPEN, Hist. van der Nederl. Overzettinge des Bybels (Leyden, 1777); REID, Bibliotheca scoto-celtica (Glasgow, 1833); The Bible in Every Land (London, 1860). (See also MANUSCRIPTS OF THE BIBLE.)

A.J. MAAS

Richard Verstegan

(Alias ROWLANDS).

Publisher and antiquarian, born at London, about 1548; died at Antwerp 1636 (?). His grandfather, who had migrated from Guelderland, took the name Rowlands, and Richard was sent to Oxford (Christchurch) under this name in 1565. Being a Catholic he found it impossible to obtain a degree, and finally returned to Antwerp, assuming his proper family name. His first important work was his "Theatrum crudelitatis hæreticorum nostri temporis" (Paris, 1583), with illustrations of the late martyrdoms in England, continuing the idea of Persons', "De persecutione" (1582). Sir Edward Stafford, the English ambassador to France, declared that these pictures were libels on Queen Elizabeth. The book was confiscated and destroyed (one page survives in trs., London, Record Office, "Dom. Eliz.", 165, f. 77), and Verstegan was arrested and in danger of being extradited (January, 1584). Through the influence of Cardinal Allen and the papal nuncio the author was soon free again. On 25 April, 1584, he went to Rome (Foley, V, 555) to beg aid from the pope. This was refused (15 May), but he afterwards obtained a Spanish pension. Returning to Antwerp, he published a fuller edition of his "Theatrum" (1588, 1592; French tr., 1607). He was at this time corresponding agent for Cardinal Allen at Rome, the Catholics in England, and especially for the Jesuits (some fifty of his letters, 1591-95, are in the Archives of Westminster and of Stonyhurst). He also composed several political tracts (Calendar of State Papers Addenda, 1589, p. 290), and printed an answer to the Proclamation of October, 1591 (A Declaration of great Troubles intended against the Realm, 1592), which was answered by Francis Bacon ("Works", ed. Spedding, 1862, VII, 146); he took a leading part in the writing and publication in 1595 of "Dolman's Conference" (see ROBERT PERSONS). During the heated Appellant controversy he seems to have written a manuscript tract in answer to Watson, which drew upon him the furious abuse of Anthony Copley.

His main occupation was the publication of Catholic books of devotion, sometimes signed by his initials, but never with his name either as composer or publisher. The earliest known English post-Reformation manuals (see PRAYER-BOOKS) and primers (q.v.) were brought out by him, and, 25 March, 1595, he applied for the monopoly of printing the latter (Stonyhurst MSS., "Anglia", ii, n. 4). He also wrote verse with little poetic fire, but with facility and a homely, simple taste, sometimes rising, as in "Our Lady's Lullaby", to religious song of real merit. The translations of hymns in the Primer of 1599, presumably by him, are again above the average. He published a small collection of verse, "Odes in imitation of the Seaven Penitential Psalms", s.l., 1601. His chief work was, "A Restitution of decayed Intelligence in Antiquities" (Antwerp, 1605), remarkable as perhaps the first endeavour to persuade Englishmen that they should regard with special predilection the remains of Anglo-Saxon in their language, customs, and laws, a matter in which (despite obvious faults) he was far in advance of his age, when the influence of Latin was so predominant. It is probable that he translated and published many more works than can now be traced to him, but the later Dutch works, sometimes attributed to him, should no doubt be ascribed to a younger man, probably his son, of the same name. Exile and other hardships sometimes embittered his pen; but his correspondence and publications show us a man of faithful and affectionate mind, and of varied talents, a diligent collector of literary and scientific curiosities, with a wide circle of literary friends.

Besides the correspondence, mentioned above, and introductions to his various works see: French Correspondence (London, Record Office, January, 1584); Roman Transcripts (ibid., May, 1584); WOOD, Athenæ Oxoniensea (1813), ii, 392; SMITH in Dict. Nat. Biog., a.v. Rowlands, Richard; GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., a.v.; KELLY, New Review (July, 1897), a literary estimate.

J.H. POLLEN

John Vertin

Third Bishop of Marquette, U.S.A., b. at Doblice, Diocese of Laibach (Carniolia), Austria, 17 July, 1844; d. at Marquette, 26 Feb., 1899. He received his classical education at Rudolfswert, and came to America at the age of nineteen. His pious parents presented him to Bishop Baraga, who, upon adopting him into the diocese, sent him to St. Francis, Wisconsin, where he completed his theological training. On 31 Aug., 1866, he was ordained priest. For twelve years he laboured zealously, displaying great administrative ability. Upon the resignation of Bishop Mrak, Leo XIII elevated him to the episcopate, and he was consecrated at Negaunee, Michigan, 14 Sept., 1879. The greatness of his mind and heart are reflected in the management of his diocese and in untold charities.

REZEK, History of the Diocese of Sault Ste Marie and Marquette (Houghton, Michigan, 1906); Diocesan Archives (Marquette).

ANTOINE IVAN REZEK

Réné-Aubert, Sieur de Vertot

French historian, b. at Benetot, Normandy, 25 Nov., 1655; d. in Paris, 15 June, 1735. He was for some time a pupil of the Jesuit Fathers, seminary at Rouen, which he left at the end of two years to enter the Capuchin Order. His health was here greatly impaired by his austerities, and his family, alarmed, obtained permission for him to join the Premonstratensian Canons. he was afterwards appointed pastor to several small parishes in Normandy. In 1690, at the suggestion of Fontenelle and the Abbé de Saint-Pierre, he wrote his "Histoire de la conjuration de Portugal". The book was received with favour, and in 1695 appeared the "Histoire des révolutions de Suède". In 1703 Vertot was made a member of the "Académie des inscriptions". Besides contributions to the "Mémoires of the Académie and other minor works, he wrote the "Révolutions romains" (1719) and "Histoire des chevaliers hospitaliers de Saint-Jean de Jérusalem". It is related, in connection with the latter, that in answer to an offer of additional data, he said, "Mon siege est fait",-"My siege is finished", a phrase misconstrued by some of his critics and interpreted as an expression of Vertot's utter disregard for historical accuracy. The truth seems to be that he simply wished to get rid of an intruder who was trying to force upon him documents whose authenticity was very doubtful. On the other hand it must be acknowledged that Vertot's talent as an historian is more of a literary than of a critical character.

VILLEMAIN, tableau du huitieme siecle; RENOUARD, Catalogue d'un amateur, IV; D'OLIVET, Hist. de l' Académie francaise.

PIERRE J. MARIQUE

Veruela

A celebrated Cistercian monastery and church dedicated to the Blessed Virgin. It is situated five miles north-west of Borja, Saragossa, Spain. The monastery and church, forming one edifice, were founded in 1146 by Pedro de Atarés, to whom the Blessed Virgin appeared, and whom she directed in the discovery of a hidden statue of herself. The statue was placed in the monastery chapel, where it is still venerated. Pedro de Atarés did not live to see the completion of the buildings, whose construction took more than twenty years, but before his death he was enrolled among the Cistercians, who were dwelling in the partly-finished cloister. The most famous abbots of Veruela were Fernando de Aragón (1498- 1577) and Lope Marco (d. 1560). The former was nominated abbot by Charles V in 1537, and two years later became Archbishop of Saragossa; V. la Fuente calls him one of the most eminent Spanish clergymen of the sixteenth century (España Sagrada, L, 223). He was succeeded by Lope Marco who, as his epitaph tells us, raised the monastery "ex terreo marmoreum, ex augusto amplum". But his grotesque Renaissance addition of the living apartments did not improve the Gothic church and cloister. The chapter house at the southern side of the cloister, an exact representation of the Westminster cloister, is Byzantine. The great buildings, including church, monastery, house, and cloister, constructed at different times and in different styles, surrounded by a wall that dates back to feudal times, present an imposing and beautiful appearance. Antonio José Rodríguez, styled by Menéndez y Pelayo "one of the most remarkable cultivators of medical moral studies" (Ciencia espanola, III, 440), lived at Veruela and died within its walls in 1777. Gustavo Becquer, the Spanish poet, made Veruela his abode while the religious were prevented from living there. From 1835 to 1877 the buildings were in the hands of seculars, and from this date down to the present day they have been occupied by the Jesuits, who, assisted by the duchess of Villahermosa, a descendant of Pedro de Atarés, restored the church and monastery. Of the Jesuits who lived at Veruela Padre Costa was theologian to the Vatican Council; L.I. Fiter revived the "Congregaciones Marianas" in Spain; Antonio Rota, now secretary of the Society of Jesus, was the rector of Veruela when in 1888 the image of the Blessed Virgin was solemnly crowned.

The fact of the apparition is attested by ABARCA, ZURITA, and ARGENSOLA in their Anales de Aragón. PIFERRER, Noviliario de los reinos y senorios de España, IV; YEPES, Cronica de San Benito, VII (Valladolid, 1621), 370; DE ZARAGOZA, Teatro hist. de las iglesias del reino de Aragón, IV, 74; Definitiones congregationis cisterciensis coronae Aragónum (Valladolid, 1790); DE UZTARROZ, Cronologia de las imagenes aparecidas de N. Senora en Aragón (Saragossa, 1644); TORRE, Resena hist. de N. S. de Veruela (Barcelona, 1881); NONELL, La santa duquesa (Madrid, 1892); QUADRADO, Aragón in España, sus monumentos y artes (Barcelona, 1886); there is at present in the archives of Veruela an extensive collection of documents gathered by FITER who began to write a complete history of Veruela. There is also a MS. Brevis hist. regalis monasterii Berolae, ab ejus fundatione quae fuit anno 1146 usque ad annum 1738.

WILLIAM FURLONG

Andreas Vesalius

(WESALIUS.)

The reorganizer of the study of anatomy; b. at Brussels, 31 Dec., 1514; d. in a Greek city on his journey home from Jerusalem in 154. He was descended from a German family of physicians called Witing (Wytinck), which came from Wesel on the Rhine, and was the son of Andreas Vesalius, court-apothecary to the Emperor Charles V. As a boy he showed great interest in the dissection of animals. After pursuing his early studies at Louvain, he went about 1533 to the University of Paris, where Johannes Quinterus of Andernach and Jacobus Sylvius taught medicine. At the university Vesalius gave his attention largely to anatomy, especially that of the bones which he found in cemeteries and at the place of execution. He dissected entire animals, and gained in this way so much knowledge that at the request of his teachers and fellow-students he publicly dissected a corpse and explained its parts. In 1536 he returned to Louvain and made a public dissection there, the first in eighteen years. He also published a more accurate Latin translation of the ninth book of Almansor of Rhazes. In 1537 he went to Venice, thence to Padua, where he took the degree of Doctor of Medicine, and on 6 Dec. was appointed professor of surgery and anatomy at Padua. Contrary to custom, Vesalius dissected the bodies himself and explained the different parts: the former usage had been for a surgeon to dissect while a physician read aloud suitable chapters from Galen or the "anatomic" of Mundino. In 1538 he published the "Tabulae anatomicae" from his own drawings and those of the painter Johann Stephan of Kalkar; this was the first fruits of his investigations. His labours led him to the conviction that Claudius Galenus had never dissected the dead body of a human being, and that Galen's celebrated "anatomy" lacks the stamp of truthfulness, as it is based almost entirely on the dissection of apes. In 1540 he began his celebrated work "Fabrica", in 1542 went to Basle in order to supervise the printing of it, returned to Padua at the end of 1543 after the publication was completed, spent a short time in Bologna and Pisa, and in 1544 was appointed court physician to the Emperor Charles V. Up to the time of the emperor's abdication in 1556, Vesalius accompanied Charles on all his journeys and campaigns. After the abdication he entered the service of King Philip II of Spain. For unknown reasons, in the spring of 1564 he undertook a pilgrimage to the Holy Land, from which he never returned.

The services of Vesalius to anatomy were that he was the first to lead the way to independent investigation in the examination of the structure of the human body, and in the teaching concerning it, and that he discovered the numerous errors of Galen. In so doing he destroyed the foundation of the whole teaching of Galenism and of the belief in its authority, and pointed out the way for the free investigation of nature. However, the numerous followers of Galen began a biter struggle against the daring investigator, and even the medical school of Padua turned against him. Jacobus Sylvius called him a madman (vesanus) and declared that an advance beyond the knowledge of Galen was impossible, and that Galen had not erred, but probably the human body had changed since then. Bartholomew Eustachus of Rome declared he would rather err with Galen than accept the truth from the innovator. His enemies even sought to prevent his appointment as physician to the emperor and spread slanders broadcast, so that Vesalius, depressed by his troubles, threw a large part of his manuscript and works into the fire. Nevertheless his works and drawings were frequently used by opponents unrighteously for their own advantage.

His most important works are: "Paraphrasis in nonum librum Rhazae ad Almansorem" (Basle, 1537); "Tabulae anatomicae" (Venice, 1538); "Epistola docens venam axillarem dextri cubiti in dolore laterali secandam" (Basle, 1543, 1555); "De humani corporis fabrica libri septem" (Basle, 1543, 1555), his chief work, containing numerous plates, and repeatedly reprinted: "Suorum de humani corporis fabrica librorum epitome" (Basle, 1543); "Epistola rationem modumque propinandi radicis Chynae decocti, quo nuper invictissimus Carolus V imperator usus est, pertractans" (Basle, 1546); "Anatomicarum Gabrielis Fallopii observationum examen" (Venice, 1564); "Opera omnia anatomica et chirurgica", ed. by H. Boerhaave and B. S. Albinus (Leyden, 1725). In addition, in "Galeni opera omnia" (Venice, 1541), the following translations: I, ii, p. 49. "Galeni de nervorum dissectione liber"; I, ii, p. 50, "Galeni de venarum arteriarumque dissectione liber"; I, ii, p. 58, "Galeni de anatomicis administrationibus libri novem". The treatise "Gabrielis Cunei Mediolanensis apologiae Franc. Putei pro Galeni anatome examen" (Venice, 1564) is not by Vesalius, as H. Haeser ("Lehrbuch der Geschichte der Medizin", II, 1881, 39) believes.

The story, that towards the end of his life Vesalius came into conflict with the Inquisition, is found in a letter, written at Paris under date of 1 Jan., 1565, by Hubertus Languetus to Kaspar Peucer. A rumour brought from Spain said that Vesalius had dissected a distinguished man whose heart still beat, and was therefore accused of murder by the family of the deceased. In order to secure a more severe punishment the family also made an accusation of atheism against him before the Inquisition. Only the personal intervention of Philip II saved him from the death penalty, and Vesalius was obliged as penance to undertake a pilgrimage to Jerusalem and Mount Sinai. Modern historians regard the report as a malicious invention, and all the more as, according to his own statement, Vesalius never had an opportunity in Spain to perform a dissection. At that era a scholar with so many enemies, one who generally struck out new ideas in opposition to the commonly-held opinion, could easily be accused of heresy. to many his relations with Protestant scholars appeared suspicious. When a young man he had a dispute about 1536 with the theologians of Louvain because he differed from them as to the seat of the soul. About the same time an opponent characterized Vesalius in connection with a dispute about blood-letting, as the "Luther of the physicians". There is not a single sentence in his writings which has even the appearance of heresy. In speaking of the seat of the soul he blames the theologians for wishing to solve such questions without understanding anatomy. Personally he avoided expressing his opinion, in order not to fall under suspicion of heresy. In that age there could be only one reason for such a dangerous journey as one to the Holy Land, namely strong religious feeling.

ROTH, Andreas Vesalius Bruxellensis (Berlin, 1892), an exhaustive authority.

LEOPOLD SENFELDER

Vespasian

(TITUS FLAVIUS VESPASIANUS).

Roman Emperor, b. at Reate (now Rieti), the ancient capital of the Sabines, 18 Nov., A.D. 9; d. there, 23 June, 79. His father was a prosperous tax-gatherer and moneylender, while the fact that his mother's brother was a senator may have at least encouraged him to enter the public service. Early in his career he had opportunities to become familiar with conditions in the Levant, where he served as quaestor; before entering his thirty-fourth year he had filled still more important magistracies. After serving with the army in Germany, he made a successful expedition into Southern Britain in command of the Second Legion, and attained consular rank in A.D. 51. Ten years later he was proconsul in Africa. He first appears in history as a member of the imperial suite when he accompanied Nero on a tour through Greece; but Vespasian was evidently a very poor courtier, for it is said that he fell asleep in Nero's presence while the emperor was reciting one of his own poems. In spite of this offensive conduct, and either because Nero could be sensible enough to forget personal animosities when reasons of state demanded, or because no one else could be found who was not still more objectionable, Vespasian was appointed to conduct the war against the Jews-an appointment which proved the immediate cause of his elevation to the purple.

Brutal oppression by successive Roman governors, culminating in the atrocities of Gessius Florus, had stirred the Jews to an insurrection in which the Roman garrison of Jerusalem was slaughtered. Many considerations obliged the Roman Court to take a serious view of this disturbance, not the least being the widespread belief that a new power originating in Judea was destined to supplant Rome in the mastery of the world. Taking with him his son Titus, Vespasian, in 66, invaded Judea, entering upon the last war in which the Jews were to take part as a nation. The siege of Jerusalem, in which more than half a million of the inhabitants perished, was conducted by Titus, and ended in the fall of the city (2 Sept., 70), and the final destruction of the Temple. In the meantime Nero's career had ended in suicide, his successor, Galba, had been killed by Otho, and Otho, in his turn dethroned by partisans of Vitellius, had followed Nero's last example. While the Jewish war was still in progress the soldiers in Egypt proclaimed Vespasian emperor (1 July, 69), and their comrades in Judea confirmed the choice. Ostensibly, at least, he had made no bid for the diadem, but his soldiers were sincerely attached to him, and the debauchee Vitellius, Nero's parasite and favourite, whom the legions in Germany had proclaimed, was as unpromising from a military point of view as he was morally worthless. Vespasian remained at his post in Judea, while his lieutenant, Antonius Primus, with the armies of Pannonia and the Balkan Peninsula, invaded Italy, routed the Vitellian forces near Cremona, and stormed Rome, which was defended by the Praetorian Guard and the populace (20 Dec., 69). It was not until the following summer that the new emperor left the conduct of affairs in Palestine to his son Titus and entered the city to receive confirmation at the hands of the Senate.

Vespasian's assumption of the imperial authority ended one of those spasms of civil war which had shaken Rome at intervals ever since the days of Marius and Sulla. His reign was distinctly an era of reform. Titus, who was to become one of the most beneficent pagan rulers in history, was associated as Caesar in his father's administration. The dignity of the Roman Senate was revived, largely by elimination of the disreputable elements; the law of treason, an odious legal cloak for tyranny, was abrogated; the courts of law were reformed; military discipline was placed upon a fairly secure basis. Vespasian, who was a master of financial administration, knew how to lavish his wealth in adding to the splendour of the imperial city, and it was in his reign that the Colosseum was begun. Abroad, the final conquest of Judea was followed by the suppression of a serious rising in Gaul and the consolidation of Roman authority in Britain by Cneius Agricola, who built the chain of forts between the Firths of Clyde and Forth. Still more important to the subsequent progress of civilization was the period of tranquility for the infant Church which began in this reign. The official classes of Rome then regarded the Christians vaguely as a Jewish sect, and as such the latter was subject to the impost of half a shekel for rebuilding the Capitoline temple, which had been destroyed when Rome was stormed for Vespasian; but this tax does not seem to have been the occasion of any general harsh treatment. Tertullian (Apologia) and Eusebius (Hist. eccl.) agree in acquitting Vespasian of persecution. St. Linus, the pope whose death occurred during this period, cannot be proved to have suffered martyrdom, while St. Apollaris of Ravenna, though a martyr, may very well have suffered at the hands of a local mob.

The character of this emperor showed very little, if anything, of the pagan tyrant. Though himself a man of no literary culture, he became the protector of his prisoner of war, the Jewish historian Josephus, a worshipper of the One God, and even permitted him the use of his own family name (Flavius). While this generosity may have been in some degree prompted by Josephus's shrewd prophecy of Vespasian's elevation to the purple, there are other instances of his disposition to reward merit in those with whom he was by no means personally sympathetic. Vespasian has the distinction of being the first Roman Emperor to transmit the purple to his own son; he is also noteworthy in Roman imperial history as having very nearly completed his seventieth year and died a natural death: being in feeble health, he had withdrawn to benefit by the purer air of his native Reate, in the "dewy fields" (rosei campi) of the Sabine country. By his wife, Flavia Domitilla, he left two sons, Titus and Domitian, and a daughter, Domitilla, through whom the name of Vespasian's empress was passed on to a granddaughter who is revered as a confessor of the Faith.

TACITUS, History; SUETONIUS, Lives of the Twelve Caesars: Vespasian; JOSEPHUS, De bello jud.; TERTULLIAN, Apologia, V; ALLARD, Hist. des persecutions pendant les deux premiers siecles (Paris, 1892); IDEM, Le Christianisme et l'Empire Romain (Paris, 1898); MERIVALE, Hist. of the Romans under the Empire (London, 1865); HENDERSON, Civil War and Rebellion in the Roman Empire, A.D. 69- 70.

E. MACPHERSON

Vespasiano da Bisticci

(Or FIORENTINO.)

Florentine humanist and librarian, b. in 1421; d. in 1498. He was chiefly a merchant of choice books, and had a share in the formation of all the great libraries of the time. When Cosimo de' Medici wished to create the Laurentian Library of Florence, Vespasiano advised him and sent him by Tommaso Parentucelli (later Nicholas V) a systematic catalogue, which became the plan of the new collection. In 22 months Vespasiano had 200 volumes made for Cosimo by 25 copyists. Most of them were, under the circumstances, books of theology and liturgical chant. He had performed important services for the diffusion of classical authors when Nicholas V, the true founder of the Vatican Library, became pope. He devoted fourteen years to collecting the library of the Duke of Urbino, organizing it in a quite modern manner; it contained the catalogues of the Vatican, of St. Mark's Florence, of the Visconti Library at Pavia, and even that of Oxford. Vespasiano had only a mediocre knowledge of Latin, and he is one of the few writers of the time who acknowledged it. He left a collection of 300 biographies, which is a source of the first rank for the history of fifteenth-century humanism: "Vite di uomini illustri del secolo XV", published by Mai, "Spicilegium Romanum", I, Rome, 1839; by Frati, Bologna, 1892. He is certainly inferior to the great Italian historians, such as Machiavelli and Guicciardini, but he admirably depicts the atmosphere of the period. His accounts plunge the reader into the very atmosphere of Florence; they contain delicate pictures of manners, charming portraits, noble female figures, of which last point it is possible to judge by reading the biography of Alessandro Bardi (ed. Mai, 593). The general tone is that of a grave moralist, who shows the dangers of the Renaissance, especially for women, warns against the reading of the novelists, and reproaches the Florentines with usury and illicit gains. Vespasiano is a panegyrist of Nicholas V, the great book-lover; he is severe to the point of injustice against Callistus III, the indifferent lender of books, which, however, he did not give over to pillage, as Vespasiano accuses him of doing.

BURCKHARDT, Die Cultur der Renaissance, I (3rd ed., Leipzig, 1877), 198, 236-39, 261, 354; MUNTZ and FABRE, La bibliotheque du Vatican au XV siecle (Paris, 1887), 116; SANDYS, A History of Classical Scholarship, II (Cambridge, 1908), 95.

PAUL LEJAY

Vespers

This subject will be treated under the following headings:

I. Vespers in the Sixth Century

In the sixth century the Office of Vespers in the Latin Church was almost the same as it has been throughout the Middle Ages and up to the present day. In a document of unquestionable authority of that period the Office is described as follows: The evening hour, or vespertina synaxis, is composed of four psalms, a capitulum, a response, a hymn, a versicle, a canticle from the Gospel, litany (Kyrie eleison, Christe eleison), Pater with the ordinary finale, oratio, or prayer, and dismissal (Regula Sancti Benedicti, xvii). The psalms recited are taken from the series of psalms from Pss. cix to cxlvii (with the exception of the groups cxvii to cxxvii and cxxxiii to cxlii); Pss. cxxxviii, cxliii, cxliv are each divided into two portions, whilst the Pss. cxv and cxvi are united to form one. This disposition is almost the same as that of the "Ordo Romanus", except that the number of psalms recited is five instead of four. They are taken, however, from the series cix to cxlvii. Here, too, we find the capitulum, versicle, and canticle of the "Magnificat". The hymn is a more recent introduction in the Roman Vespers; the finale (litanies, Pater, versicles, prayers) seems all to have existed from this epoch as in the Benedictine cursus. Like the other hours, therefore, Vespers is divided into two parts; the psalmody, or singing of the psalms, forming the first part, and the capitulum and formulæ the second. Vesper time varied according to the season between the tenth hour (4 p. m.) and the twelfth (6 p. m.). As a matter of fact it was no longer the evening hour, but the sunset hour, so that it was celebrated before the day had departed and consequently before there was any necessity for artificial light (Regula S. Benedicti, xli). This is a point to be noted, as it was an innovation. Before this epoch this evening synaxis was celebrated with all the torches alight. The reason of this is that St. Benedict introduced in the cursus, another hour--that of Compline--which was prescribed to be celebrated in the evening, and which might be considered as a kind of doubling of the Office of Lucernarium.

II. Origin of Vespers: Period anterior to the Sixth Century

The Rule of St. Benedict was written about 530-43 and represents the Office of Vespers drawn up in the manner shown above. Much earlier than this we find an evening Office corresponding to both that of Vespers and that of Compline. Its name varies. In St. Benedict we find the name vespera which has prevailed, whence the French word vêpres and the English vespers. Cassian calls it Vespertina synaxis, or Vespertina solemnitas (P. L., XLIX, 88-9). The name, however, by which it was most widely known during that period was Lucernalis or Lucernaria hora (l. c., 126). This name is characteristic. It was so called because at this hour a number of candles were lighted, not only to give light, but also for symbolical purposes. The "Peregrinatio", which gives the liturgical order as practised at Jerusalem and the date of which is probably the fourth century, calls it Lichnicon. This is the Latin transcription of the Greek word lychnikon, which corresponds to the word Lucernarium (cf. AMBROSIAN LITURGY AND RITE). The author tells us that this Office took place at the tenth hour (four o'clock in the evening); it is really the Office des lumières, i.e. of the lights; it was celebrated in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre; all the lamps and torches of the church were lighted, making, as the author says, "an infinite light". The Lucernal psalms were sung, after which followed the recitation of the supplication and commemorations or litanies, then the prayers, and finally the blessing and dismissal. In the "Antiphonary of Bangor", an Irish document of the sixth century, Vespers are called hora duodecima, which corresponds to six o'clock in the evening, or hora incensi, or again ad cereum benedicendum. All these names are interesting to note. The hora incensi recalls the custom of burning incense at this hour, while at the same time the candles were lighted. The term ad cereum benedicendum presents a still greater interest because it reminds us that the ceremony of the lights at Vespers was symbolic and very solemn. In Prudentius (fourth century) we find a hymn entitled "Ad incensum lucernæ" which, according to some critics, would appear to have been composed for the hour of the Lucernarium (Arevalo, "Prudenti carmina", I, 124, ed. 1788; cf. also Cabrol, "Les églises de Jérusalem, la discipline et la liturgie au IVe siècle", 47). Others see in this an allusion to the ceremony of the paschal candle. However, the Lucernarium may have had, at that time, some analogy with the ceremony of Holy Saturday, and the hymn could thus be adapted to one or the other. In the "Old Gallican Sacramentary" (Thomasi, "Opera", VI, 395) we find for Holy Saturday an oratio ad duodecima, designed to celebrate the light as well as the Resurrection, which would seem thus to favour our hypothesis. St. Basil also speaks of a hymn being sung at the moment when the torches were lighted, doubtless the famous hymn--"Lumen hilare" (cf. Cabrol, l. c., 47-8).

Vespers, then, was the most solemn Office of the day and was composed of the psalms called Lucernales (Ps. cxl is called psalmus lucernalis by the Apostolic Constitutions, VIII, xxxv; cf. II, lix; also Cabrol, l. c.). The "Peregrinatio" does not mention the number of psalms sung at this hour, but Cassian, who, a short time after the "Peregrinatio", describes this Office as it was celebrated by the monks of Egypt, says they recited twelve psalms as at Vigils (Matins). Then two lessons were read as at Vigils, one from the Old, and the other from the New, Testament. Each psalm was followed by a short prayer (P. L., XLIX, 83-4, 88-9). For the rest Cassian agrees with the "Peregrinatio". He says the Office was recited towards five or six o'clock and that all the lights were lighted. This evening synaxis is looked upon as a souvenir of the evening sacrifice of the Old Law. The use of incense, candles, and other lights would seem to suggest the Jewish rites which accompanied the evening sacrifice (Ex., xxix, 39; Num., xxviii, 4; Ps. cxl., 2; Dan., ix, 21; Par., xxiii, 30; cf. Haneberg, "Die relig. Alterth. der Bibel", Munich, 1869, p. 362). It may thus be seen that the Lucernarium was, together with Vigils, the most important part of the Offices of the day, being composed of almost the same elements as the latter, at least in certain regions. Its existence in the fourth century is also confirmed by St. Augustine, St. Ambrose, St. Basil, St. Ephraem, and, a little later, by several councils in Gaul and Spain, and by the various monastic rules (see texts in Bäumer-Biron, l. c., 78, 80, 118-27, 188-98, 208, etc.). The "Apostolic Constitutions" (VIII, xxi, 34, 35) describe it in almost the same terms as the "Peregrinatio". Before the fourth century we find allusions to the evening prayer in the earlier Fathers, Clement I of Rome (Clemens Romanus), St. Ignatius, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Origen, the Canons of St. Hippolytus, St. Cyprian (for texts see Bäumer-Biron, l. c., I, 20 sqq., 73-4, 76, 78). Pliny, in his famous letter at the beginning of the second century, speaks of liturgical reunions of the Christians in the morning and in the evening: "coetus antelucani et vespertini" (Ep., x, 97). Vespers is, therefore, together with Vigils, the most ancient Office known in the Church.

III. Office of Vespers in the Middle Ages: Variations

We have already remarked that the institution of the Office of Compline transformed the Lucernarium by taking from it something of its importance and symbolism, the latter at the same time losing its original sense. We have seen that St. Benedict calls it only Vespera, the name which has prevailed over that of Lucernarium (cf. Ducange, "Glossarium med. et inf. lat.", s.v. Vesperae). The Gallican Liturgy, the Mozarabic Liturgy, and, to a certain extent, the Milanese, have preserved the Lucernarium (cf. Bäumer-Biron, l. c., 358). The Greek Church retains the "Lumen hilare" and some other traces of the ancient Lucernarium in the Offices of Vespers and Compline (cf. Smith, "Dict. Christ. Antiq.", s.v. Office, Divine). In the Rule of St. Columbanus, dated about 590, Vespers still has twelve psalms, amongst which are Pss. cxii and cxiii, the Gradual psalms, Pss. cxix sqq. (cf. Gougaud, "Les chrétientés celtiques", 309; "Dict. d'arch. chrét. et de liturgie", s.v. Celtique, 3015). The "Antiphonary of Bangor", a document of Irish origin, gives for Vespers Ps. cxii and also the "Gloria in excelsis". For modifications since the twelfth century, cf. Bäumer-Biron, l. c., II, 54 sqq.

IV. Latest Changes

The Decree "Divino afflatu" (1 Nov., 1911) involves some important changes in the old Roman Office. New psalms are appointed for each day of the week. These psalms are to be recited with their antiphons, not only at the Office de tempore (Sundays and feriæ) but also on feasts of a lesser rite than doubles of the second class, that is to say, on simples, semidoubles (double minors), and double majors. On feasts which are doubles of the second class and a fortiori of the first class, as well as on feasts of the Blessed Virgin, the Holy Angels, and Apostles, the psalms are proper to the feast as heretofore. On all feasts, of whatever rite, the second part of Vespers, that is, the capitulum, hymn, antiphon of the "Magnificat", is taken from the Sanctorale. On semi-doubles and those of a lesser rite the suffrages are now reduced to a single antiphon and orison which is common to all the saints heretofore commemorated, whilst the preces ("Miserere" and versicles) formerly imposed on the greater feriæ are now suppressed.

V. Symbolism: the Hymns

Notwithstanding the changes brought about in the course of time, Vespers still remains the great and important Office of the evening. As already pointed out, it recalls the sacrificium vespertinum of the Old Law. In the same manner as the night is consecrated to God by the Office of the Vigil, so also is the end of the day by Vespers. It terminates, as Matins formerly terminated, and Lauds at present terminates, by a lection, or reading, from the Gospel, or canticum evangelii, which, for Vespers, is always the "Magnificat". This is one of the characteristic traits of Vespers, one of the liturgical elements which this particular Office has retained in almost all regions and at all times. There are, however, a few exceptions, as in some liturgies the "Magnificat" is sung at Lauds (cf. Cabrol in "Dict. d'arch. et de liturgie", s.v. Cantiques évangéliques). This place of honour accorded so persistently to the canticle of Mary from such remote antiquity is but one of the many, and of the least striking, proofs of the devotion which has always been paid to the Blessed Virgin in the Church. The psalms used at Vespers have been selected, from time immemorial, from Pss. cix to cxlvii, with the exception of Ps. cxviii, which on account of its unusual length does not square with the others, and is consequently ordinarily divided up into parts and recited at the little hours. Pss. i to cviii are consecrated to Matins and Lauds, whilst the three last psalms, cxlviii to cl, belong invariably to Lauds. The series of hymns consecrated to Vespers in the Roman Breviary also form a class apart and help to give us some hints as to the symbolism of this hour. The hymns are very ancient, dating probably, for the most part, from the sixth century. They have this particular characteristic--they are all devoted to the praise of one of the days of the Creation, according to the day of the week, thus: the first, "Lucis Creator optime", on Sunday, to the creation of light; the second, on Monday, to the separation of the earth and the waters; the third, on Tuesday, to the creation of the plants; the fourth, on Wednesday, to the creation of the sun and moon; the fifth, on Thursday, to the creation of the fish; the sixth, on Friday, to the creation of the beasts of the earth; Saturday is an exception, the hymn on that day being in honour of the Blessed Trinity, because of the Office of Sunday then commencing.

VI. Importance

We can now see the great importance which the Church appears to have attached always to the Office of Vespers. It is the only one which has remained popular (excepting, of course, the Holy Sacrifice which we do not consider here as an Office) among pious Christians up to the present day. Matins and Lauds, on account of the hour at which they are celebrated, have always been more or less inaccessible to the faithful; likewise the little hours, except, perhaps, Terce, which serves as an introduction to the Mass. Vespers, on the contrary, occupies a privileged place towards the end of the day. On Sundays it is the Office most likely to bring the faithful together in church for the second time and thus becomingly completes the Divine Service for that day. This is why, in the majority of Catholic countries, the custom of Sunday Vespers has been for so long a time, and is still, maintained. It is quite conformable to tradition, moreover, to invest this Office with a particular solemnity. The Vesper psalms, as well as the hymns and antiphons, are well calculated to edify the faithful. Lastly, the ancient custom of having a lection or reading from the Old, or from the New, Testament, or from the homilies of the Fathers, might well in certain cases and to a certain extent be re-adopted, or serve as the subject-matter for the sermon which is sometimes delivered at this service.

Notes

Concerning the Lucernarium: MÉNARD in P. L., LXXVIII, 335; Regula incerti auctoris (sixth century) in P. L., LXVI, 996; Regula magistri in P. L., LXXXVIII, 1004, 1006; L, 1013; MARTÈNE, De ant. eccl. ritibus, IV, 32 sqq.; DE VERT, Explic. des cérémonies de l'église, II, 385; IV, 133, 150; LEBRUN, Explic. de la messe, I, 66 sqq.; CABROL, Les églises de Jérusalem, la discipline et la liturgie au ive siècle (Paris, 1895), 47-8.

Concerning Vespers: ZACCARIA, Onomasticon, 13, 19; CAVALIERI, Opera liturgica, II (Bassani, 1778), 139; MORIN, Les vêpres du dimanche in Rev. bénédictine, IV (1887), 434-46; LECLERQ in Dict. d'arch. et de liturgie, II, 1270 sqq.; BÄUMER-BIRON, Hist. du bréviaire, I, 208-31, etc.; BATIFFOL, Hist. de bréviaire romain (3rd ed., 1911), 23, 108, etc.

F. CABROL

Music of Vespers

The texts (e.g. antiphons, psalms, hymn) sung in Vespers vary according to the feast or the season of the church year; and in churches where it is obligatory to recite publicly the Canonical Hours of the Divine Office the Vespers must follow the direction of the "Ordo". The Second Plenary Council of Baltimore (1868) decreed (no. 379) that complete vespers be sung on Sundays and feasts in all churches, as far as possible, after the Roman fashion, and that vespers never be replaced by other exercises of piety; "for the solemn worship approved by bishops of the Church and flourishing through so many centuries must be deemed pleasing to Almighty God". To facilitate the introduction of Vespers, the council further legislated (no. 380) that the rudiments of Gregorian chant be taught in parish schools, "so that gradually the greater part of the congregation might be enabled to join with the sacred ministers and the choir" in singing. A Rescript of the Congregation of Sacred Rites (11 Mar., 1882, Montereyen. et Angelor. n. 3539, 3) declared that the custom which had obtained in certain churches, of singing some verses of all or of some psalms in Vespers and of omitting the others, should be wholly eliminated; and two years later the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore (1884) decreed (no. 118): "Moreover we will and command . . . that, where the office of Vespers is performed, complete Vespers, that is, with integral psalms, be sung."

The difficulty of preparing different antiphons, psalms, etc., for the various Sundays and feasts overtaxed the powers of ordinary choirs; and happily a decree of the S.R.C. (29 Dec., 1884, Lucionen. n. 3624, 12) met the difficulty by declaring that in mere parish churches, where there is no obligation of public recitation of the Divine Office, but where Vespers are sung for the devotion of the people, the Vespers may be taken from any Office, such as that of the Most Blessed Sacrament or of the Blessed Virgin, provided that the sacred ministers privately recite the Vespers proper to the day. It is therefore clear that in practically all churches in English-speaking countries the choir may repeat the same Vespers, selected from any appropriate feast, for every Sunday or feast. Composers and publishers of church music have further simplified the task of the choir by issuing brochures which contain all the ceremonial or rubrical directions in English, in their appropriate place, and which give easy musical settings to the antiphons, psalms, etc., or furnish easy accompaniments to the plainsong melodies. Must the Vespers thus selected at the pleasure of the priest or the choirmaster be complete in every part, e.g., the antiphons? Johner (p. 14) declares that "such Vespers must accord in every respect with the Vespers of the Office selected". The Provincial Council of Milwaukee follows the Fourth Provincial Council of Cincinnati in the desire that "in vespers on Sundays the antiphons, the entire five psalms, and the hymn proper to the occurring feast should never be omitted, unless the bishop deems it impossible to observe this rule on account of local circumstances". In this connection, the discussion in the "Ecclesiastical Review" (Dec., 1911) should be consulted.

The texts must be either sung or "recited" in a clear and intelligible manner. The portions that must be sung are: the first verse of the "Magnificat", the first and last verse of the hymn, the verses where genuflection is prescribed (e.g. "Veni Creator", "O Crux Ave" on the Feasts of the Holy Cross, "Ave Maris Stella") or where all bow the head (e.g. the "Gloria Patri"). The "Ceremonial of Bishops" permits alternate verses of the "Magnificat" to be supplied by the organ, provided the choir meanwhile recites the text in an intelligible voice or--a better arrangement--a single chanter sings the text to accompaniment of the organ. The S.R.C. (Senogallien., 4 Mar., 1901, V) permits a similar arrangement for the psalms, but adds the condition that there be a poverty of voices (e.g. one or two voices on each side of the choir, as the Ephemerid. liturg., XV, 353, interprets). The "Ceremonial of Bishops" forbids the playing of the organ on Sundays of Lent and Advent, except Gaudete and Lætare Sundays (the third of Advent and the fourth of Lent); but a Rescript of the S.R.C. (11 May, 1911) permits the organ to be played when it is necessary for sustaining the voices, provided it ceases when the voices cease. The S.R.C. (Senogallien., 4 Mar., 1901, VII) requires a pause to be made at the asterisk in each verse of the psalms, "any custom whatsoever to the contrary notwithstanding".

The general musical character of vespers is indicated in the "Instruction on Sacred Music" issued by Pius X (22 Nov., 1903), no. IV, 11. Classical polyphony or modern music may be used, although the Gregorian chant is the typical setting for the texts. While the antiphons should regularly be in the assigned Gregorian melodies, it is permitted occasionally to sing them in figured music; but in this case "they must never have either the form of a concert melody or the fullness of a motet or cantata". While the "Gloria Patri" and "Sicut erat" may also be in figured music, the psalms should regularly be in Gregorian chant; but on greater feasts the verses in Gregorian chant may be alternated with verses in falsibordoni or "with verses similarly composed in a proper manner". Single psalms may sometimes be sung wholly in modern music, "provided the form proper to psalmody be preserved in such compositions; that is, provided the singers seem to be psalmodizing among themselves, either with new motifs, or with those taken from the Gregorian chant or based upon it". The "Instruction" immediately adds that "psalms known as di concerto are, therefore, forever excluded and prohibited". These di concerto psalms are "theatrical compositions . . . with soli, chorus, and orchestra, comprising adagios, allegros, and often dance airs" (Duclos, 106, footnote 2). Pius X alludes to these in his letter to Card. Respighi (8 Dec., 1903): "For the devout psalmody of the clergy, in which the people also used to join, there have been substituted interminable musical compositions on the words of the Psalms, all of them modelled on old theatrical works, and most of them of such meagre artistic value that they would not be tolerated for a moment even in second-rate concerts. Certain it is that Christian piety and devotion are not promoted by them; the curiosity of some of the less intelligent is fed, but the majority, disgusted and scandalized, wonder how it is that such an abuse can still survive. We, therefore, wish the cause to be completely extirpated, and that the solemnity of vespers should be celebrated according to the liturgical rules indicated by us." As to the hymn, the "Ceremonial of Bishops" permits recitation of alternate stanzas with accompaniment of organ.

JOHNER, New School of Gregorian Chant (New York, 1906), 9-14; BENEDICTINES OF STANBROOK, Grammar of Plainsong (London, 1905), 68-9; POTHIER, Les mélodies grégoriennes (Tournai, 1880), 240-68; TERRY, Catholic Church Music (London, 1907), 21-38 (Church legislation), 125-6 (Order of Vespers), 128 (Pontifical Vespers), 136 (Vespers of the Dead); DUCLOS, Sa sainteté Pie X et la réforme de la musique religieuse (Rome, 1905), 105-7; FINN, WELLS, and O'BRIEN, Manual of Church Music (Philadelphia, 1905), 90-4, 134-5; JOHNER, Die Psalmodie nach der Vaticana (Ratisbon, 1911); Ecclesiastical Rev., Feb., 1904, 184-8 (Letter of Pius X to Card. Respighi): "There is much to be corrected or removed in the chants of the Mass . . . but that which needs a thorough renewal is the singing of Vespers of the feasts celebrated in the different churches and basilicas. The liturgical prescriptions of the `Cæremoniale episcoporum', and the beautiful musical traditions of the classical Roman school, are no longer to be found. . . . And do you, Lord Cardinal, neither grant indulgences nor concede delays. The difficulty is not diminished but rather augmented by postponement, and since the thing is to be done, let it be done immediately and resolutely. . . . The Vesper service will, indeed, be notably shortened. But if the rectors of the churches desire on a special occasion to prolong the function somewhat . . . [they may] have a suitable sermon after the vespers, closed with Solemn Benediction of the Most Holy Sacrament"; LEMAISTRE, Vatican Chant (New York, 1905), 69-95; BENEDICTINES OF SOLESMES, Rules for Psalmody (Rome, 1904), no. 598, English ed.; IDEM, Psalmi in notis pro vesperis et officiis in omnibus dominicis et festis duplicibus (Rome, 1909), no. 590, gives the texts in full under each of the eight psalm tones in notation; PIÉRARD, Psautier-vespéral, séméiographie nouvelle (Rome, 1908); BONVIN, On Recitation in Church Music (March, 1906, 145-56).

H.T. HENRY

Sicilian Vespers

The traditional name given to the insurrection which broke out at Palermo on Easter Tuesday, 31 March, 1282, against the domination of Charles of Anjou. It was only in the fifteenth century, during the excitement aroused by the passing of Charles VIII (Nov., 1494), that the expression "Sicilian Vespers" and the legend of the Easter bells calling the insurgents to arms seem to have originated. Charles of Anjou, Count of Provence and brother of St. Louis, had received from Urban IV the crown of the Two Sicilies which had been taken from the Hohenstaufens. Having defeated Manfred in 1256, he established his authority by force, and cruelly repressed the Ghibelline revolt led by Conradin in 1268, in consequence of which 130 barons were condemned to death. As undisputed master of the Two Sicilies, he resumed the ambitious designs of his predecessors, the Norman and Hohenstaufen kings, and sought to establish his dominion in the Mediterranean. In 1281 he was on the point of attaining his object; in 1277 he had purchased the rights of Mary of Antioch to the Kingdom of Jerusalem, he was the protector of the Kingdom of Armenia, the Emir of Tunis was paying him tribute, and his soldiers occupied a portion of the Morea. Finally, at his instance Pope Martin IV had excommunicated the Emperor Palæologus. Then, concluding a treaty which assured him the assistance of the Venetian fleet (3 July, 1281), Charles was organizing a formidable crusade for the conquest of Constantinople, when the revolt of 31 March, 1282, obliged him to direct his arms against Sicily and save the Byzantine Empire.

It was long held on the authority of Giovanni Villani (d. 1348) that this revolt was the result of a plot between Michael Palæologus, Pedro III, and the Sicilian barons, whose active agent was a gentleman of Salerno, Giovanni da Procida. In a famous book, "La Guerra del Vespero Siciliano", the first edition of which appeared at Palermo in 1842, the Sicilian patriot Amari endeavoured to show that the insurrection of 1282 was a wholly spontaneous popular movement due to the oppressive administration and fiscal tyranny of Charles of Anjou. The legend of Giovanni de Procida did not appear until the fourteenth century, in works such as the "Ribellamentu di Sicilia" (Biblioth. Script. Aragon., I, 241-74), or in a letter of King Robert of Naples (1314). Contemporary historians [Saba Malaspina, Dean of Malta ("Rerum sicularum historia", ed. Muratori, "SS. Rer. Ital.", VIII, 785-874), who wrote about 1285; Bartolommeo de Neocastro, author of an "Historia Sicula" (ed. Muratori, "SS. Rer. Ital.", XIII, 1013-1196)] speak only of a popular outbreak of fury consequent upon injuries and annoyances of all kinds inflicted on the people by French barons and the officers of Charles of Anjou. A search of the State archives of Naples and Barcelona has led to the same conclusion.

What is certain is that on 31 March the insurrection broke out, amid cries of "Death to the French", after vexatious searches had been carried on by the command of the Governor of Palermo, who wished to deprive the inhabitants of the right of bearing arms. Within a few weeks the revolt spread over the entire island and more than 8000 French were massacred. The towns of Sicily formed a sort of federal republic and placed themselves under the protection of the Holy See. It was only when Charles of Anjou appeared before Messina with all his troops that the Sicilian nobles called to their aid King Pedro III of Aragon, and the other towns only approved this action when it seemed to them impossible to resist Charles of Anjou.

Amari's theory, though fundamentally correct, is too sweeping. The popular and spontaneous nature of the uprising of 1282 is an indisputable fact, but on the other hand the negotiations between Michael Palæologus and Pedro of Aragon unquestionably took place. In these Giovanni da Procida played a part which it is impossible to define precisely, and possibly certain of the Sicilian nobles were aware of this intrigue. There was at least a coincidence between the coalition against Charles of Anjou and the popular insurrection of the Sicilian Vespers. The results of this revolt were considerable, as it proved the death blow to all the projects for the domination of the East formed by Charles of Anjou. The crusade against Constantinople did not take place, and Charles of Anjou began the long and fruitless warfare against the House of Aragon, which exhausted his resources without obtaining Sicily. A compromise between the rival dynasties was only effected in 1302.

LOUIS BRÉHIER

Amerigo Vespucci

A famous Italian navigator, born at Florence, 9 March, 1451; died at Seville, 22 February, 1512; he was the third son of Ser Nastagio, a notary of Florence, son of Amerigo Vespucci. His mother was Lisabetta, daughter of Ser Giovanni, son of Ser Andrea Mini; her mother was Maria, daughter of Simone, son of Francesco di Filicaia. The date of Vespucci's birth, formerly much discussed, is now definitively established by the books of the Ufficio delle Tratte, preserved in the Reale Archivio di Stato of Florence, where the following passage is found: "Amerigo, son of Ser Nastagio, son of Ser Amerigo Vespucci, on the IX day of March MCCCCLI" (1452, common style). The mother of Amerigo's father was Nanna, daughter of Mestro Michele, of the Onesti of Pescia, and sister of Mestro Michele, the father of Nicolè and of Francesco, who resided in the magistrato supremo of the Priors in the Republic of Florence.

Vespucci received his first instruction from his uncle Giorgio Antonio, a Platonic philosopher who was a teacher of the greater part of the Florentine nobility. Amerigo cultivated the study of literature, including that of the Latin language, as is shown by a small autograph codex in the Biblioteca Ricardiana of Florence, entitled "Dettati da mettere in latino" at the end of which there is written the following: "This booklet was written by Amerigo Se Anastagio Vespucci." He also wrote a letter in Latin to his father, dated 19 October, 1476, in which he gives an account of his studies. Possibly Vespucci had relations with Toscanelli, who, as is known, died in 1482, two years after Amerigo left for Spain. Thereafter, Amerigo devoted himself to the study of physics, geometry, astronomy, and cosmography, in which sciences he made rapid progress.

After the death of his father, which occurred about the year 1483, Amerigo, perhaps on account of the unfortunate circumstances of his family, became steward in the house of Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco de' Medici, with various charges that were multiplied in proportion as he acquired the confidence and the affection of the sons of Pierfrancesco, of whose rural and commercial interests he became superintendent, as appears from numerous letters written to him, which have recently been published. From 1478 to 1480 he was attached to the embassy at Paris, under his relative Guido Antonio Vespucci, ambassador of Florence to Louis XI of France. Accordingly, he wrote many reports to the Signoria, which are preserved in the Archivio di Stato at Florence. The sojourn of Vespucci at Paris, and that of Duke Rene of Lorraine at Florence, earlier, explain why Vespucci should have sent to Duke Rene' a copy, in Latin, of the letter of the four voyages, written in Italian to the gondolfiere perpetuo Piero Soderini, and why one of the earliest editions of Vespucci's voyages (the third) should have been made at Paris in 1504. The offices that Vespucci held from the younger branch of the house of Medici explain why the former, between November of 1491 and February of 1492, joined, at Seville, Giannetto di Lorenzo Berardo Berardi, chief of a house, established at that city, which had close financial relations with the younger branch of the Medici, that is, with Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco and his son. Through his intelligence, he became one of the chief agents of that firm, which, later, had a leading part in fitting out the oceanic expeditions that led to the discovery of the New World.

The successful voyages of Christopher Columbus increased Vespucci's desire to take a part in the general European movement to seek a western passage to the Indies. Having obtained three ships from Ferdinand, King of Castille, Vespucci was able to undertake his first voyage. Accordingly, he set sail from Cadiz on 10 May, 1497, sailing toward the Fortunate Islands, and then laying his course towards the west. After twenty-seven or thirty-seven days, on 6 or 10 April, he touched the mainland (Guiana or Brazil?), and was well received by the inhabitants. In this first voyage he may have entered the Gulf of Mexico and coasted along a great portion of the United States, as far as the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Then he returned to Spain, and landed at Cadiz on 15 October, 1498. There is no other relation of this first voyage than that contained in the first letter of Amerigo Vespucci concerning the islands newly found in his four voyages, addressed to Piero Soderini, Gonfaloniere of Florence.

On 16 May, 1499, Vespucci sailed from Cadiz on his second voyage, with Alonzo de Ojeda and Juan de la Cosa. He directed his course to Cape Verde, crossed the Equator, and saw land, on the coast of Brazil, at 4° or 5° S., possibly near Aracati. From there, he coasted along the Guianas and the continent, from the Gulf of Paria to Maracaibo and Cape de la Vela; he discovered Cape St. Augustine and the River Amazon, and made notable observations of the sea currents, of the Southern Cross and other southern constellations. He returned to Spain in September, 1500. There two expeditions were undertaken in the service of Spain; the third and the fourth, in that of Portugal. In consequence of the long fatigues of his second voyage, Vespucci was taken ill of the quartan ague. When his health was re-established, he wrote an account of his voyage to Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco de' Medici.

On 14 May, 1501, he sailed from Lisbon to Cape Verde, and thence westward, until, on 1 January, 1502, he came to a gulf at 13° S., to which he gave the name of Bahia de Todos Santos, and upon the shores of which the city of Bahia now stands. From there he coasted along South America, as far as the Plata. On his return, he discovered the island of South Georgia, at 54° S., and 1200 miles east of Tierra del Fuego. He arrived at Lisbon on 7 September, 1502. On his fourth voyage, he sailed with Gonzal Coelho from Lisbon, on 10 June, 1503, touched land at the Cape Verde Islands, and bent his course towards the Bay of All Saints. At Cape Frio, having found great quantities of brazil-wood, he established an agency, exactly on the Tropic of Capricorn. Thereafter, he coasted along the continent, nearly to the Rio de la Plata, and then returned to Lisbon, where he arrived on 18 June, 1504. Vespucci made a fifth voyage with Juan de la Cosa, between May and December, 1505; they visited the Gulf of Darien, and sailed 200 miles up the Atrato River. During that voyage, they collected gold and pearls, and received information of there being a great abundance of those substances in that region. This voyage was repeated by the two navigators in 1507. Of these two expeditions, however, there is no special account by Vespucci. It should be added that, in 1506, Vespucci was busy in Spain, fitting out the expedition of Pinzón, which was abandoned in March, 1507.

The facts regarding the voyages of Vespucci are accepted as given in the above narrative by the majority of the authoritative biographers of that navigator; but the inexactness of the printed texts, the difficulty of identifying the names of places, used by Vespucci, with the modern ones, and the error of attributing sincerity to all assertions contained in official documents, especially in those relating to legal proceedings, have given rise to enormous confusion in all that relates to the voyages of Amerigo Vespucci, of which the chief base for future criticism will be the investigation of the apocryphal codices of the narratives of the voyages of Vespucci, written at the time when the authentic ones appeared. Vespucci was certainly held in high esteem in Spain, where he established himself after his voyages in the service of Portugal. In 1505, by a royal decree of 14 April of that year, he had received Spanish naturalization, and a decree of 6 August, 1508, named him piloto mayor de España, a title corresponding to the modern one of head of the admiralty, and which was borne by Vespucci until his death.

Amerigo Vespucci married Maria Cerezo, apparently in 1505. The only precise information concerning her is furnished by the royal decree of 28 March, 1512, according her a pension, on account of the satisfaction given by her husband as piloto mayor, which pension was confirmed by the decree of 16 November, 1523. On the other hand, a decree of 26 December, 1524, grants the remainder of her pension to her sister Catalina Cerezo; which proves that Maria died between the two latter dates, and that she left no children. With Amerigo Vespucci, however, was the son of his brother Antonio, Giovanni, who was born on 6 March, 1486, and who was named piloto mayor in 1512, upon the death of his predecessor and uncle, Amerigo. For information concerning him, see Harrisse, "The Discovery of North America" (1892), 744-5.

It is impossible to determine, here, the place of Amerigo Vespucci in the history of the discovery of the New World, in relation to those of Christopher Columbus, of Sebastian Cabot, and of the brothers Pinzón. First it is necessary to distinguish between the geographical, and the social, discovery of America. The former is due to the Icelanders, who established, on the eastern coast of Greenland, a colony that was maintained from the tenth to the fifteenth century, of the history of which a very good compendium is given by Fischer in "The Discoveries of the Norsemen in America" (London, 1902); in connection with this work there should be consulted the collection of documents concerning the relations of the Church of Rome with Greenland during these centuries, published by order of Leo XIII.

The discovery of America was due to the failure of the crusade against the Turks which was attempted by Pius II, and the success of which was frustrated by the rivalry and corruption of the states of Europe at that time. Europe then felt the necessity of going to the East by another way, of seeking the East by way of the West, a motto that became the flag of the navigators of that age. Paolo Toscanelli, whose sincerity of religious sentiment was not less than his great merit of scientific attainment (see the present writer's work on Toscanelli, I, 1894, in the "Raccolta Colombiana", part V), foresaw, before Portugal foresaw it, that the time had come for that country to take the place of Italy as the intermediary of the commerce between Europe and Asia, and therefore, as the starting-point of navigators and adventurers, seduced by the desire of being the executors of the great emprise. Columbus was the first to reach land to the west--one of the islands of the Bahamas--on 12 October, 1492, convinced that he had reached one of the islands of eastern Asia. He was followed by Vespucci, Cabot, and many others, each proposing to himself to reach the land of spices, that is, India.

We may not, here, enter into the very intricate question of which, of the three navigators named, was the first to tread the mainland of the New World. For that, it would be necessary to have before us the correct texts of all the fundamental documents concerning those navigators. As regards Columbus, the "Raccolta Colombiana", published by the Italian Government on the occasion of the fourth centenary of the discovery of America, is an exhaustive document. Very important, for all the history of the discovery of America, are the collection of Navarrete, the books and documents published by Harrisse, the Duchess of Alba, and many others. But as regards Vespucci, there are, at Florence, the apocryphal synchronous copies of all the accounts of his voyages, except the text that was used for the publication of the "Mundus novus", of which accounts, as will be seen further on, a correct edition is lacking.

The first editions of the documents relating to the voyages of Vespucci may be classified as follows:

A. Parisian text.-- A. "Mundus novus" (third voyage), 1st ed., 1503 or 1504. B. Florentine texts- Ba. Letter of the four voyages in the years 1497-98, 1499-1500, 1501-2, 1503-4; 1st ed., 1507; Bb. Letter published by Baldini in 1745, relating to the second voyage; Bc. Letter published by Bartolozzi in 1789, relating to the third voyage; Bd. Letter published by Baldelli Boni in 1827, relating to the third voyage. C. Venetian texts:- Ca. Letter of Girolamo Vianello to the Signoria of Venice, dated 23 December, 1506, relating to a fifth voyage, published for the first time by Humboldt, in 1839. Cb. Letter of Francesco Corner to the Signoria of Venice, dated 19 June, 1508, relating to a sixth voyage, published for the first time by Harrisee, in 1892.

The principal question turns, at once, upon the authenticity of the voyage and upon that of the publications A, Ba, Bb, Bc, Bd, Ca, and Cb. In general, a very erroneous confusion is made between two points: nearly every one admits the authenticity of the publications A and Ba, but many reject the authenticity of the first voyage, made by Vespucci in the years 1497 and 1498, and described in the publication Ba. Some, as Varuhagen and others, deny the authenticity of the texts Bb, Bc, and Bd, while others hold the contrary opinion with regard to one or another, or to all three, of these texts. Nearly all regard as inadmissible the fifth and the sixth voyages, narrated in the texts Ca and Cb.

For the various editions of the "Mundus novus", the publication of Sarnow and of Trubenbach is exhaustive, but there is no critical edition of any of the other texts, which were printed with many errors; while, as has been said, the apocryphal, though contemporary, texts of all of them are preserved at Florence. The present writer proposed the preparation of a critical edition of this kind, and the proposition was approved by three National Geographical Congresses of Italy, held at Florence (1898), at Milan (1901), and at Naples (1904), respectively, and by the International Congress of Americanists, held at Stuttgart, in August, 1904. Recently, a commission has been created at Florence, for the execution of that purpose, under the presidency of the Marchese Filippo Corsini, president of the Society of Geographical and Colonial Study resident at Florence; of this commission, Professor Attilo Mori, of the Military Geographical Institute, and the writer of this article are members. Until the publication in question appears, it will be useless to discuss the genuineness of the voyages of Vespucci, basing such discussion upon the incorrect texts that are now available--exception being made of the "Mundus novus", cited above. Those seeking further details in regard to these codices may consult Harrisse, "Biblioteca americana vetustissima" (1868), and "Additions" (1872). All the works of that author, whether bibliographical or historical, are the basis for any work on the discovery of America.

It is well known today that Vespucci was in no way responsible for the fact that his name, and not that of Columbus, was given to the new World, and therefore, that he certainly does not deserve the charge of theft that has been made against him by many; among them, the famous American publicist, Emerson, who was led into error by partisan writers. On the other hand, the affectionate correspondence between the two great navigators would suffice to disprove all unworthy accusations. The charge received some support form the efforts of a considerable portion of the clergy, throughout the world, to obtain the canonization of Columbus, which, however, was unsuccessful, when the merits of the case were examined, by order of Leo XIII, on the occasion of the fourth centenary of the discovery of America. At that time, the general outcry against Amerigo Vespucci was so great that the famous American statesman Blaine, upon the occasion of the exposition at Chicago, published a book under the title of "Columbus and Columbia," in order that it might not be contaminated by the unholy name of Vespucci.

It may be remarked that, at the time of the discovery of America, as is now clearly proven, the narratives of the voyages of Vespucci were more widely disseminated, by far, than were those of the voyages of Columbus, and that Florence was the chief centre for the diffusion of news on the discovery of the New World. To the close relations that existed between Gianfrancesco Pico, Duke della Mirandola, and Florence, and between Gian Francesco and the learned German, Matthew Ringmann, who, in 1504, edited one of the most important editions of the "Mundus novus", under the title of "De ora antartica per regem Portugalliae pridem inventa", and to the close relations between Ringmann and the geographer Martin Waldseemuller (Hylacomilus), is due the fact that when, in 1507, Waldseemuller published the celebrated work "Cosmographiae introductio", at Saint-Dié, in Lorraine, he gave the name of America to the New World, arguing that, since the three continents then known, Europe, Asia, and Africa, had names of women, it was proper to give the newly-discovered continent also the name of a woman, taking it from the baptismal name of the discoverer of the new continent, Vespucci. Many attempts were made to name the New World Columbia, as justice seemed to demand, but all such efforts failed. The writer has tried to clear up these points and to prove the honesty of Vespucci; and his efforts have received the approbation of the Numismatic and Archaeological Society of New York; for, the latter, having resolved to strike, each year, a medal commemorative of some benefactor of America, decided that the first of these medals should be coined in honour of Amerigo Vespucci, and requested the writer to proposed the best portrait of the great navigator for reproduction. The Society accepted the writer's suggestion and gave the preference to the portrait of the Galleria degli Uffizi of Florence, which is generally considered to be the most genuine, but thought that they should take into account the great map of Waldseemuller, of 1507, on which there is a portrait of Amerigo Vespucci; and therefore, the medal was struck with the two portraits, one on either side.

In the following bibliography, we have deemed it useless to cite the general works upon America, and upon its discovery, which, although not concerning Vespucci specially, refer to him, as are those of ASENSIO, FISKE, GAFFAREL, HERRERA, HUGUES, HUMBOLDT, IRVING, PAYNE, ROBERTSON, ROSELLY DE LORGUES, TIRABOSCHI, WINDSOR, etc., for which the reader is referred to the articles AMERICA and COLUMBUS; we have, on the contrary, limited our citations to the works that have brought new facts to light, and are not, therefore, expositions of the opinions of their authors. For the bibliography of the various editions of the voyages of Vespucci and of the authors who wrote concerning them between the years 1492 and 1551, see HARRISSE, Biblioteca americana veiustissima (New York, 1866); IDEM, Additions (Paris, 1872); and for the same, but, to the present day, see FUMAGALLI, Bibliographia di Amerigo Vespucci in BANDINI, Vita di Amerigo Vespucci illustrata e commentata da Gustavo Uzielli (Florence, 1898), 104-28. Some may find it strange that certain authors are not cited, as, for example, Hugues, who has written numerous very learned works on Vespucci, totally devoid, however, of criticism; they are all cited in the Bibliografia of Fumagalli. Hugues and Varnhagen regard as apocryphal some narratives of voyages of Vespucci that are regarded by other writers as being the most authentic; and they base this view on the fact that the narratives in question were published two or three centuries after the death of Vespucci. By that reasoning, one should declare the commentary of Pietro Alighieri on the "Divine Comedy" to be apocryphal, for it was published five centuries after Dante's death. Hugues and Berchet, however, in accordance with that reasoning, have omitted some of the accounts of the voyages of Vespucci, contained in the "Raccolta Colombiana", part V, vol. II, and, like all students of Vespucci, except Sarnow and Trubenbach, they have entirely omitted any critical study of the texts of the narratives, accepting the current publications as they stand, without taking heed to compare them with the codices. RAMUSIO, Navigationi et viaggi, I (Venice, 1550-59); BANDINI, Vita e letters di Amerigo Vespucci (Florence, 1745); BARTOLOZZI, Ricerche istorico-critiche circa alle scoperte di Amerigo Vespucci (Florence, 1789); CANOVAI, Viaggi d'Amerigo Vespucci (Florence, 1817); BALDELLI-BONI, Il milione, I (Florence, 1827), p. liii-lix; NAVARRETE, Coleccion de los viages y descubrimientos, III (Madrid, 1825-37); HUMBOLDT, Examen critique de l'histoire du nouveau continent, XI (Paris, 1836-39), 157; SANTAREM, Recherches sur Americ Vespuce et ses voyages (Paris, 1842); AVEZAC, Les voyaes d'Americ Vespuce au compte de l'Espagne in Bulletin de la societe de geographie de Paris (1858); VARNHAGEN, Amerigo Vespucci, Son caractere, ses ecrits (meme les moins authentiques), sa vie et ses navigations (Lima, 1865); HARRISSE, Bibliotheca americana vetustissima. Additions (Paris, 1872), p. xxviii; IDEM, The Discovery of North America (London, 1892); TOSCANELLI, Notes et documents concernant les rapports entre l'Italie et l'Amerique (Florence, 1893); MARKHAM, Vespucci. The Letters and other Documents illustrative of his Career (London, 1894); HARRISSE, Americus Vespuccius (London, 1895); THATCHER, The Continent of America: its Discovery and its Baptism (New York, 1896); UZIELLI, Amerigo Vespucci davanti la critica storica in Atti del Congresso Geografico Italiano (Florence, 1898); BANDINI, Vita di Amerigo Vespucci, illustrata e commentata da Gustavo Uzielli (Florence, 1898); MASETTI BENCINI AND HOWARD SMITH, La vita di Amerigo Vespucci in Firenze (Florence, 1903); SARNOW AND TRUBENBACH, Mundus novus (Strasburg, 1903); FISCHER AND WIESER, The oldest Map with the name of America of the year 1507 and the Carta Marina of the year 1516 by M. Waldseemuller (Ilacomilus) (Innsbruck, 1903); Proceedings and Papers of the American Numismatic and Archaeological Society of New York City, 46th annual meeting (1904), 8-15.

GUSTAVO UZIELLI

Vestibule (Porch)

A hall projecting in front of the façade of a church, found from the fifth century both in the East and the West. In western Europe it was generally a narrow open ante-chamber with sloping roof and closed on the smaller sides, which were probably, when connected with the main buildings, provided with apses, as in the baptistery of San Giovanni at Rome. In the East, especially in Syria, this ante-chamber was given a fine façade, and was flanked by two towers. It was also frequently closed in front in Oriental countries and entered by one or three doors, and often had two stories, as in the churches of Turmanin and Suweda. The purpose of the vestibule, at least in western Europe, was not to provide a resting-place for penitents, but to deaden the noise outside. In medieval times Italy held firmly to the simple open chamber with sloping roof. North of the Alps, however, the vestibule developed into a projecting structure united with the main building, recalling the Syrian churches. The method of construction shown in the palace church of Charlemagne at Aachen, an ante-structure of several stories between the two western round towers, was adopted in the early Romanesque period, especially by the Cluniac monks. The Romanesque architecture also made use of a covered ante-structure placed before the west front. This style was first used on a large scale in the cathedral at Speyer, where the vestibule has three stories. The churches in which the main entrance was on the side aisle had a vestibule or portico (called the "Paradise") on the same aisle, as in the cathedrals at Münster and Paderborn. The name "Paradise", originally given to the atrium, was given later to the ante-chamber. In Gothic architecture the vestibule was reduced in size, and became an ornamental baldachino-like structure, which also served as an entrance, as in the cathedral at Freiburg in Baden. The name "Paradise" for the vestibule explains the festival, popular among the common people and called the Expulsion of Adam, held at Halberstadt as early as 1391, and which took place in the vestibule. In the Middle Ages alms were distributed and offerings made in the vestibule. The latter was used at times also for judicial proceedings, and in many such ante-chambers the announcements of the standard weights and measures were posted up, as at Freiburg in Baden the standard weight of bread in 1270, 1317, and 1320.

In Italy the architecture of the Renaissance and of the Rococo style held to the vestibule, which had been made sacred by tradition. Alberti considered its use necessary on all occasions. Even basilicas, as San Giovanni in Lateran and Santa Maria Maggiore, received new porticoes, which in the two churches mentioned were constructed as loggias in two stories. These vestibules were detrimental to both churches, concealing the façades and giving the buildings a somewhat secular appearance. The Carmelite church at Arezzo has a vestibule with columns built by Benedetto da Majano.

BEDA KLEINSCHMIDT

Vestments

IN WESTERN EUROPE

By liturgical vestments are meant the vestments that, according to the rules of the Church or from ecclesiastical usage, are to be worn by the clergy in performing the ceremonies of the services of the Church, consequently, above all, at the celebration of the Mass, then in the administration of the sacraments, at blessings, the solemn recitation of the canonical hours, public services of prayer, processions, etc. The liturgical vestments of the Latin Rite are: the amice, alb, cincture, maniple, stole, tunicle, dalmatic, chasuble, surplice, cope, sandals, stockings (or buskins), gloves, mitre, pallium, succinctorium, and fanon. The pope has the most elaborate and the greatest number of liturgical vestments, for all the vestments mentioned belong to him. The vestments of the priest are the amice, alb, cincture, maniple, stole, chasuble--vestments which the priest wears at the celebration of the Mass--then, in addition, the surplice and the cope. Besides the vestments worn by the priest the liturgical dress of the bishop includes also the tunic, dalmatic, sandals, buskins, gloves, and mitre; those of the archbishop include further the pallium. The subdiaconal vestments consist of the amice, alb, cincture, maniple, and dalmatic; those of the deacon of amice, alb, cincture, maniple, stole, and dalmatic. Finally, the lower clergy wear the surplice as a liturgical vestment, a vestment that belongs to all the grades of ordination.

IN THE EAST

There are also liturgical vestments in the Oriental Rites. They are fewer than the sacerdotal vestments of western Europe and vary from these also as regards form, nature, and use. Nevertheless the sacerdotal vestments of the East and West agree in essentials. The liturgical vestments worn in all Oriental Rites as well as in western Europe are: the under-tunic (alb), the cincture, stole, chasuble, and omophorion (pallium). In the East the chasuble is still bell-shaped, but, according to present usage, is slit in front in some rites. It is customary only in a few of the Eastern Rites to use the humeral veil and the mitre as in the Latin Rite, still, some, instead of a mitre, have a hat like the tiara, a covering like a turban, or, lastly, a cowl or veil. the vestments peculiar to the Oriental Rites are: the sakkos, the outer vestment of the Greek bishop, which is like a dalmatic; the epigonation of the Greeks and Armenians, a rhombic-shaped ornament of bishops and prelates that hangs on the right side to below the knee, hence the name; lastly the epimanikia, cuffs, or gloves with the part for the hand cut off, customary in all Oriental Rites. Pontifical vestments are the liturgical head-covering, excepting in the Armenian Rite where the priest also wears such a covering for the head, the sakkos, the omophorion, the epigonation, and the epimanikia.

Liturgical Vestments in a more General Sense

Besides the vestments worn by the clergy there are various other articles of clothing worn by ecclesiastics which are not, it is true, designated as vestes sacrae, but which, nevertheless, in a general sense can be included among the liturgical vestments. Thus, in the Latin Rite, there are the cappa magna, the amess, the mozetta, the rochet, the biretta; in the Greek Rite the mandyas (mantle) of the bishops, and the biretta-like covering for the head called kamelaukion, which, when worn by monks or bishops, has a veil called exokamelaukion.

Origin

The liturgical vestments have by no means remained the same from the founding of the Church until the present day. There is as great a difference between the vestments worn at the Holy Sacrifice in the pre-Constantinian period, and even in the following centuries, and those now customary at the services of the Church, as between the rite of the early Church and that of modern times. Just as the ceremonies that today surround the celebration of the Sacred Mysteries are the product of a long development, so are also the present liturgical vestments. It was sought at an earlier era to derive the Christian priestly dress from the vestments of the Jewish religion. Yet even a superficial comparison of the liturgical vestments of the New Covenant with those of the Old should have sufficed to show the error of such an opinion. The Christian vestments did not originate in the priestly dress of the Old Testament, they have, rather, developed from the secular dress of the Graeco-Roman world. The influence of the dress of the Mosaic cult upon the form of the Christian priestly dress can only conceded in this sense that the recollection of it must have made the use of liturgical garments specially reserved for the services of the Church appear not only entirely in keeping with the dignity of the mysteries of religion, but even necessary. This influence, however, was clearly general in character, not such as to make the Jewish priestly dress the prototype of the Christian.

Development

Four main periods may be distinguished in the development of the Christian priestly dress. The first embraces the era before Constantine. In that period the priestly dress did not yet differ from the secular costume in form and ornament. The dress of daily life was worn at the offices of the Church. In times of peace and under normal conditions better garments were probably used, and these were especially reserved for the celebration of the Sacred Mysteries. It would undoubtedly have scandalized the faithful if they had seen the dusty, dirty, or worn garments. The opinion which St. Jerome expresses--"The Divine religion has one dress in the service of sacred things, another in ordinary intercourse and life"--is certainly true also for the pre-Constantinian period, which it is hardly permitted to regard as a period of liturgical barbarism. It is even possible, though not demonstrated, that, as early as the close of the pre-Constantinian period, liturgical insignia came into use among the bishops and deacons, as the orarion, or stole, and the omophorion or pallium.

The second period embraces the time from about the fourth to the ninth century. It is the most important epoch in the history ofliturgical vestments, the epoch in which not merely a priestly dress in a special sense was created, but one which at the same time determined the chief vestments of the present liturgical dress. The process of development which was completed in this period includes five essential elements: definitive separation of the vestments worn at the liturgical offices from all non-liturgical clothing, and especially from that used in secular life; separation and definitive settlement of certain articles of dress; introduction of the sacrales distinctiva; employment of the vestments definitively assigned for use at the Divine offices with retention of the ordinary clothing under these vestments; lastly, introduction of a special blessing for the vestments intended for liturgical use. It cannot be decided positively how far this development was consummated by means of mere custom, and how far by positive ecclesiastical legislation. However, it may be taken as certain that the growth of a priestly dress did not proceed everywhere at a equal pace, and it is very probable that this development was completed earlier and more rapidly in the East than in Western Europe, and that the Orient was the prototype for Western Europe, at least with regard to certain garments (stole and pallium). It was of much importance for the forming of a special priestly costume differing from the garments ordinarily ward, that the poenula (cloak or mantle) and the long tunic, which came into universal use in the third century and were also worn in the offices of the Church, were gradually replaced in daily life, from about the sixth century, by the shorter tunic and the more convenient open mantle. The Church did not join in this return to the former fashion, but retained the existing costume, which was ore suitable to the dignity of the Divine offices; this fact in itself was the beginning of a rubrically distinct priestly dress. As regards the influence of Rome upon the development of a liturgical costume in other parts of Western Europe, such influence cannot have been of much importance outside of Italy before the eighth century. The case, however, was different in the eighth century, and as early as the ninth century Roman custom was authoritative nearly everywhere in the West. The great simplicity of the liturgical dress in the pre-Carlovingian era is very striking. The dignified shape with many folds that is constantly met in the sculpture and pictures of that era did not in fact require decoration, which at that time was limited almost exclusively to the clavi, the red ornamental trimming of the dalmatic.

The third period, extending from the ninth to the thirteenth century, completed the development of the priestly vestments in Western Europe. It ceased to be customary for the acolytes to wear the chasuble, stole, and maniple. The tunicle became the customary vestment of the subdeacons; the chasuble was the vestment exclusively worn at the celebration of the Mass, as the pluvial, the liturgical caps, took its place at the other functions. Another, and new vestment is the surplice, which, appearing in the course of the eleventh century, began in steadily increasing measure to replace the alb. In the third period, above all, the pontifical dress received its definitive form. This was the natural result of the enormous advance in the secular importance of the bishops and of their position in public life, which occurred in the Carlovingian era. Vestments such as sandals and stockings became exclusively episcopal ornaments. New pontifical vestments were the gloves, the succinctorium, and the mitre, to which were added among the German bishops the rational, an imitation of the pallium. When Amalarius wrote his treatise, "De officiis ecclesiasticis" at the beginning of the ninth century, eleven garments were included among liturgical vestments: amice, alb, cingulum, maniple, stole, tunic, dalmatic, chasuble, sandals, pontifical stockings, and the pallium. In the time of Innocent III the liturgical vestments numbered seventeen, the fanon, that is the papal amice, not being included among these. Protestants have claimed that the development of the priestly dress in the third period was due to the formulation of the dogma of Transubstantiation. However, this is entirely incorrect. As early as about 800, therefore, before the discussion concerning the Eucharist, the liturgical dress was complete in all its essential parts. The introduction of the pluvial, or cope, and the surplice arose from the desire to be more comfortable; but the development of the pontifical costume was based, as has been said, upon the important secular position which the bishops enjoyed from the Carlovingian era, which naturally brought about a corresponding enrichment of the pontifical dress. The doctrine of Transubstantiation exerted no influence upon the development of the liturgical vestments.

In the Greek Rite--the development of the liturgical dress in the other Oriental Rites cannot be traced in this period--only the pontifical dress was enriched. The new pontifical vestments were: the sakkos, still a patriarchal vestment; the epimanikien; the epigonation, in so far as this vestment had not already been introduced before the ninth century; the epigonation first had the form of a handkerchief and was called enchirion (hand-cloth, handkerchief), it was not named epigonation until the twelfth century.

In the fourth period, from the thirteenth century to the present time, the history of the liturgical vestments is almost entirely the history of their rubrical evolution, their adornment with embroidery and ornamental trimmings, and the nature of the material from which they are made. For the various particulars the reader is referred to what is said in the articles devoted to the various vestments. In general the tendency in the fourth period has been towards greater richness of material and ornamentation, but, at the same time, towards greater convenience, therefore, a constantly increasing shortening and fitting to the figure of the vestments, naturally impairing the form and aesthetic effect of the vestments. The mitre alone has been permitted to grow into a tower disproportionate in shape. Taking everything together, the development which liturgical vestments have experienced since the thirteenth century, and more especially since the sixteenth century, hardly appears to be a matter of satisfaction, notwithstanding all the richness and costliness of ornamentation, but rather a lamentable disfigurement caused by the taste of the time.

In the East there has been little or no development in the fourth period. The one vestment which has been added to the liturgical dress of the Greek Rite is the episcopal mitre.

Liturgical Vestments and Protestantism

As is known, all denominations of Protestantism rejected the doctrine of the sacrifice of the Mass and of the priesthood. It would therefore have been logical if all denominations had done away with liturgical vestments. For even though they are not in themselves essential to the Sacrifice of the Mass, being only something external, yet by their entire history they are connected most intimately with it. Of all the Protestant denominations logical action was taken only be the Reformed Churches (Calvinist and Zwinglian), which did away entirely with the Mass and the Mass vestments, and substituted for these vestments in the church service a dress taken from secular life. On the other hand, the Lutherans did not show themselves so logical. It is true that, in agreement with their rejection of celibacy and the degrees of Holy orders, they rejected the cincture, the symbol of chastity, as well as the maniple and stole, the insignia of the higher orders, but they retained the alb or surplice and the chasuble for the celebration of Communion; and this was the case in Germany until the eighteenth century; in isolated cases the surplice is worn there even now; it is worn also in Scandinavia, where the bishops retained the cope, and in Denmark up to the present time. In England the first edition of the Book of Common Prayer in 1549 still permitted the surplice, alb, chasuble, cappa, and tunic; three years later, however on account of the greatly increased strength of Calvinism, the second edition of the Prayer Book only allowed the rochet and surplice. It is true that the third edition, of 1559, issued during the reign of Elizabeth, restored the force of the regulations of the first edition, but only in theory. In practice the regulations of the second edition prevailed. Further, the attempt of the bishops at the Convocation of Canterbury to save at least the cappa and surplice had no permanent success on account of the domination of Puritanical opinions. Not even the surplice, the minimum of liturgical dress, remained in universal use. A movement for the revival of the old liturgical vestments began in England with the appearance of Ritualism. Although the ecclesiastical authorities fought the revival with determination, yet is has continually advanced until now there are at least 2000 Anglican churches where the old liturgical vestments have been reintroduced.

Blessing of the Liturgical Vestments

Not all the vestes sacrae necessarily require a blessing. This is strictly commanded only for the amice, alb, maniple, stole, chasuble, and perhaps also the cincture. The blessing of the liturgical vestments is a prerogative of the bishop; others can bless them only when specially empowered to do so. Vestments that have been blessed lose the blessing when the form is essentially altered, when they are much worn, and are therefore unworthy of the holy service, finally, when very greatly repaired. On account of the lack of positive information, it cannot be even approximately settled as to the time at which the blessing of liturgical vestments was introduced. The first certain statements concerning the blessing of liturgical vestments are made by the pseudo-Isidore and Benedict Levita, both belonging to the middle of the ninth century, but the oldest known formula of blessing, which is in the Pontifical of Reims, belongs to the end of the ninth century, for the benedictory prayers the Pontifical of Egbert of York are an interpolation of the tenth century. From the twelfth century and especially in the later Middle Ages, the forms of blessing were very numerous. The blessing f the vestments was probably always the prerogative of the bishop, though this is not expressly mentioned before Gilbert of Limerick in the early part of the twelfth century. In the Oriental Rites the blessing of the liturgical vestments is also customary; it is given by the bishop, but in case of necessity the priest can perform the ceremony. The benedictory prayers in the Greek Rite are very similar to those in the Latin Rite. It is perhaps even more difficult to determine the time when the blessing of the vestments in the Oriental Rites began than to settle its date in Western Europe.

Symbolism

It has been said at times that mystical considerations were the cause of the introduction of liturgical vestments and consequently of their existence. But this is absolutely wrong. These mystical considerations did not create the priestly dress; they are, rather, the result of the appearance of these vestments and of the defining of the individual ones. The omophorion and orarion were the first to receive symbolical interpretation, which was given by Isidore of Pelusium (died about 440); the earliest symbolism of the entire priestly dress of the Greek Rite is found in the Historia ekklneiastike, probably of the eighth century. This work was the basis of the symbolical interpretation of the sacred vestments among the Greek liturgists until the late Middle Ages. In Western Europe the first attempt to give a symbolical meaning to the vestments of the Mass is found in what is called the Gallican explanation of the Mass. However, it was not until the ninth century that a more complete symbolism of the priestly dress was attempted in Gaul. The mystical interpretation became from this time a permanent theme for the writers on the liturgy, both in the Middle Ages and in modern times. In the symbolical interpretation of the sacred vestments, Amalarius of Metz became especially important. Even in his lifetime Amalarius aroused much opposition on account of his symbolism, which, it must be acknowledged, was not seldom peculiar, labored, and arbitrary. In the end, however, his mystical interpretations, which in reality contained many beautiful and edifying thoughts were greatly admired and were a model for liturgists until far into the thirteenth century. Various traces of the influence of Amalarius's interpretations are evident even in the late Middle Ages. A symbolism, however, appeared even as early as the ninth century in certain liturgical prayers, the prayers that are spoken when putting on the sacred vestments, and the words pronounced by the bishop at an ordination, when he gives the garments to the newly ordained. It should, however, be said that up to the twelfth century these prayers appear only occasionally in the Sacramentaries, Missals, and Pontificals, but after this they soon appeared more frequently in those books. It is a striking fact that the symbolism of these prayers often pursues its own course without regard to the interpretations of the liturgists. It was not until towards the end of the Middle Ages that a greater agreement arose between the symbolism of the liturgists and what might be called the official symbolism of the Church expressed in the prayers in question; this official symbolism, moreover, differed greatly at different periods and in different places.

Characterization of the Symbolism

This is not the place to enter into the details of the many interpretations which the various liturgical vestments have received and which, notwithstanding the chaff, contain much pure wheat. (For such detailed presentation cf. Braun, "Geschichte der liturg. Gewandung", pp. 701 sqq.) It must suffice here to give them a general characterization. The symbolism customary among the liturgists from the ninth to the eleventh century is a moral symbolism, that is the liturgical vestments were made to symbolize the official and priestly virtues of their wearers. In the twelfth century there were added to this the typico-dogmatic symbolism, in which the vestments were expounded in reference to Christ Whose representative is the priest, and soon they symbolized Christ's Incarnation, the two Natures of Christ, the unity and relation to each other of these natures before long the virtues of Christ, His teaching, and soon, lately, His relations to the Church. Curious to say the vestments were not made to symbolize Christ's Passion and Death. This last symbolism, which may be called typico-representative, first appeared in the course of the thirteenth century, and quickly became very popular, because it was the most easily expressed and consequently most easily understood by the people. The people interpreted the vestments as symbolizing the instruments of Christ's Passion, as the cloth with which Christ's head was covered (amice), the robe put on him in mockery (alb), the fetters (cincture, maniple), etc., and the priest who was clothed with these was regarded as typifying the suffering Saviour. A fourth method of interpretation may be called the allegorical. This method of interpretation looks upon the priest at the altar as the warrior of God, who fights with the foe of the God of the people, and regards his vestments as his weapons in this spiritual struggle. The first traces of this symbolism are found in the ninth and tenth centuries, but are not seen in a developed form until the twelfth century. However this last method of symbolism was never very widespread. As early as the Middle Ages the moral symbolism was customary in the putting on of the vestments, and in the prayers of the ordination service. The typical reference to Christ was always foreign to them.

Up to the fifteenth century it was customary among the Greek liturgists to make use, almost exclusively, of typical symbolism. It was not until later that they employed moral symbolism; this symbolism apparently arose while putting on the vestments, a custom of prayer that had in the meantime come into use. In these prayers the liturgical vestments symbolize the virtues of their wearers.

MARRIOTT, Vesiarium christianum (London, 1868); Realencyklopadie der christ. Altertumer, II (Freiburg, 1886); THALHOFER, Handbuch der kath. Liturgik (Freiburg, 1883); BRAUN, Die liturgische Gewandung im Occident und Orient (Freiburg 1907).

JOSEPH BRAUN

Veszprém

(VESPRIMIENSIS.)

Diocese in Hungary, suffragan of Gran, one of the sees founded about 1009 by King St. Stephen, or perhaps by Queen Gisela, his wife. Later records make no mention of a foundation by the queen. But the see owes much to the queen who caused the beautiful cathedral with its four spires to be built; it was completely destroyed by fire in 1276. Queen Gisela gave rich donations to the church, especially gold and silver plate. She also selected Veszprpremeacute;m as her place of burial, and her example was followed by several of the succeeding queens of Hungary. From the earliest times the bishop possessed the right of crowning the queen, and was ex officio, her chancellor. The bishopric was one of the richest episcopates in Hungary during the fourteenth century. A celebrated school offered facilities for theological studies as well as for the study of law. When, in 1276, the town was destroyed in the conflicts between the lords of Németujvár and those of Csák, the cathedral, the school, and the library were demolished. After the battle of Mohács (1526) the Turks destroyed the possessions of the see; shortly afterwards, the Reformation seriously affected ecclesiastical life. The battles, which were fought against the Turks in this part of Hungary, greatly injured the see; the ecclesiastical and religious life was ruined in spite of the endeavours of prominent bishops like Francis Forgách, George Lippay, George Szelepesenyi, and George Széchényi. It was not until 1686, after the fall of Turkish suzerainty in Hungary, and the conquest of Buda, that better times came. The work of reconstruction began in 1711 and was completed in the reigns of Charles III and Maria Theresa. In 1777 several districts of the diocese were taken away and incorporated in the newly- established sees of Stuhlweissenburg and of Steinamanger. Of the later bishops of Veszprpremeacute;m the following are particularly notable: Martin Biró, one of the most zealous opponents of Protestantism; Joseph Kopacsy (1825-41), afterwards Archbishop of Gran; John Ranolder (1848-75), prominent in public instruction and the education of girls. Since 1888 Baron Charles Horning is bishop. The diocese consists of the "Komitate" of Veszprpremeacute;m, Zala, and Somogy. It is divided into 5 archdeaneries and vice-archdeaneries. It has 9 active and 19 titular abbeys; 5 active and 12 titular provostships; 226 parishes; 18 monasteries and 23 convents of women with 140 and 228 inmates, respectively. The chapter consists of 12 active and of 6 titular canons; the number of clergy is 358. The diocese has a Catholic population of about 613,477.

ROKA, Vitae Veszprimiensium Praesulum (Posen, 1779); PRAY, S. Specimen Hierarchiae Hungariae, I, 260-307; Monumenta Romana episcopatus Veszprimiensis (3 vols., Budapest, 1896); LUKCSICS, Bibliographia diaecensis Veszprimiensis (Budapest, 1909); A katolikus Magyarorszag (Budapest, 1902), in Hungarian; KOLLANTI, A veszprmi puspok kiralyne koronazasi joganak tortenete (Veszprpremeacute;m, 1901); Schematismus diaecesis (Veszprpremeacute;m, 1911). On Bishop Martin Biro see the Hungarian work: HORNING, Padanyi Biro Marton veszprpremeacute;mi puspok naploja (Veszprpremeacute;m, 1903).

A. ALDASY

The Royal Veto

(In the appointment of Bishops in Ireland and England.)

Although the penal laws enacted against the Catholics of Ireland and of England were still on the statute book towards the close of the eighteenth century, they were less strictly administered than before. Several causes helped to bring this about. The Catholics formed the vast majority of the population of Ireland. Their sympathies were thought to be with the French whom England had at that time cause to fear. The penal laws had utterly failed of their purpose, and the Government hoped to reach that purpose by other means. The authority of the bishops and the priests, the influence of both on the people, was great; and the Government thought if it could direct or control the influence of the bishops it would secure the allegiance of the people. It hoped thus to fetter the action of the Catholic Church in Ireland. The Government saw an opportunity when the College of Maynooth was about to be founded. The Irish bishops were asked if they would agree that the president or professors of the proposed college be appointed by Government; if they would consent that the bishops be appointed by the king; and how they would advise the pope if such a proposal about the appointment of bishops were laid before him. The bishops on 17 Feb., 1795, rejected the first and second proposals categorically. To the third they answered that they would advise the people "not to agree to his Majesty's nomination if it could be avoided; in unavoidable, the king to nominate one of three to be recommended by the Provincial bishops".

In connection with the Union, Pitt intended to bring in a Catholic Relief Bill, or at least he so pretended; and he sought for such security of Catholic loyalty as might allay the prejudices which he should have to encounter in England. He commissioned Lord Castlereagh to make such arrangements as would satisfy the king that no priest whose loyalty the king should have reason to suspect would be appointed to an Irish bishopric. Ten bishops, trustees of Maynooth College, met on 17 Jan., 1799, to transact college business. Castlereagh submitted his views to them, reminding them of the suspicion of disloyalty under which the Catholics of Ireland lay since the insurrection of the year before. The ten bishops embodied their reply in certain resolutions, of which this was one: "That in the appointment of the Prelates of the Roman Catholic Religion to vacant sees within the kingdom, such interference of government as may enable it to be satisfied of the loyalty of the person appointed, is just, and ought to be agreed to." And as a way towards that security, they expressed the opinion that the name of the priest chosen to be submitted to the pope might be transmitted to the Government, but that the Government should declare within a month whether there was any cause to suspect his loyalty. They did not leave to the Government to decide the reasonableness of such suspicion, for they said "if government have any proper objection against such candidate". Moreover they laid it down that no security given must in the working out "infringe the discipline of the Roman Catholic Church, or diminish the religious influence which the Prelates of the Church ought justly to possess over their respective flocks", and that any agreement made "can have no effect without the sanction of the Holy See".

Those were not resolutions of the Irish episcopate, but simply the opinion of ten bishops who had met to transact business of another kind; they were driven against their wish to give an opinion. On 15 June, 1799, Cardinal Borgia, prefect of Propaganda, having heard a report that Dr. Troy, Archbishop of Dublin, was leader of a party which was disposed to compromise the jurisdiction of the Holy See by assenting to some plan about church discipline, wrote to him asking him for the facts. On 17 Aug., 1799, Dr. Troy replied to the cardinal declaring it was quite false that any plan had been arranged, and having given an account of the meeting and resolutions of the Maynooth trustees he adds: "As to the proposal itself, the Prelates were anxious to set aside or elude it; but being unable to do so, they determined to have the rights of the Church secured." In the spring of 1800, Dr. Troy, writing on the same topic to his agent at Rome, Father Concannon, says: "We all wish to remain as we are; and we would so, were it not that too many of the clergy were active in the wicked rebellion, or did not oppose it. If the Prelates had refused to consider the proposal, they would be accused of a design to exercise an influence over the people, independent of government, for seditious purposes. Nothing but the well grounded apprehension of such a charge, though groundless in itself, would have induced the Prelates to consider the proposal in any manner. . .If we had rejected the proposal in toto we would be considered as rebels. This is a fact. If we agreed to it without reference to Rome we would be branded as schismatics. We were between Scylla and Charybdis." The opinion thus expressed by those ten bishops in Jan., 1799, was never published by them. It was not meant for publication; the bishops never took official cognizance of it except to discard it. Every pronouncement of the Irish bishops from that time forward rejected absolutely any proposal which would allow the British Government to meddle in appointments to Irish bishoprics.

In 1805 Fox and Lord Grenville presented to Parliament a petition to relieve the Irish Catholics from their civil disabilities. In the debate which followed, Sir John Hippisley spoke in a general way of securities for Catholic loyalty. That was the first time any such proposal was made in public; but nothing definite was proposed. On 25 May, 1808, Grattan, in moving for a parliamentary committee to consider the claims of the Catholics, said he was authorized by them to propose "that no Catholic bishop be appointed without the entire approbation of His Majesty". On 27 May May, Lord Grenville presented a petition for the Catholics in the Lords, and, in moving for a committee, proposed an effective veto for the king on the appointment of bishops. What is known as the "veto" thus assumed a definite form as a public question in Ireland and in England. How did the Irish bishops meet it? Dr. Milner tells us in his "Supplementary Memoirs of the English Catholics" that "both in conversation and in correspondence they universally disavowed" what had been said by the promoters of the bill on the subject of the veto; and on 14 September they met and officially protested against the veto. In 1810 Grattan gave notice that he would again bring the Catholic claims before Parliament. On 1 Feb. the English Catholic Board held a meeting in London at which a series of resolutions were carried, including one which involved the veto. It is known as the 5th resolution. Charles Butler, the leader of the English Catholic vetoists, says of that resolution that it "was with the single exception of the Vicar Apostolic of the Midland District, agent of the Irish bishops, unanimously adopted". He was Dr. Milner, whom the Irish bishops had commissioned in 1807 to represent them. The Irish bishops at once condemned the 5th resolution. In May, Grattan's motion for a committee to consider the Catholic petition was defeated. Early in June Lord Donoughmore made a like motion in the House of Lords, which was also defeated. But here was the parting of the ways between the great body of the Irish Catholics led by the bishops, and the English Catholics, with whom were the vicars Apostolic except Milner.

In 1813 Grattan, Canning, and Castlereagh brought in what purported to be a Catholic Relief Bill, with a condition which would practically place the appointment of bishops in the hands of a board of commissioners to be named by the king; it also provided that anyone exercising special functions or receiving documents from the Holy See without the knowledge and approbation of that Board, was to be considered guilty of a misdemeanour. Those uncatholic conditions notwithstanding, an amendment to the Bill was proposed and carried, which would still disable Catholics "to sit and vote in Parliament". Thus the Bill was lost; bigotry had defeated itself. The Irish bishops had declared that they could not accept the Bill "without incurring the guilt of schism". A few days after, at a meeting of the Irish Catholic Board in Dublin, O'Connell proposed that their thanks be sent to the bishops. Some of the laity, who were in agreement with the English Catholics, opposed the vote; but it was carried by a very large majority. The vetoists were disappointed at the defeat of the Bill of 1813. It then occurred to them that if they could get the Holy See in any way to countenance it, the mark of schism attached to it by the Irish bishops would no longer stain it. They therefore represented to Propanganda the great benefit which the Catholic religion would derive from Emancipation, and the harmlessness of the vetoistic conditions on which the Government had offered it. Dr. Milner was represented to the aged secretary of Propaganda, Mgr. Quarantotti, as one whose uncompromising attitude would fasten the chains more painfully on the Catholics; the assent of the vicars Apostolic of England was set forth as evidence that the veto claimed in the Bill did not contain any element of danger for religion; the motive for the opposition in Ireland was made to appear political rather than religious.

In the light of these representations Mgr. Quarantotti, whilst rejecting certain conditions of the Relief Bill as not lawful, declared that securities for the loyalty of bishops which the Government claimed might be allowed. That was the famous Rescript of February, 1814. It did not contain an order, but rather a permission, its words being: "Haec cum ita sint, indulgemus" etc., thus leaving the Catholics free to accept or refuse Emancipation on the condition offered. It raised a storm, however, in Ireland. The Irish bishops deputed Dr. Murray and Dr. Milner to represent to the pope, who had been a prisoner when it was issued, that there was danger in the Rescript such as it was. Pius VII declared that Mgr. Quartantotii "ought not to have written that letter without authority from the Holy See". He appointed a commission to examine the question. In the meantime, Murat marched on Rome, and the pope fled to Genoa. On 26 April, 1815, Cardinal Litta, prefect of Propaganda, in a letter set forth the only conditions under which the Catholics could safely accept Emancipation. It rejected all arrangements hitherto proposed. The claim of the Government to examine communications between the Catholics and the Holy See "cannot even be taken into consideration". As to the appointment of bishops, it said that quite enough provision had been made for their loyalty in the Catholic oath; but for their greater satisfaction it permits "those to whom it appertains" to present to the king's ministers a list of the candidates they select for bishoprics; it insisted, however, that if those names were presented, the Government must, if it should think any of them "obnoxious or suspected" name him "at once"; moreover, that a sufficient number, from amongst whom the pope would appoint the bishop, must always remain even after the government objection.

The Catholics of Ireland had become so mistrustful of the Government that they still feared danger and they sent deputies to Rome to make known their feelings to the pope. Two replies were sent, one to the bishops and the other to the laity. The pope insisted on the terms of Cardinal Litta's letter, pointing out its reasonableness under the trying circumstances. According to the terms of the letter it would, in fact, be the fault of the ecclesiastics who had the selection of candidates if any undesirable person were left for papal appointment. Cardinal Litta's letter was the last papal document issued on the veto question. The controversy between vetoists and anti-vetoists was, however, kept alive by the passions which it had raised. The Catholic cause grew so hopeless that in December, 1821, O'Connell submitted to Dr. Blake, the Vicar-General of Dublin, a sort of veto plan, to get his opinion on it. Soon after the prospect grew brighter; O'Connell founded the Catholic Association in 1823, through which he won Emancipation six years later for the Catholics of Ireland and England--without a veto.

Archives of Propaganda; Orthodox Journal, files from 1813 to 1817; BUTLER, Hist. Memoirs of the English, Irish, and Scottish Catholics (London, 1822); MILNER, Supplementary Memoirs of English Catholics (London, 1820), written to correct Butler's work; WYSE, Hist. of the Cathlic Association in Ireland (London, 1829); FLEMNG, The Catholic Veto (Dublin, 1911); Dublin Evening Post, files especially from 1808 to 1817.

M. O'RIORDAN

Conrad Vetter

Preacher and polemical writer, b. at Engen in the present Grand Duchy of Baden, 1547; d. at Munich, 11 October, 1622. He entered the priesthood and vigorously championed the Catholic cause in speech and writing. While prefect of music in the collegiate church for nobles, at Hall, he became more thoroughly informed concerning the Society of Jesus. As all he learned of it agreed with his desires, he asked to be received into the Society, and in 1576 entered the novitiate at Munich. After completing his studies he was made academic preacher at Munich, on account of his unusual gift for oratory. He subsequently preached for several years at Ratisbon, where many Lutherans were brought back to the Church by his sermons. At the same time Vetter developed an extraordinary activity as a writer. It is stated that his writings, large and small, number nearly one hundred; they were chiefly polemical. Unfortunately the tone is ordinarily not very refined. Vetter used all the coarseness of which the Swabian tongue is capable to disparage Luther; so that involuntarily Luther's similar style is recalled. In spite of this, or perhaps exactly for this reason, the little books found a large sale and were often reprinted. Catholic contemporaries sought to defend Vetter's method of writing, among them was Duke Maximilian who defended him against the Count Palatine of Neuburg. He was highly regarded by the Dukes of Bavaria, William V, and Maximilian.

SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliotheque de la Comp. de Jesus, VIII, 617-635; THOELEN, Menologium oder Lebensbilder aus der Gesch. der deutschen Ordensprovinz, als Manuscript gedruckt (Roermond, 1901); DUHR, Gesch. der Jesuiten in den Landen deutscher Zunge (Freiburg, 1907).

N. SCHEID

Louis Veuillot

Journalist and writer, b. at Boynes, Loiret, 11 Oct., 1813; d. in Paris, 7 April, 1883. He was the son of a poor cooper and at the age of thirteen was obliged to leave the primary schools and earn his living, obtaining a modest position with a Paris attorney, the brother of the then famous poet Casimir Delavigne. The poet's friends frequented the lawyer's studio, even the clerics among them being more or less engaged in literary pursuits, and in these surroundings the youthful Veuillot became conscious of his vocation as a writer. He was encouraged by some well-intentioned friends, some of whom gave him advice and lessons. He devoted every free moment, especially at night, to the study of literature and history. At seventeen he was the editor of a newspaper at Rouen, and shortly after of another at Perigueuz. Attention was soon drawn to his talent as manifested in his style and wit and he was called to enter Parisian journalism, where his successes followed one another rapidly. But he was troubled to know what political party he should adopt definitively. Political questions under discussion at that time (reign of Louis-Philippe) did not seem interesting to the young writer, imbued with eagerness and strength. He did not despise religion, but he lacked almost any conception of it, and he complained that he did not know what use to make of his life and his devotion. A friend who had just turned to the practice of religion took him to Rome and there he discovered the splendours of faith. When he returned to Paris he had sworn to devote himself completely to the cause of Catholicism.

In France at that time this cause had very few resolute and active partisans. The Government declared itself favourable to religion, but it also feared to displease the public, still more or less animated by the prejudices and hatreds diffused by Voltaire and the Revolution. Veuillot wrote several works entirely devoted to depicting the beauty of Christian doctrine and life and then he found the journal of which he stood in need, the "Univers", which had been established some years previously and was still unknown and almost without financial resources. At this juncture friends of Veuillot's in official positions offered him an enviable post. He had as yet acquired no fortune, being content to gain a livelihood and to assist his family, but he refused all the advantages offered him and became a Catholic journalist, resolved never to be anything else. The chief question then being discussed (1843-50) was liberty of teaching, which was claimed by the Catholics headed by Montalembert. Transformed by the ardour and talent of Veuillot, the "Univers" became the organ of the party and contributed greatly to its ultimate success. But this struggle was long and impassioned. The unbelieving Press and, in general, even that which claimed or imagined itself to be favourable to religion, passionately opposed the Catholic journalist. The widespread prejudices would not suffer Catholics to display daring, talent, or wit. These three qualities Veuillot possessed abundantly, and the use he made of them won him not only much renown and admiration but also inflexible hatred. In 1844 he was sentenced to a month's imprisonment for having in the "Univers" undertaken the defence of the Abbé Combalot, a preacher whom the Government had just condemned in connection with the controversy concerning the university. Even among Catholics there was a party which always remained hostile to him. After the partial triumph of liberty of instruction (1850), Veuillot found himself in conflict with his former friend Montalembert, with bishops (especially Mgr Dupanloup), and other persons who reproached him with carrying doctrinal intransigentism too far and with defending religion with too great violence, though all he asked for the Church was mere liberty.

Under the Second Empire this double conflict continued. Veuillot combated free-thinking, which assumed a philosophical character, and the liberal world, which sought, then, "to reconcile religion with modern ideas". In 1859, during the war of Napoleon III with Austria, Veuillot foresaw that this undertaking would result inevitably in the destruction of the temporal sovereignty of the pope, and he pointed out the dangers of the Napoleonic policy. Soon the "Univers" was suppressed by the Government for having published the Encyclical, "Nullis certe", in which Pius IX denounced the same dangers (29 Jan., 1860). Deprived of his journal Veuillot devoted himself to writing pamphlets and books which made a great stir. All were devoted to a single cause, religious truth. In 1867 he was once more able to publish the "Univers". The subjects which engaged him were of the utmost importance to France, Europe, and the world. They may be classified in three categories: the visible decline of the imperial régime, the European conspiracy against the temporal power of the pope, the Vatican Council and its preliminaries. The discussions were incessant. Veuillot withstood the opposition of ten journals. His adversaries included men of talent, such as Prévost-Paradol, Guéroult, About, and many others who represented free-thinking, philosophy, or the revolutionary policy known as Liberal, and during this time he was often the object of attacks from Catholic sources.

This double conflict became still more acute prior to and during the session of the council. Numerous and prolonged discussions were sustained by Veuillot with the free-thinkers, who were extremely irritated by the announcement of the council, and with the Catholic opponents of the doctrine of infallibility. Several times in the course of the disputes entered into by the "Univers", Pius IX declared himself in favour of that journal which several bishops were attacking vigorously, while many others defended it. Veuillot refrained from allying himself with any political party. His rule of conduct formulated in 1842 was: "Avoid factions of all kinds; we belong only to our Church and our country." He supported or opposed the successive Governments according to the manner in which they treated the Church. Hence, after having vigorously upheld the Second Empire he withdrew his support when Napoleon III favoured the free-thinking or revolutionary ideas. In 1871 he supported Comte de Chambord who wished to restore the Christian monarchy.

Veuillot's work as a journalist is comprised in 12 volumes entitled, "Mélanges religieux, historiques, politiques et littéraires". This collection represents the political and religious history of a period of forty years, many of the articles being masterpieces. This is acknowledged by the free-thinkers themselves, who recognize Veuillot not only as an incomparable journalist but as one of the greatest writers of France. Since his death his reputation has continued to spread. In the free-thinking world, where formerly he was furiously attacked, his talent and character are now admired. Besides countless works as a journalist, he wrote also romances and poems, all inspired by a love of religious faith. Of his voluminous correspondence, and eminent critic, a skeptic, but one always respectful towards religion, M. Jules Lemaitre, says that it is "With that of Voltaire-for what different reasons-the most extraordinary ever left by a man of letters". The same critic says again, "Among writers who count, Veuillot seems to me the best in the tradition of the language, while he is likewise one of the most free and individual. . .I do not hesitate to number him among the half-dozen very great prose writers of the century." Louis Veuillot's brother, Eugene Veuillot, intimately sharing his life, labours, and combats, himself a very brilliant polemist, and who until his death at the age of 87 (1905) continued to edit the "Univers", wrote an account in three volumes of his brother's career and history.

The works of Louis Veuillot comprise 58 volumes. They are: "Les Pèlerinages de Suisse" (2 vols., 1838); "Pierre Saintive" (1839); "Rome et Lorrette" (1841); "Histoirettes et fantaisies" (1844-66); "Agnes de Lauwens: Mémoires de Soeur Saint-Louis" (1845); "L'honnète femme" (1844; 1908); "Les Français en Algérie" (1845); "Les libre penseurs" (1848; 1866); "L'esclave Vindex"; "Le lendemain de la victoire"; "La légalité"; (pamphlets, 1851; 1871); "La vie de la bienheureuse Germaine Cousin" (1854; 1909); "Le droit du seigneur au moyen-Age" (1854); "La guerre et l'homme de guerre" (1855); "Cà et Là" (2 vols. 1859; 1874); "Le parfum de Rome" (2 vols. 1861; 1867); "Le fond de giboyer" (1863); "De quelques erreurs sur la papauté" (1859); "La Vie de Notre Seigneur Jésus-Christ" (1864; large illustrated edition, 1875); "Les odeurs de Paris" (1867); "Corbin et d'Aubecourt" (1854; 1869); "Paris pendant les deux sieges" (2 vols., 1871); "Rome pendant le concile" (1876; from the Mélanges); "Moliere et Bourdaloue" (1877); "Oeuvres poetiques" (1878); "Etudes sur Victor Hugo" (1886); "Cara" (posthumous poems); "Mélanges" etc. (22 vols. in 4 series, 1856; 1859; 1876; 1909); "Correspondance" (7 vols. 1884; 1885; 1887; 1892).

VILLEFRANCHE, Dix grands chretiens du siecle (1892); LEMAITRE, Les contemporains (Paris, 1896); LONGHAYE, Equisses litteraires et morales (Paris, 1906); ALBALAT, Louis Veuillot, pages choises (Paris, 1906) with biographical and literary introduction; CERCEAU, L'ame d'un grand chretien (Paris, 1908); EUGENE VEUILLOT, Louis Veuillot (3 vols. Paris, 1899, 1901, 1904); BELLESSORT, Conference sur Louis Veuillot in Revue française (19 Feb., Paris, 1911).

EUGENE TAVERNIER

Vexilla Regis Prodeunt

This "world-famous hymn, one of the grandest in the treasury of the Latin Church" (Neale), and "surely one of the most stirring strains in our hymnology" (Duffield), was writien by Venantius Fortunatus, and was first sung in the procession (19 Nov., 569) when a relic of the True Cross, sent by the Emperor Justin II from the East at the request of St. Radegunda, was carried in great pomp from Tours to her monastery of Saint-Croix at Poitiers. Its original processional use is commemorated in the Roman Missal on Good Friday, when the Blessed Sacrament is carried in procession from the Repository to the High Altar. Its principal use however, is in the Divine Office, the Roman Breviary assigning it to Vespers from the Saturday before Passion Sunday daily to Maundy Thursday, and to Vespers of feasts of the Holy Cross, such as the Finding (3 May), the Exultation (14 September), the Triumph (16 July, "pro aliquibus locis").

Originally the hymn comprised eight stanzas. In the tenth century, stanzas 7 and 8 were gradually replaced by new ones ("O crux ave, spes unica", and the doxology, "Te summa Deus trinitas"), although they were still retained in some places. Stanza 2 survived the omission of the other two, and passed from the manuscripts into many printed breviaries. The correctors of the Breviary under Urban VIII revised the whole hymn in the interest of classical prosody. They omitted stanzas 2, 7, and 8, which are as follows:

Pimont thinks the hymn has lost nothing by the omissions, and that "Its movement is more active and its unction more penetrating". The correctors also replaced the last two lines of the first stanza by those of the eighth, and channged "reddidit" into "protulit", giving us the stanza as now found in our breviaries:

It is unneccessary to indicate more in detail the changes wrought by the correctors, as our Breviaries give the revised text, and the Vatican Graduale gives the ancient text. In general, the changes made by the correctors in the Church hymns are not liked by hymnologists. Some exceptions taken by the Abbé Pimont to those made in the "Vexilla Regis" are noted in the appended bibliography. The Vatican Graduale gives plain evidence of the desire and purpose of the Commission on Plain Chant, established by Pius X, to restore the original texts. The Antiphonary (1912) gives equal evidence of an intention to retain the revised texts. Thus the Graduale (1908) gives only the ancient form of the hymn, while the Antiphonary gives only the revised form. Curiously, the Processionale (1911) gives both forms.

"Vexilla" has been interpreted symbolically to represent baptism, the Eucharist, and the other sacraments. Clichtoveus explains that as vexilla are the military standards of kings and princes, so the vexille of Christ are the cross, the scourge, the lance, and the other instruments of the Passion "with which He fought against the old enemy and cast forth the prince of this world". Kayser (p. 397) dissents from both, and shows that the vexillum is the cross which (instead of the eagle) surmounted, under Constantine, the old Roman cavalry standard. This standard became in Christian hands a square piece of cloth hanging from a bar placed across a gilt pole, and having embroidered on it Christian symbols instead of the old Roman devices. The splendour and triumph suggested by the first stanza can be appreciated fully only by recalling the occasion when the hymn was first sung--the triumphant procession from the walls of Poitiers to the monastery with bishops and princes in attendance and with all the pomp and pageantry of a great ecclesiastical function. "And still, after thirteen centuries, how great is our emotion as these imperishable accents come to our ears!" (Pimont). Gounod took a very plain melody based on the chant as the subject of his "March to Calvary" in the "Redemption", in which the chorus sings the text at first very slowly and then, after an interval, fortissimo. There are about forty translations into English verse.

MEARNS AND JULIAN in Dict. of Hymnology (2nd ed., London, 1907), 1219-22, 1721, first lines etc. of thirty-five translations, to which list should be added: BAGSHAWE, Breviary Hymns and Missal Sequences (p. 53: "Behold the Royal Standard raised"); DONAHOE, Early Christian Hymns (p. 82: "Behold the Standard of the King"); HENRY, The Poet of Passiontide in American Ecclesiastical Review (March, 1891), 179-192 ("Behold the banners of the King"), together with Latin text and historiac and exegetical comment. DUFFIELD, The Latin Hymn-Writers and Their Hymns (New York, 1889), 88-95. NEALE, Mediæval Hymns and Sequences (3rd ed., London, 1867), 6-8; the version of this felicitous Anglican hymnologist and translator is also given in the (Baltimore) Manual of Prayers, p. 612. KAYSER, Geschichte und Erklärung der ältesten Kirchenhymnen, I (Paderborn, 1881), 395-411. PIMONT, Les Hymnes du Brévaire Romain, III (Paris, 1884), 30-46, thinks the correctors erred in transferring the last two lines of the eighth stanza to the first stanza (footnote, pp. 36-38), and also in changing "reddidit" to "protulit", since "reddidit" is the more exact and theologically appropriate word (footnote, p. 34), and dislikes the "Dicendo nationibus" of the third stanza as a correction of the original "Dicens: in nationibus", this latter being the reading of all the old manuscripts and an exact reproduction of the Vulgate reading, Psalm xcv, 10 (except that "gentibus" is used for "nationibus"): "Can it be believed that the presence of a trochee in the third foot, surely inoffensive enough, would suffice for its rejection?" Holding that Justin Martyr's charge that the Jews had suppressed the "a ligno" is now untenable, Pimont thinks that Fortunatus may have borrowed it from some of the Latin Fathers who maintained its correctness, or perhaps from a copy of the Psalms in which a gloss had crept into the text. Apropos of this stanza, Julian (loc. cit. supra) thinks its best English translation is that of BLOUNT in The Office of the Blessed Virgin Mary in English (1687), which first appeared in Blount's Office of Holy Week (Paris, l670), "Abroad the regal banners Fly":

SHIPLEY, Annus Sanctus (Londonm 1874) 94-100, gives trs. of KENT, AYLWARD, CAMPBELL, Evening (1710); and in the appendix, trs. of Primers of 1604, 1619, 1685, 1706. MARBACH, Carmina Scripturarum (Strasburg, 1907), p. 197 for various liturgical uses of "Regnavit a ligno Deus". Hymns Ancient and Modern, historical edition (London, 1909), xx, xxi, xxii, xxxiv and pp. 148-9 for harmonized plainsong, modern setting, comment, DREVES, Lateinische Hymnendichter des Mittelalters in vol. L of Analecta Hvmnica (Leipzog, 1907), pp. 74-75, for manuscript readings and brief sketch of Fortunatus. Church Music (March, 1908), p. 140. for answers to questions arising out of the different texts. (Unrevised and revised) of the hymn in the Breviary and Graduale (Vatican Edition).

H.T. HENRY

Antonio Francesco Vezzosi

Member of the Theatine Congregation and biographical writer, born at Arezzo, Italy, 4 October, 1708; died in Rome, 29 May, 1783. At an early age he determined to devote himself entirely to the service of God and in 1731 he entered the Theatine Congregation. On account of his unusual abilities he was appointed professor of philosophy at the seminary at Rimini (1736-38). In 1742 he was sent to Rome as professor of theology at San Andrea della Valle. While here he became favourably known for his fine scholarship and loyal orthodoxy. His superiors entrusted him, therefore, with the editing of the collected works of Cardinal Tommasi (11 vols., Rome, 1749-69). The attention of Benedict XIV was thus called to him, and in 1753 the pope appointed him professor of church history at the College of the Sapienza and examiner of candidates for the episcopal office. Later he was also elected general of his congregation. Among his publications are an oration on Leo X, "De laudibus Leonis" (Rome, 1752), and the biographical work, excellent for that era and still useful, "I scrittori de' Chierici regolari detti Teatini" (2 vols., Rome, 1780), which forms the basis of the "Bibliotheca Teatina" of P. Silvos.

PATRICIUS SCHLAGER

José Viader

Born at Gallimes, Catalonia, 27 August, 1765. He received the habit of St. Francis at Barcelona in May 1788, joined the missionary College of San Fernando de Mexico in 1795, and was sent to California in the following year. Appointed assistant at the Indian mission of Santa Clara, he served there steadily until 1833, when he returned to Spain by way of Mexico and Cuba. For thirty-three years Father Viader was the faithful companion of the saintly Father Magin Catala. As such he fearlessly resisted the encroachments of the military and colonists, carried on the correspondence, and drew up the reports, which Father Catala countersigned. Hence it is that numerous letters of Father Viader concerning Mission Santa Clara still exist, whereas not one has thus far been discovered written by Father Catala. Father José, albeit an exemplary religious, knew how to make use of his great physical strength and courage. On one occasion three Indians suddenly fell upon him, but he defeated them all, and they became his best friends. In 1818 he accompanied the presidente of Misión San José to San Francisco and San Rafael; but otherwise he never left his Indians for any length of time. Like nearly all the missionaries, he in 1826 declined to take the oath of allegiance to the so-called Republic of Mexico.

Santa Barbara Mission Archives; Records of Mission Santa Clara; ENGELHARDT, The Holy Man of Santa Clara (San Francisco, 1909); The Franciscans of California (Harbor Springs, Michigan, 1897).

ZEPHYRIN ENGELHARDT

Viaticum

Name

Among the ancient Greeks the custom prevailed of giving a supper to those setting out on a journey. This was called hodoiporion "Convivium, quod itineris comitibus præbetur" (Hedericus, "Lex. græc-lat."). The provision of all things necessary for such a journey, viz. food, money, clothes, utensils and expense, was called ephodion. The adjectival equivalent in Latin of both these words is viaticus, i.e. "of or pertaining to a road or journey" (Facciolati and Forcellini, "Lexicon"). Thus in Plautus (Bacch., 1, 1, 61) we read that Bacchis had a supper prepared for his sister who was about to go on a journey: "Ego sorori meæ coenam hodie dare volo viaticam", and (Capt. 2, 3, 89), "Sequere me, viaticum ut dem trapezita tibi", and in Pliny (VlI, ep. 12, in fine), "Vide ut mihi viaticum reddas, quod impendi". Subsequently the substantive "viaticum" figuratively meant the provision for the journey of life and finally by metaphor the provision for the passage out of this world into the next. It is in this last meaning that the word is used in sacred liturgy.

Formerly it meant anything that gave spiritual strength and comfort to the dying and enabled them to make the journey into eternity with greater confidence and security. For this reason anciently not only any sacrament administered to persons at the point of death, baptism (St. Basil, "Hom. in sac. Bapt."; St. Gregory Nazianzen, "Orat. de bapt."), confirmation, penance, extreme unction (Moroni, "Diz. di erudizione stor.-eccl.), Eucharist (Fourth Counc. of Carthage, cap. 78, calls it "viaticum Eucharistiæ"), but even prayers offered up or good works performed by themselves or by others in their behalf, e.g. alms-deeds (St. Cyprian), and finally anything that tended to reconcile the dying with God and the Church came under this designation. In the course of time "viaticum" was applied to the Eucharist generally, but finally it acquired its present fixed, exclusive, and technical sense of Holy Communion given to those in danger of death. The Catechism of the Council of Trent (De Euch. sacr., n. 3) says: "Sacred writers call it the Viaticum as well because it is the spiritual food by which we are supported in our mortal pilgrimage, as also because it prepares for us a passage to eternal glory and happiness". As early as A. D. 325 the Holy Eucharist given to the dying was called the "last and most necessary Viaticum" (Counc. of Nice, can. 13). Although Aubespine, Bishop of Orléans, in his note on this canon says that "viaticum" here means only the reconciliation and absolution granted at the hour of death to public penitents who had not performed the prescribed canonical penance, yet Macri (Hierolexicon) declares that it means simply "Sacramentum Eucharistic, cui antonomastice nomen veri muniminis convenit". Innocent I (402-17), in "Ad Exsuperium", and the First Council of Orange, 441, employed this word in the same sense.

Minister

Formerly Viaticum was administered not only by bishops and priests, but also by deacons and clerics of inferior orders and even by lay people. During the persecutions lay people carried consecrated particles to their homes and administered Holy Communion to themselves, and it is natural to conclude that they received it as Viaticum in the same manner. Dionysius of Alexandria ("Ep. ad Fabium Antioch." in Eusebius, "Hist. eccl.", VI, xliv) relates that Serapion, an old man in danger of death, received Viaticum from his nephew, a mere boy, who had received the consecrated particle from a priest. From a Decree of the Council of Reims (Regino, "De eccl. disc.", I, cxx) it appears that sometimes even females carried the Viaticum to the dying, which practice the Council strictly forbade. Apparently for a while it was difficult to eliminate this abuse, for Hincmar, Archbishop of Reams, required the diocesan visitors to inquire whether the priests gave Communion to the sick with their own hands or by others', "per se et non per quemlibet", and whether they gave the consecrated particle to any lay person, "cuiquam laico", to carry it home for the sake of giving it to the dying (Martène, "De antiq. eccl. rit.", I, I, v, 2). After the tenth century no mention is made of lay persons carrying Viaticum to the dying, but deacons regularly administered it, and from two manuscript codices in the monastery of Casalis Benedicti it is evident that subdeacons carried it to the house of the sick person, but that the priest administered it (Martène, ibid.). At present only parish priests or their assistants carry and administer it to the dying. In case of necessity a deacon my be delegated, and if the necessity be urgent this delegation need not be waited for (Lehmkuhl, II, 135).

Subject

All, even children who have reached the age of reason (Decr., "Quam singulari", præscriptio VIII, 8 Aug., 1910), are bound by Divine precept to receive the Viaticum when they are in danger of death, according to the opinion of theologians and the rule of the Church; though it is disputed whether one who is now in danger of death and who has within the last few days received Holy Communion is so bound by Divine precept. The obligation in the latter case is not clear, as the previous Communion in all probability satisfies the Divine law (Slater II, v, 1; Lehmkuhl, II, n. 146). St. Liguori says that according to the more probable opinion the obligation exists (VI, n. 285, dub. 2, sec. sent.). If a person becomes dangerously ill on the day on which he received Holy Communion out of devotion, it is disputed whether he may, or is bound to, receive it as Viaticum (Slater and Lehmkuhl, ibid.). Benedict XIV (De syn. dioec., VII, xi, n. 2) leaves the decision of this question to the prudent discretion of the priest, but St. Liguori (ibid., tertia sent.) thinks that the sick person is bound to receive it if the danger comes from an external cause, but not if he were already ill or if the danger already existed in some internal though unknown cause, as might be presumed in case of sudden illness, e.g. apoplexy and the like. Viaticum, like Holy Communion, out of devotion, may not be given to persons who are insane and who have never had the use of reason (Rit. Rom., Tit. IV, n. 10). To persons labouring under insanity from fever or other causes and at the time incapable of sentiments of piety, Communion cannot be administered; if, however before they became insane they evinced pious and religious sentiments and led a good life and it is apprehended that they will not recover their reason until they are dying, Viaticum may be administered to them in their delirium provided there be no danger of irreverence (Catech. of Council of Trent, II, vi, n. 64). It should not be administered when there is danger of irreverence to the sacrament from incessant coughing, difficulty of breathing or swallowing, and frequent vomiting. In all these cases, a little food or drink may be given first, to try whether the person can receive without danger of rejecting the Sacred Host. The same may be done in case of delirium also. Many recommend the trial to be made with an unconsecrated particle (O'Kane, "On the Rubrics" n. 782). Public sinners ("Publici usurarii, concubinarii, notorie criminosi, nominatim excommunicati aut denuntiati"-Rit. Rom., Tit. IV, cap. iv, n. 1) are not allowed to receive Viaticum until they have repaired, as far as circumstances will permit (the confessor must decide in each case the nature and extent of this obligation), the injuries and scandals of which they have been the cause.

Species

Formerly Viaticum was usually administered under the species of bread, because the Blessed Sacrament, which was to be carried to the house of the dying person, was customarily reserved under this form only. The incident, related above, of the aged Serapion would indicate this, for the boy was instructed by the priest to dip the consecrated particle into water before giving it to his uncle. To this rite the Fourth Council of Carthage (Can. 76) seems to allude, because it states "infundatur ori eius Eucharistia" when Viaticum was to be given to dying persons, who, on account of the parched state of the throat, were unable to swallow the Host. About the twelfth century the custom of receiving Holy Communion out of devotion under both species began to be disused (Chardon "Storia dei sacramenti", I, III, vii). It cannot be doubted that, as long as this custom prevailed, Viaticum was often administered in the same manner when it was given after Mass, celebrated in the room of the dying person, which was frequently done. Menard, in his notes on the "Gregorian Sacramentary" says that it contained two separate forms for the administration of Viaticum, "Corpus Domini nostri Jesu Christi custodiat te in vitam æternam" and "Sanguis Domini nostri Jesu Christi redimat te in vitam æternam". Sometimes the Host was dipped into the Precious Blood, as is evident from many ancient Rituals, and the Council of Tours prescribes "Sacra oblatio (Host) intincta debet esse in Sanguine Christi, ut veraciter presbyter possit dicere-Corpus et Sanguis Domini proficiat tibi" (Martène, ibid.). Although anciently it was the custom to receive Holy Communion during Mass under both species (also Viaticum after Mass), yet it was never believed that those who communicated under the species of bread only did not receive, whole and entire, the Body and Blood of Christ. At present Viaticum is administered, at least on the Latin Church, under the form of bread only.

Rites and Ceremonies

Things to be prepared.-(a) By the priest.-The pyx, a small corporal, and a purificator in small burse, a white (even on Good Friday) stole, and a Ritual. (b) In the sick room.-A table (near the foot of the bed, or in some other position in which it is easily visible to the sick person), a crucifix (although this is not prescribed by the rubric), two lighted wax candles, a wineglass containing a little water for purifying the priest's fingers, a clean cloth or napkin for the sick person, a vase containing holy water, and a sprinkler of box or other wood. (c) On the altar.-Two lighted wax candles, the key of the tabernacle and a burse with a large corporal (if the particle is to be transferred from the ciborium to the pyx in this case also an ablution cup and a finger towel). It frequently happens that all the necessary things are not prepared in the sick room, therefore it will be expedient for the priest to carry with him two wax candles, holy water, and a small communion-cloth.

The priest, having placed the pyx in the burse, which should hang on his breast by a cord round his neck goes to the sick person's house, reciting on the way the "Miserere" and other psalms and canticles he may know by heart. At the door of the sick-room he says: "Pax huic domui" and if there be no one to answer, he replies himself: "Et omnibus habitantibus in ea", enters the room, puts on his stole, takes out the pyx, places it on the table, genuflects, and rises. Then he takes the holy water and sprinkles first the sick person in the form of a cross, i.e. in front of himself, then on his (own) left, then on his (own) right, after which he sprinkles some around him on the floors and walls of the room and on those present, saying in the meantime: "Asperges me . . . dealbabor", to which he adds the first verse of the "Miserere", "Gloria Patri" "Sicut erat", and then repeats the antiphon "Asperges me", etc. which must not be changed during Paschal time. He immediately subjoins the versicles "Adjutorium", etc. and the prayer "Exaudi nos", etc.

If the sick person has not previously confessed, the priest should ask those present to leave the room; then he hears the confession, imposes a light penance, and may recall the sick person's attendants. Even if the priest had previously heard the confession, he should not administer Viaticum until he has given the sick person an opportunity to confess again, if he desires it. The priest then goes to the table, genuflects, and uncovers the pyx, and the communion-cloth or napkin is adjusted under the chin of the sick person who recites the "Confiteor", if he be able; if not, it is said in his name by one of the bystanders, or, when there is no one able to do this, by the priest himself. After the "Confiteor" the priest genuflects, rises, and turns towards the sick person, taking care, however, not to turn his back to the Blessed Sacrament. In this position he says "Misereatur" and "Indulgentiam" using the words tui, tuis, tuorum, and tibi. (The singular is used when Communion is given to one who is sick, except in the rare case in which it is given during Mass, when the plural form is used. "Sacrorum Rituum Cong.", 16 Nov., 1906.) The priest then turns to the table, genuflects, and takes the particle between the thumb and index finger of the right hand and holds the pyx in his left hand under the particle. The "Ecce Agnus Dei" and the "Domine non sum dignus" are said as prescribed for the ordinary Communion in the church. The sick person should say the "Domine non sum dignus" with the priest, at least once, in a low tone (Rit. Rom. Rubr., 19). Instead of the "Corpus Domini", the form "Accipe frater (soror)" etc. is used, whether the sick person is fasting or not, for it is always used when the sick person is in probable danger of death. It is a very probable opinion that Communion may be administered the next day, and even every day, and while the danger continues the form should always be "Accipe frater" (O'Kane, op. cit., 777). If difficulty is experienced in swallowing the Host on account of the parched condition of the throat, a little water may be given to the sick person before he receives Holy Communion, or the Host may be placed in some wine or water in a spoon or a little wine or water may be given immediately after receiving the Host.

If the danger of death be imminent, but the person be able to receive, all the prayers, as far as the "Misereatur", may be omitted. In case of extreme necessity the priest may even omit the "Misereatur" and the following, and give Communion immediately. In these cases the prayers which were omitted are not supplied afterwards, even though the state of the sick person should allow this. If it be feared that the person will be unable to swallow the Host before death, it should not be given. If it be given and death ensue before he can swallow it, it should be removed from his tongue and placed either in a corporal or in some vessel and kept in some secure place and in due time put into the sacrarium. Should the Host not be visible in the mouth, nothing further need be done (Dunne, "The English Ritual Explained", 67; De Herdt, III, n. 191; O'Kane, op. cit., n. 823). If the priest, after bringing the Blessed Sacrament, finds unexpectedly that the sick person is unable to communicate, he may give benediction with it to the sick person. But he is never allowed to bring the Blessed Sacrament for this purpose when he knows that the person will be unable to receive. Should the sick person he unable to retain the Sacred Host, it should be removed and carried to the church in a corporal or clean vessel. There it should be kept in a becoming place until it corrupts, when it should be put into the sacrarium.

After the Communion the priest purifies the pyx and his fingers in a small glass of water, and the water is given by the priest, or one of the attendants, to the sick person to drink. If the latter be unable or unwilling to take it, it may be thrown into the sacrarium or into the fire at the house. The priest may, if he wish, purify the pyx and his fingers by rubbing them with one part of the little purificator previously moistened with water. The purificator should then not be used again before it is washed. The priest then says "Dominus vobiscum" and the prayer "Domine sancte ", etc. If no particle remains in the pyx he blesses the sick person with his hand in the same manner as after Communion in the church, using the form "Benedictio Dei", etc. O'Kane (n. 835) thinks that since we use "tui" instead of "vestri" in the "Misereatur", there is sufficient reason to justify the use of "super te"instead of "super vos" in this blessing; the rubric "eum manu benedicit " seems to favour this opinion, although authors who give the form in full say it ought to be "super vos". If a particle remain in the pyx, the priest genuflects, puts the pyx in the burse, and, without saying anything, gives the blessing with the pyx, puts off his stole and surplice, and returns to the church reciting on the way the Psalm, "Laudate Dominum de coelis", etc. (This rubric ought to be observed, when the priest is obliged to give Viaticum to person in different houses, until the last particle is given, for the rubric says: "Si altera particula Sacramenti superfuerit".) Having arrived at the church he places the pyx on the corporal, genuflects, descends to the lowest step and there recites the versicles "Panem de coelo", etc. and "Dominus vobiscum" and the prayer "Deus qui nobis", etc., after which he announces the indulgence of seven years and seven quarantines to those who accompanied the Blessed Sacrament with a light, and five years and five quarantines to those who accompanied it without a light. He then ascends to the predella, genuflects, gives the blessing to the assembled people in the church with the pyx and places the latter in the tabernacle in the customary manner.

From the Mass of Maundy Thursday till the Mass of Holy Saturday the colour of the stole must be white, the "Gloria Patri" is recited at the end of the Psalms, and the blessing with the pyx may be given in the room of the sick person, but not in the church. It may happen that Viaticum is to be given during Mass, e.g. to a criminal about to be executed, in an hospital or private house, when the sick person is in view of the altar. The rites and ceremonies observed in such cases are exactly the same as when Communion is given in the church, except that the form will be "Accipe frater (soror)". The colour of the vestment will be suited to the Mass. When Viaticum is administered to two or more persons at the same time, it is given to them successively, as in the church, provided they be in the same apartment or in apartments opening into each other. In this case "Misereatur vestri . . . vestris" and "Indulgentiam . . . vestrorum . . . vobis" are said; the ablution may be given to any one of them, and need not be divided; in the prayer "Domine sancte" the words "fratri nostro" or "sorori nostræ" are changed into "fratribus nostris", or, if all are females, "sororibus nostris", and at the end the blessing with the pyx is given only once to all together.

MACRI, Hierolexicon (Venice, 1712); CHARDON, Storia dei sacramenti (Verona, I1754); ZACCARIA, Bibl. ritualis (Rome, 1781); BENEDICT XIV, De synodo di£cesana (Naples, 1772); LABBE AND COSSART, Concil. coll. (Paris, 1715); MARTÈNE, De antiq. eccl. rit. (Venice, 1783), BARUFFALDI, Ad rituale roman. Comment. (Venice, 1792); BERNARD, Cours de liturgie romaine (Paris, 1893); A SEXTEN, Tract. Pastoralis de sacramentis (Mainz, 1894); SLATER, Manual of Moral Theology (New York, 1908); DUNNE, The English Ritual Explained (London, 1908); O'KANE, Notes on the Rubrics (Dublin, 1867) Rituale Romanum (Ratisbon, 1895).

A.J. SCHULTE

Clerics of Saint Viator

St. Viator, lector of the cathedral at Lyons, France, lived in the fourth century and is the earliest type of the teacher of the cathedral schools, In the exercise of the then important functions of the lectorate, namely in reading and expounding the Scriptures to the people and in catechizing the children, he displayed that zeal and ability for which he was held in such high esteem by his bishop, Saint Just, and by the Christian flock of Lyons. Hagiographers refer to him as "a most holy youth, who on account of his eminent virtues was much beloved by his bishop". After the Council of Aquileia (381) St. Just decided to spend the remainder of his life in the penitential solitudes of Thebais, and selected young Viator as the companion of his voluntary exile. Both the aged bishop and his youthful lector died in the odour of sanctity in an austere monastery of Scété in the year 389. The feast of St. Viator, according to the Roman martyrology, is observed on 21 October.

Because St. Viator had sanctified himself in teaching the young, he was selected as the patron of a community of parochial clerics or catechists, who are priests and teaching brothers living on a footing of religious equality. This community, known as the Clerics of St. Viator, was founded in the year 1835 by the Very Rev. Father Louis-Joseph Querbes, pastor of the village of Vourles in the Archdiocese of Lyons. Desirous of securing Christian teachers for his own and for neighbouring parishes, where sad havoc had been wrought by the Reign of Terror, Father Querbes established at Vourles as early as 1829 a school for the training of lay teachers, which was soon officially sanctioned by the Royal Council of Public Instruction. In 1835 this organized band of secular teachers developed into a community of priests and brothers with the vows of religion, and was approved by the archiepiscopal authority of Lyons. With the assistance of the Roman Jesuits, Father Querbes obtained the approbation of the statutes of his new community from Gregory XVI in 1838. Under the generalship of Father Querbes the membership of the community increased so rapidly that before the time of his death (1 Sept., 1859) there existed three provinces of the society in France and one in Canada; and the Clerics, besides teaching very many parochial schools, conducted the boarding colleges of Camonil (Rodez), St-Michel (Paris), St. Angeau College, the Deaf and Dumb College of Rodez, schools of agriculture at Blancotte and Notre-Dame de Treize-Pierres, and at Fontaines-sur-Saone a well-equipped publishing house from which were issued a large number of practical school classics and educational magazines such as "L'Ecole et la Famille" and "L'Ange Gardien", setting forth the necessity of co-operation between home, church, and school, pastor, parent, and teacher in view of the best educational results.

All the important houses of the community have been suppressed in France, where some two hundred members of the institute are still teaching in what are called Ecoles Libres. The exiled members are conducting flourishing schools in Spain and in Belgium, where the superior-general now resides. In 1847 Bishop Bourget, of Montreal, obtained from Father Querbes teachers for a small college recently founded in Joliette, Canada. Father S. Champagneur, C.S.V., who was appointed president of the college, opened a novitiate in Joliette in 1848, and became provincial superior of the new obedience of Canada, which developed rapidly in membership and efficiency. Soon Bourget College arose in Rigaud, the Deaf and Dumb School and the St. Louis School in Montreal, the St. Viator School in Juliette, and ten commercial colleges in the villages of the Province of Quebec. With this impetus the community continued to make rapid strides under the successors of Father Champagneur, Fathers Lajoie, Beaudry, and Ducharme, who found it necessary to enlarge the colleges of Bourget and Joliette. This last is now known as the Seminaire de Joliette, and is admittedly one of the best-equipped colleges of the Dominion. Having now three hundred priests and brothers, the Provincial administration was able to accept the large Ecole St. Jean Baptiste, Montreal, and to open colleges in St. Joseph de Levis, Berthier, Terrebonne, Boucherville, St. Remi, and to take charge of a large number of primary schools.

In the United States the Clerics of St. Viator, sometimes called Viatorians, have since 1865 had important parochial schools in Bourbonnais, Kankakee, St. George, Aurora, and Chicago, Illinois, in St. Joseph's parish, Cohoes, New York, in the cathedral parish, Ogdensburg, New York, and in Baker City, Oregon. In all these schools, except that of Bourbonnais, the Brothers have gradually been replaced by Sisters. The members of the community are now exercising their educational activities almost exclusively in high school and college work. Owing chiefly to this change in the educational conditions of the country, the Brothers of the American province more often embrace the larger opportunities offered by their community to pursue courses leading to the priesthood. The most important institution of the Viatorians in the United States is St. Viator College, Bourbonnais, Illinois, which grew out of the original district or village school, first into a commercial academy in 1865 upon the arrival of Father P. Beaudoin, and Brothers Martel and Bernard; then in 1868 with Father Thomas Roy, recently from Canada, the young school evolved into a classical college. The institution won the patronage of the public and the favour of the ecclesiastical authorities. After nine years of work Father Roy, whose memory was enshrined by his students in the beautiful Roy Memorial Chapel, returned in broken health to Canada, and was succeeded by Father M. J. Marsile, who directed the growing institution for over a quarter of a century. Under Father Marsile's presidency, courses and faculties in theology, philosophy, science, and languages were strengthened, and several branches were added to divers other courses to answer, the need of the times. In his honour his students built the Marsile Alumni Hall as a memorial. In 1906 the several buildings of St. Viator College were destroyed by fire. Courses were continued in improvised quarters and new buildings were erected. Father Marsile then resigned the presidency and Rev. J. P. O'Mahony, C. S. V., was appointed his successor. The college for several years has had a yearly enrollment of over three hundred students, and nearly three hundred priests and religious are numbered among its alumni. The list of commercial graduates and alumni who have entered the professions of law and medicine is larger still. St. Viator College has, besides a preparatory department and high school, the four years' college course proper. There is also, chiefly for the scholastics of the community, a complete four years' course of theology, to which diocesan students are admitted.

In 1910 Bishop O'Gorman, of Sioux Falls, South Dakota, purchased from the Federal Government a group of ten school buildings situated in Chamberlain, and placed these in the hands of the community of St. Viator. The Knights of Columbus took an active interest in the founding of the new institution, which therefore was called Columbus College. In the United States the Viatorians have also undertaken the care of parishes. They have now charge of: the Maternity parish, Bourbonnais, Illinois; St. Edward's and St. Viator's, Chicago; St. Mary's, Beaverville, Illinois; and in Chamberlain, Pukwana, and Plankinton, South Dakota; and the five missions attached to the parish of McMinnville, Oregon. In years past they were pastors in St. George, Manteno, Aurora, Dwight, Brimfield, and St. Jean Baptiste, Chicago, Illinois. In 1882 the establishments of the middle west became independent of the Canadian province and were erected into a separate obedience. Very Rev. Father C. Fournier was appointed superior, and opened a novitiate in Bourbonnais, 6 Oct., 1882. In 1888 the novitiate and the headquarters of the provincial administration were moved to Chicago. During the twenty-five years of his incumbency as provincial and master of novices, Father Fournier supplied the new province with the needed force of well-trained teachers for the various schools of his jurisdiction. Very Rev. A. Corcoran came to the assistance of Father Fournier for four years as provincial (1898-1902). Upon the death of Father Corcoran, Father Fournier again resumed the burden of the provincial direction. Resigning in 1908, he was succeeded by Very Rev. J. A. Charlebois, the present superior. As teaching Christian doctrine by word and example is the most important function of the Christian educator, every catechist of St. Viator is required by the rule to write a complete course of religious instruction. The brother catechists twice every day read selected portions of the Holy Scripture, of the Catechism of the Council of Trent, and of the Following of Christ. Priests and Brothers make daily a half hour meditation on the life of Christ and the virtues of religious life, read regularly ascetical works such as the "Christian Perfection" of Rodriguez, hear or say daily Mass, receive Holy Communion daily, and besides morning and evening prayers and beads in common, make a daily visit to the Blessed Sacrament or assist at benediction. The community rules require careful personal research in preparation for teaching. The books, school classics, published by members of the Congregation range from the elementary reading and spelling books to manuals of belle-lettres, from language primers and the small catechism to literary criticism and apologetics, from arithmetic to the higher mathematics.

Manual of the Clerics of St. Viator (Bourbonnais, Illinois, 1890); Directoires et reglements organiques de L'Institu des Clercs St-Viateur (Paris, 1900); QUERBES, Livre d'Or (Ms., Jette, Belgium); BOURGET, Vie de St-Viateur (Montreal, 1897); BOLLANDISTS, Vita Brevis Sancti Justi; SURIUS, Vita prolixior Sancti Justi; GOUILLOUD, Deux grands eveques de Lyon (Lyons, 1890); Breviary of Lyons; Feast of St. Viator, 21 Oct., Marytrology of Adon (858); Roman Martyrology, 2 Sept. and 21 Oct.; Collections de l'annuaire de l'institutet des lettres circulaires du superieur general (Jette, Belgium); L'Ecole et La Famille (pedagogical monthly, Fontainessur-Saone, France); L'Ange Gardien (devotional monthly, Paris); The Viatorian (college monthly, Bourbonnais, Ill.); The Missionary (Washington, D. C., June, 1912); The Catholic Church in the U.S. (New York, 1912).

EUGENE LOUIS RIVARD

Vicar

(Lat. vicarius, from vice, "instead of")

In canon law, the representative of a person clothed with ordinary ecclesiastical jurisdiction. The office of vicar was in use among the ancient Romans, that being the title of officials subordinate to the praetorian prefects. In the ecclesiastical forum, from very early times, we read of vicars of the Apostolic See, such as the archbishops of Thessalonica. Bishops also had their vicars, such as the archdeacons and archpriests, and likewise the rural priest, who, in the first ages, had the cure of souls outside of episcopal cities. In course of time, all of these officials became part of the ordinary magistracy of the Church. These vicars are treated in the Decretum of Gratian and in the Decretals of Gregory IX, but vicars-general of bishops first appear in the sixth book of Decretals and in the Clementines of the "Corpus juris canonici". After the institution of vicars-general, the office of archdeacon ceased almost entirely when the Council of Trent had limited the powers of such officials. That council (Sess. XXV, c. xvi, "De ref.") completely abrogated other vicarships that were incompatible with clerical discipline. A vicar differs from a vicegeregent, who is constituted by a prelate in place of a vicar. The vicar himself without special faculties cannot substitute another vicar with equal powers in his own place. The jurisdiction of vicars is generally ordinary, but sometimes only delegated. The former archdeacons and archpriests and the present vicars capitular and some others have ordinary power in consequence of their office, but by the present discipline vicars Apostolic and vicars forane have only delegated power conferred by special commission. Vicarial jurisdiction in general can not be called merely mandatory (which is ultimately delegated power), for many vicars have a tribunal distinct from that of the prelate represented by them. As to their powers: vicars are constituted either in divinis, as parochial vicars and auxiliary bishops, or created vicars in jurisdiction, as vicars capitular and vicars general, to exercise power in the external forum, either voluntary or contentious. Some writers also distinguish vicars a lege, or those whose powers are perpetual and prescribed in law, and vicars ab homine, who depend entirely on delegated powers and are removable at will. Neither bishops nor inferior prelates can constitute vicars except in cases permitted by canon law. The powers of vicars are not affected by the mode of appointment, that is whether they are freely nominated or elected. When vicars have ordinary jurisdiction, their rights and duties in general are the same as those of other ordinary prelates, but their particular obligations must be learnt from the office they hold. The same is to be said of the cessation of their powers, which are terminated by resignation, etc., with the addition, however, of some special regulations for particular vicarships, as that of vicar-general.

WERNZ, Jus decretalium, II (1899); AICHNER, Compendium juris ecclesiastici (Brixen, 1895).

WILLIAM H.W. FANNING

Vicar Apostolic

(1) In the early ages of the Church, the popes committed to some residentiary bishops the duty of watching over ecclesiastical matters in a certain region, as the Archbishop of Arles for Gaul and the Archbishop of Thessalonica for Illyria. These prelates were called vicars Apostolic.

(2) Prelates with the title of vicar Apostolic are sometimes commissioned by the Holy See to administer dioceses which are vacant, or whose bishops are prevented from exercising their ordinary jurisdiction by some impediment. These vicars Apostolic have the powers of vicars capitular (q.v.) and at times receive also some extraordinary faculties, which much be learnt from their Brief of appointment.

(3) In regions where the ordinary hierarchy of the Church has not yet been established, and which consequently fall under the ordinary and immediate jurisdiction of the pope in a special manner, the Holy See usually governs such missionary regions by means of a delegate who has received episcopal consecration to some titular see, and who is designated a vicar Apostolic.

These prelates generally have the same powers that bishops have by common law in their own dioceses, and the Congregation of Propaganda also concedes to them various extraordinary faculties. All these powers, however, are delegated, not ordinary. As they are not diocesan bishops, they have not cathedral or chapter (S.C. Prop., 27 Nov., 1858). Without special concession from the Holy See, they may not concede the usual forty days indulgence, nor erect a throne in a church, nor wear the capa magna, nor have their names inserted in the canon of the Mass (Collect. S.C. Prop., 1883 n. 139, etc.). While they may not constitute ordinary vicars- general, they can give special faculties to various priests to assist them in administering the vicariate. They must, in addition, name some proper secular or regular cleric who, in case of their unexpected demise, may rule the region as pro-vicar until other provision is made. The pro-vicar has the same faculties as the vicar, except those that flow from episcopal consecration. He can, however, in case of necessity consecrate chalices, patens, and portable altars, with oils consecrated by some bishop. Regulars in a missionary district must communicate their letters patent to the vicar Apostolic, and in the cure of souls are subject to his authority. Vicars apostolic are appointed outside of Consistory by a special pontifical brief, and later this provision is merely published in Consistory. All matters concerning the promotion of vicars Apostolic are conducted by Propaganda on the lines of the Constitution, "Gravissimum", of Benedict XIV (18 Jan., 1757) and the later Decrees of the Holy See (Collect. S.C. Prop., n. 38-87). There are about 150 vicariates in existence at present.

TAUTON, The Law of the Church (London, 1906), s.v.; WERNZ, Jus decretalium, II (Rome, 1899); FERRARIS, Bibliotheca canonica, VII (Rome, 1891), s.v.

WILLIAM H.W. FANNING

Vicar Capitular

The administrator of a vacant diocese, elected by a cathedral chapter. On the death of a bishop, the canons of a cathedral chapter (where such exists) inherit the episcopal jurisdiction as a body corporate. Within eight days of the vacancy of the see, however, they must meet and constitute a vicar capitular (Conc. Trid., Sess. XXIV, c. xvi, de ref.). If they neglect this duty, the right passes to the metropolitan, or, in case the metropolitan see is in question, to the senior suffragan bishop, or, when the diocese is exempt, to the nearest bishop. In constituting a vicar capitular, a strict form of election need not be followed; but if suffrages are cast, they should be secret, and no one may vote for himself. The vicar chosen should be a doctor of licentiate in canon law if possible, and though a canon is commonly to be chosen yet this is not required for validity.

On his election the vicar succeeds to all the ordinary episcopal jurisdiction that the chapter had inherited, nor can the chapter reserve any part of the jurisdiction to itself, nor constitute only a temporary vicar, nor remove him. Faculties which are committed to bishops by the Holy See for a term of years, pass also to the vicar capitular (S. Off., 22 Apr., 1898), in which are included the powers usually granted for dealing with a certain number of cases (S. Off., 3 May, 1899). Canonists usually hold that perpetual delegations to ordinaries, sanctioned by the Council of Trent, pass likewise to the vicar capitular. Faculties, however, which had been granted to the bishop personally are not extended to the vicar. There are, nevertheless, some limitations on the power of a vicar capitular, even as regards ordinary episcopal jurisdiction. Thus, he may not convoke a synod or visit the diocese unless a year has elapsed since these offices were performed. He may not grant indulgences. He should not undertake any new work or engagements that might prejudice the action of the in-coming bishop. Hence, during the first year of vacancy, he can promote to sacred orders only those who are obliged to receive that dignity through possession of a benefice. The vicar cannot grant the benefices of free collation, nor may he suppress them and unite them to the cathedral chapter. He may not alienate the goods of the cathedral church or of the episcopal mensa. He can, however, grant permission for the alienation of the goods of inferior churches. He can neither begin nor pursue a judicial process concerning the goods or rights of the cathedral church. The vicar cannot give permission for the erection of a new monastery or a new confraternity (S.C. Ind., 23 Nov., 1878). Canonists usually declare that a vicar capitula can receive extern clerics into his diocese, but deny that he can excardinate the home clergy. If the vicar is in episcopal orders, he can perform all that belongs to the ministry of consecration; otherwise he may invite a bishop from another diocese to exercise such functions. If the vicar die or resign, the chapter must elect another within eight days, but the newly-elect must not be one who has already received the nomination to the vacant see. In case the removal of the vicar capitular becomes necessary, this may be done only by the Holy See. The office of a vicar capitular ceases when the bishop who has been promoted to the diocese presents his letters of appointment to his cathedral chapter. The new bishop has the right of demanding an account from the chapter and vicar capitular of all their acts of administration, and of punishing any dereliction of duty.

LAURENTIUS, Institutiones juris ecclesiastici (Fribourg, 1903); TAUNTON, The Law of the Church (London, 1906), s.v.; WERNZ, Jus decretalium, II (Rome, 1899); FERRARIS, Bibliotheca canonica, VII (Rome, 1891), s.v.

WILLIAM H. W. FANNING

Vicar-General

The highest official of a diocese after the ordinary. He is a cleric legitimately deputed to exercise generally the episcopal jurisdiction in the name of the bishop, so that his acts are reputed the acts of the bishop himself.

The wide powers of administration now enjoyed by the vicar-general belonged formerly to the archdeacon. The latter official was the first among the seven deacons, a number long retained in many churches, and he held office, not by reason of priority of ordination, but by free appointment of the bishop. To him was generally committed the external administration of the diocese, including the control of the inferior clergy and the right of visiting and correcting all the clerics by judicial procedure.

In the sixth century, there were both urban and rural archdeacons, and the dioceses were divided into districts ruled by these officials. This custom began in France and later spread all over Europe. By the eleventh century, the jurisdiction of archdeacons had become ordinary and stable. They had courts of first instance, and, besides their contentious jurisdiction, they had wide administrative powers, so much so indeed that they became obnoxious to the legitimate exercise of the bishop's authority. In consequence, from the twelfth century onwards, we find new diocesan assistants of the bishop, later called vicars-general, or officials, removable at the will of the ordinary. Vicars-general are not named in the Decretals of Gregory IX, but they are frequently referred to in the Sixth Book of Decretals (e.g., cap. ii, iii, "De off. Vic.", I. 13 in 6) and in the Clementines (cap. ii, "De reser.", 1.2. in Clem). In large dioceses in England and some other countries, a distinction was made between the vicar-general, who had voluntary jurisdiction or administration, and the official, who had contentious jurisdiction, but this distinction was never received into the common law, and the titles vicar-general and official are used indiscriminately for the same person in the Decretals and the Tridentine decrees. The institution of vicars-general greatly limited the powers of the archdeacons, and finally the latter officials were reduced by the Council of Trent (Sess, XXIUV, c. xii, "De ref.") to mere honorary dignitaries in cathedral chapters.

According to the present discipline, the vicar-general is deputed by the bishop to exercise the latter's jurisdiction with a certain universality of power. Bishops could not of themselves be competent to establish officials with the same ordinary faculties which they themselves have, and consequently the office of vicar-general rests on powers communicated by the pope and common law. The bishop, therefore, cannot concede to the vicar-general any jurisdiction except within the bounds allowed by the law or legitimate custom, or express Apostolic indults. The jurisdiction of the vicar-general is necessarily universal in the whole diocese, both for persons and causes, with a universality, however, not absolute, but moral, and therefore, though the bishop can restrict it both as to places and causes, he cannot so limit it that it ceases to be general, at least morally. It is in the discretion of the bishop to constitute a vicar-general for his diocese, but he cannot suppress an office instituted by common law.

The office of vicar-general is unique, and therefore there should not be several of them in one diocese, either acting in concert or governing a special part of the diocese (S.C.C., 21 Feb., 1614). However, separate vicars-general may be appointed for the faithful of a different rite or language (C. 14, X, 1, 31). The cleric appointed as vicar-general should be of legitimate birth, tonsured, and celibate. He should have attained his twenty-fifth year and be commendable for the probity of his life, his prudence, and his knowledge of canon law, in which he should be a doctor or licentiate, or at least equivalently qualified. Statutes of particular councils and rescripts of Roman Congregations declare that the vicar-general should not have the cure of souls, but this is nowhere prescribed in common law, and though an urban parish, or a capitular office, or the rectorship of a seminary are hindrances to the liberty of a vicar-general, yet they are not strictly incompatible with it. Regulars cannot be appointed vicars-general without the permission of their religious superiors, and they need, in addition, the license of the Holy See to live outside their monasteries. It is expedient that the vicar-general should not be a blood relation of the bishop or a cleric of the diocese, but there is no general law to this effect, though the schema of the Vatican Council contains one (Jus. Pont. de Prop. Fid., VI, append.).

The power of the vicar-general, by reason of his office and deputation, extends to all causes in the ordinary episcopal jurisdiction, except those which common law or the bishop may have reserved or made dependent on a special mandate. The tribunal of the vicar-general is one with the bishops, and therefore there is no appeal from one to the other. The vicar-general cannot substitute another cleric in his place to exercise his whole jurisdiction, but he may appoint delegates for special causes. Owing to the dependence of the jurisdiction of the vicar on that of the bishop, it ceases or is impeded with the latter. When, however, the vicar is acting in a special case as a strict delegate, he may even then finish the cause he had begun. The jurisdiction of a vicar-general, according to most canonists, is of a class by itself between ordinary and delegated, and it may be called quasi-ordinary, because, on the one hand, it is connected with a certain office by legal enactment and, on the other, it is exercised not in his own, but another's name. As ordinary jurisdiction, however, is always exercised by him as a matter of fact, there is no reason why his power should not be called ordinary. By virtue of a general mandate, the vicar-general exercises ordinary jurisdiction in the name of the bishop, but for some causes he needs a special mandate. These are: to make a visitation of the diocese, to confer benefices of free collation, to punish the excesses of clerics or remove them from their benefices or offices, to use the bishop's Tridentine faculties of dispensation and suspension, to concede dimissorial letters for receiving orders. All of the above require a special mandate by explicit law, but others of a similar nature, according to canonists, also require this mandate. They are: to suppress, unite, or divide benefices, to admit resignations for the purpose of exchanging benefices, to convoke a diocesan synod, to erect monasteries and confraternities. The office of a vicar-general expires with his death or resignation; with the cessation of the bishop's jurisdiction; with the revocation of his vicarial mandate, which must, however, be justified by a grave cause and against which, if his honour be impugned, he has recourse to the Holy See.

TAUNTON, The Law of the Church (London, 1906), s.v.; SMITH, Elements of Ecclesiastical Law, I (New York, 1895); WERNZ, Jus decretalium, II (Rome, 1899); THOMASSIN, Vetus et nova disciplina (Paris, 1688); LAURENTIUS, Institutiones juris ecclesiastici (Fribourg, 1903); FERRARIS, Bibliotheca canonica, VII (Rome, 1891), s.v.

WILLIAM H.W. FANNING

Hermann von Vicari

Archbishop of Freiburg in Baden, b. at Aulendorf in Wurtemberg, 13 May, 1773; d. at Freiburg, 14 April, 1868. In 1789 he received tonsure at Constance and obtained a canonry, studied law until 1795 at Vienna, and after a brief practice began the study of theology. In 1797 he was ordained priest, and made ecclesiastical councillor and official of the episcopal curia at Constance. After the suppression of the diocese (1802) the Archbishop of Freiburg appointed him cathedral canon, in 1827 vicar-general, and in 1830 cathedral dean. In 1822 he was appointed Auxiliary Bishop of Macra, in 1836 and 1842 diocesan administrator, and in 1842 archbishop. As archbishop, Vicari endeavoured to release the Church of Baden from the bonds of Josephinism and the principles of Wessenberg, and to defend its rights against the civil Government. To overcome prevalent religious indifference he emphasized the rights of bishops in training and appointing the clergy, and enforced discipline as regards mixed marriages. In a violent dispute with the Government over his prohibition of a Requiem Mass for deceased Protestant rulers he was victorious, as also in later contests about the schools. Though placed under police supervision and held prisoner in his palace, his unwavering determination brought about the reorganization of Catholic life in Baden. He founded a seminary for boys out of his private means, established a theological house of studies, and appointed learned and ascetic men of sound religious convictions as professors at the ecclesiastical seminary. In numerous pastoral letters and exercises he animated the priests for their high calling, exhorted them to the faithful fulfilment of their duties, especially in the administration of the sacraments, and punished disobedience with great severity. He was energetic in his support of the secular authority, and in the revolutionary years of 1848-1849 he exhorted the Catholics to remain loyal.

KUBEL, Hermann von Vicari (Freiburg, 1869); HANSJAKOB, Hermann von Vicari (Wurzburg, 1873).

PATRICIUS SCHLAGER

Vicar of Christ

(Lat. Vicarius Christi).

A title of the pope implying his supreme and universal primacy, both of honour and of jurisdiction, over the Church of Christ. It is founded on the words of the Divine Shepherd to St. Peter: "Feed my lambs. . . . Feed my sheep" (John 21:16-17), by which He constituted the Prince of the Apostles guardian of His entire flock in His own place, thus making him His Vicar and fulfilling the promise made in Matthew 16:18-19.

In the course of the ages other vicarial designations have been used for the pope, as Vicar of St. Peter and even Vicar of the Apostolic See (Pope Gelasius, I, Ep. vi), but the title Vicar of Christ is more expressive of his supreme headship of the Church on earth, which he bears in virtue of the commission of Christ and with vicarial power derived from Him. Thus, Innocent III appeals for his power to remove bishops to the fact that he is Vicar of Christ (cap. "Inter corporalia", 2, "De trans. ep."). He also declares that Christ has given such power only to His Vicar Peter and his successors (cap. "Quanto", 3, ibid.), and states that it is the Roman Pontiff who is "the successor of Peter and the Vicar of Jesus Christ" (cap. "Licet", 4, ibid.). The title Vicar of God used for the pope by Nicholas III (c. "Fundamenta ejus", 17, "De elect.", in 6) is employed as an equivalent for Vicar of Christ.

WILLIAM H.W. FANNING

Vice

(Lat. vitium, any sort of defect) is here regarded as a habit inclining one to sin. It is the product of repeated sinful acts of a given kind and when formed is in some sense also their cause. Its specific characterization in any instance must be gathered from the opposition it implies to a particular virtue. It is manifest that its employment to designate the individual wicked act is entirely improper. They differ as the habit of doing something is distinguished from the act of that thing. Hence a man may have vices and yet be at times guilty of no sin, and conversely the commission of isolated sins does not make him vicious. Such guilt as he may have contracted in any case is charged directly to the sinful act, not to the vice. Hence the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas that, absolutely speaking, the sin surpasses the vice in wickedness. Even though the sin be removed by God the vice, if there was one, may still remain, just as failure to act in any direction does not necessarily and straightway destroy the habit which perchance existed. The habit of sinful indulgence of any sort is to be extirpated by unrelenting vigilance and the performance of contrary acts over a space more or less protracted according as the vice was more or less inveterate. Obviously this applies to vices antagonistic to acquired virtues, for so far as the infused virtues are concerned they can be recovered only, as they were originally obtained, through the gratuitous bounty of God. It is interesting to note that according to St. Thomas after one has been rehabilitated, in the state of grace and has received, let us say, the infused virtue of temperance, the vice of intemperance does not continue formally as a habit but only as a sort of disposition and as something which is in process of destruction. (in via corruptionis).

JOSEPH F. DELANY

St. Vicelinus

Bishop of Oldenburg, apostle of Holstein, b. at Hameln about 1086; d. 12 Dec., 1154. Orphaned at an early age, he received his primary education at Hameln. He left secretly for Paderborn, where he enjoyed the home and instructions of Hartmann, and soon surpassed his companions and assisted in the management of the cathedral school. He was called to Bremen to act as teacher and principal of the school, and was offered a canonry by Archbishop Frederic. In 1122 he went to Laon in France to complete his studies (Hauck, "Kirchengesch. Deutschl.", Leipzig, 1903, IV, 600); this is doubted by Schirren (Beitrage zur Kritik alterer holst. Geschichte, 1876, 38). On his return he was ordained priest by St. Norbert of Magdeburg. Archbishop Adalben sent him among the Wends, and in the fall of 1126 Henry, Prince of the Obotrites, gave him a church in Lubeck. At the death of Henry (22 March, 1127) Vicelinus returned to Bremen, and was appointed pastor at Wippenthorp. This gave him an opportunity to work among the Holstians and neighbouring Slavs. His preaching gathered crowds of eager listeners, and many priests aided him in founding the monastery of Neumunster, according to the Rule of St. Augustine, which was liberally endowed by the archbishop. Wars among the tribes in 1137 caused the missionaries to abandon their labours for two years. Vicelinus sent two priests to Lubeck, but with little success. At his suggestion King Lothair intended to build a fortress and monastery at Segeburg, but death prevented him. Some years later Vicelinus established a house at Hogersdorf. In 1149 he was made Bishop of Oldenburg, where he did much for the spiritual and temporal welfare of his diocese. In 1152 he was struck by paralysis and lingered amid much suffering for two years. His body was transferred to Bordesholm in 1332, and buried before the main altar. In 1874 the small Catholic parish at Hameln had his picture engraved on a new bell. He is usually represented with a church resting on his left arm; his feast is celebrated on 12 Dec.

KREUSCH, Kirchengesch. Der Wendenlande (Paderborn, 1902), 35; STRUNCK, Leben der Heiligen Westfalens, I (Munster, 1863), 123; HELMODI, Chron. Slav.; Bibl. Hag. Lat., II, 1236.

FRANCIS MERSHMAN

Gil Vicente

Portuguese dramatist, b. about 1470; he was living in 1536. He took up the study of law but abandoned it for literature. As a lyric poet he is represented by some humorous poems in the "Cancioneiro" of Garcia de Resende. He owes his fame to his plays, and with good reason he is styled the father of the Portuguese drama. He wrote in all no fewer than 42 pieces, of which 10 are in Spanish, 14 in Portuguese, and the rest in mingled Spanish and Portuguese. It had already become the fashion for the leading Portuguese authors to write in Spanish as wll as in their native tongue, and this fashion was to continue throughout the Renaissance. Many of Vicente's plays were composed for the purpose of celebrating religious and national festivals; others commemorate events in the life of the royal family; still others are quite popular in their tone and were intended by him to serve the ends of entertainment only. The first of his plays was the "Visitacao" (in Spanish), which celebrates the birth of John III, King of Portugal (1502). He recited it himself in the chamber of the Spanish mother of John III. It is known that ladies and gentlemen of the Court, as well as the poet himself, played parts in his dramas when they were produced in the palace. Like the classic dramas of Spain, they are regularly in verse, and they contain lyrics of his own with melodies composed also by him, as well as other popular lyrics and melodies introduced for particular effect. For the sake of convenience the plays may be grouped under the headings of autos (the more peculiarly religious pieces), comedias and tragi- comedias, and farces. The 17 autos are usually called his "Obras de devocao". They reveal an influence of the contemporaneous Spanish dramatist, Juan del Encina, while contemporaneous Spaniards, like Lucas Fernandez and Torres Naharro, may possibly have inspired his profane compositions. But he was never a servile imitator; the life of the time is reflected again and again by him in an original and interesting manner, and, in spite of uncouthness of form, his little dramas remain very readable. Of course, only a genuinely devout Catholic could have written his "Obras de devocao". The first edition of his works was published at Lisbon in 1561-2.

Eds. of the Obras de Gil Vicente (Hamburg, 1834, and Lisbon, 1852), a good critical ed. is needed; MICHAELIS DE VASCONCELLOS in GREBER, Grundriss der romanischen Philologie, II, ii, 270 sqq.; MENENDEZ Y PELAYO, Antologia de poetas liricos castellanos, VII (Madrid, 1898), clxiii; SANCHES DE BAENA, Gil Vicente (Marinha Grande, 1894); BRAGA, Eschola de Gil Vicente, etc. (Oporto, 1898); IDEM; Gil Vicente e as origens de theatro nacional (Oporto, 1898); BRAGA is always to be used with caution.

J.D.M. FORD

Diocese of Vicenza

(VICENTINA).

The city is the capital of a province in Venetia (Northern Italy). The surrounding country is agricultural, but there are also quarries of marble, sulphur, copper, and silver mines, and beds of lignite and kaolin; mineral springs also abound, the most famous being those of Recoaro. Among the industries worthy of mention are the woollen and silk, pottery, and musical instruments. The cathedral, dating from early in the eleventh century, and restored in the thirteenth, sixteenth, and nineteenth, possesses numerous pictures and sculptures, nearly all of them by Vicentine artists (Cittadello, Celestia, Liberi, Ruschi). The Church of the Ara Coeli (1244), formerly belonging to the Clarisses, contains statutes by Marinali and Cassetti, and paintings by Tiepolo. The Churches of the Carmine (1372) and S. Caterina (1292), formerly belonging to the Humiliati, possess notable pictures. S. Corona (1260) was built by the Dominicans after the death of Ezzelino, and is pictures by Montagna ("The Magdelene") and Relline ("Baptism of Christ"). Other churches are: S. Croce (1179), SS. Felice e Fortunato (eighth century), SS. Filippo e Giacomo (twelfth century), S. Lorenzo of the Friars Minor (1280), in the Gothic style, contains the tombs of many illustrious Vicentines. In the cloister of S. Maria of the Servites (1319) took place the miracles of St. Philip Benizi de Damiani. The most remarkable secular buildings are the theatre, built by Palladio in 15890 for the Accademia degli Olimpici, and the Basilica--the building itself Gothic of 1444, though Palladio built the outer portico in two orders. Near the latter are the clock tower (1224-1446), 268 feet in height, and the Rotondo, another work of Palladio's (1570), with four porticoes. There are numerous private palaces which were transformed by Palladio and his pupils. A special feature is the multitude of towers which still remain. The Communal Library was founded by Count Giovanni M. Bertolo. The Museum contains a picture-gallery exclusively devoted to Vicentine painters. Of the philanthropic institutions many, like the hospital, date back to the fourteenth century, others to the fifteenth.

Vicentia was a city of the Veneti, from whom it was taken by the Gauls. In Roman times it was of little importance, though it had the franchise in 45 B.C. It suffered by the incursions of the Goths and the Huns, but is not mentioned in connection with the Gothic War. In the eighth century we find a Lombard Duke of Vicenza. When the Othos handed over the government of the city to the bishop, its communal organization had an opportunity to develop, and separated itself from the episcopal authority. It took an active part in the Lombard League, compelling Padua and Treviso to join, and its podesta, Ezzelino III, il Balbo, was captain of the league. When peace was restored, however, the old rivalry with Padua, Bassano, and other cities was renewed, besides which there were the internal factions of the Vivaresi (Ghibellines) and the Maltraversi (Guelphs). The tyrannical Ezzelino IV drove the Guelphs out of Vicenza, and caused his brother, Alberico, to be elected podesta (1230). The city joined the Second Lombard League against Frederick II, and was sacked by that monarch (1237), after which it formed part of Ezzelino's dominions. On his death the old government was restored--a consiglio maggiore of four hundred members and a consiglio minore of forty members--and formed a league with Padua, Treviso, and Verona. Three years later the Vicentines entrusted the protection of the city to Padua, so as to safeguard republican liberty; but this protectorate (custodia) quickly became dominion, and for that reason Vicenza in 1311 voluntarily submitted to the Scaligeri of Verona. In 1404 it submitted to Venice, and thenceforward shared the history of that republic. It was beseiged by the Emperor Sigismund, and Maximilian I held possession of it in 1509 and 1516. In 1848 it rose against Austria, but was recovered after a stubborn resistance. Vicenza was the native city of the historian Ferreto dei Ferreti (fourteenth century), the peot Trissino (1478-1553), the traveller Pigafetta, companion of Magalhaes, the architects Palladio and Scamazzi, and the engraver Valerio Belli.

Among its patron saints the city venerates St. Lontius, bishop and martyr, and Sts. Theodore and Apollonius, bishops and confessors in the fourth century. The Christian cemetery discovered recently near the Church of Sts. Felix and Fortunatus, dates from the earlier half of the fourth century, and these two saints were probably martyred under Diocletian. The first bishop of whom there is any certain record is Horontius (590), a partisan of the Schism of the Three Chapters. Other bishops were: Vitalis (901), high chancellor of King Berengarius: Girolano (1000), deposed by Henry II for political sedition; Torengo, in whose episcopate a number of bishops rebelled against the episcopal authority; Blessed Giovanni Ccciafronte (1179-85), a Benedictine, slain by one of his own vassals. Uberto was deposed by Innocent III as a despoiler of church property, but the canons put off until 1219 the election of his successor, Gilberto, who was forced by the tyranny of Ezzelino to live in exile. Blessed Bartolommeo da Breganze (1256), a Dominican, had previously been Bishop of Nicosia, in Cyprus, and legate in Syria. Under Bishop Emiliani (1409) took place the apparition of the Blessed Virgin on Monte Berico which led to the foundation of the famous sanctuary, 3280 feet above the sea level. Pietro Barbo (1451) was afterwards Pope Paul II. Cardinal Giovanni Battista Zeno (1468) was distinguished for his sanctity and learning. Matteo Priuli (1563) founded the seminary and made efforts for reform. Alvise M. Ganrielli (1779) restored many churches and the seminary. The See of Vicenza was suffragan of Aquilcia, then of Udine, and since 1818 of Venice. The diocese contains: 219 parishes, with 477,000 souls; 699 secular and 39 regular priests; 10 houses of male religious and 52 sisters; 4 schools for boys, and 52 for girls. The Catholic Press comprises "Il Berico" (tri- weekly, Vicenza), "La Riscossa" (tri-weekly, Breganze), and six other periodicals.

CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, X; CASTELLINI, Storia della citta di Vicenza (14 vols., Vicenza, 1782-1822); RICCARDO, Storia dei Vescovi Vicentini (Vicenza, 1786); GIAROLO, La necropoli cristiana di Vicenza (Vicenza, 1909).

U. BENIGNI

Diocese of Vich

(Vicensis, Ausonensis).

Suffragan of Tarragona, bounded on the north by Gerona, on the east by Gerona and Barcelona, on the south by Barcelona and Tarragona, on the west by Tarragona and Lerida. It lies within the four Catalonian provinces, but the greater part of it in that of Barcelona. The capital has 9500 inhabitants. Vich is of very ancient origin; it was called Ausa by the Romans, and Iberian coins bearing this name have been found there. The Goths called it Ausona. After its destruction by the Moors only one quarter (Vicus) was rebuilt, and this was called Vicus Ausonensis, from which the name Vich was derived. The introduction of Christianity was undoubtedly very remote, as martyrs of Ausa are recorded in the time of Decius, and in the earliest records of the Tarraconensian sees the Bishop of Vich is one of the very first mentioned. None, however, is mentioned by name until 516 when Cinidius is named as assisting at the provincial Council of Tarragona and Gerona. Aquilinus (589-99) attended the third Council of Toledo; Esteban, the fourth and one at Egara; Dominus, the sixth of Toledo; Guericus, the eighth; Wisefredus sent his vicar to the thirteenth, and attended in person the fifteenth and sixteenth. With this bishop ends the history of the Church of Ausona before the Saracen invasion. The reconquest of Vich was begun in the time of Louis the Pious, who confided the civil government to Borrell, Count of Ausona, all ecclesiastical matters being under the direction of the Archbishop of Narbonne. In 826 Vich fell once more into the hands of the Moors and was finally reconquered by Wilfred the Hairy, independent Count of Barcelona.

Wilfred dedicated to the Blessed Virgin the famous monastery of Ripoli, which was already in existence in 888, and obtained form the Archbishop of Narbonne the consecration of Godmarus as Bishop of Vich. The bishops and the family of Moncada disputed the right of sovereignty over the city until 1315, when the Bishop Berenguer Gaguardia ceded his rights to the king, James II, who also purchased the rights of the Moncadas. It is disputed whether the Church of San Pedro Apóstol or S. Maria la Rotonda was the first cathedral church. For centuries the bishops celebrated the first Christmas Mass in this church, and the third in that of San Pedro. The very ancient Church of S. Maria was rebuilt from the foundations by Canon Guillermo Bonfil in 1140, and consecrated forty years later by Bishop Pedro Retorta. In 1787 it was demolished to make room for the new Cathedral. Bishop Jorge (915- 38) reconsecrated the Church of Ripoli and also consecrated that of S. Maria de Manresa. Bishop Atton (960-72) is worthy of mention as a great promoter of studies. Many persons availed themselves of the advantages offered by his reforms, among them Gerbert, the monk of Orleans, afterwards Pope Sylvester II, who was distinguished for his learning. Another of the most illustrious bishops of Vich was Oliva (1018-46), son of the Count of Besahi, and Abbot of Ripoli where he reconstructed and richly decorated the church. The dedication took place 15 January, 1032. He also, with the help of Ermesinda, Countess of Barcelona, reconstructed the cathedral and dedicated it to Sts. Peter and Paul on 31 August, 1038. In the time of his successor Guillermo I the relics of its patron saints, the martyrs Lucianus and Marcianus, were found at Vich, and a council was held for the restoration of peace among the faithful. Berenguer Seniofredo reformed the chapter, expelling lax members and introducing regular observance. Berenguer obtained for himself the dignity of Archbishop of Tarragona, which was contested by the Bishop of Narbonne. Among the Spanish bishops who attended the Council of Trent was Acisclo Moya de Contreras, Bishop of Vich, who was accompanied by the theologian Pedro Mercado.

Of the more recent bishops, Jose Morgades y Gili deserves special mention. He restored the monastery of Ripoli, destroyed and pillaged by the revolutionists, and reconsecrated its church on 1 July, 1893. He also established at Vich an archaeological museum where he collected many treasures of medieval art which had been dispersed among the ancient churches of the diocese. The present Bishop of Vich is Jose Torras y Bages, a man of great culture and learning. The greatest glory of Vich of modern times is Jaime Balmes, the foremost Spanish philosopher of the nineteenth century, whose remains are interred in the cloister of the cathedral. His first centenary was celebrated at Vich by a Catholic Congress. The original cathedral, which had but a single nave, thick walls, and few windows, was replaced by that built by Bishop Oliva. As early as the thirteenth century Bishop Raimundo de Anglesola wrote a pastoral letter exhorting his people to contribute towards repairing the cathedral. In 1401 Bishop Diego de Heredia added a transept, and in 1585 the door of San Juan was added, but the necessity of a complete reconstruction was soon recognized, and towards the end of the eighteenth century the building was torn down, and the corner stone of the new one was laid on 24 September, 1781. It was consecrated on 15 September, 1803. It is classic in design, a combination of Doric and Tuscan, with a facade of white stone enriched with a beautiful balustrade. It has three entrances, corresponding to the three naves, and colossal statutes of its six patrons. The interior is Corinthian. All the monuments and altars were destroyed when the old church was demolished, except the high altar which is of alabaster, in the Gothic style, and was given early in the fifteen century by D. Bernardo Despujol. Among the chapels that of S. Bernardo Calvo (1233-43), who assisted Jaime I in the conquest of Valencia, deserves special mention. The two-storied Gothic cloister is exceedingly beautiful. A handsome Gothic doorway leading to the chapter house has been preserved.

The conciliar seminary was begun in 1635 by Gaspar Gil and was finally finished, by command of Benedict XIV, by Manuel Munoz in 1748. The present seminary is located in the former Jesuit College. It has sent out many famous men, among them Balmes and the poet Mosén Jacinto Verdager, author of "La Atlantida". The episcopal palace was destroyed in the wars of 1640 and rebuilt by degrees, being completed by Bishop Veyan. The archaeological museum is in this building. the University of Vich never attained to any great importance; it is not known when or by whom it was founded. Philip III granted it the privilege of conferring degrees, but only in philosophy and the arts (1599). Philip V, in the Cortes of Barcelona (1702), granted it the power to confer degrees in theology and other higher sciences. Manresa, where St. Ignatius Loyola wrote his Spiritual Exercises, is situated in the Diocese of Vich. His memory is venerated in the Santa Cueva, which has been converted into a church, and a magnificent college of the Jesuits built near it. Among the celebrated natives of Vich should be mentioned the Trinitarian St. Miguel de los Santos and Padre Claret, confessor of Isabella II and founder of the Congregation of the Missionaries of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

PIFFERRER, Esp., sus monumentos y artes: Cataluna, II (Barcelona, 1884); FLOREZ, Esp. Sagrada, XXVIII (Madrid, 1774); DE LA FUENTE, Hist. de las universidades de Esp., II (Madrid, 1885); IDEM, Hist. ecles. de Esp.; (Barcelona, 1855); FLOREZ, ARGAIE, MONCADA VEYAN, Episcopologios.

RAMON RUIZ AMADO

Francescoe de Vico

Astronomer, b. at Macerata, States of the Church, 19 May, 1805; d. at London, England, 15 Nov., 1848. Entering the Society of Jesus at San Andrea, Rome, and showing peculiar aptitude for mathematics and astronomy, he was appointed professor of these branches at the Roman Collega and assistant to the director of the observatory, Father Dumouchel, whom he succeeded as director in 1839. Under his direction the observatory acquired a European reputation, and his labours in astronomy made him famous. Science owes to him many important discoveries. Unwearied in activity, he held correspondence with the most celebrated astronomers, and was a frequent contributor to scientific publications. He was a charter member of the Italian Society of Science, and was elected to membership in many scientific societies at home and abroad. He received the Lalande prizes of the French academy, and six times won the gold medal offered by the King of Denmark to the first discoverer of a telescopic comet. One of these medals is in the museum at Georgetown University, U.S.A. Father de Vico left Rome towards the end of March, the political disturbances of 1848 making his stay impossible. Arago, then Minister of Marine, wished to retain him at Paris, but the threatening outlook of affairs in Europe and the cordial invitation from Georgetown College to assume charge of its recently founded observatory impelled him to come to the United States. He arrived on 22 July, 1848, and, with characteristic activity, spent the whole of the first night with Lieutenant Maury at the U.S. Naval Observatory, Washington. The honourable reception, the frank and liberal treatment accorded him, and the generous offerings made to him, were powerful inducements to retain him in America, and he accepted the position of director of the observatory at Georgetown College. Clear-sighted and prompt in planning for future work, after a few weeks stay at Georgetown, he returned to England to expedite necessary business arrangements; at Liverpool he contracted typhus fever, and, although he recovered, his constitution had been undermined, and he fell into a decline.

As de Vico's most important works may be mentioned: "The Discovery of six Comets" (see Poggendorff, infra); "The Discussion of the Rotation-period of the planet Venus". the dispute between the periods of twenty-four days and twenty-three hours had been kept up for a century, and was settled by him by the important discovery that the spots on the planet Venus could be observed in the day-time, at least under the Italian sky. He gave the period twenty-three hours, twenty-one minutes, and twenty-two seconds, which was generally accepted until Schiaparelli (1890) maintained that the rotation coincided with the revolution, as is the case with our moon. De Vico's value was, however, justified, among others, by A. Muller (1898) and Belopolsky (1911). His various astronomical works are contained in the "Memorie" of the Roman College for the years 1836 to 1847, besides minor articles in the astronomical journals ("Comptes Rendus" and "Astronomische Nachrichten"). In addition to his scientific attainments, de Vico acquired reputation as a musical composer; his compositions were produced in the churches in Rome on the principal feasts, and his "Lamentations", published under the title "Antiphons and Responses of Matins and Lauds for the Last Three Days of Holy Week" (London, 1887) are famous in sacred music.

SECCHI in Memorie dei Osservatorio del Collegio Romano (1850), 131 sqq.; VOLPICELLI, Atti Acad. Nuovi Linceri, I, 172: POGGENDORFF, Handworterbuch, II, 1203; HERSCHEL, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society of London, IX (1849), 65; SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliotheque de la Compagnie de Jesus, VIII, 642. See also L'Ami de la Religion, XCCCIC (Paris, 1849), 239-42.

E.I. DEVITT

Victimae Paschali Laudes Immolent Christiani

The first stanza of the Easter sequence. Medieval missals placed it on various days within the octave, but the Roman Missal assigns it daily from Easter to the following Saturday inclusively. On the authority of an Einsiedeln manuscript of the eleventh century, its authorship has been ascribed to Wipo (q.v.). With less apparent reason it has been ascribed to Notker Balbulus (q.v.) by Cardinal Bona, to Robert II of France by Durandus, and even to Adam of St. Victor (although found in manuscripts antedating his birth). It shares with certain of Notker's sequences their varying stanzaic form and almost casual assonance, but makes an advance in the frequency of rhyme; it thus marks a transition from the Notkerian sequences to the regular rhymic and stanzaic form of those of Adam of St. Victor. As the only sequence in quasi-Notkerian from retained in our Missal, it is of great interest hymnologically. "Vos" in the line "Praecedet vos in Galilaeam", in the typical Missal (1900), was replaced in the Vatican Graduale (1908) by "suos", the original word; this brings the line into appropriate syllabic conformity with the similar line in the preceding stanza, "Et gloriam vidi resurgentis". Although the lines in any one stanza will vary in syllabic length, a comparison of stanzas will show perfect numerical correspondence in the lines. Thus, stanzas 2 and 3:

The first two lines in the stanzas have seven syllables each; the third line has six; the fourth line, four. The chant melody is the same for each stanza. Another melody is found for the next two stanzas, which are also in perfect syllabic correspondence:

Finally, comparing the original sixth stanza (omitted in the reform of the Missal by the Council of Trent, when, also, "Suos" was changed into "vos" and "Amen. Alleluia." was added to the sequence), perfect correspondence is again found:

Dr. Neale, in his "Epistola" (published in Daniel, IV), speaks (p. 22) of the wonderful art of building proses or sequences, and expresses (p. 10) his surprise at the deep ignorance, displayed by liturgists, of the rhythm of the Notkerian proses. Daniel also (V, p. 58) is shocked at the judgment of Frantz,-that the text is trivial, considered as poetry, and that the sequence has retained its popularity because of its good melody. The text of the "Victimae Paschali Laudes" has, however, so rarely appeared in correct form, that the syllabic correspondence cannot be perceived. Modern commentators often replace "surrexisse", "suos" by "vos", and omit "vidi" from the fourth stanza. The apparently irregular rhythms and casual rhymes or assonances have combined to give pause to translators, who render the sequence in our regular English stanza (as C.S. Calverley):

or (like Caswall) rhyme with apparently equal casualness:

or vary the verse lengths while keeping rhyme (like C.B. Pearson in the Baltimore "Manual of Prayers"), or frankly adopt prose (like the version in the "Missal for the Use of the Laity", London, 1903).

This "magnificent sequence . . . this triumphal hymn" (P. Wagner) assumed a scenic character as early as the thirteenth century, became a portion of the "Office of the Sepulchre", entered into many paschal Mystery Plays, and served as a model for many imitations in honour of the Blessed Virgin and the saints.

MEARNS and JULIAN in Dict. of Hymnology (london, 1907), 1222-4, 1722, with bibliographical references; to the list of trs. add: BAGSHAWE, Breviary Hymns and Missal Sequences (London, s.d.), no. 80; ESLING in Catholic Record, V, 12; DONAHOE, Early Christian Hymns, S. II (Middletown, Conn., 1911); and prose tr. in Missal for the Use of the Laity (London, 1903). KAYSER, Beitrage zur Gesch. u. Erklarung der altesten Kirchenhymnen, II (Paderborn, 18886), 37-60, with variant texts, rubrics, in full, of the Sepulcri Officium. comment. WAGNER, Origine et Developpement du Chant Liturgique, etc., tr. BOUR (Rome, Tournai, 1904), 264-5, gives corrected test: "It became quite as celebrated as the Media vita of Notker . . . In Germany it has maintained a glorious popularity even down to our own times through the hymn Christus ist erstanden". Wagner adds that he published in the Gregoriusblatt (1896), no. II sq., two imitations "which could be sung to the triumphant and much-loved melody of Wipo". JOHNER, A New School of Gregorian Chant (New York, 1906), 15: "the melody is imbued with a spirit of triumphal joy . . . The jubilant scimus Christum surrexisse . . . should be sung with emphasis and solemnity, tempo moderato, not dragged." The tr. of LEESON, omitted from the hist. ed. of Hymns Ancient and Modern (London, 1909), is given by OULD, Book of Hymns (Edinburgh, 1910). BATES, The English Religious Drama (New York and London, 1893), omits "vidi" and has "vos" for "suos". COURTHOPE, History of English Poetry, I (London and New York, 1895), 394-5, omits "vidi" and has "vos" for "suos", dates the beginning of modern drama from the use of the "Victimae paschali laudes" in the Sepulcri Officium and the representations thence developed. THOMPSON in DUFFIELD, The Latin Hymn Writers and Their Hymns (New York, 1889), thinks the undoubted poems of Wipo do not "show the fine ear for rhythm which the author of the Victimae paschali laudes must have possessed. The sequence was one of those Easter hymns in which Luther took such delight. He calls this a "very beautiful hymn", especially finding delight in the second verse Mors et Vita. . ." See also EASTER-The Easter Office and Mass.

H.T. HENRY

Pope St. Victor I

(189-198 or 199), date of birth unknown. The "Liber Pontificalis" makes him a native of Africa and gives his father the name of Felix. This authority, taking the "Liberian Catalogue" as its basis, gives the years 186-197 as the period of Victor's episcopate. The Armenian text of the "Chronicle" of Eusebius (Leipzig, 1911, p. 223) places the beginning of Victor's pontificate in the seventh year of the reign of the Emperor Commodus (180-87) and gives it a duration of twelve years; in his "Church History" (V, xxxii, ed. Schwarts, Leipzig, 1902, p. 486) Eusebius transfers the beginning of the pontificate to the tenth year of the reign of Commodus and makes it last ten years. During the closing years of the reign of Commodus (180-192) and the early years of Septimius Severus (from 193) the Roman Church enjoyed in general great external peace. The favourable opinion of the Christians held by Commodus is ascribed to the influence of a woman named Marcia. According to the testimony of Hippolytus ("Philosophumena", IX, 12) she had been brought up by the presbyter Hyacinthus, was very favourably inclined towards the Christians, perhaps even a Christian herself (Hippolytus, loc. cit., calls her philotheos God-loving). One day she summoned Pope Victor to the imperial palace and asked for a list of the Roman Christians who had been condemned to forced labour in the mines of Sardinia, so that she might obtain their freedom. The pope handed her the list and Marcia, having received from the emperor the required pardon, sent the presbyter Hyacinthus to Sardinia with an order of release for the Christian confessors. Callistus, afterwards pope, who had been among those deported, did not return to Rome, but remained at Antium, where he received a monthly pension from the Roman Christians. Irenaeus ("Adv. Haerses", IV, xxx, 1) points out that Christians were employed at this period as officials of the imperial Court. Among these officials was the imperial freedman Prosenes, whose gravestone and epitaph have been preserved (De Rossi, "Inscriptiones christ. urbis Romae", I, 9, no. 5). Septimius Severus, also, during the early years of his reign, regarded the Christians kindly, so that the influence of Christian officials continued. The emperor retained in his palace a Christian named Proculus who had once cured him. He protected Christian men and women of rank against the excesses of the heathen rabble, and his son Caracalla had a Christian wet nurse (Tertullian, "Ad Scapulam", IV). Christianity made great advances in the capital and also found adherents among the families who were distinguished for wealth and noble descent (Eusebius, "Hist. eccl.", V, xxi).

Internal dissensions during this era affected the Church at Rome. The dispute over the celebration of Easter (see EASTER CONTROVERSY) grew more acute. The Christians at Rome, who had come from the province of Asia, were accustomed to observe Easter on the 14th day of Nisan, whatever day of the week that date might happen to fall on, just as they had done at home. This difference inevitably led to trouble when it appeared in the Christian community of Rome. Pope Victor decided, therefore, to bring about unity in the observance of the Easter festival and to persuade the Quartodecimans to join in the general practice of the Church. He wrote, therefore, to Bishop Polycrates of Ephesus and induced the latter to call together the bishops of the province of Asia in order to discuss the matter with them. This was done; but in the letter sent by Polycrates to Pope Victor he declared that he firmly held to the Quartoceciman custom observed by so many celebrated and holy bishops of that region. Victor called a meeting of Italian bishops at Rome, which is the earliest Roman synod known. He also wrote to the leading bishops of the various districts, urging them to call together the bishops of their sections of the country and to take counsel with them on the question of the Easter festival. Letters came from all sides: from the synod in Palestine, at which Theophilus of Caesarea and Narcissus of Jerusalem presided; from the synod of Pontus over which Palmas as the oldest presided; from the communities in Gaul whose bishop of Irenaeus of Lyons; from the bishops of the Kingdom of Osrhoene; also from individual bishops, as Bakchylus of Corinth. These letters all unanimously reported that Easter was observed on Sunday.. Victor, who acted throughout the entire matter as the head of Catholic Christendom, now called upon the bishops of the province of Asia to abandon their custom and to accept the universally prevailing practice of always celebrating Easter on Sunday. In case they would not do this he declared they would be excluded from the fellowship of the Church.

This severe procedure did not please all the bishops. Irenaeus of Lyons and others wrote to Pope Victor; they blamed his severity, urged him to maintain peace and unity with the bishops of Asia, and to entertain affectionate feelings toward them. Irenaeus reminded him that his predecessors had indeed always maintained the Sunday observance of Easter, as was right, but had not broken off friendly relations and communion with bishops because they followed another custom (Eusebius, "Hist. eccl.", V, xxiii-xxv.) We have no information concerning the further course of the matter under Victor I so far as it regards the bishops of Asia. All that is known is that in the course of the third century the Roman practice in the observance of Easter became gradually universal. In Rome itself, where Pope Victor naturally enforced the observance of Easter on Sunday by all Christians in the capital, an Oriental named Blastus, with a few followers, opposed the pope and brought about a schism, which, however, did not grow in importance (Eusebius, loc. cit., B, xx). Pope Victor also had difficulties with a Roman priest named Florinus, who probably came from Asia Minor. As an official of the imperial court, Florinus had become acquainted in Asia Minor with St. Polycarp, and later was a presbyter of the Roman Church. He fell into the Gnostic heresy and defended the false learning of Valentine. St. Irenaeus wrote two treatises against him: "On the Monarchy [of God] and that God is not the Author of Evil", and "On the Ogdoad". Irenaeus also called Victor's attention to the dangerous writings of Florinus, who was probably degraded from his priestly functions by the pope and expelled from the Church (Eusebius, "Hist. eccl.", V, xv, 20).

During the pontificate of Victor a rich Christian, Theodotus the Leather-seller, came from Constantinople to Rome and taught false doctrines concerning Christ, Whom he declared to be merely a man endowed by the Holy Ghost, at baptism, with supernatural power. The pope condemned this heresy and excluded Theodotus from the Church. The latter, however, would not submit, but, together with his adherents, formed a schismatic party, which maintained itself for a time at Rome. Victor may also have come into contact with the Montanists. Tertullian reports ("Ad Praceam", 1) that a Roman bishop, whose name he does not give, had declared his acceptance of the prophecies of Montanus, but had been persuaded by Praxeas to withdraw. Duchesne ("Histoire ancienne de l'église", I, 278) and others think Tertullian means Pope Eleutherius, but many investigators consider it more probable that he meant Pope Victor, because the latter had had much to do with the inhabitants of Asia Minor, and because, between 190 and 200, Praceas had gone from Rome to Carthage, where he was opposed by Tertullian. The question cannot be decided positively.

Jerome calls Pope Victor the first Latin writer in the Church (Chronicon, ad an. Abr. 2209); he mentions small treatises (mediocria de religione volumina, loc. cit.; cf. "De viris illustribus", XXXIV: "Victor, thirteenth bishop of the Roman city, the writer of certain opuscula on the paschal question and others, ruled the Church ten years under Severus"). Besides the letters touching the Easter controversy none of St. Victor's works is known. Harnack tried to prove that he was the author of the treatise against the dice-throwers ("De alcatoribus"), erroneously ascribed to St. Cyprian (see "Texte und Untersuchungen," V, Leipzig, 1899), though the opinion is how universally rejected (cf. Harnack, "Geschichte der altchristl. Literatur", II, pt. II, 370). It was during Victor's administration, perhaps, that the canon of Scripture used at Rome, and which has been partially preserved in the Muratorian Fragment, was drawn up. In the note concerning him in the "Liber Pontificalis" (ed. Duchesne, I, 137) the Easter controversy is also mentioned; in addition, the introduction of sequentes among the clergy is also attributed to him. It is not certain what this means, whether it applies to the acolytes, or to the assistants who appeared later at Rome for such clergy as were much occupied with the administration of their cures. In any case the note is one of those which the author arbitrarily inserted into the biographies of the various popes, and has, accordingly, no historical value. The same is true of the ordinance respecting the administration of baptism in cases of necessity ascribed to Pope Victor by the same author.

EUSEBIUS, Hist. eccl., V, xx-xxvii; Liber Pontificalis, ed. DUCHESNE, I, 137-138; Acta SS., July, VI, 534-542; LANGEN, Geschichte der römishen Kirche, I (Bonn, 1881), 176 sqq., 179 sq., 182 sqq.; DUCHESNE, Histoire ancienne de l'église, I (Paris, 1906), 251 sq., 277 sq., 289 sqq.

J.P. KIRSCH

Pope Victor II

(GEBHARD, COUNT OF CALW, TOLLENSTEIN, AND HIRSCHBERG.)

Born about 1018; died at Arezzo, 28 July, 1057. The papal catalogues make him a native of the Bavarian Nordgau, while most German sources designate Swabia as his birthplace. His parents were Count Hartwig and Countess Baliza; the Emperor Henry III recognized him as a collateral kinsman, and he was a nephew of Bishop Gebhard III of Ratisbon, who at the court Diet of Goslar presented him (Christmas Day, 1042) to Henry III as a candidate for the episcopal see of Eichstatt. The emperor hesitated at first because Gebhard was only twenty-four years old, but, on the advice of the aged Archbishop Bardo of Mainz, he finally consented to invest him with this important see. Gebhard proved to be a good bishop and a prudent statesman. He was in the emperor's retinue when the latter was crwned at Rome in 1046; he took part in the synod presided over by Leo IX at Mainz in October, 1049, and in the consultations between the pope and the emperor at Ratisbon and Bamberg in 1052. By this time he had become the most influential councillor of Henry III. It was upon his advice that in 1053 a German army, which was on its way to join Leo IX in his war against the Normans, was recalled, an advice which he is said to have regretted when he was pope (Leo Marsicanus in his "Chronaicon Casinense", II, 89, in P.L., CLXXIII, 692). Early in the same year he became regent of Bavaria for the three year old Henry IV. In this capacity he had occasion to prove his loyalty towards the emperor by defind the rights of the empire against the deposed Duke Conrad, the counts of Scheyern, and his own uncle, Bishop Gebhard of Ratisbon.

After the death of Leo IX (19 April, 1054) Cardinal-subdeacon Hildebrand came to the emperor at the head of a Roman legation with the urgent request to designate Gebhard as pope. At the Diet of Mainz, in September, 1054, the emperor granted this request, but Gebhard refused to accept the papal dignity. At a court Diet held at Ratisbon in March, 1055, he finally accepted the papacy, but only on condition that the emperor restored to the Apostolic See all the possessions that had been taken from it. The emperor consented to this condition and Gebhard accompanied Hildebrand to Rome, where he was formally elected and solemnly enthroned on Maundy Thrusday, 13 April, 1055, taking the name of Victor II. Even as pope he retained the Diocese of Eichstatt. Victor II was a worthy successor of Leo IX. With untiring zeal he combated, like his predecessor, against simony and clerical concubinage. Being well supported by the emperor, he often succeeded where Leo IX had failed. On Pentecost Sunday, June 4, 1055, he held a large synod at Florence, in presence of the emperor and 120 bishops, where former decrees against siony and incontinence were confirmed and several offending bishops deposed. To King Ferdinand of Spain he sent messengers with threats of excommunication if he should continue in his refusal to acknowledge Henry III as Roman Emperor. Ferdinand submitted to the papal demands. Before the emperor returned to Germany he transferred to the pope the duchies of Spoleto and Camerino. Early in 1056 Victor II sent Hildebrand back to France to resume his labours against simony and concubinage, which he had begun under Leo IX. He appointed the archbishops Raimbaud of Arles and Pontius of Aix papal legates to battle against the same vices in Southern France. Late in the summer of the same year he accepted the urgent invitation of the emperor to come to Germany, arriving at Goslar on 8 September. He accompanied Henry III to Botfeld in the Hartz Mountains where on 5 October he witnessed the untimely death of the emperor. Before his death, the emperor entrusted his six-year-old successor, Henry IV, and the regency of the kingdom to the pope. On 28 October, after burying the emperor in the cathedral at Speyer, he secured the imperial succession of Henry IV by having him solemnly enthroned at Aachen. He still further strengthened the position of the boy-king by recommendng him to the loyalty of the princes at the imperial Diet which he convened at Cologne early in December, and at the court Diet of Ratisbon on Christmas Day.

Leaving the regency of Germany in the hands of Agnes mother of Henry IV, Victor returned to Rome in February, 1057, where he presided over a council at the Lateran on 18 April. On 14 June he created Frederick, whom he had a month previously helped to the abbacy of Monte Cassino, Cardinal-priest of San Crisogono thus gaining the friendship of the powerful Duke Godfrey of Lorraine, a brother of the new cardinal. He then went to Tuscany, where he settled (23 July) a jurisdictional dispute between the palace of St. Donatus near Arezzo; five days later he died. His attendance wished to bring his remains to the cathedral at Eichstatt for burial. On their way thither, the remains were forcibly taken from them by some citizens fo Ravena and buried there in the Church of Santa Maria Rotonda, the burial place of Theodoric the Great.

The chief sources for th life of Victor II are the narrations of an anonymous writer of Herrieden, ANONYMUS HASERENSIS, a contemporary of Henry IV; they are printed in Mon. Germ. Hist.: Script., VII, 263 sq.; MANN, the Lives of the Popes in the Middle Ages, VI (London, 1910), 183-206; JORIS, Victor II, pape et regent de l'empire in Revue du monde catholique (1862-3), IV 560-72; V, 46-61; HOFLER, Die deutsch. Papste, II (Ratisbon, 1839), 217-68; STEINDORFF in Allgemeine deutsch. Biographie, XXXIX (Leipzig, 1895), 670-3; IDEM, Jahrbucher des deutsch. Reiches unter Heinrich III, I, II (Leipzig, 1874-81); MEYER VON KNONAU, Jahrb. des deutsch. Reiches unter Heinrich IV. u. Heinrich V, I (Leipzig, 1890); LEFFLAD, Regesten der Bischofe von Eichstadt, I (Eichstadt, 1871); SAX, Die Bischofe u. Reichsfursten von Eichstadt, I (Landshut, 1884), 39, 43; WILL, Victor II als Papst und Reichverweser in Tubinger Theol. Quartalschrift (1862), 185-243; JAFFE, regesta Pontif. rom. (Leipzig, 1885-8), I, 549-553; II, 710-1, 750; WATTERICH, Pontif. rom. vitae, I (Leipzig, 1862), 177-88; Liber pontif., ed. DUCHESNE, II, 277.

MICHAEL OTT

Pope Blessed Victor III

(DAUFERIUS or DAUFAR).

Born in 1026 or 1027 of a non-regnant branch of the Lombard dukes of Benevento; died in Rome, 16 Sept., 1087. Being an only son his desire to embrace the monastic state was strenuously opposed by both his parents. After his father's death in battle with the Normans, 1047, he fled from the marriage which had been arranged for him and though brought back by force, eventually after a second flight to Cava obtained permission to enter the monastery of S. Sophia at Benevento where he received the name of Desiderius. The life at S. Sophia was not strict enough for the young monk who betook himself first to the island monastery of Tremite in the Adriatic and in 1053 to some hermits at Majella in the Abruzzi. About this time he was brought to the notice of St. Leo IX and it is probable that the pope employed him at Benevento to negotiate peace with the Normans after the fatal battle of Civitate. Somewhat later Desiderius attached himself to the Court of Victor II at Florence and there met two monks of Monte Cassino, with whom he returned to their monastery in 1055. He joined the community, and was shortly afterwards appointed superior of the dependent house at Capua. In 1057 Stephen IX (X) who had retained the abbacy of Monte Cassino came thither and at Christmas, believing himself to be dying, ordered the monks to elect a new abbot. Their choice fell on Desiderius. The pope recovered, and, desiring to retain the abbacy during his lifetime, appointed the abbot-designate his legate for Constantinople. It was at Bari, when about to sail for the East, that the news of the pope's death reached Desiderius. Having obtained a safe-conduct from Robert Guiscard, the Norman Count (later Duke) of Apulia, he returned to his monastery and was duly istalled by Cardinal Humbert on Easter Day, 1058. A year later he was ordained cardinal-priest of the title of S. Cecilia and received the abbatial blessing.

Desiderius was the greatest of all the abbots of Monte Cassino with the exception of the founder, and as such won for himself "imperishable fame" (Gregorovius). He rebuilt the church and conventual buildings, established schools of art and re-established monastic discipline so that there were 200 monks in the monastery in his day (see MONTE CASSINO). On 1 Oct., 1071, the new and magnificent Basilica of Monte Cassino was consecrated by Alexander II. Desiderius's great reputation brough to the abbey many gifts and exemptions. The money was sepnt on church ornaments of which the most notable were a great golden altar front from Constantinople, adorned with gems and enamels and "nearly all the church ornaments of Victor II which had been pawned here and there throughout the city" [Chron. Cass., III, 18 (20)]. The bronze and silver doors of the Cassinese Basilica which Desiderius erected remain, and in the Church of S. Angelo in Formis near Capua some of the frescoes executed by his orders may still be seen. Peter the Deacon gives (op. cit., III, 63) a list of some seventy books which Desiderius caused to be copied at Monte Cassino; they include works of Sts. Augustine, Ambrose, Bede, Basil, Jerome, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Cassian, the registers of Popes Feliz and Leo, the histories of Josephus, Paul Warnfrid, Jordanus, and Gregory of Tours, the "Institutes" and "Novels" of Justinian, the works of Terence, Virgil, and Seneca, Cicero's "De natura deorum", and Ovid's "Fasti".

Desiderius had been appointed papal vicar for Campania, Apulia, Calabria, and the Principality of Beneventum with special powers for the reform of monasteries; so great was his reputation with the Holy See that he "was allowed by the Roman Pontiff to appoint Bishops and Abbots from among his brethren in whatever churches or monasteries he desired of those which had been widowed of their patron" (Chron. Cas., III, 34).

Within two years of the consecration of the Cassinese Basilica, Pope Alexander died and was succeeded by Hildebrand. Undoubtedly the chief importance of Desiderius in papal history lies in his influence with the Normans, an influence which he was able repeatedly to exert in favour of the Holy See. Already in 1059 he had persuaded Robert Guiscard and Richard of Capua to become vassals of St. Peter for their newly conquered territories: now Gregory VII immediately after his election sent for him to give an account of the state of Norman Italy and entrusted him with the negotiation of an interview with Robert Guiscard. This took place on 2 Aug., 1073, at Benevento. In 1074 and 1075 he acted as intermediary, probably as Gregory's agent, between the Norman princes themselves, and even when the latter were at open war with the pope, they still maintained the best relations with Monte Cassino (end of 1076). At the end of 1080 it was Desiderius who obtained Norman troops for Gregory. In 1082 he visited the emperor at Albano, while the troops of the Imperialist antipope were harassing the pope from Tivoli. In 1083 the peace-loving abbot joined Hugh of Cluny in an attempt to reconcile pope and emperor, and his proceedings seem to have aroused some suspicion in Gregory's entourage. In 1084 when Rome was in Henry's hands and the pope besieged in Sant' Angelo, Desiderius announced the approach of Guiscard's army to both emperor and pope.

Though certainly a strong partisan of the Hildebrandine reform the gentler Desiderius belonged to the moderate party and could not always see eye to eye with Gregory in his most intransigent proceedings. Yet when the latter lay dying at Salerno (25 May, 1085) the Abbot of Monte Cassino was one of those whom he named as fittest to succeed him. Desiderius was by no means willing to assume the mantle of Gregory VII, experience had taught him that his power and utility lay in being a middleman, yet at a time when the Church was surrounded by powerful enemies his influence with the Normans made him the most obvious candidate. The Romans had expelled the antipope from the city, and hither Desiderius hastened to consult with the cardinals on the approaching election; finding, however, that they were bent on forcing the papal dignity upon him he fled to Monte Cassino, where he busied himself in exhorting the Normans and Lombards to rally to the support of the Holy See. When autumn came Desiderius accompanied the Norman army in its march towards Rome, but becoming aware of the plot which was on foot between the cardinals and the Norman princes to force the tiara upon him, he would not enter Rome unless they swore to abandon their design; this they refused to do, and the election was postponed. At about Easter (Chron. Cass., III, 66) the bishops and cardinals assembled at Rome summoned Desiderius and the cardinals who were with him at Monte Cassino to come to Rome to treat concerning the election. On 23 May a great meeting was held in the deaconry of St. Lucy, and Desiderius was again importuned to accept the papacy but persisted in his refusal, threatening to return to his monastery in case of violence. Next day, the feast of Pentecost, very early in the morning the same scene was repeated. The consul Cencius now suggested the election of Odo, Cardinal-Bishop of Ostia (afterwards Urban II), but this was rejected by some of the cardinals on the grounds that the translation of a bishop was contrary to the canons. The assembly now lost all patience; Desiderius was seized and dragged to the Church of St. Lucy where he was forcibly vested in the red cope and given the name of Victor (24 May, 1086). The church had been without a head for twelve months all but a day. Four days later pope and cardinals had to flee from Rome before the imperial prefect of the city, and at Terracina, in spite of all protests, Victor laid aside the papal insignia and once more retired to Monte Cassino where he remained nearly a whole year. In the middle of Lent, 1087, a council of cardinals and bishops was held at Capua at which the pope-elect assisted as "Papal vicar of those parts" (letter of Hugh of Lyons) together with the Norman princes, Cencius the Consul, and the Roman nobles; here Victor finally yielded and "by the assumption of the cross and purple confirmed the past election" (Chron. Cass., III, 68). How much his obstinacy had irritated some of the prelates is evidenced in the letter of Hugh of Lyons preserved by Hugh of Flaviony (Mon. Germ. Hist.: Script. VIII, 466-8).

After celebrating Easter in his monastery Victor proceeded to Rome, and when the Normans had driven the soldiers of the Antipope Clement III (Guibert of Ravenna) out of St. Peter's, was there consecrated and enthroned (9 May, 1087). He only remained eight days in Rome and then returned to Monte Cassino. Before May was out he was once more in Rome in answer to a summons for the Countess Matilda, whose troops held the Leonine City and Trastevere, but when at the end of June the antipope once more gained possession of St. Peter's, Victor again retired to his abbey. In August a council was held at Benevento, at which he renewed the excommunication of the antipope and the condemnation of lay-investiture, and anathematised Hugh of Lyons and Richard, Abbot of Marseilles. When the council had lasted three days Victor became seriously ill and retired to Monte Cassino to die. He had himself carried into the chapter-house, issued various decrees for the benefit of the abbey, appointed with the consent of the monks the prior, Cardinal Oderisius, to succeed him in the Abbacy, just as he himself had been appointed by Stephen IX (X), and proposed Odo of Ostia to the assembled cardinals and bishops as the next pope. He died 16 Sept., 1087, and was buried in the tomb he had prepared for himself in the chapter-house. In the sixteenth century his body was removed to the church, and again translated in 1890. The cultus of Blessed Victor seems to have begun not later than the pontificate of Anastasius IV, about 60 years after his death (Acta SS. Loc. cit.). In 1727 the Abbot of Monte Cassino obtained from Benedict III permission to keep his feast (Tosti, I, 393).

Pope Victor III is a far less impressive figure in history than Desiderius the great Abbot of Monte Cassino, but there is abundant evidence that it was largely his failing health that made him so reluctant to accept the great position which was thrust upon him, indeed Ordericus tells us that he was taken ill when saying the first Mass after his consecration, so that during his papacy "he hardly got through a single Mass", vix una tantum missa perfunctus (P.L., CLXXXVIII, p. 578). On 5 Aug., 1087, when Victor was holding the Council at Benevento, an army consisting of Roman, Genoese, Pisan, and Amalfitan troops sent by him to Africa under the Banner of St. Peter captured the town of El Mahadia, and forced the Mohammedan ruler of Tunis to promise tribute to the Holy See and to free all Christian slaves. This event may perhaps be considered as the beginning of the Crusades. The only literary work of Victor which we possess is his "Dialogues" on the miracles wrought by St. Benedict and other saints at Monte Cassino. There is also a letter to the bishops of Sardinia to which country he had sent monks while still Abbot of Monte Cassino. In his "De Viris illustribus Casinensibus", Peter the Deacon ascribes to him the composition of a "Cantus ad B. Maurum" and letters to Philip of France and Hugh of Cluny which no longer exist.

The chief source is the Chronicon Cassinense, in Mon. Germ. Hist.: Script., VII, reprinted in P.L., 173; some autobiographical details are to be met with in his own Dialogues, P.L., 149. See also MABILLON, Acta SS., Sept., V, 373 sqq.; WATTERICH, Pontificum Romanorum Vitae, I (Leipzig, 1862), in which (562) is to be found the letter of Hugh of Lyons mentioned above; Liber Pontificalis, ed. DUCHESNE, II (Paris, 1892), 292; JAFFE, Regesta Pont. Rom., I (Leipzig, 1885), 655-6. The best English account is MANN, Lives of the Popes, VII (London, 1910), 218-244. For Desiderius's relations with the Normans see CHALANDON, Hist. de la Domination Normande en Italie et en Sicile (Paris, 1907); BOHMER, Victor III in Realencyklopadie fur protestantische Theologie, XX (Leipzig, 1908); GREGOROVIUS, Hist. of Rome in the Middle Ages, tr. HAMILTON, IV (London, 1894-1900); MILMAN, Latin Christianity, IV (London, 1872); TOSTI, Storia della Badia di Monte Cassino (Naples, 1842); CROWE and CAVALCASELLE, Hist. of Painting in Italy (New York, 1909).

RAYMUND WEBSTER

Victor IV

Two antipopes of this name.

I. Cardinal Gregory Conti, elected in opposition to Innocent II in the middle of March, 1138, by the partisans of the Pierleoni family, as successor to Anacletus II. At the end of two months, however, Gregory submitted on 29 May to Innocent and renounced his office.

II. Octavius, Cardinal of St. Cecilia, d. at Lucca, 20 April, 1164. He was elected 7 Sept., 1159, by a small minority of the cardinals (four or five), the clergy of St. Peter's, and the Roman populace, while at the same time the majority of the college of cardinals elected the chancellor Rolando who assumed the title of Alexander III. Octavian belonged to one of the most powerful Roman families (Counts of Tusculum), had been cardinal since 1138, and was very popular on account of his liberality, accessibility, and splendour of living. He was considered a great friend of the Germans, and rested his hopes on the Emperor Frederick Barbarossa. Yet it is not to be assumed that the emperor had desired his election; Rolando was certainly not agreeable to him, yet neither was it to his interest to have an antipope. As a matter of fact the emperor was at first neutral and called upon the bishops not to take sides; the decision, the emperor said, should be reserved for the action of the Church. As the chief protector of the Church, therefore, he convoked a synod at Pavia (February, 1160). It decided, as was to be expected, for Victor, and pronounced an anathema upon Alexander, while Alexander on his side excommunicated the emperor. The attempt to secure Victor's recognition was never completely successful in Germany, where Bishop Eberhard of Salzburg was his principal opponent. France and England sided with Alexander; Spain, Hungary, Ireland, and Norway followed their example. King Louis VII of France wavered, indeed, once more in 1162, but the disastrous meeting with the emperor at Saint-Jean-de- Losne had as its result that the king held firmly to the obedience of Alexander. During the years 1162-65 Alexander lived in France, and from 1163 the pope exerted himself to gain more of Germany for his cause. All uncertainty came to and end at the death of Victor IV. His successor was Paschal III.

JAFFE, Regesta pontificum Romanorum (2nd ed., Leipzig, 1885-1886), I, 919; II, 418-26; LANGEN, Geschichte der romischen Kirche von Gregor VII. bis Innocenz III. (Bonn, 1893), 439-76; HAUCK, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, IV (Leipzig, 1902), 156, 225-58; HERGENROTHER, Handbuch der allgemeinen Kirchengeschichte, ed. KIRSCH, II (4th ed., Freiburg, 1904), 454-57.

KLEMENS LOFFLER

Victor

Bishop of Tunnunum (Tonnenna, Tunnuna) in Northern Africa and zealous supporter of the Three Chapters; died about 569, probably in confinement at a monastery in Constantinople. On account of his fanatical adherence to the three Chapters, which had been condemned by an edict of Justinian I in 544, he was first imprisoned in the monastery of Mandrakion, then exiled to the Balcaric Islands on the Mediterranean Sea, and finally to Egypt. In 564 he was summoned before the emperor and the Patriarch of Constantinople, with five other African bishops, and ordered to submit to the emperor's edict. All of them remained obstinate and were imprisoned in different monasteries of Constantinople. Victor is the author of a celebrated chronicle from the creation of the world to the end of the year 566. Only that part of the chronicles which extends from 444 to 566 is extant. It is of great historical value, dealing chiefly with the Eutychian heresy, the controversy about the Three Chapters, and giving some details concerning the Arians and the invasion of the Vandals. It was first edited by Canisius in 1600, is reprinted in Migne, P.L., LXVIII, 941-62, and was newly edited by Mommsen in "Mon. Germ. Hist. Auct. Antiq.", XI, (Berlin, 1894), 178-206. The chronicle was continued to 590 by Joannes Gothus, founder of the Abbey of Biclar in Spain (Migne, P.L., LXXII, 859-70 and Mommsen, loc. cit., 211-20). Victor is probably also the author of "De Poenitentia", a treatise formerly attributed to St. Ambrose and printed in Migne, P.L., XVII, 971- 1005.

PAPENCORDT, Geschichte der Vandalischen Herrschaft in Afrika (Berlin, 1837), 359-65; HOLDER EGGER, Victor von Tunnuna in Neues Archiv fur ëltere deutsche Geschichtsforschung, I (Berlin, 1876), 298 sq.; LECLERCQ, L'Afrique Chrétienne, II (Paris, 1904), 271-72; STOKES in Dict. Christ. Biog., IV, 1126.

MICHAEL OTT

Victoria

(VICTORIEN. IN INS. VANCOUVER.)

Diocese in southwestern British Columbia, of which province it is the capital, was known until recently, first, as the Diocese, and later, as the Archdiocese of Vancouver. It is the mother-diocese of British Columbia, for at its establishment in 1847 it comprised the mainland of this province and all the coast island, including the Queen Charlotte group. In 1863 the mainland became an Apostolic vicariate, and was afterwards erected into the Diocese of New Westminster, at which time the diocese of Vancouver was restricted to Vancouver Island and adjacent islands. Alaska, after its cession to the United States in 1867, was attached to this see, and remained so until 1894 when it became a prefecture Apostolic (see ALASKA). In 1904 the title was changed to that of the archdiocese, and in 1909 to that of the Diocese of Victoria, the Archdiocese of Vancouver being then transferred to Vancouver City, B.C.

As early as 1778 Franciscan missionaries reached Nootka on the west coast of the island. Later, a sprinkling of settlers established themselves in the southern part, in what was known as Fort Camosun, a name afterwards changed to Victoria, in honour of the reigning Queen of England. In 1843 Father Bolduc volunteered to minister to the spiritual necessities of these pioneers. In 1847 Rev. Modeste Demers (q.v.), a missionary of Oregon, was called to take charge of the newly created See of Vancouver. He had already acquired personal knowledge and experience regarding the territory known as British Columbia, and, before taking possession of his see, he went to Europe to secure priests and means for his needy diocese. Father, afterwards Bishop, Lootens was one of the generous volunteers. With characteristic energy, foresight, and wisdom, Bishop Demers soon organized the district assigned him. To aid him, he brought the Sisters of St. Ann in 1858, and, the following year, the Oblates of Mary Immaculate. The latter were given charge of the natives of the entire diocese, and established themselves with headquarters at Esquimalt; they remained until 1864. The former, devotedly both to education and the care of the sick, are still actively engaged in various parts of the diocese, and have two institutions in Victoria, St. Ann's Academy for girls and St. Joseph's Hospital.

Before the death of Bishop Demers in 1871, he appointed as his administrator, the Reverend C. J. Seghers, (q.v.), who two years later became bishop. The apostolic zeal of his saintly predecessor marked his six years' tenure of office, when Bulls from Rome appointed him coadjutor to Archbishop Blanchet of Oregon, with right of succession, and the Rev. J. B. Brondel succeeded him in Victoria. Five years later, the latter was transferred to Helena, Montana, and Archbishop Seghers, at his own suggestion, was appointed to the vacant see of Vancouver. Right Rev. J. N. Lemmens (b. in Schimmert, Holland, in 1850) was ordained at the American College of Louvain, Belgium, in 1875, and came the following year to Victoria. In 1884, he was sent to represent the diocese at the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore. After the tragic death of Archbishop Seghers, Father Lemmens was consecrated Bishop of Vancouver, in 1888. A lasting monument to his energetic efforts is the Gothic cathedral, which was completed in 1892. He died in 1897 in Guatemala, Central America, where he was spending some months for the double purpose of soliciting contributions towards the payment of the cathedral debt, and of aiding the exiled Archbishop of Guatemala by administering confirmation throughout the diocese. His successor, Right Rev. Alexander Christie, took possession of his see in 1898, and the following year was promoted to the Archdiocese of Oregon City. Right Rev. Bertram Orth succeeded in 1899, and in 1903 was raised to the dignity of archbishop of the newly established ecclesiastical province of British Columbia. Owing to failing health, he resigned in 1908, and in 1909 Right Rev. Alexander MacDonald, of Antigonish, Nova Scotia, was consecrated in Rome under the title of Bishop of Victoria. Bishop MacDonald is well-known as a writer on religious subjects and questions of the day.

The Indian missions both on the east and on the west coast of the island were established by the secular clergy of the diocese, and were, until recently, under their sole direction. In 1900, the Benedictine Fathers of Mount Angel, Oregon, and in 1903, the Fathers of the Company of Mary, came to take a share in the work of the diocese. There are 2,500 Catholic Indians, and the total Catholic population is 10,000. There are 8 schools, 1 college, 5 convents, 24 churches, 13 missions, 19 priests, and 40 stations.

A.J. BRABANT

Vicariate Apostolic of Northern Victoria Nyanza

The Mission of Victoria Nyanza, founded in 1878 by the White Fathers of Cardinal Lavigerie, was erected into a vicariate apostolic 31 May, 1883, with Mgr. Livinhac as the first vicar Apostolic. When the latter was raised to the superior-generalship of the Society of White Fathers (October, 1889), the Holy See appointed Mgr. Hirth as his successor. A Decree of 6 July, 1894, divided Victoria Nyanza into three autonomous missions: that of Southern Nyanza in the German Protectorate, of which Mgr. Hirth retained the government and became the first titular; those of the Upper Nile and Northern Nyanza, in English territory, the former given to the Fathers of Mill Hill and the second to the White Fathers. From the 18 provinces of Uganda the Decree of 1894 detached that of Kyaggive and Kampala Mengo, which it placed under the jurisdiction of the Fathers of Mill Hill, and gave to Northern Nyanza the remaining 17 provinces of the Kingdom of Uganda, the three Kingdoms of Unyoro, Toro, and Ankole, and in the Belgian Congo an isosceles triangle whose top was the northern point of Lake Albert Nyanza and whose base followed the 30th degree of longitude. Three races share the portion of Northern Nyanza lying in the English protectorate; the first, that of the Baganda, is represented by 670,000 inhabitants, and has given the strongest support to evangelization, and in 1886 had the courage and the honour to give to the Church its first negro martyrs. The second race, the Banyoro, is represented by 520,000 aborigines; the third, the Bahima (Hamites), the leading class in the shepherd Kingdom of Ankole, is in a minority not exceeding 50,000 souls. The total population of Northern Nyanza equals therefore about 1,500,000 inhabitants, of whom 1,400,000 are in English territory, and 360,000 in the Congo country.

At the time of its creation (July, 1894) Northern Nyanza had an administrator, 17 missionaries divided among 5 stations, 15,000 neophytes and 21,000 catechumens. In July, 1896, the date of the death of Mgr. Guillerman, the first vicar Apostolic, the vicariate had 6 stations, 21 missionaries, and 20,000 baptized Christians. In July, 1911, it had 1 bishop, Mgr. Henri Streicher (preconized 2 Feb., 1897), Bishop of Tabarca and second vicar Apostolic of Southern Nyanza, 118 missionaries divided among 28 stations, 113,810 neophytes and 97,630 catechumens. All the missionaries of Northern Nyanza, including the vicar Apostolic, are members of the Society of White Fathers founded by Cardinal Lavigerie. As yet the native clergy consists only of 2 subdeacons, 4 minor clerics, and 4 tonsured clerics. They are assisted by 28 European religious of the Society of White Sisters, and by an institute of native religious called the Daughters of Mary. Eleven hundred and five Baganda and Banyoro teachers cooperate in the educational work and in the service of 832 churches or chapels. The Vicariate of Northern Nyanza has 894 scholastic establishments, viz. a lower seminary with 80 students, an upper seminary with 16 students in philosophy and theology, a high school with 45 pupils, most of them the sons of chiefs, a normal school with 62 boarders, and 890 primary schools in which free instruction is given to 19,157 pupils, of whom 11,244 are boys and 7913 girls. The annual report of the vicar Apostolic from June, 1910, to June, 1911, shows 7930 confirmations, 1154 marriages, 578,657 confessions heard, 1,236,126 communions administered, and the gratuitous distribution of 394,495 remedies. The headquarters of the mission is at Villa Maria, near Masaka, Uganda. There are situated the residence of the bishop, the two seminaries, a flourishing mission station, the central house of the White Sisters, the novitiate of the native sisters, and a printing establishments where there is published monthly in the Ruganda language an interesting 16-page magazine entitled "Munno", which has 2000 native subscribers. Entebbe is the seat of the procurator of the vicariate.

HENRY STREICHER

Southern Victoria Nyanza

Vicariate apostolic erected from the mission of Nyanza, 13 June, 1894, lies north of the Vicariate of Unyanyembe, and comprises the land surrounding the southern half of Lake Victoria Nyzanza from Lake Kivu in the west to Lake Natron in the east, on the Anglo-German frontier (36º E). The mission thus including the northern portion of German East Africa is entrusted to the White Fathers, who first settled in the district in 1883, when expelled from Uganda (see UPPER NILE, VICARIATE OF THE). They were well received by the Wasukuma and the Unyamwezi, but these people being engaged chiefly as porters for caravans, have all the vices natural to a roving life and but little inclination for religion; progress among them has been slow, but the fruit is permanent. About 1896 a mission was established on the island of Ukerewe, as a result of numerous conversions made there for some years previous by a native who had been baptized in 1889 at the first mission headquarters Notre-Dame de Kamoga and had returned to spread the light among his fellow-islanders. As polygamy and divorce are practically unknown in Ukerewe good progress has been made. In 1900 the Mission of the Sacred Heart, Isavi, near Lake Kivu, in Ruanda was established among the Bahutus, a simple laborious race, rarely indulging in polygamy. The Catholic natives of the vicariate are a source of great consolation to the missionaries, they recite the rosary daily, very many attend daily Mass, and most of them approach the sacraments weekly; they have a strong filial devotion to the Blessed Virgin and some, especially those of Baganda race, give proof of a very high degree of virtue and a wonderful delicacy of sentiment.

Statistics

Mgr. John Joseph Hirth, titular bishop of Teveste, born at Niederspechbach, near Altkirch, 26 March, 1854, appointed vicar Apostolic, 13 July, 1894, resides at Rubia; there is also a coadjutor vicar, Mgr. Joseph Sweens, titular Bishop of Capsa, born at Boise-le-due, Holland, 22 May, 1855; ordained 1882; joined the White Fathers, 1889; was appointed director of the lay-brothers at Maison-Carrée, Algiers, in 1891, and later superior at Marienthal; in 1901 he went to Africa and established the mission of Marienheim; in 1909 he was named visitor of his congregation, was nominated coadjutor to Mgr. Hirth, 1 Jan., 1910, and consecrated at Bois-le-duc. The vicariate contains about 2,500,000 pagans, 7000 Catholics, 12,000 catechumens, 30 White Fathers; 23 lay brothers; 6 Missionary Sisters of Notre-Dame-d'Afrique; 20 churches or chapels; 15 stations; 85 schools with 3900 pupils; 190 catechists; 4 orphanages and 5 dispensaries; and a meteorological station belonging to the missionaries. Current details of the missions in German Africa are given in "Gott will es" (Maria-Gladbach), published by the "Afrikaverein deutscher katholiken".

LE ROY in PIOLET, Les missions cath. Franc. au xix siecle, V (Paris, 1902), 458-66.

A.A. MACERLEAN

St. Victorinus

An ecclesiastical writer who flourished about 270, and who suffered martyrdom probably in 303, under Diocletian.

He was bishop of the City of Pettau (Petabium, Poetovio), on the Drave, in Styria (Austria); hence his surname of Petravionensis or sometimes Pictaviensis, e.g. in the Roman Martyrology, where he is registered under 2 November, which long caused it to be thought that he belonged to the Diocese of Poitiers (France). Until the seventeenth century he was likewise confounded with the Latin rhetorician, Victorinus After. According to St. Jerome, who gives him an honourable place in his catalogue of ecclesiastical writers, Victorinus composed commentaries on various books of Holy Scripture, such as Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Isaias, Ezechiel, Habacuc, Ecclesiastes, the Canticle of Canticles, St. Matthew, and the Apocalypse, besides treatises against the heresies of his time.

All his works have disappeared save extracts from his commentaries on Genesis and the Apocalypse, if indeed these texts are really a remnant of his works, concerning which opinions differ. These latter with a critical annotation are published in Migne's P.L., V (1844) 301-44. It is certainly incorrect to regard him as the author of two poems, "De Jesu Christo" and "De Pascha", which are included in the collection of Fabricius. Born on the confines of the Eastern and Western Empires, Victorinus spoke Greek better than Latin, which explains why, in St. Jerome's opinion, his works written in the latter tongue were more remarkable for their matter than for their style. Like many of his contemporaries he shared the errors of the Millenarians, and for this reason his works were ranked with the apocrypha by Pope Gelasius.

BARONIUS, Ann. (1589), 303, 126-7; CAVE, Script. eccles. hist. litt., I (1741), 147-51; CEILLIER, Hist. des aut. sacr., III (1732), 245-48; FABRICIUS, Bib. lat. med. aev., VI (1746), 822-23; HARNACK, Chron. altchristl. litt., II (Leipzig, 1904), 426-32; HIERONYMUS, De vir. ill., 74; Act. SS. Boll., Nov. 1 (1887), 432-43; LAUNOY, De Victorino episc. et mart. dissert. (Paris, 1664); PRILESZKY, Act. et Script. SS. Corn. Firmil., Pont. et Victorini suo ord. digesta Cassoviae (1765): TILLEMONT, Mem. pour serv. d l'hist. eccles., V (1698), 311-2, 707-9.

LEON CLUGNET

Caius Marius Victorinus

(Called also VICTORINUS MARIUS, or MARIUS FABIUS VICTORINUS, and frequently referred to as VICTORINUS AFER.)

A fourth-century grammarian, rhetorician, philosopher, and theologian, b. in Africa about the year 300. In pursuance of his profession as teacher of rhetoric he migrated to Rome where he attained such fame and popularity that in 353 a statue was erected in his honour in the Forum of Trajan (Jerome, "Chron." ad an. 2370). Details regarding his life come almost entirely from Jerome or Augustine, the latter of whom calls him a man of the highest learning and thoroughly skilled in the liberal arts. In addition to his activities as a teacher he was a copious author and wrote or translated many works. Three works written before his conversion still exist: "Liber de Definitionibus"; a commentary on the "De inventione" of Cicero; and a treatise on grammar, "Ars grammatica". Works from the same period which have perished are: a treatise on logic, "De syllogismis hypotheticis"; commentaries on the "Topica" and the "Dialogues" of Cicero; a translation and commentary of Artistotle's "Categories"; a translation of the same author's "Interpretation"; translations of Porphyry's "Isagoge", and works of other Neo-Platonists. The conversion of Victorinus, which took place before 361, was brought about, according to Augustine, through study of the Bible. A seeming reluctance at first to enroll himself in the Christian community was compensated for afterwards by his insistence on making his profession of faith as publicly as possible. His accession to the Church, which was received with joy by the Christians of Rome, did not cause Victorinus to abandon his profession, and he continued to teach until the edict of Julian in 362, closing the teaching profession to Christians, caused him to retire.

Nothing more is known of his subsequent career except what can be gleaned from his writings. The range and fulness of these manifest his diligence and zeal in defence of his faith. Most of the writings of his Christian days have perished. Those which survive are an anti-Arian treatise, "Liber de generatione divini Verbi"; a work "Adversus Arium" in four books, a tract "De Hoimoousio Recipiendo"; three hymns "De Trinitate"; commentaries on St. Paul's Epistles to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, and to the Philippians. Other works of doubtful authenticity are "Liber ad Justinum manichaeum"; "De verbis scripturae: Factum est vespere et mane dies unus"; "Liber de physicis". Many references in his own writings show that Victorinus was the author of many other works of a theological, exegetical, or polemical character. He is also credited with the translation of some of Origen's works and the authorship of other Christian hymns. Though a man of varied books and great erudition Victorinus is little studied. This neglect is largely attributed to the fact that his style is obscure and burdensome in the extreme. Recent study of his works tends to enhance his position in the history of pedagogy, letters, and theology, and above all as a potent influence in disseminating Neo-Platonic doctrines in the West.

There is no critical edition of the works of Victorinus. P.L., VIII, is the most accessible. KOFFMANN, De Mario Victorino philosopho christiano (Breslau, 1880); MONCEAUX, Histoire litteraire de l'Afrique chretienne, 111 (Paris, 1905), 373-422.

PATRICK HEALY

Victor of Capua

A sixteenth-century bishop about whose life nothing is known except what is found in his epitaph (C.I.L., 4503), which has been preserved, though the tomb itself has disappeared. This inscription simply states that his episcopate of thirteen years ended in April, 554. The authenticity of the inscription and its chronological data admit of no doubt. Victor is commemorated in the Roman Martyrology on 17 Oct., as "eruditione et sanctitate conspicus". His original writings, preserved only in fragments, show him to have been a devoted student and a man of wide and varied learning. His best known work is the "Codex fuldensis", one of the most ancient MSS. of the Vulgate, prepared under his direction, and which he himself revised and corrected. In this codex the place of the Four Gospels is taken by a harmony of the Gospels, or as he himself terms it in the preface, a single Gospel composed from the four. Victor was not certain that the harmony he used was identical with the "Diatesseron" of Tatian. The discovery of the text of the latter work and recent investigation have made it clear that this Latin harmony used by Victor was drawn up about A.D. 500. The anonymous author of this work simply substituted the Latin of St. Jerome's Vulgate for the Greek of Tatian, and at times changed the order or inserted additional passages. Many of the discrepancies may be due however to subsequent changes. Other works by Victor were: "De cyclo paschali" written about 550 in refutation of the "Cursus paschalis" of Victorius. Only a few fragments of this work have survived (P.L., LXVIII, 1097-98; Pitra, "Spic. Solesm.", I, 296); commentaries on the Old and New Testament, for the most part catenae of quotations from the Greek exegetes; "Libelius reticulus seu de arca Noe" (Pitra, "Spic. Solesm.", I, 287), containing an ingenious allegorical computation showing that the dimensions of the ark typified the years of Christ's earthly life; "Capitula de resurrectione Domini" dealt with some of the chief difficulties regarding Christ's genealogy and the hour of the Crucifixion as recorded in the Evangelists.

UGHELLI, Italia sacra, VI, 306; PITRA, Spicileg. Solesm, I (Paris, 1852), p. 1 sq., 265 sq., 287, 296; ZAHN, Gesch. d. neutestam. Kanons, II, 535; BARDENHEWER-SHAHAN, Patrology, p. 628.

PATRICK HEALY

Victor Vitensis

An African bishop of the Province of Byzacena (called VITENSIS from his See of Vita), b. probably about 430. His importance rests on his "Historia pesecutionis Africanae Provinciae, temporibus Geiserici et Hunirici regum Wandalorum". This is mainly a contemporary narrative of the cruelties practised against the orthodox Christians of Northern Africa by the Arian Vandals. Formerly divided into five books, this work is now usually edited in three, of which the first, dealing with the reign of Geiseric (427-77), is derived from the accounts of others, while the second and third, covering the reign of Huneric, are a strictly contemporary account of events, of which the author was in the main an eyewitness. No exception can be taken to the accuracy of Victor's narratives, except that at all times he exaggerates, but when allowance is made for the stress of feeling under which the work was written, it can be seen that he records little that did not happen. Victor throws much light on social and religious conditions in Carthage and on the African liturgy of the period. His history contains many valuable documents not otherwise accessible, e.g. the Confession of Faith drawn up for the orthodox bishops by Eugenius of Carthage and presented to Huneric at the conference of Catholic and Arian bishops in 484. Two documents: a "Passio beatissimorum martyrum qui apud Carthaginem passi sunt sub impio rege Hunerico (die VI. Non. Julias 484)" and a "Notitia Provinciarum et Civitatum Africae", formerly appended to all the MSS. and now incorporated in the printed editions, are probably not Victor's. The former may be the work of one of his contemporaries; the latter is a list of the Catholic bishops summoned to the conference of 484, arranged according to provinces, with an exact indication of the ecclesiastical geography of that portion of Africa.

The early editions of Victor are found in MIGNE, LVIII, 179-276. Newer and more critical editions by HALM (Berlin, 1879) in Mon. Germ. Hist.: Auct. Antiq., III, 1; and PETSCHENIG (Vienna, 1881); Corpus Scrip. Eccles. Lat., VII; FERRERE, De Victoris Vitensis libro qui inscribitur historia persecutionis Africanae Provinciae (Paris, 1898).

PATRICK HEALY

Marco Girolamo Vida

Italian Humanist, b. at Cremona about 1490; d. in 1566. He came to Rome under Julius II; a priest and canon regular, he presented, in the rather lax Court, the greatest example of severity of morals. The Humanists were called upon to produce a great Christian epic. Vida undertook it, and in order that he might work at it Leo X gave him the priory of St. Sylvester at Frascati. The work, the "Christias", was not finished until after the death of Leo X (Cremona, 1535). The subject goes beyond the life of Christ and is in reality the establishment of Christianity, for Vida accords much space at the end of his poem to the spread of the Gospel. There is no mythological element in the six cantos; hence the unity of tone is more perfect than in Sannazaro's "De partu Virginis". Vida was also the author of short poems, such as "De Bombyce", "De ludo scaccorum" (on chess), and of a second serious and extensive work, "De arte poetica", written before 1520 (published in 1527). This didactic poem is interesting as an expression of the ideas of Humanism concerning poetry and because of its great influence. Vida dealt only with the ancients and their imitators, wholly neglecting writers in the vernacular. The general conception of his "Ars poetica" is inspired by Qunitillian. The writer takes the future poet almost at the cradle, and describes the education and care which he should receive. He instructs him in invention, composition, and especially style, emphasizing particularly the harmony of the verse and defining imitative harmony, examples of which, taken from Virgil, have passed into classical teaching, e.g. "ruit Oceano nox, procumbit-humi bos, conuolsum remis rostrisque stridentibus aequor". While Boileau exaggerates the difficulties of poetry and multiplies the duties of the poet, Vida undertakes to cultivate a taste for poetry and to remove the obstacles from the poet's path. In consequence of his plan Vida treats only of poetry in general. To him the model and prince of poets was Virgil, while he depreciates Homer, criticising his prolixity, repetition, and low style. He was the source of arguments later made use of in France by the partisans of the moderns; Vida was the first to assert that the word "ass" used by Homer did not belong to the noble style. He carried prejudice so far as to congratulate the Latin language for being ignorant of compound words so frequent in Greek. Vida's own style is elegant, clear, harmonious, and ordinarily simple. He was warm in admiration, especially in his eulogies of Virgil, but he is verbose, and if by chance he imitates Horace he dilutes him. The poem is now of interest only as a manifestation of Classicism in modern literature.

SANDYS, Hist. of Classical Scholarship, II (Cambridge, 1908), 117, 133; VISSAC, De Marci Hieronymi Vidae poeticorum libris tribus (Paris, 1862), a thesis.

PAUL LEJAY

Antonio Vieira

Missionary, diplomat, orator, b. at Lisbon, 6 February, 1608; d. at Bahia, Brazil, 18 July, 1697. Brought when a child to Bahia, he studied under the Jesuits, and entered the Society of Jesus in 1623, pronouncing his first vows in 1625. At eighteen he was teaching rhetoric, and shortly after writing commentaries on the "Canticle of Canticles", the tragedies of Seneca, and the "Metamorphoses" of Ovid. Ordained priest in 1635, he immediately astounded all by his eloquence. When the Dutch besieged Bahia (1640), he delivered his "Discourse for the Success of the Portuguese Arms", called by the sceptical Raynal the most extraordinary outburst of Christian eloquence. Portugal, under John IV, had thrown off the Spanish yoke in 1640. The following year Vieira went to Lisbon with young Mascarenhas, whom the viceroy had commissioned to assure the new king of the loyalty of the colonists. John, recognizing the Jesuit's merit, made him tutor to the Infante Dom Pedro, court preacher, and a member of the Royal Council. Vieira did efficient work in the War and Navy Departments, revived commerce, urged the foundation of a national bank and the organization of the Brazilian Trade Company. A champion of freedom, he maintained that no citizen should be exempt from taxation, and denounced the severity of the Portuguese Inquisition. He advocated a purely defensive war with Spain, and to his skilful plans are partly due the victories on Elvas, Almeixal, Castello-Rodrigo, and Montes-Claros.

At different periods (1646, 1647, 1650) John IV sent Vieira on diplomatic missions, to Paris, The Hague, London, and Rome. The Jesuit little relished such honours, and steadily refused the official title of ambassador and the offer of a bishopric. In 1652 he returned to Maranhâo. But so fearless were his denunciations of the slave owners and their excesses that in 1654 he was obliged to return to Lisbon, where he pleaded the cause of the outraged Indians. He was successful, and sailed for Brazil in 1655. Six years he worked for the Indians, translating the Catechism into their rude idioms, teaching them the arts of peace, travelling hundreds of miles on the Amazon and its tributaries, winning even the fierce Nheengaibas by his eloquence, but again arousing the hatred of the slave owners, who in 1661 "exiled" him to Lisbon. The corrupt Alphonso VI had succeeded John IV, and Vieira found many enemies at Court. For his leniency to the converted Jews, for alleged doctrinal errors, for his ultra-patriotic "Sebastianism", and his too credulous acceptance of the prophecies of Bandarra, who foretold a millennium in which Portugal and the Church should rule the world, for his harmless, but extravagant, "As Esperanças do Portugal" and "Clavis Prophetarum", he was condemned by the Portuguese Inquisition, forbidden to preach, and kept a prisoner from Oct., 1665, to Dec., 1667. Under Pedro II the Inquisition reversed it sentence. But Rome was a safer residence, and from 1669 to 1675 he found there an enthusiastic welcome. Clement X, the cardinals, his general, the great preacher Oliva, that erratic princess Christine of Sweden, who vainly begged him to become her director, and high and low were fascinated by his eloquence. But Vieira, amid his triumphs, longed for his Indians of Maranhao, and after a brief stay in Portugal sailed for South America in 1681. Trial and tribulation again faced him. Worn out by his labours as preacher, superior, and visitor of the missions, slanderously accused of conniving at the murder of a colonial official, denounced to his superiors for illegal canvassing in a provincial congregation of his order, and cleared of the charge only when in his grave, he died, sorrowing, but unbroken, in his ninetieth year. The slaves and the poor were his chief mourners.

Vieira is one of Portugal's greatest figures in the seventeenth century. Southey (History of Brazil) calls him one of the greatest statesmen of his country. A thorough-going Jesuit, Vieira was also a progressive administrator with large and democratic views. His character, though streaked with a vein of extravagance, was of the noblest. He had lofty conceptions, and, in their execution, was independent and bold. In the midst of courts, he remained humble and mortified. He had one dream, to see Portugal the standard- bearer of civilization and Christianity in the old and new world. As a prose writer he is perhaps the greatest Portugal has produced. As an orator he is undoubtedly one of the world's masters, equally great in the cathedrals of Europe and the rude shrines of Maranhao. He is not free from the bad taste and artificial "gongorism" imported from Spain, but he is clear, popular, and practical, profoundly original and frequently sublime. In this respect he does not suffer by comparison with Bossuet himself. He has variety, dialectical skill, imaginative colouring, pathos, power, and even humour. He is amazingly fertile; he has, for instance, 30 sermons on the Rosary, 18 on Saint Francis Xavier, 14 on the Eucharist. He had mastered the Scriptures, and his interpretations, if forced at times, are always striking. Vieira's works have been frequently published, as for example, "Obras Completas" (Lisbon, 1854), fairly complete with 15 volumes of sermons alone, 500 letters, etc.; this edition, however, omits many manuscripts kept in the British Museum and the National Library, Paris; "Obras Completas" (Porto, 1907); "Sermões Selectos" (6 vols., 1852-53); "Cartas" (3 vols., Lisbon, 1735). For a complete list of Sommervogel and Cabral's fine work, "Vieira Pregador".

BARROS, Vida do Padre Antonio Vieira (Lisbon, 1746); BARBOSA MACHADO, Bibliotheca Lusitana I (Lisbon, 1741-59), 416; PERREIRA DE BERREDO, Annales historicos do Estado do Maranhao (Lisbon, 1749); LOBO, Discurso historico e critico (Coimbra, 1823); MAGNIN, Causeries et meditations litteraires (Paris, 1842); ROQUETTE, Epitome da Vida do P. A. Vieira in Revista trimensal do instituo historico (Rio de Janeiro, 1860); HONORATI, O Chrysostomo Portuguez (Lisbon, 1878); LISBOA, Vida do P. A. Vieira in Obras posthumas (St. Luis de Maranhao, 1864); CAREL, Vieira, sa vie et ses aeuvres (Paris, 1879); CABRAL, Une grande figure de pretre, Vieira (Paris, 1900); CABRAL, Vieira Pregador (Porto, 1901); DE SOUSA, Trecho Selectos do P. A. Vieira (Lisbon, 1897); AVELINO D'ALMEIDA E SANTOS LOURENCO, O livro de oiro do P. A. Vieira (Porto, 1897); G. ALVES in Introduction to Obras completas (Porto, 1907); PRESTAGE, Portuguese Literature to the end of the eighteenth century (London, 1909); SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliotheque de la C. de J., VIII, 653.

JOHN C. REVILLE

Nicholas Viel

Died 1625, the first victim of apostolic zeal on the shores of the St. Lawrence. After persistently asking for three years, he at length obtained the favour of consecrating his life to the Canadian missions. He arrived at Quebec, 28 June, 1623, accompanied by Brother Sagard, the future historian. After a few days rest he set out for the Huron country, which he reached with great difficulty, taking up his residence in the village of St. Nicolas (Toanche), but did not remain long before joining Father Le Caron stationed at St. Joseph (Carhagouha). Here he began earnestly to study the language, collecting the first elements of a dictionary, and sowing the good seed of faith amidst great difficulties and tribulations. In the spring of 1624 he found himself completely isolated, Fr. Le Caron and Br. Sagard having left for Quebec. The following year he consented to accompany a band of Hurons going down to Quebec, with the intention of making a few days retreat and then returning to his missions. It is known that he never reached Quebec, but was drowned in the last chute of the Riviere des Praiiries, which from that time bears the name of Sault-au-Recollet. The neophyte Auhaitsique, whom he had instructed and baptized, met with the same fate. It was learned later that this was not an accident; but that a few Hurons, enemies of religion, drowned them in hatred of the Faith. If we can rely on the "Martyrologe des Recollets", Father Viel was buried in St. Charles's Chapel, 25 June, 1625.

SAGARD, Grand voyage: Histoire du Canada; LECLERCQ, Premier etablissement de la Foi; LE TAC, Histoire chronologique; JONES, Huronia; Jesuit Relations.

ART. MELANCON

Vienna

Vienna -- the capital of Austria-Hungary, the residence of the emperor, and the seat of a Latin archbishopric -- is situated at the north-east end of the Alps, mainly on the right bank of the Danube.

I. THE CITY OF VIENNA

(1) History

The first settlers on the site were Celts, about five hundred years before Christ. Shortly before the Christian era the land was occupied by the Romans under Tiberius, stepson of the Emperor Augustus; a permanent Roman camp for the thirteenth legion was established on the spot, and remains of this camp still exist. The first mention of the place in Roman literature is in Pliny's encyclopedia (about A.D. 77), where it is called Vianiomina, while the inscriptions extant use only the form Vindobona. During the reign of Domitian, Vindobona was a naval port, under Trajan it was the station for the tenth legion, the legion of the imperial family. During his struggle with the Marcomanni Marcus Aurelius often stayed at Vindobona and finally died there. After this there began an amalgamation of the Romans resident at Vindobona with the Germans who were forcing their way into the empire. Caracalla raised Vindobona to the rank of a municipality with mayors (duumviri) and town councils. The martyrdom, about 303, of St. Florian during the persecution of Galerius proves that as early as the third century Christianity had gained entrance into Vienna. In 427 Vindobona together with Pannonia, to which it belonged, fell to the Eastern Roman Empire; in 448 it was ceded to Attila and after his death was independent. During the migrations Vienna was conquered and plundered by the Huns and Ostrogoths, most of its inhabitants taking refuge in the mountains. Vienna is first mentioned again in the Chronicles when Charlemagne advanced down the Danube in 791, destroyed the Empire of the Avars, and formed the East Mark out of the region between the River Enns and the mountains called Wienerwald. There is but little mention of Vienna in the succeeding era, which signifies that no legal changes had occurred within its walls. According to ancient tradition the oldest parish church of Vienna was founded in the Carolingian period. This was St. Rupprecht's, built on a Roman foundation and probably dedicated by Archbishop Arno of Salzburg. In the tenth century the East Mark was held for a time by the Magyars, but restored to the empire, when it was settled by Bavarian peasants. Then it was transferred by the Saxon kings to the Babenbergs. Conquered by the magyars in 1030, it was restored to the empire by the victory of the German King Henry III over the Magyar King Aba.

By the middle of the twelfth century Vienna was a town of importance and a centre of German civilization in eastern Europe. The four churches, of which only one was a parish church, no longer met religious needs; consequently in 1137 a second parish church, that of St. Stephen, was founded. The church was solemnly dedicated in 1147 in the presence of the German Emperor Conrad III, of Bishop Otto of Freising, and of other German nobles who were going to the East on a Crusade. In 1156 the East Mark became an independent duchy and the bishops to whose diocese it belonged built residences for themselves at Vienna. Thus there arose within the city walls the residences of the Bishops of Salzburg, Freising, and Seckau, of the Abbots of Klosterneuburg, Melk, Göttweig, Heiligenkreuz, etc. Through the favour of the Babenberg dynasty a flourishing church life developed. In 1158 Henry Jasomirgott founded what is called the Scotch monastery (Schottenkloster) for Irish Benedictines, who were called Scots by the common people; until 1418 the monks were entirely Irish. Leopold VI built the church of St. Michael near the new palace for the people of his court and the citizens who lived near the palace. He also invited Dominicans from Hungary, after his return from Palestine gave a house an chapel to the Franciscans, and offered a friendly reception to the Teutonic Knights; who thereupon built a house of their order at Vienna. At about the same time the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem settled in the town. The churches of St. Paul and St. Nicholas, the convents of the Cistercian nuns of St. Nicholas, of the Penitents of St. Mary Magdalen, and other convents were built outside the city walls. Leopold VI sought, although unsuccessfully, to release Austria from the ecclesiastical control of the Bishops of Passau and to make Vienna the see of an independent bishopric. In 1198 the city had already its own jurisdiction; in 1221 Leopold VI gave it a new municipal law, the privileges of which were still further increased by the last of the Babenberg dynasty, Frederick II (1230-46). All these circumstances increased the importance and prosperity of the city, so that Vienna became the most prominent city on the Danube as a prosperous commercial place, the home of noted Minnesingers, a centre of much visited tournaments, etc. Towards the close of the thirteenth century a decided change took place for Vienna; it became the centre of the great empire which the Habsburgs acquired in the course of centuries, of which Rudolph laid the foundation. The citizens of Vienna fought readily under the flag of the Habsburgs against the Magyars (1291, 1403), the Hussites (1421-25), the Bohemians and Moravians, Matthias Corvinus, the Turks, etc., and received from the ruling house a charter whereby their rights could not be infringed either by nobles or ecclesiastics; these rights included the holding of fiefs, free election of burgomaster and city councillors, jurisdiction over life and property, while they undertook the defence of the city. Duke Rudolph IV (1358-65), in particular, suppressed most of the courts existing in the city, limited the right of sanctuary, and forbade the building of houses without the consent of the city council. In order to make Vienna a centre also of learning he founded in 1365 a university, which he endowed richly and to which he invited distinguished scholars from Germany and France. He added a cathedral chapter to the parish church of St. Stephen, and made the crypt of the church the place of burial for the Habsburg dynasty. He also enlarged the church and laid the corner-stone of the high south tower. His brother and successor, Albert III (1366-95), encouraged the university and acquired Trieste, thus making the commerce of Vienna independent of Venice. In the first half of the fifteenth century the prominent position of Vienna was still maintained, although the university was ravaged by the pest, the Hussites advanced almost as far as the city, and the good relations of Vienna with the ruler were disturbed, because Vienna sided with the Antipope Felix V, while Frederick III adhered to Eugenius IV. There is a celebrated description of Vienna during this era written by AEneas Sylvius, later Pope Pius II, who was one of the most distinguished men of Vienna during the years 1443-55; he asserts that of all the cities on the Danube none is richer, has a larger population, nor is more charming than Vienna, the chief town of the country and the queen of the cities of Eastern Europe. Through the efforts of Frederick III Vienna was raised to the rank of a diocese.

In the second half of the fifteenth century Vienna began to decline. After the advance of the Turks into Europe the feeling of security had disappeared, and on account of the debasement of the currency and the dearness of living foreign merchants avoided Vienna more and more. The spread of Humanism led to violent conflicts at the university, which lost much of its renown. The revolt in 1461 of a large part of the citizens against Frederick III, which cost the burgomaster his office and life, the siege of the city by Matthias Corvinus in the years 1482-8, and the supremacy of this king for the five years 1485-90, caused the prosperity of the city to decay. The growth of the power of the Habsburg dynasty during the reign of Maximilian was no benefit to the city of Vienna itself. After the discovery of the sea-route to the East Indies and the discovery of America, international commerce followed another course; this led to a great decline in the importance of Vienna for trade with Italy and the East. When, after the death of Maximilian, Vienna revolted against his grandson Ferdinand, a new municipal Constitution was introduced, which annulled the former autonomy and a large part of the ancient rights and privileges of the city and strengthened the power of the sovereign. To the internal confusion was added the danger of the Turks, who advanced farther and farther up the Danube and on 19 September, 1525, appeared before Vienna. The heroism of the besieged, who abandoned all the suburbs of Vienna in order to concentrate for the protection of the inner city, forced Sultan Suleiman to abandon the siege in the middle of October and to withdraw after murdering 2000 prisoners. As, however, the Turks ruled a large part of Hungary and constantly renewed the was from this base, Vienna was now constantly in danger of conquest by them. The effects of the Reformation were fully as destructive for Vienna as the danger from the Turks. The new doctrine found entrance first among the nobility and then spread through a large part of the population, as at first the Government did not take strong measures against the innovations. The work of the Counter-Reformation was not zealously promoted until the Jesuits were called to Vienna in 1551, and until, in particular, the reigns of the emperors Ferdinand II and III. Unlike Rudolph II, these rulers preferred to live at Vienna, to which they invited numerous artists, poets, musicians, and scholars. The citizens were obliged to take an oath to conform to the catholic religion; large numbers of monasteries and brotherhoods laboured to revive the Catholic religion, partly by preaching and partly by education and training. Besides the disastrous effects of the danger form the Turks and the Reformation, the prosperity of Vienna was also kept in check by the fact that on account of the danger of its position it had to be turned into a strong fortress, a condition very unfavourable to the health of the city. Terrible devastation was caused by the plague during the years 1541, 1570, 1586, and 1679.

Vienna had to suffer another siege by the mortal foe of Christendom during the reign of Emperor Leopold I. Influenced by Louis XIV of France, the sultan sent directly against Vienna an army of 200,000 men under the command of the Grand Vizier Kara Mustapha; this army appeared before the city before the gathering of the imperial army had been completed. The defenders f Vienna were led by Count Rudiger von Starrhemberg, Bishop Leopold Kollonitz, who laboured unweariedly for the wounded and for the obtaining of provisions, and the burgomaster, Johann Andreas von Liebenberg. The Turks began the attack 13 July, 1683, and made violent assaults almost daily; the number of defenders sank from day to day, hunger and misery appeared, and the hospitals were full of sick and wounded. It was not until early in September that the relieving army, which had collected at Tulln, set out for Vienna; the commander-in-chief was the King of Poland, John Sobieski; among his generals were Charles of Lorraine, Maximilian Emmanuel of Bavaria, Margrave Louis of Bavaria, and others. The memorable battle began on 12 September; the Christian army descended form the Kahlenberg in three charges and won a brilliant victory over the Turks. Thenceforth Austria and Germany were permanently relieved of the danger of invasion by the Turks, and Vienna was released from its difficult position of being the outpost of Christendom.

The eighteenth century brought a new internal organization of the empire for the provinces of Austria. The erection of large ecclesiastical and secular buildings made it a capital worthy of the emperor and his empire. Thus the ties uniting Vienna and its rulers were constantly drawn together. Consequently the Viennese welcomed the Pragmatic Sanction, by which Charles VI secured the unity and indivisibility of the monarchy: they hailed with joy the entry of the Empress Maria Theresa and the birth of her son Joseph II. Vienna also tolerated in some degree the reforms that Joseph II wished to introduce in ecclesiastical and secular affairs, odious though they were in themselves because by his friendliness towards the citizens he had done much for the beautifying and improvement of the city. When, after the death of Francis I, Ferdinand I came into power and none of the much-needed reforms were undertaken, although such were urged by the estates, discontent constantly increased and the conviction that absolutism could not be maintained became almost universal. The Liberals and Democrats of all countries violently attacked the Austrian Government as the chief enemy of all political and intellectual advance. This discontent found expression in 1848, when the revolutionary wave from France spread over almost the whole of Europe. Vienna took the lead in the movement in Austria which aimed to overthrow the existing system of absolutism. On 16 March, 1848, Emperor Ferdinand proclaimed a Constitution, granted the freedom of the press, and the right of the people to bear arms, but he Radical leaders kept up the discontent of the people, notwithstanding the concessions, and succeeded in having the Constitution rejected as insufficient. On 2 December, 1848, Francis Joseph became emperor in succession to his uncle Ferdinand, who abdicated voluntarily. Vienna now developed rapidly as the capital and residence of the ruler. Its prosperity was only temporarily interrupted by economic crises and wars as in 1859 and 1866. In 1895 the supremacy of the Liberal party in the city council was broken by the Christian Socialists. Under the guidance of the great burgomaster, Karl Lüger (1897-1910), Vienna became not only one of the best administered cities economically, but there also sprang up such an abundance of institutions for public and social benefit as no other large city of the world can show. Religious life has also enjoyed a great revival under the supremacy of the Christian Socialists.

(2) Statistics

On 31 December, the city of Vienna numbered, including the garrison, 2,004,493 inhabitants; of these 1,767,223 were Catholics (including 3723 adherents of the Greek Rite and 125 adherents of the Armenian Rite), about 60,000 Protestants, and about 150,000 Jews. The city is divided into 21 administration districts; of these 20 lie on the right bank of the Danube proper, 9 constitute Old Vienna which up to 1891 was separated from the adjacent districts by a circle of fortifications. Ecclesiastically there are 4 city deaneries, 76 parishes with the same number of parish churches, 77 monastery churches, chapels of ease, and public chapels, and about 100 private chapels. In 1912 there were in the city 308 secular priests of the diocese, 103 regulars, and 45 priests from other dioceses, 44 houses of 25 male orders, and 121 houses of 27 female orders. Besides the chief officials of the archdiocese, Vienna is also the see of the Apostolic field vicariate of the imperial and royal army and navy, which is immediately under the direction of the pope. Only the most important of the churches can here be mentioned: the cathedral of St. Stephen, a Gothic building of three naves of equal height, with a south tower 449.5 feet high. The cathedral is the most important Gothic building of the Austrian territories; it was dedicated in 1147 as a small Romanesque church, after the fire of 1293 was rebuilt in the Gothic style during the fourteenth to sixteenth centuries, and since 1852 has been completely restored by the architects, Ernst Fr. Schmidt and Hermann. The Votiv Kirche of Our Saviour, one of the most beautiful Gothic churches of modern times, was built 1856-79 according to the plans of Ferstel, in commemoration of the escape of the Emperor Francis Joseph from assassination in 1853. It has a very rich facade and two towers each 316 feet high. The church of Maria Stiegen (Maria on the riverbank), the national church of the Czechs, was built in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries in the Late Gothic style; the heptagonal tower was erected in 1536. The "Karlskirche", an elaborate structure in the Baroque style with a huge cupola, is the masterpiece of Fischer von Erlach, and was erected 1715-37. The parish church "zu den sieben Zufluchten" was built by Muller (1848-61), in the Italian Roundarched style with an octagonal cupola and two towers each 223 feet high; the church of the Lazarists was built 1860-62 in Early Gothic style after the design of F. Schmidt; St. Brigitta, a Gothic church, erected in 1862-73 by the same architect; the Gothic church of the Augustinians, dating from the fourteenth century, contains the celebrated monument by Canova of Maria Christina, daughter of the Empress Maria Theresa; the Capuchin church erected n the Baroque style (1622-32) contains the crypt of the imperial family with 132 coffins; St. Pete, the second oldest church of Vienna, rebuilt in the Baroque style (1702-13) by Fischer von Erlach. Associational church life is highly developed in the city of Vienna, and there are numerous Catholic charitable institutions.

II. THE DIOCESE OF VIENNA

(1) History

The territory which now belongs to the Diocese of Vienna was subject, from the time the Germans acquired it, to the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Passau, who was represented in Vienna by an official. At the beginning of the thirteenth century Duke Leopold VI began negotiations with Rome for the founding of a separate bishopric for Vienna, but these efforts failed owing to the opposition of the Bishops of Passau. Like the rulers of the Babenberg dynasty the first princes of the house of Habsburg also desired to make Vienna an independent diocese. However Emperor Frederick III was the first to bring it about; in 1469 two dioceses were established at the same time in the Austrian territories by the Bull "In supramae dignitatis specula"; these sees were placed directly under the control of the pope: one was for the city of Vienna, which then contained three parishes, and for the fourteen, later sixteen, parishes of its immediate vicinity; the second was for the city of Wiener-Neustadt. The right to appoint the bishops of these two small dioceses was given by Pope Paul II to Emperor Frederick III and his successors. The church of St. Stephen was made the cathedral church of the Diocese of Vienna. The Bishop o Passau did not withdraw his opposition until 1481, consequently it was not until this year that the Bull of erection could be formally proclaimed in the presence of a papal envoy, Bishop Alexander of Forli, and a deputy of the Archbishop of Salzburg, the primate of Germany. In 1471 Frederick III appointed as first bishop Count Leopold of Spaur, who was not, however, able to occupy his see. The small endowment of the dioceses was the main reason why during the first century administrators rather than bishops were generally appointed. The first administrator was Johann Beckenslör or Peckenschlager (1480-82), formerly Archbishop of Gran, from which he had been driven by the Magyars; he received the archiepiscopal See of Salzburg in 1482. This bishop was succeeded by Bernhard Rohrer (1482-87), who could only exercise his office for a short period on account of the siege and occupation of Vienna by Matthias Corvinus. The diocese was administered during the supremacy of Matthias Corvinus by his court preacher, Urban Docsi.

After Vienna came again under the control of the Habsburgs the succession of administrators was as follows: Matthias Scheidt (1490-93), Bishop of Seckau; Johann Vitéz (1493-99), private secretary to Matthias Corvinus and a zealous promoter of Humanism; Bernhard Pollheim of Wartenberg (1499-1504), formerly rector of the University of Padua, and Franz Bakacs of Erdod (1504-09), Bishop of Raab. After a vacancy of several years the diocese was administered by Georg Slatkonia, Bishop of Piben in Istria (1513-22); Petrus Bonomo, Bishop of Trieste and governor of the Austrian Netherlands (1522-23), and Johann of Revellis (1523-39), chief almoner of Archduke Ferdinand. Distinguished administrators were Johann Faber (1533-41) and Frederick Nausea (1541-52). After the death of Nausea's successor, Christopher Werthwein (1552-53), the cathedral chapter undertook the administration of the Diocese, Blessed Peter Canisius aiding it by advice and deed in the struggle against the religious innovations. Bishop Anthony Bruns, who was appointed in 1558, received the Archdiocese of Prague in 1561. His successor Urban Sagstetter, a zealous defender of the ancient Faith, resigned in 1568, on account of the violent opposition he encountered among the clergy and laity, who were largely inclined to Lutheranism. After his resignation the chapter undertook the spiritual administration. Johann Kaspar Neubock (1574-94), formerly professor at the University of Freiburg in the Breisgau, was the first of the unbroken series of the actual Bishops of Vienna. During his episcopate the Protestant movement, which he opposed to the best of his ability, although without great success, reached its culmination at Vienna. His successor Cardinal Melchior Klesl (1598-1630) introduced the Counter-Reformation in Austria with the aid of Emperors Ferdinand II and III and carried it to a successful termination. Anthony Wolfrath of Cologne (1631-39), who was also Bishop-Abbot of Kremsmünster, obtained for himself and his successors the dignity of a prince of the empire.

Among the most distinguished of his successors were: the zealous and energetic Prince-Bishop Philip Frederick Count of Breuner (1639-69), the Capuchin Emmerich Sinelli (1680-85), councillor of the emperor, during whose episcopate the memorable siege of Vienna by the Turks occurred; Francis Ferdinand Freiherr von Rummel (1609-16), who was the tutor of the later Emperor Joseph I; Prince-Bishop Sigmund Count von Kollonitz (1716-51), nephew of Bishop Kollonitz of Wiener-Neustadt, who won imperishable glory during the siege of Vienna. During this episcopate Pope Innocent XIII, at the request of Emperor Charles VI, raised the Diocese of Vienna in 1722 to the rank of an archdiocese and gave it the formerly exempt Diocese of Wiener-Neustadt as suffragan. In 1729 the diocese was enlarged by the addition of the parishes in the "district under the Wienerwald" which had formerly belonged to Passau. His successor John Joseph Count von Trautson (1751-57) was regarded as a free-thinker on account of his leniency towards Protestants and his enmity to the Jesuits, although he was zealous for the training and discipline of the clergy. During the episcopate of Cardinal Anthony Christopher von Migazzi (1757-1803), the keen adversary of the Josephine system, the Diocese of Vienna received its present boundaries. In 17895 the Diocese of Wiener-Neustadt was suppressed and incorporated in that of Vienna; in addition Vienna received the parishes of the "district under the Mannhartsberg" in Lower Austria, and five parishes of the Diocese of Raab. At the same time the two Dioceses of Lins and St. Polten, which Joseph II had erected against the wish of the pope and of the Bishop of Passau, were made suffragans of Vienna. Migazzi was followed by Sigmund Anthony Count von Hohenwart (1803-20), who had been a tutor of the Emperor Francis II, and was distinguished for charity and his care for the training of the clergy; Leopold Maximilian Firmian (1820-31), formerly administrator of Salzburg; Eduard Milde (1831-530, the celebrated pedagogue; Cardinal Othmar Rauscher (1851-75), a noted statesman and orator. Rauscher's successors were also raised to the cardinalate: John Rudolph Kutschker (1876-81), a distinguished scholar in canon law; Colestin Joseph Ganglbauer (1881-89), noted for his kindness and benevolence, who was formerly abbot of the Benedictine Abbey of Kremsmünster; Anthony Joseph Gruscha (1890-1911), who like his predecessor did much to relieve the lack of churches; Gruscha also deserves great praise for his labours in regard to Catholic associational life in Vienna, especially in respect to the Catholic Gesellenverein, which he and Kolping founded in Austria. He was the president of its central association for Austria-Hungary while still archbishop. The present archbishop if Francis Xavier Nagl, b. at Vienna 26 November, 1855, rector of the German national church, Santa Maria dell'Anima at Rome in 1889, Bishop of Capo D'Istria in 1899, coadjutor at Vienna with the right of succession in 1910, Prince Archbishop of Vienna 5 August, 1911, made cardinal 27 November, 1911.

(2) Statistics

The Archdiocese of Vienna forms with the suffragan dioceses of Linz and St. Polten the ecclesiastical Province of Vienna. The archdiocese includes the eastern part of the Archduchy of Austria below the Enns, namely the two former administrative departments of the "District under the Wienerwald" and the "District under the Mannhartsberg". At the beginning of 1912 it included 4 city deaneries in Vienna and 25 rural deaneries, 526 parishes, 4 vicariates, 54 benefices, 20 positions for assistant priests, 1 prince archbishop, 2 coadjutor bishops, 903 secular priests, 640 regular priests (these figures include resident priests who do not belong to the diocese); 2,564,240 Catholics. The cathedral chapter consists of 2 auxiliary bishops, 1 cathedral provost, 1 cathedral dean, 1 custos, 1 cantor, 1 scholasticus, 10 canons, 12 honorary canons. The institutions for the training of the priesthood are the Catholic theological faculty of the University of Vienna with 14 professors and (1911) 237 students; the clerical seminary under the direction of the prince-archbishop with 112 students; the seminary for boys with 240 pupils; and the theological schools conducted by the orders in their monasteries: the school of the Augustinian Canons at Klosterneuburg, of the Mechitarists at Vienna, of the Cistercians at Heiligenkreuz, of the Society of the Divine Word at Maria-Enzersdorf. For the priests of other dioceses there are the higher institute of St. Augustine for secular priests, intended for priests from all the dioceses of Austria, and the Pazmanian college for the dioceses of Hungary that was founded in 1623 by Cardinal Pázamány. The public higher and middle schools of Austria are established on an inter-denominational basis. The Catholics of the diocese, however, have a large number of private schools and institutions of learning which are generally conducted by members of religious orders and are largely intended for the education of girls. Among the schools for boys should be mentioned: the Jesuit gymnasium at Kalkburg, the gymnasiums of the Benedictines and Mechitarists in Vienna, the boarding schools for seminarians f the Piarists, Redemptorists, the Pious Workers, and of the School Brothers. The ancient monasteries for men which still exist in the archdiocese are: the Abbey of Klosterneuburg of the Reformed Lateran Augustinian Canons, founded in 1106 by Margrave St. Leopold, which has 96 members; the Benedictine Schottenkloster at Vienna, founded in 1158 by Henry Jasomirgott, which has a gymnasium with 77 members; the Cistercian Abbey of Heiligenkreuz-Neukloster with a high-school for boys preparing for the priesthood, with 63 members; it was also founded by St. Leopold (1135).

Other orders and congregations are: Mechitarist, 1 monastery at Vienna with 45 members; Dominican, 2 monasteries, with 29 members; Minorite, 3 houses, 24 fathers; Franciscan, 3 houses, with 42 members; Capuchin, 2 houses, with 18 members; Calced Carmelites, in Vienna, with 5 members; Discalced Carmelites, 1 house, 19 members; Servites, 2 houses, with 14 members; Brothers of Mercy, 2 houses, with 45 members; Trinitarians in Vienna, with 9 members; Barnabites, 4 houses, with 19 members; Jesuits, 5 houses, with 144 members; Camillans, 1 monastery, 13 members; Piarists, 3 houses, 16 fathers; Lazarists, 3 houses, 87 members; Redemptorists, 3 monasteries, 103 members; Resurrectionists, 1 house, 7 members; Salesians of Don Bosco, 1 house, 12 members; Brothers of Mary, 2 houses, 25 members; Oblates of St. Francis of Sales, 2 houses, 12 members; Salvatorians, 2 houses, 31 members; the Society of the Divine Word, 3 houses, 357 members; of the Christian Schools, 9 houses, 357 members; Pious Workers, 5 houses, 94 members; total, 66 monasteries, 640 priests, 229 clerics, 508 brothers, 342 novices and candidates. The 30 female orders and congregations represented in the archdiocese had, at the close of 1911, 252 houses and 5180 members. The most important, represented by the number of members, are: Daughters of the Divine Saviour, 918; Sisters of Mercy of St. Vincent de Paul, 492; Sisters of Mercy of the Third Order of St. Francis, 478; Sisters of the Poor Child Jesus, 379; Daughters of Christian Love of St. Vincent de Paul, 374; Daughters of Divine Love, 274; Sisters of Mercy of the Holy Cross, 223; School Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis, 211; Nuns of the Holy Heart of Jesus, 120; Poor School Sisters of Notre Dame, 114; Ursuline Nuns, 109; there are also Nuns of the Good Shepherd, Sisters of St. Elizabeth, Salesian Nuns, Carmelite Nuns, Sisters of St. Charles Borromeo, Missionaries of Mary, Sisters of the Perpetual Adoration; Daughters of the Childhood of Jesus and Mary; Sisters of the Mother of Sorrows, etc. Most of the female orders devote themselves to the care of the sick in and outside of hospitals, or take charge of primary and middle schools and schools for girls, of homes for children, asylums, institutions, etc. Of late years Catholic associational life has developed greatly. Among the most important societies are: the Catholic School Union for Austria the Society for the training of Catholic Teachers, the Austrian Leo Society for the promotion of Christian learning, literature, and art; there are also societies for journeymen, for men, workmen, youths, the St. Vincent de Paul societies, etc. Outside of Vienna the most important churches are the old cathedral at Wiener-Neustadt, the church of St. Othmar at Modling, the monastery churches at Klosterneuburg and Heiligenkreuz.

JOSEPH LINS

University of Vienna

Foundation of the University

Next to the University of Prague that of Vienna is the oldest university of the former Holy Roman Empire. It was founded on 12 March, 1365, by Rudolph IV, Duke of Austria, and its charter confirmed on 18 July of the same year by Urban V, a faculty of theology not being included in the papal authorization. The school, planned on too large a scale and not sufficiently endowed, did not prosper; moreover the duke died on 27 July at Milan. About 1380 his successor, Albert III, called teachers from Paris and obtained permission from Urban VI, 20 Feb., 1384, for the establishment of a theological faculty. After the drawing up of the university statutes in 1385, and of the statutes of the faculties of theology, law, medicine, and philosophy on 1 April, 1389, the organization of the university on the model of Paris was complete. All members of the university, scholars, bachelors, licentiates (who were obliged to lecture for a certain period), and doctors, were divided into "nations", Austrian, Rhenish, Hungarian, and Saxon. Each "nation" elected a proctor from its membership; the head of the university was the rector elected semi-annually by the proctors, while his council was composed of the proctors and the deans of the faculties. The university was subject to the ruler of the country, who was its patron, but otherwise it was autonomous and had its own jurisdiction. The permanent ecclesiastical representative of the university was the cathedral provost of St. Stephen's, who was chancellor of the university and conferred the academic degrees.

During the first century of its existence the university repeatedly proved that it was founded as an institution of the Church chiefly for the extension and defence of the Faith. An address of loyalty (rotulus) was sent to each newly-elected pope with a request for the confirmation and increase of the privileges. As an ecclesiastical corporation the university took an active part in the Councils of Pisa (1409), Constance (1414), and Basle (1431), and in several provincial synods. In that era of incessant disorder and scanty revenues, the continued existence of a university was possible only when closely connected with the Church and under the protection of the papacy. The popes granted important rights, e.g., the privilege, granted on 20 Feb., 1384, and 27 May, 1399, that distant benefices of priests teaching and studying at Vienna could be administered by a vicar; the appointment of ecclesiastical conservators (17 Aug., 1411; 21 May, 1434; 12 July, 1513); ecclesiastical jurisdiction with the right of pronouncing excommunication (27 May, 1420; 16 Feb., 1441; 12 July, 1513; 1 July, 1517), and the right of trying and judging heretics (16 Feb., 1441). Physicians (28 March, 1452) were protected by a letter of the Bishop of Passau in 1406 excommunicating quacks. The subject matter taught was confined to prescribed books, the method of teaching rigidly scholastic. The theological students were limited to the Scriptures and dogmatic theology, pastoral theology and Hebrew being added later. At first, in the faculty of law, canon law alone was taught, but Roman law was added in 1484; medicine was still entirely under the spell of sterile Arabian theories. The widest range of subjects belonged to the philosophical (liberal arts) faculty, which, as the introductory course to the three "higher faculties", had the largest number of students. Among the celebrated mathematicians and astronomers of this faculty were Johannes of Gmunden (about 1380-1442), George of Peuerbach (1423-61), and Johannes Muller of Konigberg, also called Regiomontanus (14536-76). A distinguished theologian and statesman was Thomas Ebendorffer (1387-1464), noted for his part in the Council of Basle.

Period of Prosperity and Humanism

During the reign of Maximilain I (1493-1519) the university enjoyed its first period of prosperity; with the rise of Humanism about 1490, the influence of the Church steadily decreased.

Decline: Reforms

The disorders after Maximilian's death and the appearance of Luther's doctrines in Austria caused the university to decline rapidly. As early as 1511 it refused to send a representative to a council. The laxity of the medical and philosophical faculties in regard to heretics obliged the theological faculty on 14 July, 1526, to give back to the bishop authority in such matters. During the years 1525-30 the number of students steadily declined, the faculty of law was hardly more than nominal, and in 1529 that of theology had but two professors. Only the strong hand of Ferdinand I (1522-1564) saved the university from complete decay; reforming statutes were promulgated on 2 Aug., 1533; 15 Sept., 1537, and 1 Jan., 1554. It was placed under the direction of a superintendent with large powers, who was appointed by the sovereign. Teachers having regular salaries were appointed to each faculty; the faculties of medicine and theology had each three such professors, the faculty of law four. The period of study was made five years, for the philosophical course two years. In the medial department more attention was to be paid to practical branches; in the law course Roman law was made the most important study. In 1551 Ferdinand I called the Jesuits to Vienna to revive the religious spirit and on 17 Nov., 1558, gave them two permanent theological professorships. The Jesuits established a Latin school and a house of studies, and gave philosophical courses that were largely attended.

Non-Catholic tendency and the Counter-Reformation

From 30 March, 1546, each new professor was obliged to submit to an examination of his orthodoxy, in order to prevent the admission of heretics. This regulation was annulled on 5 Sept., 1564, by Maximilian II (1564-76), who also ordained that instead of the customary formal profession of Catholic Faith, the candidate for degrees had only to declare himself a Catholic--disregarding the Bull of Pius IV (13 Nov., 1564). The emperor withdrew one professorship from the Jesuits and, at the demand of the Diet, ordered the house of studies to be closed. During the reign of Rudolph II (1576-1612), who was by education a strict Catholic, a Counter-Reformation was begun. This was due to the efforts of the cathedral provost Melchior Khlesl, appointed chancellor of the university in 1579. The first step was the publication on 2 July, 1581, and 31 March, 1591, of the papal Bull of 13 Nov., 1564; the entrance of Protestants into the university was thus prevented. In 1565 the Jesuits attempted to obtain university degrees for the students trained at their school, but their appeal was rejected both at this date and in 1573. The university was not altogether wrong in regarding as an infringement of its privileges the permission granted the Jesuits in 1570 to hold philosophical and theological courses in their college. It felt its very existence threatened, especially as the Jesuits, e.g. in 1593, had one thousand students, while the entire university had but two hundred. The dispute was settled by Emperor Matthias (1612-19) on 25 Feb., 1617, who again granted the Jesuits two professorhips in theology, and in addition three in philosophy. Finally, during the reign of Ferdinand II (1619-37), the entire theological and philosophical faculties were handed over to the Jesuits, and their college was incorporated into the university (21-22 Oct., 1622; 17 Nov., 1622; 9 Aug., 1623; Sanctio pragmatica of 13 Oct., 1623, confirmed by Ferdinand II on 4 May, 1640). The Society renounced in perpetuity any claim to the dignity of rector of the university, but on the other hand the rector of the Jesuit college had a seat and vote directly after the superintendent appointed by the ruler. The election of professors and the methods of teaching were left to the Society.

The intent of the Sanctio pragmatica was to make the University Catholic in its future development. This end was the easier to attain as the Jesuits controlled all the preparatory schools. The matter, however, was more difficult in regard to the students of law and medicine, among whom many were still openly or secretly non-Catholic. The restriction to Catholics was finally effected in these departments by decrees and by the edict of 17 Nov., 1651, which expelled all non-Catholics from the country. Following the example of other universities, as Paris, Cologne, and Mainz, Ferdinand III (1637-57) appointed (17 May, 1649) the feast of the Immaculate Conception as the church feast of the university; henceforth before attaining a degree, the rectorship, or a professorship, the candidate was obliged to profess his belief in the Immaculate Concetion. From 2 Dec., 1656, the dean-elect had also to make this profession. The Dominicans alone were exampted (31 Oct., 1649) from this obligation, but on this account they were excluded from the position of dean. Thanks to the zeal and learning of the Jesuits, the theological and philosophical departments flourished greatly; those of law and medicine, however, lagged behind. The reform of studies carried out by Ferdinand I had not the desired success in these two branches, as money was lacking, and the very scanty salaries of the professors were seldom paid. The great disadvantage in the faculty of law was that German common law, though necessary in practice, was not taught. The students of medicine were more fortunate, for after winning the baccalaureate they generally attended an Italian university, particularly Padua, where better facilities for study were offered, and a shorter period of attendance required. Thus the members of the faculty of medicine were generally physicians educated in Italy, as Johann Wilhelm Mannagetta (d. 1660), and Paul de Sorbalt (d. 1691). However, owing to the lack of students and of equipment, there was no stimulus to work. Numerous proposals of reform were made, such as those of 1629, 1687, and 1735, but all attempts to bring the two faculties to a higher level failed on account of the financial embarrassment of the Government.

Reorganization in the Reign of Maria Theresa: University a State Institution

During the reign of Maria Theresa (1740-80) the university was completely reconstructed. What led to this change was the calling to Vienna in 1745 of Gerhard van Swieten (1700-72), a medical professor at Leyden, as court physician and university professor. The reforms of the medical faculty, which he planned, went into effect on 7 February: i.e. the designation of van Swieten as director of studies, appointment of professors by the empress, not as before by the university consistory, rigid supervision of the examinations by the Government, establishment of a professorship of chemistry, founding of a botanical garden, and the delivery of clinical lectures in the hospital. They university soon excelled the University of Leyden, previously so celebrated; this was effected by the appointment of distinguished teachers, as, in 1749, for chemistry and botany, Alexander Ludwig laugier, whose successor in 1769 was Nikolaus Jacquin; in 1754, for practical therapeutics, Anton de Haen, whose successor in 1776 was Maximilian Stoll; and Ferdinand Leber, in 1761, for surgery. The theological and philosophical faculties were reformed in 1753. The professors of philosophy were forbidden to dictate their lectures to the students as formerly, or to teach the Aristotelean doctrine. The plan drawn up for the reform of the department of law by Prince- Archbishop Count Trautson and Sigismund Popowitsch, professor of eloquence, was put in force in 1753. New courses in constitutional law, the law of nature, feudal law, the Theresian laws for the hereditary Austrian dominions, and, as an experiment, history, were established. The director of studies was Johann Franz von Bourguignon. Up to 1757 all matters pertaining to instruction were controlled by Prince-Archbishop Count Trautson, the "protector of studies". The position of superintendent was abolished in 1754.

These reforms took from the university the last vestiges of its former autonomy, made it entirely subsidiary to the purposes of the State, and turned the professors into state officials. Intellectual life was restricted by the directors of studies who prescribed the text-books to be used, and by the Government censorship of books. The medical faculty suffered least from these limitations and continued to develop. The aim of the prevailing system was to exclude entirely the influence of the Church and of the Society of Jesus; its leading spirits were van Swieten and, in the course of time, the freemason Joseph von Sonnenfels (1733- 1817). Thus in 1755 the conferring of the degrees at St. Stephen's was abolished, and the influence of the chancellor limited; in 1757 the Jesuit rector was removed from the university consistory, and in 1759 the directors of studies belonging to the Society were removed. The court commission of studies, with van Swieten as vice-president, was created on 23 March, 1760, as the chief board of supervision. In the same year the commission made a request for the admission of Protestants to the courses in law and medicine, but did not secure this until 1778. From 18 Jan., 1782, the university was open to all creeds. The suppression of the Society of Jesus in 1773 necessitated the reorganization of the theological and philosophical faculties. The property of the Jesuits went to the fund for stipends for students (Jesuitfond); ex-Jesuits were excluded from the new appointments to the theological chairs. The process of separating the University from the Church continued during the last years of the reign of Maria Theresa and still more during the reign of Joseph II (1780-90). Abbot Stefan Rautenstrauch of Branau wrote a text-book on canon law, pervaded with the spirit of Febronius, that received the approval of the Government in 1776. The oath before receiving a degree, and in general everything that had the appearance of an ecclesiastical celebration at the graduation exercises, was done away with in 1785. Prince-Archbishop Count Migazzi protested repeatedly, although in vain, in 1786 against the university text-books which contained false statements and attacks upon the Church. The university sank to a training school for government officials, the students of theology included. This intellectual servitude checked all scientific activity, and in the succeeding years brought the university into a condition of stagnation from which it could be rescued only by a fundamental reformation of the bureaucratic system.

Self-Governing University since 1848

The first step towards self-government was taken (on 12 March, 1848) by a general assembly of the university, which petitioned Ferdinand I (1835-48) for freedom of teaching and study. On 20 March the newly-appointed minister of instruction, Freiherr von Somaruga, promised the speedy granting of academic freedom, and at the same time announced a reform of the courses of study. The medical faculty, still the most important one, made proposals regarding the restoration of the old autonomy, such as the election of rector and deans by the professors. On 30 Sept., 1849, this was granted by the provisional law on the organization of academic authorities. A distinction was made in the faculties between the group of professors and that of the doctors or teachers below professors in rank, each electing a dean. On 13 Oct., 1849, the "general ordinances concerning the system of studies at the royal and imperial universities", with exception of the theological studies, was issued; on 1 Oct., 1850, "the general regulations for studies". On 9 Jan., 1865, the year of the celebration of the fifth centenary of the existence of the university, fifty-eight professors presented to the minister of instruction, von Schmerling, a memorial which denounced the exclusively Catholic as no longer just. Pursuant to the law of 28 April, 1873, on the organization of academic administration, the attainment of an academic dignity is now independent of the candidate's faith. The Catholic character of the university is at present limited to the theological faculty, for the "Protestant theological institute" that was raised to a faculty in 1850 is not a part of the university. On 11 Oct., 1884, the new university building on the Franzen-Ring was dedicated in the presence of Emperor Francis Joseph. In 1857 the "new university house", built in 1756, was given to the academy of sciences. New statutes for the regulation of the examinations for the doctorate in the three secular faculties were issued on 15 April, 1872. The course of study in the medical school requires five years, in the other faculties four years are necessary.

The reform of the theological faculty indicated a complete break with the Febronian-Josephinist system. There was a meeting of the bishops at the invitation of the Government on 30 April, 1849; the assembly made the demand that the competent bishop should have influence over the appointment of professors, that he should appoint half of the board of examiners, and that all should be obliged before appointment to make the Tridentine Confession of Faith. This request was granted on 30 June, 1850. The plan of study approved by the Government on 29 March, 1858, and still in use, was worked out by Prince-Archbishop Rauscher. The present statutes governing the examination for the doctorate were issued on 16 Jan., 1894. In respect to the ceremony of conferring degrees it was ordained on 19 May, 1880, that the protector or the dean of the faculty of which the rector was a member should be the presiding officer in case the rector was not a Catholic.

On 18 Oct., 1849, temporary statutes were issued regulating the study of law and political economy; on 2 Oct., 1855, these ordinances were revised, and on 20 April, 1893, the present statutes respecting studies and examinations for the doctorate were promulgated. The original freedom of study was limited in so far that students must pass three state examinations at fixed times. The medical faculty, which even before 1848 had a high reputation, gained a world-wide renown both by the calling of foreigners to professorships, as Ernst Brucke (1849-92), Johann Oppolzer (1850- 71), and Theodor Billroth (1865-94), and others, and by the work of native investigators, as Karl Rokitansky (1844-78), Joseph Hyrtl (1845-74), Joseph Skoda (1846-81), and Ferdinand Hebra (1849-80). The statues of 1872, respecting examinations for the doctorate, those concerning the organization of the medical instruction (1 June, 1872) and of the practical tests in the examination for the medical degree (24 Oct., 1872), put an end to the institute for partially trained medical men (surgeons) and instead only permitted the gaining of "the doctorate of the entire science of medicine" (medicinae universae doctor), with which the right to practise medicine is united. On 21 Dec., 1899, a new series of statutes suited to modern needs was issued in regard to the examinations for the doctorate. In the philosophical faculty the former two years' preparatory course was transferred to the gymnasium (18 May, 1845); the departments of natural science (chemistry, natural history) were taken over from the medical faculty on 16 Nov., 1849. Besides increasing the number of professorial chairs, seminars and institutes for scientific research and for the training of teachers of the intermediate schools were established. Among the distinguished scholars of this faculty should be mentioned: in physics, Christian Doppler (1850-53); in astronomy, Karl von Littrow (1842-77); in photographic optics, Josef Max Petzval (1837- 77); in the history of art, Rudolf von Eitelberger (1852-85); in classical philology, Hermann Bonitz (1849-67).

University Statistics (on 1 October, 1911)

Theology: 8 regular and 2 auxiliary professors, 4 Privatdozenten; law: 17 regular and 13 auxiliary professors, 41 Privatdozenten; medicine: 24 regular and 22 auxiliary professors, 197 Privatdozenten; philosophy: 54 regular and 25 auxiliary professors, 95 Privatdozenten, 255 lecturers and teachers. In the winter of 1910- 11 the total number of students was 9922. Of this number 241 studied theology, 3956 law, 2491 medicine, 3234 philosophy; in the summer of 1911 the student-body numbered 8457; 226 of its members studied theology, 3467 law; 2053 medicine, 2711 philosophy. Total amount of endowments 4,539,600 Kronen. The university and its institutes is supported by the treasury of the State.

KINK, Gesch. der kaiserlichen Universitat in Wien (Vienna, 1854); ASCHBACH, Gesch. der wiener Universitat im Il. Jahrhunde (3 vols., Vienna, 1865-88). Supplement to third vol. By HARTL and SCHRAUF (Vienna, 1898); Gesch. der wiener Universitat 1848-1898 (Vienna, 1898); WAPPLER, Gesch. der theologischen Fakultat (Vienna, 1884); SCHRAUF, Acta facultatis medicae (3 vols., Vienna, 1894-1904), covers the years 1399-1558; SENFELDER, Acta facultatis medicae, 1558-1724 (3 vols., Vienna, 1908-1912), a continuation of the preceding work. A complete bibliography is given in ERMAN and HORN, Bibliographie der deutschen Universitaten, II (Leipzig, 1904-5), 1051-95.

LEOPOLD SENFELDER

Council of Vienne (1311-12)

Pope Clement V, by the Bull "Regnans in coelis" of 12 Aug., 1308, called a general council to meet on 1 Oct., 1310, at Vienne in France for the purpose "of making provision in regard to the Order of Knights Templar, both the individual members and its lands, and in regard to other things in reference to the Catholic Faith, the Holy Land, and the improvement of the Church and of ecclesiastical persons". The Bull was sent to the kings of the respective Christian countries and to the archbishops of the various church provinces. The archbishops of every church province with two or three bishops, as designated in the individual Bulls, were to appear in person at the council, the bishops remaining at home were to transfer their rights to their colleagues who had been personally called. The bishops and prelates of all kinds were also to bring to the council proposals and motions in writing concerning the points to be improved in church life. A special Bull of 8 Aug., 1308, directed the Order of Knights Templar to send suitable defensores to the council, before which the grand master and the other chief officials had been commanded to appear in person. The council, however, could not open at the appointed time, on account of the trials of the Templars which were begun in the various countries, and the process respecting Boniface VIII which Clement V had undertaken at the appeal of the French king Philip the Fair. The Bull "Alma mater" of 4 April, 1310, postponed the opening of the council until 1 Oct., 1311, on account of the investigation of the Templars that was not yet finished. In September the pope went to Vienne with the cardinals and on 16 Oct., 1311, the first formal session of the council was held in the cathedral there. This was the Fifteenth Ecumenical Council. In his opening address the pope again designated the three following points as the main tasks of the council: the matter of the Templars; the assistance to be given the Holy Land; and the reform of the clerical order and of morals.

The Acts of the council have disappeared, with the exception of a fragment which Father Ehrle, S. J., found in a manuscript in the National Library at Paris (see below). Consequently there is no positive certainty as to the course of the synod. The number of its members is also variously stated by the authorities. Villiani ("Chron.", IX, XXII, ed. Muratori, "Script", XIII, 454) enumerates 300 bishops, while other authorities whose testimony is more probable give 114 bishops, to which should be added a number of abbots and proxies. The best known proceedings of the council are those respecting the Templars. A commission was appointed to examine the official records concerning the order, in which commission the various classes of participants in the council and the different countries were represented. From the members of this commission was formed a smaller committee of archbishops and bishops presided over by the Archbishop of Aquileia, which was to examine exhaustively the official records and the abstracts of these. The pope and the cardinals negotiated with the members of this commission respecting the matter. The majority of the cardinals and nearly all the members of the commission were of the opinion that the Order of Knights Templar should be granted the right to defend itself, and that no proof collected up to then was sufficient to condemn the order of the heresy of which it was accused without straining the law. As early as the beginning of December, 1311, the cardinals and commission had voted to this effect. The pope was in a difficult position, on account of the insistence of the powerful French king. In February, 1312, the king himself appeared with a great retinue before the gates of the city of Vienne, and vehemently demanded the suppression of the Templars in a letter of 2 March, addressed to the pope. Clement now adopted the expedient of suppressing the Order of Knights Templar, not be legal method (de jure), but on the plea of solicitude for the Church and by Apostolic ordinance (per modum provisionis sen ordinationis apostolicae). The pope announced this decision in an assembly of the cardinals, on 22 March, 1312. On 3 April the second formal session of the council was held; the French king and his three sons were present, and the decision respecting the suppression of the Templars was promulgated. The Bull of Suppression "Vox clamantis" is dated 22 March, 1312. The pope had retained for himself the decision as to the persons and the lands of the Templars; two further Bulls were issued to cover these points on 2 and 6 May. During the council, apparently at this second session, Boniface VIII was declared to have been a lawful pope, and absolved from the accusations brought against him. Nevertheless, an earlier Decree issued by Clement V was renewed, whereby the King of France was absolved from all responsibility for what he had done against Boniface and the Church.

The synod also took up the question of the Holy Land. In the third formal session, held 6 May, a letter from the King of France was read aloud, in which he promised to take the cross, together with his sons and large numbers of the nobility, and to begin the Crusade within six years. If he should die before this time his eldest son would undertake the expedition. Upon this, it was decided to lay a church tithe for six years for this purpose, which was to be raised throughout Christendom for the Holy Land. Concerning the raising of this tithe, cf. Kirsch, "Die papstlichen Killektorien in Deutschland" (Paderborn, 1894), 18. In France the revenues drawn from the tithe for six years were given to the king, who used the money for the war against Flanders. The Crusade never took place, although both the Kings of England and of Navarre had agreed to it at the council.

As already mentioned, the bishops were directed before the meeting of the council to bring with them written suggestions as to the reform of the Church. The pope renewed this demand at the opening of the council. Only three of the proposals sent in are known up to now, namely the treatise of William Durandus, Bishop of Mende, on the holding of the council ("De modo celebrandi generalis concilii"), that of Major, Bishop of Angers [in "Collection des documents inedits sur l'hist. de France. Melanges historiques"; II (1877), 471 sqq.], and that of James Dueze, later Pope John XXII [published by Verlaque, "Jean XXII" (Paris, 1883), 522 sqq.]. This material was divided into two parts for discussion by the council: improvement of morals and protection of the independence of the Church. The countless complaints, opinions, and suggestions that were handed in by prelates as well as by secular nobles were systematically arranged and treated. Still it is not known what decrees on these questions resulted from the discussions of the council itself and were promulgated in the third and last session. All that is certain is that a number of decrees on these subjects were proclaimed. These were issued later on 25 October, 1317, by John XXII, together with other decrees of Clement V, which the latter had been prevented by death from promulgating. John published them as the collection of the laws of the Church, the Clementines, "Corpus Juris Canonici". The decrees passed at the council which are found in this collection refer to the disputes concerning the Franciscan Spirituals (condemnation of the three propositions attributed to Petrus Johannes Olivi), the dispute about poverty among the Minorites, the mendicants, the visitation of convents by the bishops, the Beguines, the observance of the ecclesiastical hours, administration of religious foundations, matters relating to benefices, the founding of professorships for the Oriental languages at the Curia and at the four chief universities, the management of the Inquisition, and various ordinances respecting the clergy. The council closed with the third formal session, 6 May, 1312.

MANSI, Conciliorum collectio, XXV, 367 sqq.; EHRLE, Ein Bruchstuck der Akten des Konzils von Vienne in Archiv fur Literatur-und Kirchengeschichte des Mittelalters, IV (1888), 361 sqq.; IDEM, Vorgeschichte des Konzils von Vienne, loc. cit., II, 353 sqq., III, 1 sqq., 1409 sqq.; HEFELE, Konzilienqueschichte, VI (2nd ed.)., Freiburg im Br., 1890), 436 sqq., 515 sqq.; HEBER, Gutachten und Reformvorschlage fur das Vienner Generalconcil (Leipzig, 1898); GOLLER, Die Gravamina auf dem Konzil von Vienne in Festgabe fur H. Finke (Munster, 1904), 107 sqq.; MOLLAT, Les doleances du clerege de la province de Sens au concile de Vienne in Revue d'hist. eccles., VI (1905), 319 sqq.

J.P. KIRSCH

Franz Michael Vierthaler

A distinguished Austrian pedagogue, b. at Mauerkirchen, Upper Austria, 25 September, 1758; d. at Vienna, 3 October, 1827. As his parents were poor, he was a choir-boy at the Benedictine Abbey of Michaelbeuren and at Salzburg. At Salzburg he also attended the gymnasium and from 1776-77, he took the law course at the university, though his favourite study was classic languages. In 1783 he became instructor at the Virgilian college for nobles at Salzburg. By teaching history he was led to write his "Philosophische Geschichte der Menschheit" (7 vols., 1787-1819). The first volume attracted attention and gained for Vierthaler, in 1790, the position of director of the seminary for teachers at Salzburg, which the archbishop had established for the betterment of the primary schools. In the same year he began a course of catechetical instruction for the students of the seminary for boys, and in 1791 pedagogical lectures at the university. In 1796 he was made court librarian. During 1800-02 he edited the "Salzburger Literaturzeitung" and from 1799-1806 the "Salzburger Staatszeitung". He married in 1802; in 1803 he was appointed supervisor of the public schools in the Duchy of Salzburg, and in 1804 supervisor of the two orphan asylums. Three years later, when Salzburg was made part of Austria, the Austrian Government called him to Vienna, where he took charge of the orphan asylum.

Vierthaler was a strong advocate of practical training in teaching. He kept up a correspondence with the young teachers from the seminary and encouraged their zeal. He prepared a unified plan of studies for schools that he visited, sought to provide good and cheap school-books and other aids to study, and succeeded in arousing public interest in the cause of the schools. His three chief pedagogical works are: "Elemente der Methodik und Padagogik" (1791); "Geist der Sokratik" (1793); "Entwurf der Schuler- ziehungskunde" (1794). He was a master in his calling, distinguished by the clearness, simplicity, and practicalness of his teachings. He laid more emphasis than other teachers of his era on the principle that instruction should subserve education. The aim of his pedagogical method was a "noble humanity transfigured by God". The basis of all his efforts was the Catholic Faith which he placed above everything else. Like Overberg he regarded the personality of the teacher as the most important thing in education. In many respects he was ahead of his times, e.g. in his high estimation of the teaching of the natural sciences and of physical training; also in his opposition to corporal punishment. Besides his pedagogical writings Vierthaler wrote a large number of school-books and books for children; among these are an edition of the Gospels and Epistles and a geography of Salzburg.

ANTHALLER, Franz Michael Vierthaler, der Salzburger Padegoge (Salzburg, 1880); VIERTHALER, Pedagogische Hauptschriften, ed. VON DER FUHR (Paderborn, 1904); VON DER FUHR, Michael Vierthaler u. seine Zeit (Berlin, 1909).

KLEMENS LÖFFLER

François Vieta, Seigneur de La Bigottière

(VIÈTE.)

Father of modern algebra, b. at Fontenay-le-Comte (Poitou), 1540; d. in Paris, Feb., 1603. The son of a solicitor, he made his early studies under the Franciscans of his native place. He studied law in the University of Poitiers, returned to Fontenay at nineteen, and soon took rank with the leading barristers at the province, numbering Mary Stuart among his clients. Indifferent in religion, and with his legal practice ruined by the religious wars, he accepted the position of tutor to Catherine, the eleven-year-old daughter of Jean de Parthenay, Sieur de Soubise, a militant Huguenot. Three years later, at the marriage of his pupil, he left the Chêteau du Parc and went to La Rochelle. Here he gained as clients and friends the Huguenots, Coligny, Condé, the Queen of Navarre, Henry of Navarre, and Françoise de Rohan, who, like his former pupil, Catherine, Viscountess de Rohan by second marriage, remained his benefactress for life. Of his wife little beyond the name is known. The title of Sieur de La Bigottière he probably assumed. He became a barrister in Paris and later a councillor of the Parlement in Rennes. For some years he was in disfavour with Henry III, despite the efforts in 1585 of his friend Henry of Navarre. To the latter, as king, Vieta, while councilor of the Parlement in Tours, rendered signal service by discovering the key to the Spanish cipher. During his last years, spent mainly in Paris, he was maître des requêtes (master of requests) and royal privy councillor. He was a Catholic at his death. His kindly treatment of Adrianus Romanus, a rival scholar, indicates a generous nature.

To Vieta as a mathematician Huygens, Halley, Chasles, and Fourier have given high rank. He made the use of letters as symbols of quantity a general custom. He was highly skilful in the treatment of equations, knew the relations between the positive roots and the coefficients, and devised solutions for the equations of the second, third, and fourth degrees by methods different from the existing ones. He enumerated the principle of homogeneity. He extended the tables of Rheticus, gave formulae for the sine and cosine of a multiple angle, and attempted to find the value of pi by means of infinite series. To a considerable extent he applied algebra to geometry and trigonometry and geometry and trigonometry to algebra. His collected works were published by Van Schooten, "Opera Mathematica", Leyden, 1646.

BERTRAND in Revue des Deux Mondes (15 May, 1897), or Eloges Academiques, new series, 143-76 (Paris, 1902); CHASLES, Comptes rendus de L'Acad. Des Sci., XII, XIII (1841); FILLON ET RITTER, Notice sur la vie et les ouvrages de Francois Viete (Nantes, 1850); GAMBIER, Le mathematicien Francois Viete, Genealogie de sa famille (La Rochelle, 1911); HUTTON, Tracts on Math. And Phil. Subjects, II (London, 1812), 260-74; RITER, Bullettino di Bibliografia e di Storia delle Sci. mat. E fis., I (Rome, 1868), 223-27.

PAUL H. LINEHAN

Denis-Benjamin Viger

French-Canadian statesman and writer, b. at Montreal, 19 Aug., 1774; d. 1861. After studying classics and philosophy at the Sulpician college of his native city, he joined the bar, was elected (1808) member of Parliament for Montreal, and re-elected for other constituencies for 1810, 1814, and 1827. He was sent (1828) to represent French Canadian interests against Lord Dalhousie's administration before the English Parliament. In 1830, though a member of the Upper House, he spent two years refuting Attorney-General Stuart's memoir. His patriotism did not impair his loyalty. Yet, in 1838, he was imprisoned for nineteen months, refusing bail, and demanding a trial. After the union of the Canadas, he was twice returned to Parliament (1841 and 1845). His knowledge of constitutional law urged him to side with Governor Metcalfe, and accept Lafontaine's heritage as premier; whereby he assumed the responsibility of dividing the Liberal party. His friends misunderstood him and suspected him of inclining towards British influence. He was accused of personal ambition, though he acted through loftier motives-the dread lest responsible government be compromised. In a pamphlet, "La crise ministerielle" (1844), he rightly defines constitutional government. He was the first president of the national society of St. Jean-Baptiste. Fordham University gave him the degree of LL.D. (1853). He wrote many newspaper articles and several important political treatises demonstrating England's interest in maintaining the laws, usages, and education of Lower Canada. He contributed to the foundation of the newspapers "La Minerve" and "L'Aurore des Canadas". His writings are noted for their logic, depth, and erudition.

BIBAUD, Le Pantheon canadien (Montreal, 1891); TURCOTTE, Le Canada sous l'Union (Quebec, 1871); ROYAL, Viger in Journal d l'Instruction publique (March, 1861); MORGAN, Bibliotheca canadensis (Ottawa, 1867).

LIONEL LINDSAY

Jacques Viger

French-Canadian antiquarian and archaeologist, b. at Montreal, 7 May, 1787; d. 12 Dec., 1858. He studied at the Sulpician college of Montreal. During the war of 1812 he served as captain in the "Voltigeurs" under de Salaberry. He was elected the first Mayor of Montreal (1833), and strove to improve its sanitary condition. Although he wrote little, his reputation as an archaeologist was universal, and the greatest contemporary historians of France and the United States have drawn from his collection of MSS., the fruit of forty years research. He compiled a chronicle under the title of "Sabretache" (28 vols.), wherein he gathered plans, maps, portraits, with valuable notes illustrating many contested historical points. He was the founder of the "Historical Society of Montreal". Pius IX honoured him with the knighthood of the Order of St. Gregory the Great.

BIBAUD, Le Pantheon canadien (Montreal, 1891); MORGAN, Bibliotheca canadensis (Ottawa, 1867).

LIONEL LINDSAY